Monday, July 07, 2008

Obama, Buyer's Remorse?

It seems there are a bunch of people who are now unhappy to find out that Barak Obama is a politician. This a guy who started his career in Chi-town politic and in that city and Illinois they play the game in a rough and twisty manner. Barak knows how to be careful with his language and how to read the public. Many of the unhappy people have not paid attention to what he has actually said, rather what they wanted to hear. They also are apparently unaware of how the politics of legislative bodies works.

Let's start with what he's said versus what people wanted to hear. In February when it became clear that the Supreme Court was going to hear the DC gun ban case on the basis of individual versus collective right he said clearly that he did not see how the 2nd Amendment could not be read as an individual right. He was not and is not a friend of gun owners in general, what he is being is a realist about what the ruling means. He is neither responsible for the ruling nor is he a fan of the outcomes - challenges to blanket bans and capricious or draconian licensing.

He has repeatedly stated that we need to leave Iraq more carefully than we went in, that his 16 month withdrawal plan was subject to conditions on the ground. Anyone proposing military strategy that ties themselves to one particular line is a fool - need I mention George II? The simple fact is that a withdrawal or retreat is one of the riskiest military maneuvers and things can go bad suddenly and drastically. Many people are aware of this and it is politically stupid to ignore that people are aware, and just as stupid to ignore that his opponent is trying to make political hay out of military inexperience.

Ignorance of legislative politics leads to unrealistic and rigid expectations. The FISA bill that has people in an uproar was decided some time ago, like virtually all bills. The speeches on the floor are window dressing, all for looks, the positions were fixed long before all the public relations talk on the floor. Supporters were courted and counted, amendments offered and accepted or rebuffed long before you see it. Political calculations were made by both Parties and individuals regarding votes. Many of the "maverick" votes you see were Party approved to allow a legislator to appeal to home voters without damaging the vote outcome. On odd occasions a Party will deliberately sabotage a vote or an amendment, there are costs involved that make this rare. Even more rarely a legislator will cross the Party position when his vote matters. People see the show and think it is the reality, it is not and cannot be. You may hear explanations on the floor or partisan attacks but this is for the show not the action. Read Obama's explanations and forget the media's and Republicans' and the web's nonsense.

I am entirely unsure now and in the past how people expected Obama to achieve consensus and bipartisan accomplishments from a hard left position. If you are actually left and you actually expect to elect a politician from that point of view, I would assert that your home is LaLaLand. Wishful thinking regarding leftism is silliness, the country is not left, it may be drifting more left than in recent years but the starting point for that drift is what counts. This country is centered much more right now than when RMN was President, so much that he now would be considered left of center. Any drift that is talked about today is encouraging but it is not what many seem to think it is. Obama's home districts both in the Illinois legislature and Congress are fairly liberal in outlook compared to the nation in general and even there he has been pretty measured in his politics, this isn't new. Buyer's remorse is not reasonable nor sensible and feeding the media and Republicans attack material is not a good idea nor based on facts.


KISS said...

Are you saying he is another lying piece of S***?
Another reason for 4-5 party system.
Maybe for the good of the country McCain would bring on a revolution more quickly.

Chuck Butcher said...

No, I didn't say that at all.

There is nothing to stop the Indies from forming Parties except the Indies themselves. It wouldn't matter what the platforms were, it would still be none of the above. You might be able to balkanize the process into 8-20 Parties and guarantee nothing except special favors would get done. As is, you get something along with the special favors....

The Revolution??? You are kidding me, you might see that hit the fan if the economy totally collapses. It sure won't be about principles, just who will win next time.

If you really don't like the current government, you can thank the American voter and non-voter. Now I don't like it, and I have picked the only path I can see that has any promise of getting anything done. Opinions may vary...

KISS said...

I find it amusing that Independents, a party I now am registered as, is not a legal party at all. The great state of Oregon chooses not to see Independents as a party. I do know that sometimes a candidate will be on the ballot as an Independent, how this happens I do not know.
As for Obama, another Bill Clinton IMHO, has lied..flip-floped once more. To paraphrase what he said to the right-winged " Relevant" magazine,that women who seek late-term abortions should not be allowed to do so if they are “feeling blue”—into his own lexicon. Physical impairment is the only criteria for an abortion.
He is pandering to the religious nuts...and this is only one issue he is turn-coating.

Chuck Butcher said...

There is an actual Independent Party, John Frohnmeyer was going to run in it for Senate.

The affiliation you want is NA, or Non-affiliated if you don't want to belong to a Party.

I would say that Obama's intent was to indicate that he didn't think late term abortion should be simply on-demand and his stands sure aren't going to appeal to the religious nuts, not now or ever. It might allow them to hold their noses and vote for him but on that issue McCain is their guy. The heat around what he's had to say seems to be limited to some pretty radical agendas.

Getting that far into a pregnancy would indicate to me that it's not something anyone would want to do as a matter of "convenience," so I think it probably is a tempest in a teacup.

Not a critique, but you seem pretty ready to find reasons to be upset. I don't know where this lefty idea about Obama came from, I've been pointing out he's not for some time. He and Hillary were similar in a lot of ways, left of her on some issues but not heavily so.

KISS said...

Here is my disappointment with Obama: The pandering to right wing nut-sos. The weakening of his position on free trade, in which your description is absolutely right, Not ever the word Fair Trade. His back pedaling on Iraq disinvolvement. He now is a gun lover. In the primary he was strong now it is just rhetoric and hype.
About Independent party. When I voted for Nader, first time, we had to go to a meeting and signed a petition for him to be on the Green Party ballot. I asked why not Independent and was told it would be the same thing. We will be casting our votes for Obama because of the supreme court. But it will be another Clintonese administration and it will be Republican light and not democratic for the people...think Lieberman.

Chuck Butcher said...

A gun lover? What news source are you using? I thought we all agreed that a ruling tossing the DC gun ban would have outcomes and it has. He said in Feb that the 2nd in his mind had to be read as an individual right.

As for the rest of it, FISA was the one, and I'm unsure what he realistically could do to get rid of it. A Nay won't do anything.