"Obama's Test" or Ours?

One of the more enduring myths in Washington is that Americans live their lives on a left-right ideological spectrum. We are all little liberals or little conservatives. Thus, the New York Times ponders how the "liberal" Barack Obama can fashion a governing coalition when conventional wisdom continues to convince us that the political center of gravity in America is right of center and only Clintonian "centrism" offers the Democrats a shot at governing. And, if you spend your adult life in Washington (which some of us choose not to do), you fall into the static mindset.

But what if most Americans, unlike perpetual Washington insiders, are neither liberal nor conservative? What if, instead, we live our lives on a future-past continuum? Students of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and others know that those who deal only in ideology can still make this work: the Democratic party (at its best) is the progressive party, the party of the future, and the Republican party is the party that wishes to hold onto the past. When the Democratic party is truly the party of the future, for change, for experimentation, for adaptation, we win. When we "triangulate," we may create enough confusion to get ourselves elected, but we have no mandate to govern and we sacrifice our identity.

The best Democratic leaders, those who succeed as national leaders, are those who define the future and show us how to get there. It shouldn't surprise anyone that those rare leaders, like Barack Obama, also have a "liberal" voting record, especially when, as Senator Obama accurately points out, right-wing ideologues make sure the voting deck is stacked to reflect the old divisive agenda they've perfected. But, as he also points out, "as president, I would be setting the agenda."

Contrary to the New York Times story, this election is not a left-right election. This is a future-past election and that is why I, a veteran of such politics, strongly believe the candidate of the future, who understands the dramatic changes now at work in the world and who is bold enough to propose innovative ways of dealing with them in the nation's interest, is Barack Obama. Besides, when he is elected, perhaps we will have journalism that understands the difference.

Comments

[Hoelder]

Lets say the conservative - liberal model is wrong and then so last century. Wrong, because after the USSR collapsed some of the apparaciks turned out too be more conservative as the rightest right winger in the Republican party and liberal is not even close to what Jefferson et al had in mind. In the end the whole left right confrontation collapsed and the unchecked power of greed wrapped itself in the voluptuous coat of conservatism. With the cold war over there was no more need for advertising how good capitalism was, how responsible and compassionate. Russia so unchecked capitalism and said no thank you, while here people are living to die with the dream of making it suddenly big enough to take revange on all the nay sayers.

[MissingAmerica]

This is the best I've ever read from you. You're right on. Thank you.

We hear so much about experience being needed more than ever. Einstein once said that you can't resolve a situation by the same means which were used to start it, and experience got us into this mess. What we need now is wisdom, candor and diplomacy, and Obama seems to be the only one who fills that bill.

[abroughton]

Thanks, Mr. Hart. This is one of the most lucid commentaries on the history we are living and the choices we have. Yes, Obama is the only candidate with a sure sense of today's world, and at least the beginning of a vision for the future. The other two candidates are mired not only in the past but in old, tired ways of governing and interacting with others on the planet. Two examples out of dozens: McCain would have us stay in Iraq as long as we've stayed in Japan, when we should be talking about how to leave both places; and Clinton just yesterday called for a blue ribbon panel to deal with Social Security. That means study it until it dies or whittle away at it until is is totally worthless instead of largely worthless as it is now. I am, by the way, of their generation but they do not speak to or for me. I shudder to think that either of them might be elected.

[Rockyman]

The "divisive agenda" in Nov. will be the Repugs claiming they can keep us safer than a 'negotiator' can, and the regressives will also bribe us with the notion that taxation does not need to rise and that deficits will cure themselves with some 'voodoo'. The Repugs have a way of concocting a narrative that somehow gets peoples neurons firing in a way contradictory to the voters actual well-being! They become compliant and malleable and therefore lack the ability to be "bold". Lets hope they come to their senses in '08 or we are in deep doodoo!

[Sheridan1]

You people who comment that "college kids don't know anything about the real world" - did you go to college? Perhaps some are more "learned" than we are. Perhaps it takes something intangible to change their apathy.

Obama did not start a youth movement. I am 60 and can tell you, both my twenty something kids and I have been campaigning, canvassing, and calling for Obama. And we're white...well, more beige really, pinkish beige. What color are YOU? In aint easy being...human.

