Is Obama dissing the nutroots?
James Kirchick of the New York Daily News says that President-elect Obama is in the process of throwing the (perpetually) angry and radical leftist blogosphere under the bus- and is preparing to govern from the Center.
The moonbat bloggers who have so enthusiastically libeled George W. Bush and the Republicans over the course of the past eight years are, in Kirchick's view, "impotent." That's not the story we heard during the primary campaign, of course. And it was these same people who were responsible for the Democrats' successful wresting of the blogosphere from the blogging machine that played such a major role in George W. Bush's victory in 2004, and dominating the web for Obama in 2008.
Meanwhile, David Sanger, who writes for the Democratic campaign pamphlet of record (the New York Times), shares the impression that Obama has decided to "tilt to the center," encouraging "a clash of ideas."
Sanger does so after finally conceding what the "progressives" denied throughout the campaign: that "President-elect Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination with the enthusiastic support of the left wing of his party, fueled by his vehement opposition to the decision to invade Iraq and by one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate."
Don't look now, but a member of the staff of the New York Times has finally admitted that Obama has heretofore been something other than a centrist!
Any way you look at it, Obama faces a dilemma: govern from the center, and he loses the very supporters who won him the Democratic nomination. Govern from the place where he's spent his whole career in public life- the far left- and he loses the nation.
Given those alternatives (and given Kirchick's premise), no doubt Obama has made the right choice. Time will tell whether it will prove any more viable than the alternative- or whether Obama's having run as the candidate of the Democratic party's McGovern wing will place him in the classic dilemma faced by the lady riding the tiger: how to get off without ending up being eaten.
HT: Real Clear Politics
The moonbat bloggers who have so enthusiastically libeled George W. Bush and the Republicans over the course of the past eight years are, in Kirchick's view, "impotent." That's not the story we heard during the primary campaign, of course. And it was these same people who were responsible for the Democrats' successful wresting of the blogosphere from the blogging machine that played such a major role in George W. Bush's victory in 2004, and dominating the web for Obama in 2008.
Meanwhile, David Sanger, who writes for the Democratic campaign pamphlet of record (the New York Times), shares the impression that Obama has decided to "tilt to the center," encouraging "a clash of ideas."
Sanger does so after finally conceding what the "progressives" denied throughout the campaign: that "President-elect Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination with the enthusiastic support of the left wing of his party, fueled by his vehement opposition to the decision to invade Iraq and by one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate."
Don't look now, but a member of the staff of the New York Times has finally admitted that Obama has heretofore been something other than a centrist!
Any way you look at it, Obama faces a dilemma: govern from the center, and he loses the very supporters who won him the Democratic nomination. Govern from the place where he's spent his whole career in public life- the far left- and he loses the nation.
Given those alternatives (and given Kirchick's premise), no doubt Obama has made the right choice. Time will tell whether it will prove any more viable than the alternative- or whether Obama's having run as the candidate of the Democratic party's McGovern wing will place him in the classic dilemma faced by the lady riding the tiger: how to get off without ending up being eaten.
HT: Real Clear Politics
Comments