Walter Reed my lips
Is it too early in the presidential campaign for my first "Democrats don't deserve to win" post? Maybe, but it's a little shocking and disappointing that even now, when Republicans are more vulnerable than ever on national defense, Barack Obama can't bring himself to make that obvious point. Instead, at yesterday's VFW convention, Obama encased his critique of Bush's military policy entirely within the GOP-created frame that that Republicans are the party of "strength" and that he will endeavor to be as much like them as possible.
As he spoke critically of the president's war strategy, the room fell silent, but the senator drew applause as he pledged to improve services for veterans. "Whatever disagreements we have on policy, there will be no daylight between us when it comes to honoring the men and women who serve and keeping faith with our veterans," Mr. Obama said."This is not a partisan issue. This is not a Democratic or a Republican issue."
Um, this damn well ought to be a Democratic issue, and a serious presidential candidate would make it one. "There will be no daylight between us"? Does Obama really mean to say that Democrats will be every bit as bad as Republicans on veterans issues? I'd think vets would want a little daylight between future treatment of vets and the current catastrophies of Walter Reed, budget squeezes and re-deployment of injured soldiers.
Whenever a partisan says something isn't a partisan issue, what they mean is that it's the issue of the other party but they're on board with it. Even as he criticizes Bush, Obama can't challenge the utterly wrong conventional wisdom that supporting veterans — and by extension active-duty soldiers and a strong national defense in general — is a Republican position. I expect that kind of cowering, self-defeating mindset from Hillary Clinton, but Obama should know better.
Comments
I agree with you it's odd that Obama didn't address Walter Reed et al, but I don't think it's fair to say he "encased his critique of Bush's military policy entirely within the GOP-created frame that that Republicans are the party of 'strength' and that he will endeavor to be as much like them as possible."
I think Obama's point here is to break out of a GOP-created frame, in regards to the issue of who does or doesn't "support the troops". He wasn't qualifying his criticism of Republicans on defense; Obama's platform is based largely on Bush's military fuck-ups. But within that criticism, he encases an effort to raise the level of discourse by diverting it from GOP oversimplification. Because, as terrifying as a Romney or Giuliani presidency would be, blaming them for Walter Reed is bordering on Rovian.
This is what I like about Obama: He's the first serious candidate in my lifetime who doesn't have to manipulate reality to make his point. You rarely get the impression Obama's saying something solely because his advisers told him to. Whether or not that will play in American politics remains to be seen, but I respect him for his devotion to it thus far.
Posted by: dean @ t.a.m.s.y. | August 23, 2007 1:16 PM
Oh, but generally I agree with you that the Democratic Party is squandering opportunity in a mind-blowing fashion.
Posted by: dean @ t.a.m.s.y. | August 23, 2007 1:20 PM