Categories
Domestic issues Election 2008 Obama Politics The Clintons

A Ship In Need of Repairs

[digg-reddit-me]I have heard many times that Barack Obama won’t change anything; that he has the same policies as Hillary Clinton; that he isn’t a radical.  Here’s my response:

There are 5 measures I use to evaluate a candidate:

  1. What they believe is reality, specifically as it affects policy (e.g. Is global climate change substantially effected by human development?)
  2. What changes should be made? (aka, What policies should be adopted in response to the perceived reality?)
  3. How do they want to achieve their changes? (as indicated by their temperament,
    their campaigns, and to some extent, their policies.)
  4. What role do they see for the government?
  5. What is their character? (which can be very subjective – but is still basic to understanding any candidate.)

Obama and Hillary agree to a large extent on the first two questions.  Arguably, they agree on the general role of government as well.  In terms of character there are significant differences, but those are more subjective – and not something I want to delve into at the moment.

The real conflict between Obama and Clinton is on how to achieve change.  And it is why I came to believe in Obama’s approach and to reject Clinton in such strong terms.  The past few weeks have only solidified my position.

Obama believes in change that is gradual, driven by the grassroots, and done through an open and transparent process.  Clinton believes in imposing policies from Washington and using whatever means are necessary to achieve whatever change she can.

Obama and Clinton are both only proposing minor changes in policy so far.  But Obama is proposing major changes in the process, which he has indicated will lead to lasting and substantial changes in policy.  I believe – as does Senator Obama – that America is not on the wrong track because the president has been steering the country wrong – like a captain setting the wrong course on a ship in working order, but because the processes which drive our policy and actions and politics have become distorted – as if the ship, still afloat and strong, needed repairs and maintenance.

3 replies on “A Ship In Need of Repairs”

“Clinton believes in imposing policies from Washington and using whatever means are necessary to achieve whatever change she can.”

I wish this were Wikipedia so I could put a {cite} tag next to this comment. Senator Clinton has surely never said such a thing, and you give us no offer of proof as to why you have made this statement. The ship in need of repairs is this post.

The proof is simple – it is in her public actions and in the policies she has promoted.

Question to you: do you think Ms. Clinton would privilege local attempts to change areas she feels are important over national ones decided in Washington? Do you think Ms. Clinton believes she can – and must – compromise her ideals in order to attain power, and that then, at that point, she could do good?

(I will post a full reply to this comment later – hopefully today. I can only avoid work for so long at my desk. I gave no proof here because this seems self-evident to me, as well as to many others, in looking at Ms. Clinton’s public career.)

“The proof is simple – it is in her public actions and in the policies she has promoted.”

This is a political blog that is trying to make a case against a particular candidate (and just as much as it is trying to make a case FOR another candidate). To make a case, or at least to make it honestly, one should rely on evidence rather than stereotypes and hidden assumptions.

“Question to you: do you think Ms. Clinton would privilege local attempts to change areas she feels are important over national ones decided in Washington?”

This is a bit of tortured English here. I am guessing that you mean to ask whether or not I believe she would forgo national solutions where local solutions exist. Of course she would. That she is interested in national endeavors is reflective of nothing more than the fact that she is currently in and running for a NATIONAL office. People in New York have frequently criticized Senator Clinton for not “doing anything for them” (i.e. bringing home pork — a practice these critics often decry in the very next breath). But what they fail to realize is that she is in a deliberative body whose main concern is supposed to be national issues. I don’t want my Senators deciding local issues, nor do I want the President to do so. I want them to see what the federal government can do to improve the nation and get to it. Does this mean changing things on a national scale? Of course it does. Is this “privileging” national policies? No. It’s called “knowing your role in the government.”

“Do you think Ms. Clinton believes she can – and must – compromise her ideals in order to attain power, and that then, at that point, she could do good?”

No. You like repeating this claim, and I’m sure it’s part of your “character evaluation,” but I think it is inaccurate. Obviously, I cannot say for certain what is in Senator Clinton’s mind, but I believe her ideals are about governance and not the electoral process. That is, I believe she recognizes how dirty a game politics is and simply plays by the rules. There is no idealism here, and thus there are no ideals to compromise. Such ambition — and the Clintons are indeed ambitious — is admirable precisely because their goal is not power for its own sake but power as a means to governing and governing well. Senator Clinton, as well as former President Clinton, both believe in the ameliorative power of proper government. That is where her ideals lie, and her compromises there are only for the sake of accomplishing some good rather than none at all. And that is exactly what I want in a leader.

(There is some tension here between Senator Clinton and myself. I am strong supporter of certain types of election reform — which is not the same thing as campaign finance reform — whereas she seems largely content to let things stand as they are. No two people can agree on everything, however, and I admit that there are bigger issues to be concerned with. Furthermore, no other candidate fares any better in this regard; and she is the only candidate who I know has addressed my concerns sympathetically in the past, even if she did not make any commitments regarding them.)

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: