Reassessing Barack Obama

But whereas Reagan’s conciliatory language masked his pursuit of a right-wing agenda, Obama seems to want to get along with adversaries even if this means adopting more centrist policies. In other words, evidence is mounting that Obama’s rhetoric is not a campaign strategy designed to broaden his base, but rather a signal that if elected he would govern from the center rather than the left.

The New Yorker recently ran a very lengthy story on Barack Obama. The profile probed deeply in seeking the key to Obama’s character, examining his parents’ backgrounds, comments from his classmates in Hawaii, assessments from those who knew him in law school, and input from people who worked with the candidate at virtually every stage of his professional life.

The piece included many comments from Obama on his approach to politics, particularly his philosophy toward social change. Obama’s basic sense is that one must take people and institutions where they are, and not impose too radical a change too suddenly.

Readers who made it through the extremely esoteric and wandering profile will feel quite good about Obama. He comes off as very thoughtful around public policy, respectful of dissent, and as a good person.

But for progressives already concerned about Obama’s attempt to “mediate” differences with Republicans over Iraq, the New Yorker article confirmed some troubling suspicions about Obama’s commitment to progressive change.

In a nutshell: unlike Bill Clinton, Obama has strong progressive instincts and as President would impose progressive policies if he could. But like former President Clinton, Obama is enamored with incremental change. In the political world he would inherit as President, Obama would be too willing to tout small steps as giant leaps. He does not appear to be temperamentally suited to standing firm against the rabid opponents of progressive change.

More
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=4514#more