Why I am not an Obama supporter
I got a chance to talk to a few people about politics at ATLARGE this past weekend. I think I'm starting to crystallize some thoughts about what Obama is. Of course, these aren't 100% original thoughts; I read far too many political articles to have 100% original thoughts. But I think that the Obama-Reagan comparison - one he made himself before being bludgeoned about it - is a good one, if not completely accurate.

Reagan was a transformative politician; he persuaded the country in broad numbers that we needed a new direction, that we needed change. His rhetoric was soaring - not in quite the same way as Obama's, but in an effective way nonetheless. And he yanked the country to the right. Obama, I think, is made of some of the same stuff that Reagan did -- to win the hearts and minds of independents and moderate Republicans and pull the country back to the left in a way that will endure beyond his Presidency.

Bill Clinton, for all his virtues and faults, never did this. Clinton was a centrist; the most important achievements of his presidency (NAFTA, welfare reform, even dontaskdonttell) were across-the-aisle bipartisan compromises loathed by the left wing. Bill Clinton pulled his party to the middle. Because he did that, he won. But at the end of Clinton's presidency, the nation hadn't really moved left at all, and the stage was set for George W. Bush's campaign of "compassionate conservatism."

There have been charges leveled at Obama that he is "all talk." I dunno, I've read through quite a number of his policy papers. And I don't see a lack of substance there at all. Now it may be that the campaign has forced him to put substance in places it was lacking previously. If so, that's okay -- that's one of the reasons we have campaigns! I don't see the lack of substance charge sticking. What I see, however, is a set of positions that are basically unoriginal, standard progressive-liberal fare.

I'll just run through a few off his own website: (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/)

Civil Rights
--Pass the Fair Pay Act to combat pay discrimination among genders.
--Expand hate crimes legislation.

Economy
--Tax breaks for working families
--Fight for "fair" trade
--Amend NAFTA

Education
--Fund NLCB
--Create the American Opportunity tax credit

Fiscal
--Reverse Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

There are plenty more, of course. Also, Obama supports a whole bunch of good ideas, as we would expect any politician to. But none of these positions is original; they are stock progressive-liberal positions.

Those of you who read my blog probably have some idea of my politics; hawkish on national defense, conservative on government spending and the size of government, moderate to liberal on social issues. You know, "free speech, free markets, free people." As such, I'm sorta happy that the nation moved right under Reagan. But I am unhappy with the corresponding increase in the power of the religious right throughout the period, the expansion of the power of the executive branch, especially under Clinton and Bush (mostly the latter), and the runaway expansion of entitlement spending.

Now there is one thing about Obama that differs from Reagan, that I think is significant about our polity. When Reagan ran for President, first in 1976 and again in 1980, he embraced the mantle of conservative. Instead of fearing that being labeled a conservative would hurt him, his campaign was more of the tone "I am a conservative. And here's why you should be too." Now for whatever reason - perhaps Rush Limbaugh has something to do with it - neither Clinton nor Obama seem interested in embracing being a "liberal." But that is precisely what they are, and it's sort of unseemly to me that they seem to be embarrassed of the term.

If I were a progressive-liberal - that is, if I favored the expansion of the government's role in things like healthcare and education, higher taxes on the rich and more subsidies for the lower classes, then I would support Obama, because I think that an Obama presidency has far more potential of advancing the progressive-liberal agenda than a Hillary Clinton presidency. There are other advantages to electing Obama as well. Electing a black man President would be great for our country, as a strong sign to our children that we want the old racist ways to fall away. An Obama presidency will be positive for our image abroad, both among our friends and our enemies, all actual handling of foreign affairs held equal.

But I'm not, and so I don't.

Also, this is funny even if it doesn't really tie with my views:
http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/