More Conservatives on Obama
Posted by Joshua Claybourn on 28 January 2008 | 11 responses
Andrew Sullivan tips his hat to my post here and earlier noted a post by Rod Dreher at beliefnet, who likens Obama to a Democrats’ Reagan:
Look, I don’t want a man who believes the things Barack Obama believes to be president. But I’ve got to confess, he makes me proud of my country. When’s the last time you heard from a politician that made you proud of your country?
11 Responses to “More Conservatives on Obama”
Why do I think that many of these same conservative pundits who are busy praising Obama to the rafters now are gonna be pounding on him like a drum if/when he’s the Dem’s nominee?
I hope the GOP gets around to running someone like that again soon. I felt that way about Dole, but I can’t imagine feeling it for anyone in y’all’s current crop.
It’s a shame that Obama is the only inspiring one of the bunch. In a country this big, with so many well-educated, articulate, interesting people, we can only get one to run for president? Weak. If only I were over 35, fabulously wealthy, and a big kiss-ass, I would be all over it.
JohnS,
The (rather faint) praise for Obama now is for his charisma and his positivism. But even Dreher’s comment leaves no doubt that he doesn’t agree with Obama’s political positions, and that is what the GOP would be attacking if Obama became the nominee. (In fact, it would be risky for anyone to personally attack Obama in the general election, lest they come across as racist.)
Eric,
I KNOW the attacks would come, and hard. I’m just not sure that a lot of Obama’s Dem supporters grok that. I also suspect that, black or not, many of them will be personal. And that in certain parts of this country, some of those attacks will be race-based — not overt, but subtle and coded.
I know you know that, JohnS. I was responding to what I read as your implication that conservative pundits will flip-flop on Obama if he gets the nomination. I was pointing out that right now they’re saying “His policy proposals may be disastrous, but he’s sure a likeable guy,” whereas if he gets the nomination they’ll probably be saying “He may be a likeable guy, but his policy proposals are disastrous.” Same thing, just a different emphasis.
And that in certain parts of this country, some of those attacks will be race-based — not overt, but subtle and coded.
Yeah, only the Republicans are capable of this.
Bill–Democrats are capable of race-based attacks, but there’s nothing subtle about throwing Oreos at Michael Steele.
Eric,
The Baltimore Sun reported that eyewitnesses at the debate disputed Steele’s cookie-throwing allegations, and also noted that he and his staffers gave differing accounts of the alleged incident.
Sure, the Oreo incident is disputed. But even if it were completely fabricated (which I doubt), there are plenty of other examples of black Republicans being accused of betraying their race (as if the color of someone’s skin should have anything to do with their politics).
Eric,
In the wake of Pat Buchanon’s infamous “Southern Strategy,” I can understand why African-Americans might have a problem with guys like Steele or Clarence Thomas shilling for the other side, and why they might find exhortations by a white guy that “the color of someone’s skin should have anything to do with their politics” a little bit ironic.