I'm sure this will cause the heads of some of my friends on the left to explode...
Barack Obama promised that his foreign policy would be a return to what he says was the realist approach practiced by George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.
"My foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional realistic policy of George Bush's father, of John F. Kennedy, of in some ways Ronald Reagan," he said Friday. A voter at the town hall in Greenburg had asked Obama to respond to charges that his foreign policy was naïve."It is George Bush who has been naïve and it's people like John McCain and unfortunately some democrats that have facilitated him acting in these naïve ways that have caused us so much damage in our reputation in the world," Obama said.
Drawing on the example of the first Gulf War, Obama said that the first President Bush had "conducted a Gulf War with allies that ended up costing twenty billion dollars and left us stronger because they were realistic."
"Remember, people were saying why didn't you go into Baghdad and overthrow Saddam Hussein? The realists understood that that would be a nightmare. And it wasn't worth our national interests," Obama added.
He described this President Bush's world view on foreign policy as a big stick approach.
"Certainly George Bush's foreign policy has been dominated by the idea that because we are so militarily powerful we can dictate events around the world," he said. "If people don't like it doesn't matter because we are the biggest, toughest thing on the block. Now that is naïve."
Obama claimed that since 9-11, the way foreign policy was viewed had turned from one that understood the limits of military power and had placed a greater emphasis on diplomatic and economic strength to one that placed its sole emphasis on country's military might.
He described the conventional thinking in Washington on foreign policy as "bipartisan" and this "both ideological and highly political."
That foreign policy he argued operated from the assumption that United States could act "as a lone super power" and said that "Senator Clinton is as captive to it in some ways as John McCain and George Bush."
"I do think that Senator Clinton would understand that George Bush's polices have failed," Obama added. "But in many ways she has been captive to the same politics that lead her to vote for the war in Iraq. Since 9-11 the conventional wisdom has been you have to look tough on foreign policy by voting and acting like the republicans. And I disagree with it."
Aside from the fact that he is comparing himself to Reagan and H.W., I'd love to know what precisely is wrong about this. Sure thing, its not something Kucinich or Nader would say, but I don't think anyone would ever confuse Obama for either of those men.
To focus too much on the comparison to Reagan is, I think, to miss the point of what Obama is trying to do here. On the one hand, broadly speaking, the comparison is an accurate one. Reagan and HW, unlike W, realized that we were stronger when we worked in cooperation with like-minded allies. They, like JFK, realized that we can and often must talk to and negotiate with the people in the world we like least. On the other hand, the comparison only holds if you don't carry it too far. Would a President Obama, for example, do anything remotely similar to illegally provide advanced weapons system to the Iranians in exchange for money that can be illegally funneled to a guerrilla movement? Or would he later pardon all of the people involved in such a scheme? Of course not. Which is why to carry this comparison too far is silly.
The point, as the title is mean to imply, is to speak to Reagan Democrats in a language they will hear, understand, and hopefully embrace. People on the far left might hate Reagan, but Reagan Dems quite literally by definition don't. And like it or not, Reagan dems will be the swing voters this election, both in the upcoming primary and in the general election. If Obama can win them over, he will beat McCain in a Goldwateresque landslide.
So if you're one of those lefties who doesn't like to hear your fellow travelers invoking Ronnie's name, a piece of unsolicited and probably unwelcome advice: in the interest of electing a president who will pursue the most progressive agenda in decades, let it slide. If the Reagan Democrats are going to come home, it will only be because Obama spoke to them in a language they can understand. Frame the issues right, and most of them will get behind an agenda to provide universal health care and clean up the environment. Frame it wrong and they will vote for McCain, giving us another 4 years of W.'s policies. Think long term, people. Long term...
Subscribe to this blog's feed