There is something intangible about a leader. Some people are born to lead and I would say Obama is one of them. He doesn't walk on water, we don't think he's the messiah, we don't believe he is some sort of god. What we recognize is intelligence, empathy, authenticity, and committment. You WANT him to be an ordinary politician, but he isn't. You want him to make mistakes, and he does. Do you really think he feels his grandmother is "a typical white person" and for some reason that's an INSULT? Heck, I'm a typical white person and if you're white, so are you. Let's get passed that, shall we? This is not old vs young or black vs white - this IS old vs new.


And I, for one, am ready for something new! I would even say...fired up.

[rextrek]

I totally agree!..as a white 47yr old man..my support for Barack Obama has NOT wavered ..with all this "muck" thats been slung around..I want a different America..and Obama represents that!

[Heartlight3]

HuffPost's Pick

I'm one of those white women over 60 that is supposed to be for Hillary. I've been for Barack since I heard his speech at the convention in 2004, and my support has not wavered either. I think this country is at a choice point. We either choose to continue on the road we are on and thus end up where we are headed (faster and faster, it seems), or we say "not this time" and choose a different path. It may be too late, and we may end up where we are headed anyway, but at least if we choose a different path, there is a chance we can shift the trajectory to a different outcome. I hope we are smart enough to make a choice for change.

[DavidK08]

With this being a delegate race and HRC not being nearly capable of attaining more than Obama, everything done in support of HRC is also supporting McCain. If you think she has good odds to win, quit your job this week and play the lottery next week. You will not need your job because you will win the lottery. "yeah, he is kicking my ass, I should see if he wants to be my VP"

[SZM]

LOL. Why play the bottom of the 9th inning when the team up for bat has the lead?

[cmrinc]

I tested Obama and the results"

"A Wasted of Good Skin"

[SoulSistah]

I tested HRC and the results . . . . nothingness

..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­..........­.....
RIP - HRC Presidential Aspirations

[wilhelmR]

I highly recommend a book titled "Listen, Little Man." It was written in 1946 and it will elucidate you whether or not "those white steelworkers from Ohio" that pundits talk so much about are ready to vote for Obama in the general elections.

[nellie]

Written in 1946? That pretty much tells me all I need to know about how relevant that book is in 2008.

[Bob Egan]

You must be as smart as Bushit! He doesn't think that old "Constitution" is relevant anymore!

[1IrishdeAztlan]

Yeah, no kidding

[SZM]

The author of this book died in prison in 1957. This applies to Ohio how exactly?? You think "those white steelworkers from Ohio" are fans of existentialism and socialism? I'm willing to bet they're not. People can't even handle the math of this election and you suggest a book like that? wackadoo

[joedabear]

Yes, this is a test, not for Obama, but for the entire country.
Thanks to the rule of the so-called conservatives for the majority of the last forty plus years, we are well on our way to becoming a hated third world nation.
If we allow the same old politics of triangulation, of the Clintons, or the so-called conservativtism, of McCain to prevail, our children and probably their children and their children’s children should rightfully curse us.
I missed Senator Obama’s speech at the 2004 convention. Some months ago we watched part of his speech at one of his rallies. I turned to my wife and said; “That’s Jack Kennedy.” There was something there. Call it charisma or what you want; He has an aura about him that was present in 1960, when America was stagnant and ready to move on from the past.
I firmly hope that America gets the message and makes the right decision.

[Ono4Hoopono]

Agreed. This is OUR test to pass or fail as citizens. Obama has provided a clear choice between an engaged informed electorate led by a president who values the individual and his or her contributions and intends to put them to good use for a higher purpose, or a "Thanks, I'll take it from here" presidency of the Clintons or McCain that makes it safe for the usual suspects and business as usual. The information is out there for us to make an informed decision. Our natural instincts, our "gut-check" often serves us well, but it can be fooled, so we need objective information to properly inform our instincts. We owe it to ourselves and each other do do our OWN research on the candidates and cross reference it with a number of objective sources, and not take someone else's word for what a candidate thinks or represents, or his or her record. In fact, I would be terribly suspect of anybody who tells me what to think, whereas I would be very appreciative of someone who asked me to do my own thinking, as Obama has done. Hoping and thinking and being an informed voter beats voting out of confusion and fear anytime. Have courage America, we can do this.

[realistic2008]

If the American people have ever realized the grave mistake they made by not electing you.

