Skip to main content

A lot of us are righteously and rightfully pissed off at Senator Obama and most of the rest of the Democratic "leadership" over the FISA bill. There's also an awful lot of hand wringing and concern trolling and even people saying they won't vote for him just because of this. But even if he isn't as progressive as we've been pretending he is, he will be an infinitely better President than any Republican.

Any progressives who find themselves agreeing with my title should consider this: it's based on today's excretion by syndicated dipshit Victor Davis Hanson.

I was having a lot more fun abusing this column based on the title I saw in my morning dead tree, Obama may be big on hope, but he's small on real change. I am reminded, as many journalists here have pointed out, that editors rewrite titles. Now I'm having to rewrite this to only insult the things that Davis actually said.

Of course there's nothing hard about that. There are morons commenting on the Merc site who agree with him; they must also think that up is down and freedom is slavery.

On foreign policy, VDH is upset that Obama wants to bring our troops home from Iraq without having "victory".

would a President Obama really ... give up on Iraq when the American military may well gradually draw down in victory, not defeat?

How about that spin? "Give up", "victory", "defeat"? Wow, he got all the buzzwords into one sentence. Carefully avoiding as always how we win an occupation. "Gradually" is the Bush-McCain policy; 100 years is soon enough for them.

On energy VDH is upset that Obama likes conservation and alternatives more than "drill more now everywhere".

Gas prices are soaring. Americans are frustrated that we continue to beg the Saudis to pump another half-million barrels a day ... when we could pump much more than that in Alaska, off our coasts and on the continental shelf - and thus save hundreds of billions of dollars.

Yet Sen. Obama's change probably wouldn't include more drilling; more nuclear power plants; or fuel extraction from tar sands, shale or coal. Instead, his strategy emphasizes more conservation; mass transit; and wind, solar and alternative green energy. All that is certainly wise and could be a winning combination by 2030, but right now it won't fill our tanks.

At least VDH is smart enough to acknowledge that conservation and alternatives are "wise", but the rest is the pure Republican talking point we've been hearing for the last week or two (and also the subject of VDH's previous poorly reasoned column), that sacrificing Alaska and the coasts will bring gas prices down within days. Nuclear, tar sands and ANWR drilling aren't going to "fill our tanks" any sooner than wind and solar do.

On the economy, Obama's plan gets spun as "old fashioned soak-the-rich". I'd LOVE to see "old fashioned soak-the-rich"; higher taxes were invested in infrastructure during the years of real prosperity and growth in the '50s and '60s, and we've been living off these investments ever since. Obama will be lucky to get us back to the pre-Bush rates. Hanson:

current aggregate federal revenues were increased by past tax cuts that spurred economic growth.

Good old Reagonomics. Is he really talking about "growth"? Really? Oh please Sen. McCain, please talk all about the "growth" the Bush years have brought us.

Just a little more:

Obama's announced policies are sounding pretty much the same old, same old once promised by candidates like George McGovern, Mike Dukakis, Walter Mondale, Al Gore and John Kerry.

Is this all they've got? Tying Obama to McGovern and Dukakis? Dukakis, Gore and Kerry all lost despite better policies than their opponents, they just campaigned horribly.

How do you know a wanna-be pundit has definitely fallen off the A-list? When nobody even bothers to make fun of him. VDH wasn't cited in DemFromCT's Pundit Roundup this morning; when I searched to see if anyone had diaried about this column I found that no one on dKos had mentioned VDH since April 30. He must be thinking "how wrong do I have to be to get the attention that Brooks and Friedman do?" I'm confident that he will keep up the good fight; VDH can be as wrong as any of them and I'm sure he'll be rewarded for it eventually.

Originally posted to esquimaux on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 03:31 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  tips? (3+ / 0-)

    after this I will leave VDH to his well earned obscurity.

    "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

    by esquimaux on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 03:31:50 PM PDT

  •  thats kind of a paradox since things are (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux, costello7

    presently hopeless.

  •  Are Obama's colors changing (3+ / 0-)

    The closer he gets to the election the more he starts to look like a Blue Dog. Too much compromise, too much give and take. Too much flexible spine.

    Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise....James Madison

    by cloudwatcher on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 03:41:13 PM PDT

    •  are they? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cville townie, cloudwatcher

      more like, he wasn't ever as progressive as some of us have enjoyed thinking. I remember 6 months ago honestly considering whether Obama or Clinton was more liberal. The primaries were decided much more on campaigning strategy and ability than on policy.
      Is he running to the center, or was he always there?

      "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

      by esquimaux on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 03:49:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think we believed (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        what the press, the republicans, and Hillary were saying about how "liberal" he was. It was a good high at the time. But I'm coming down. He's not bad...but he isn't exactly what I thought I was getting either. I guess I'm "settling" once again.

        Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise....James Madison

        by cloudwatcher on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 04:21:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It's what kind of center (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        esquimaux, cloudwatcher

        he swings to, AND how he does it, that made me support him over Hillary.

        Hillary talks the talk to look liberal during the primaries, but with Bill in tow, the greatest triangulator of our time (ok, maybe second to Tony Blair), I had absolutely no confidence her administration wouldn't push the Democrats further to the right. Bill Clinton's entire MO is not only to move to the center, but to make a big show of how he is right and the left is wrong, and spend more time and energy fighting his own party than going up against the right wing. He has managed to entrench and validate all of the right-wing baiting tactics better than the Repugs could hope themselves.

        Obama, on the other hand, personally professes rock-solid liberal principles, but he understands the conflicting interests and values in American society well enough to be able to soft-pedal a lot of the things that rile people up about progressive politics. His method of dialogue with the center is more about helping people feel comfortable with change, and making sure that change serves them, than about telling them their basest biases are correct. Respect, include, empower -- but don't pander.

        Furthermore, while he has made it very clear that he respects America, and that he does not share the type of anger people like Rev. Wright have or go about politics that way, he has consciously avoided the baiting politics that Hillary and Bill Clinton pander to, going so far as to not wear the flag pin for a while (which was very risky, although some of the smears would have happened no matter what). By doing this, he reduces the power of those very toxic smears against other Democrats in the future, and makes it easier for the Democrats to have an honest conversation with the American people that is focused upon policy and not divisive wedge issues.

        "People are people, and lobbyists are people. But lobbyist people are more people than people people." -- beltane on Hillary.

        by cville townie on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 04:56:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Obama is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux, CrustyPolemicist

    no different than any of the others in Washington. They do what is takes to get elected and nothing more. Look at Congress...Both sides are working to stay in office and not what we as a country needs to have done. Many people on this sight know what needs to be done. Why is it so hard for congress to get the job done? Obama will win the election but I think people place to much hope in his ability to get thing changed.    

    Life is not about joy and happiness. It is about duty and responsibility.

    by Void Indigo on Fri Jun 20, 2008 at 04:01:16 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site