whyroots

 
 

I took a late, long lunch today and started catching up on my reading, which I've neglected recently due to the holiday weekend and other time-consuming events in my life. Surprisingly, among all the articles I read today, the most interesting quote I came across was from a front-of-the-magazine profile of Mike Huckabee in the Dec. 1 edition of the New Yorker.

The article made me, er, understand Mike Huckabee a little more. (I add the very doubtful "er" because I don't think I can ever really understand someone who literally interprets the Bible.) Anyway, I have to give credit to the formerly-obese Baptist minister for two things: One, he called the unfurling economic crisis before nearly any presidential hopeful—on either side—did; two, he's put into words something I fear may very well be true—

"My guess is that Barack Obama will more disappoint his supporters on the far left than he will enrage his critics on the far right."

I don't want this to be true, but with the Cabinet forming along establishment lines, I fear Obama won't take the progressive mandate he was granted on Nov. 4 as far he viably could. That being said, I still harbor—yes—hope for two reasons:

(1) The Cabinet is not yet fully formed, and a few truly progressive names are still being floated around for open positions, such as Labor. (For example, Mary Beth Maxwell is the epitome of progressivism, what with her lesbian union activist credentials.)

(2) I think there's a real important and possibly unanswerable question here as to how progressive Obama really is and to what extent he can influence people who have in the past been cautiously centrist (See: all the Clintonian incrementalists he's hiring) to be bravely focused on moving our policies from the center firmly to the left side of the political spectrum.

My hope, then lies in the appointment of more high-level progressives in Obama's administration (i.e. not just lower-level appointments, such as Gaspard's), and the possibility that Obama may surprise us with the leadership needed to steer his band of establishment pols into progressive territory.

I am hopeful, then, but not really convinced that this will happen. Only time will tell.

-- Daniela Perdomo

 


Comments

Nathan Huttner

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:23:50

Thanks to your Google Reader shared items, I know you're really worried about Obama's appointments, and I can understand your fears. But I also wonder what we all actually think we were getting. To hear some progressives tell it, Obama should stack his cabinet with leading progressive intellectuals and stake progressive positions on every issue. But the history Obama's reading about a successful first term suggests there just isn't any way to be politically successful while fighting on that many fronts. The cabinet and changes in Congress suggest that Obama is going to be capable of delivering on three core campaign promises: an overhaul of health care, a refocus on Afghanistan, and a huge push to fight global warming with environmental infrastructure projects. Those are three of the leading causes in the progressive movement. If he stacks up those three wins, it will be much, much harder for Republicans to slow him down; if he fails, it will be like Bush and socialized medicine -- a potentially crippling blow. I want his appointments to deliver us those three wins, not initiate a knock 'em down, drag 'em out ideological battle that goes door-to-door on every issue. It's not the way to govern, and it's not something any progressive should reasonably expect.

 

Nathan Huttner

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:25:37

Note: by "Bush and socialized medicine," I meant "Bush and privatizing social security." Not sure what caused that misfire -- brain is sleepy.

 

Daniela Perdomo

Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:23:46

@Nathan: Sorry if I didn't make it clear in the post, but I absolutely am not of the opinion that I believe Obama should staff his Cabinet with all dyed-in-the-wool progressives. That's not at all what I'm saying. What I _am_ saying is that I would hope that he would give at least a few slots to these kinds of people so as to even out the playing field and add variety to his "band of enemies." I mean, the way I see it right now, he's keeping Gates from the Bush Administration and filling out the rest with Clintonistas. It'd be nice to have a few people in there who are further to the left, too. That's why I hope that some positions he hasn't yet nominated anyone for (like Labor and Education) will go to progressives.

 



Leave a Reply