[Purple Girl]

There are dialoluges in this country that have been intentionally sidelined.
I'm Pro Choice, but an against Abortion being used a readily accessible form of Birth Control. I'd rather reduce the number of Unwanted pregnancies to begin with.
I want a Small Gov't- who focuses on the Real task they are responsible for and allowing our country to be a real Free market- I don't want gov't interference nor Inc interference in our daily lives. But I do expect them to provide services that ultimately help the Citizens (not theCorps)
I beleive everyone as the right to their own religious an dsocial views- but tht as a nation those are not factors in our Collective discussions (those are matters of Personal ideology- Not state)
I don't believe we should allow the culture of Welfare to continue. We need to break the cycle, not by dumping everyone off but assuring their children will not depend on it (Universal Education standards). A national helath care system will insure a healthy work force, and less dependants to be cared for.
i think we must work in a Global Market- but that it does not Work on US! E should always remain Self Suficient. Easier to cut ties with unnecessary or unwanted 'markets'
we have a lot to talk about. Adn niether Mac nor Hilalry are the ones intellegent or unbiased enough to strike up this conversation.
Red & Blue (with a dose of white-color not the race) makes Purple!

[civitat]

Absolutely! And look at the overwhelming support Obama draws from younger voters. As Democrats, we need to weigh those views heavily. The young voters are the ones least wedded to the classic divisions that have made it so difficult to govern effectively. And they have grown up in the complex, high technology, global world: They understand the nuances of this world and how to navigate it. We need a leader with the same qualities. Viva la future!

[UtahLiberal435]

Not a 'left-right' election, but a 'future-past' election?!?!?
What mealy-mouthed crap.

And it comes from such an august source as Gary Hart, who utterly, totally wasted his opportunity in American politics by partying with bimbos aboard his yacht, rather foolishly christened the "Monkey Business."

There's also the post-election business of governing, which will be a very much left-vs-right process...in case Mr. Hart forgets. If Hillary, or Obama, wins the White House, as is probable, Congress and the Washington establishment will not just roll over and buy in to whatever progressive agenda is set forth.

Obama a candidate 'of the future'?
Perhaps, though I'm still waiting for any evidence.
But forgive me if I don't automatically swallow Mr. Hart's advice, on such hazy, pseudointellectual logic.

[AngerAndDetermination]

It is neither "hazy" nor "pseudoint­ellectual.­" It is about not making our future decisions tied to our past ones. By playing the accomodation game, a politician casts himself (reveals himself?) as a wishy-washy technocrat, a man who seeks to gain a tiny majority through endless compromise among policies, some of which should simply be done away with.

[richsmith]

Who would you propose, you bonehead? Clinton, McCain!

[Rockyman]

Maybe one day this country will grow up and realize that infidelity should not be grounds to discount contributions to public policy. Yes, sexual restraint is optimum. Yet I refuse to conflate a 'slip' in ones personal life beyond those it truly affects!

[rebeccaj]

In 1996, Bill Clinton ran "on the future." His theme was "The Bridge to the 21st Century." How dare you Hillary people try to make Obama people feel like crackpots because we have found the "next" great American politician!

Where would the country be if we had not taken a chance on "The Man from Hope" -- but, instead, had re-elected GHW Bush in 1992 or ignored the future in 1996 by electing the "experienced" Robert Dole?

All your insults to Obama supporters for simply caring about the future and being inspired by the hope of a new and wonderful Democratic leader is an insult to Bill Clinton and everything he represented.

I wish you all could grasp how much damage you are doing to the future of the party and how much damage you are doing for all Democrats in the General Election.

[rcat99]

No one man or woman is going to wave the magic wand and cure all our ills. That is precisely why this debate about experience versus inspiration is significant. We will all have to be involved in making change happen: those in positions of power and influence and also the rest of us by way of our voting, our attitudes and in our daily interactions. And what will get all of us interested and involved in making a better society? Will a bureaucrat or technician sitting in the oval office make you want to roll up your sleeves and do something? Or would it be a leader who not only has a vision for a better world but a way of inspiring the rest of us to want to listen to what it is and maybe even follow along?

[PhyloSeFiser]

Barack Obama has inspired me in this campaign. Despite all of the hits he's taken, he still seems committed to assuming the best about people and taking them at their word, unless there is clear evidence to the contrary of course. He's also inspired me to tone down my rhetoric and realize that we Americans actually have far more in common than talk radio windbags want us to believe.

Yes, a president can change the nation. At least, I believe Barack Obama can.

What this country desperately needs right now is leadship. Obama has demonstrated that quality in his temperament, and in that wonderful speech he gave on race. Clinton simply hasn't.