Once in a while, I wonder if Sen. Barack Obama is the progressive Democrat that he claims to be. I wonder if Sen. Obama is so ambitiously anxious to be President, that he's too willing to compromise our party's progressive values.
And just once in a while, I worry that by instinct, Obama is a moderate Republican wrapped in Democratic trappings.
That troubling thought occurred to me again on November 30, 2007 when respected progressive Princeton economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote:
"I recently castigated Mr. Obama for adopting right-wing talking points about a Social Security 'crisis.' Now he’s echoing right-wing talking points on health care...Public Noshing with Mayor BloombergWhat seems to have happened is that Mr. Obama’s caution, his reluctance to stake out a clearly partisan position, led him to propose a relatively weak, incomplete health care plan...
Now, in the effort to defend his plan’s weakness, he’s attacking his Democratic opponents from the right — and in so doing giving aid and comfort to the enemies of reform. "
And on the same day, there was Obama's oh-so-public windowside nosh at a New York deli with Republican-turned-Independent New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Of course, Sen. Obama can breakfast with anyone of his choosing... but MSNBC reporters claimed (on air) that they were tipped off the night before by the Obama campaign that "something big" would be happening at that very Gotham corner.
So the Obama-Bloomberg nosh was a political tease, clearly designed to associate the senator with the moderate, centrist politics of Independent Bloomberg. And perhaps to symbolically separate the senator from core Democratic progressive values (?).
That concerns me, as it should concern all Democrats as we imminently go to the polls to decide our 2008 presidential nominee.
Obama Attracts Republican Support
I reported in June 2007 that Supported by Republicans, Obama Takes Lead in Presidential Race, in which I observed that one of the fastest growing campaign websites is Republicans for Obama, which then counted chapters in 11 states, including Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania and Colorado.
And The Tribune, owner of the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and Baltimore Sun, reported in early November 2007:
"Obama's embracing of the GOP expanded today with the release by his campaign of a list of 268 Iowa Republicans backing his candidacy." 'This public support from Iowa Republicans is yet another sign of Senator Obama’s crossover appeal,' the campaign said in a statement."
Who Is Obama Gaming? Or Can He Please Everyone?
Now don't get me wrong: I'm all for a big political tent that welcomes everyone possible to the Democratic party. I'm as much a peace, love and harmony Democrat as any other baby boomer Californian.
But can one political leader be all things to all people? Or is he gaming some constituency? Is he gaming Democrats or Republicans?
Progressive economist Paul Krugman believes that Obama is gaming Democratic progressives on two of our most cherished centerpiece policy areas: universal health care and Social Security.
And that really, truly matters. A lot.
I'm rethinking my strong support of Barack Obama for the 2008 Democratic nomination, because I just don't know if I can trust him to uphold progressive Democratic values on urgent domestic policy issues.
I'll be waitiing with great hope for Sen. Obama to answer Paul Krugman's questions and observations. If Obama doesn't adequately address these major concerns, I cannot, and will not, cast my vote for him on February 5, 2008.
(Photo taken on Nov 30, 2007: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)
Related Reading
Obama vs. Clinton: Hillary Loses the Inevitability Factor
Obama vs. Clinton: What Do the Iowa Polls Mean?
Obama vs. Clinton: Badly Playing the Gender Victimhood Card
Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: The Iowa Niceness Factor
New York Times, Nov 30, 2007: Mandates and Mudslinging by Paul Krugman
Comments
Deborah White:
The best way to project how a person would likely behave in future is to evaluate the past and present. There is nothing in Obama’s past and present that will lead an unbiased person to conclude that he would not pursue progressive programs if given the opportunity. One thing that is clear about Obama is that he knows how to discern practical realities from fantasies.
There are many ways to approach solving healthcare issues. Senator Obama chose one way and his competition chose other ways. Please go to the link below to read the response by Professor Austan Goolsbee to Hilary’s campaign charges.
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/30/post_2.php
Professor Paul Krugman may have his concerns but he is going about them like a partisan hack, whose main motive is to undermine Obama’s presidential candidacy. Paul Krugman has written something much earlier how American society may not be ready to elect an African American, to the office of US President. On Social Security issue, krugman accused Obama of adopting Republican talking points because he thinks that there is no problem with SS as it is today and Obama thought otherwise. Republicans want to privatize SS, while Obama proposes to raise the cap on SS tax beyond income of $100,000. Republicans would rather not tax the rich but Obama disagrees. How would anybody consider Obama’s position as Republican talking point? It is beyond pale that Paul Krugman would compare Obama’s position on healthcare and Social Security with Republicans.
the columns by paul krugman are biased and unfair. Regarding social security, I have been hearing my whole life that ss will not be there for me when i retire. (I am 35.) I know krugman doesnt’ think that there is a ss crisis since it will be there for his generation. I personally am relieved that Obama is willing to address ss so that it might actually be there when i retire. He seems reasonable and practical to me.
As far as the healthcare argument goes, i read that krugman article and became angry. I was uninsured for 8 years. Krugman obviously doesnt’ know what it’s like. I have been self employed, and buying my own health insurance was cost prohibitive. People like me, who make too much to be considered “poor” and don’t qualify for gov. programs, will be left in a lurch under Edwards’ or Clinton’s plans. Telling me that if i can’t afford health insurance, i will be breaking the law, is not helpful. Krugman’s article sounded like it was written by someone like him- someone who already has health insurance. Obama’s plan is the only compassionate plan- to drive down the costs of insurance, and offer gov. alternatives so that middle class families have access to affordable healthcare.
As far as Obama’s support from repubs- i at first thought that was a red flag, too. so i looked into it, and found quotes from some of the repubs that support Obama- and across the board, they said stuff like, “even though we had different views, i always felt like Obama listened to me” or “Obama respected my views” and other similar quotes.
My impression is that repubs and independents like Obama because he is willing to listen and negotiate and makes his opponents still feel respected, without compromising his stance. It’s not because they agree with his policies.
Obama is the only top tier dem who opposed the iraq war from the start AND foresaw the quagmire of iraq. Obama opposed DOMA and “don’t ask don’t tell” from the beginning, and his energy proposal has been called the most aggressive of the top dems.
I urge you, do not put so much weight on Krugman’s opinion. It’s his opinion, and doesn’t represent facts.
thanks for listening.
I read your post this morning and have been thinking about it all day. Two or three reactions:
First, I quit listening to anything that any candidate says after the races really get going. Evasive, misleading and outright lying tactics are simply part of the American way of doing politics. I recall hating how Sam Nunn told what I considered to be lies in order to cater to any group he needed to get himself elected to the Senate. Only after he got elected did I learn to respect and appreciate him for the serious good character he displayed from then on. I was deeply disappointed when he (and a bunch of other decent Senators, as I recall) decided to “retire.”
Second, Obama is on a learning curve. As you and I know, Social Security is as American as any institution and will not be taken away. Even now tweaking the cap (or removing it altogether, a la Medicare) will handily fix the problem. And even now I think collections for SS are still overshooting the expenditures and the difference is being pissed away as it has been since the Reagan administration. (See that famous filing cabinet up in West Virginia for what Bush called “worthless IOU’s.”) As for health care, he has already put his finger on the real problem which is not medicine but portability. (And there is one Republican notion about health care that I absolutely agree with: uncoupling health care from employment. Ther has to be a better way in order to eliminate “job lock” and free people who wish to do so to start new businesses without risking the health and safety of themselves and their families.
Finally, Obama seems to be running for President, not Candidate. He’s jumping the process already, appealing to those who might be crossover voters, otherwise Republican, who don’t see anyone among that crowd that floats their boat.
Just a few idle thoughts. I may change my mind tomorrow, but that’s how I feel this evening. I still think that for the health care issue Clinton and Obama represent two different possibilities, not in their programs but in the manner in which they might get things done. It’s a choice between a cocker spaniel and a rottweiller. My money is on the rottweiler.
John
The group,Physicians for Universal Health Care, have concluded none of the three front runners in the Democrat race have workable health care proposals. I think we have three frontrunners saying anything they can to get elected.
I am not Apposed to Hillary Clinton, or Barrack Obama, Because they are minority Candidates. I believe we need a person in the White who not only understands how America works, But also how the world works, I believe Bill Richardson, is the best person to make real change happen. I think we need to have A clear platform, that tells everyone, what the Democratic party Standes for, then give us a president that Can Make things happen. at the same time we need to realize that we have to work with rest of the world, which will require some degree of Humility.
Basing your decision as to whether Barack Obama is a progressive on one person’s opinion is irrational.
Paul Krugman is not the only or the smartest progressive in America.
I think he writes an excellent column but, in this case, he is also from New York, Hillary’s state and a place I love, but he just might be slightly biased in favor of Hillary.
The fact is that Ruth Marcus of the Washington Pose has written a column with quotes from a leading progressive writer who, at the beginning of the Bush administration, was convinced that Social Security was in a crisis. That progressive was Paul Krugman!
Mmmmmm.
Moreover, Barack recommends the same answer to Social Security as John Edwards, raising taxes on those who can afford it best. That is hardly a Republican talking point.
As for health care insurance, Barack has said he opposes mandates because he doesn’t know how to reasonably compel participation without punishing people.
I also think he is concerned that Republicans love to run against the lack of choice involved in mandates.
There may in fact be a good way to compel participation. Still, I think the best way to deal with that issue is after a Democrat has been elected to the presidency. By that time, the nation will have agreed to universal health care and will be more open to whatever plan emerges from Congress to best achieve that.
The reality is that no matter what plan a President runs on, it will be changed in Congress to some degree.
Finally, when it comes to evaluating a progressive, there are a ton of important issues starting with appointments to the Supreme Court and the Justice department. So, Deborah, unless you are looking for a way to convince people to vote for Hillary, get real.
Obama has never been a progressive. When he started chumming up to McCain and Libermann when he got to the Senate, I knew he was not someone I would ever support. Like Hillary says, she is not in this for a “one night stand.” Sometimes, I think Obama says one night what that crowd wants to hear and something different the next night with another crowd.
While democracy may work in some countries, Obama demonstrates his lack of depth. He only sees things on the surface, ‘Bush attacked where there was no threat’. Obama clearly indicates that he has no concept of mob rule. He calls for democracy at all costs. He puts democracy before the well being of a country. There is something very dangerous to Obama. Any man who cannot consider the voice of the defenseless – little babies still in the womb – cannot have much regard for anyone, but himself, and the other selfish.
I have always believed that there is no difference between a liberal and a conservative; you all believe that you are “absolutely right” and that “everyone else is absolutely wrong”. If someone dares to have an opinion different from yours, you guys either call him uninformed or the devil. My opinion is that conservatives are bigots in the open and that liberals are the bigots in hiding. Is it not funny that the liberals who preach social justice and racial equality, are the ones ripping apart the first true black candidate for the presidency of the United States of America ? In my opinion moderates are the only sensible ones in this whole ideological gumbo; I have yet to see or hear a moderate stand on a soapbox and loudly proclaim that he/she is the way and light to salvation. My advice to the democrats is, stop this in-fighting, or watch your party splinter into two and opposing factions.
well, did his first couple of months in office answer your question ?
(ok, cheap shot. Let us just be thrilled he’s doing so well)