The title of this post, which is dripping with irony, is written with sadness. Barack Obama has offered himself as that different kind of politician, as someone ready to change the way Washington politics functions.
But his recent actions and statements — on telecom immunity, on the death penalty, on campaign finance — have me perplexed. (I leave out his comments on the court’s gun ruling because I have a similarly nuanced reading of the amendment).
As I wrote yesterday — linking to Greenwald — there has been a disturbing trend of Obama tacking to the right, what this NY Times story calls
a stroll this week away from traditional liberal political positions, his path toward the political center marked by artful leaps and turns.
What disturbs me is the easy manner in which Obama, having dispatched Hillary Clinton during the primaries, can now be compared with her husband:
In the last week, Mr. Obama has taken calibrated positions on issues that include electronic surveillance, campaign finance and the death penalty for child rapists, suggesting a presidential candidate in hot pursuit of what Bill Clinton once lovingly described as “the vital center.”
Don’t get me wrong. Obama is the better of the two remaining candidates and the collection of supporters surrounding him gives me hope that he will, in the end, do the right thing more often than not. But he is no progressive and it will take a lot of effort on the part of progressives to keep him from gravitating toward positions that pundits like David Broder — who is wed to the conventional wisdom — advocate.
Hank Kalet 