Living and breathing in the Second City
Okay. Okay. You have to stop using “Obama” and “Change” in the same breath. I’m begging. Because when I hear that, I get shooting pains through my arms and I begin to sweat in places I didn’t know existed. Needless to say, I’m getting concerned about my health.
I live in Cook County, Illinois, see, and we knew Obama long before he was a tingle in Chris Matthews’ leg. You may have heard of Cook County; it is home to Chicago. And of course, Chicago isn’t known for its inspirational politics. Charles Merriam famously called it “the only completely corrupt city in America.”
So the notion that a politician cut from the machine of Illinois politics, and specifically Chicago politics, could “change” American politics is frankly … well … absurd. And yet half this country has bought into that very idea.
These true believers were shocked last week to discover that, despite exaltations of the media elites, Barack Obama is in fact, just a politician. His reversal on retroactive immunity for telecom companies and hedging on the war in Iraq left many hardcore suppporters feeling abused and foresaken.
Indeed, folks in Chicago learned a while back about Obama’s more cynical side. He has a track record of putting party over principle.
In 2006, he endorsed the reelection of Rod Blagojevich, despite very real concerns about the Governor’s ethics. Since the endorsement, Blagojevich has come very close to full blown indictment, so close that some Illinois Democrats tried to have him recalled. But Obama’s voice has been silent on the matter.
In 2007, incumbent Cook County Board President and long-time Machine candidate, John Stroger, faced a tough challenge from a reform candidate in the Democratic Primary. Obama refused to make an endorsement.
When John Stroger was incapacitated by a stroke two weeks before the election, Obama was silent. When the Machine told us Stoger was fine and only admitted the seriousness of the stroke once the deadline for candidate filings had passed, Obama remained silent. And when the Machine replaced John Stroger with his inexperienced and unimpressive son, Todd, well Obama endorsed him.
Since Obama’s endorsement, Todd Stroger has gone on to break promises, lie to the public, and raise taxes to support six-figure salaries for his family and friends.
Even now, Obama is putting politics over principle in Illinois. Illinoisans have a chance to reform state politics by voting “yes” for a consitutional convention on a November ballot question. But Obama’s own campaign mastermind, David Axelrod, has been hired to oppose the effort.
I’m not blaming corruption in Illinois on Obama; let’s be clear. But he’s done very little to stand up for principles and good governance in a state that deperately needs principled and bipartisan leadership.
I really don’t care if you vote for Obama. I fully admit, as far as politics goes, he’s a fine candidate. He probably should win.
What I can’t stand is willful and selective naivety, that kind of feigned idealism that is clearly a surface level rationalization of baser motives. Vote for Obama, but for god sake, do it cynically.
The fog comes
on little cat feet.
It sits looking
over harbor and city
on silent haunches
and then moves on.
-Carl Sandburg
Eric
July 17th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Three cheers for cynical voting!
Rob_N
July 17th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
When did Obama become Axelrod?
I agree with your point, but the two are not one.
As to your larger point, politics can suck but I’d rather have two (or 3 or 4 or 5…) choices in this Republic than 1, or none. That said, as you well know one can replace McCain everywhere you wrote Obama and plenty of examples of similar such cynicism can also be found.
John Powers
July 17th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Sen. Obama supported Gov. Blagojevich as well. I think he did in his first election as well, when Blago was not such a known quantity.
JBP
Mike
July 17th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Also, on the Obama/Axelrod association. The left has been doing it for years with Bush/Rove. And certainly you would have to agree that who a person has in his inner circle is important, right? If Obama supports the Con Con, let him come out and say it.
Mike
July 17th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Good point Rob. And I agree with you, that McCain is also a politician, prone to putting politics above the public good. But last I checked no one is pretending that some how he’s something “new” or something different.
Robert
July 17th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
I get a little surprised when the Obama true believers, (and I gotta admit that I am one) are shocked or feel “hurt” when Obama does what politicians do. I’ve heard a few lines of shadiness vis. obama from his political past, particularly with the Chicago machine. Honestly, it makes me like him more. I’m hoping this “change” he speaks of doesn’t run squarely into political reality. I admit there’s quite a bit of hero worship out there but it’s nice to a least have a candidate that makes me want to care.
Rob_N
July 17th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Mike,
McCain is claiming to be something “new” and has lately taken to trying out a throw-Bush-under-the-bus tack.
I agree with Robert, there’s hero worship going on — on both sides, let’s be honest; just as there always is in every election — but that said I do agree with Obama’s policy proposals much moreso than McCain’s. And, yes, I’ve read up on most of those proposals. Then again, my values and principles differ from McCain’s as it is (though I’m more in line with the 2000 version of Mac than the suddenly rightward-lurching 2008 version).
Rob_N
July 17th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
PS: Re your point about “the left” and Bush/Rove… Most times I see references to Rove it is to Rove himself, not conflation with Bush. In the instances where there are discussions involving the two men, it almost always has involved cases of Rove speaking for the administration (ie, speaking for Bush) when he was still on WH staff.
If you know of anything different, please link directly to instances where this is not the case so we can discuss some particulars. Thanks.
Mike
July 18th, 2008 at 7:29 am
But that’s just the problem, Rob. You’re driving political value is inspiration … which is exactly how politician take advantage of taxpayers.
Robert
July 18th, 2008 at 8:51 am
I don’t know that my driving political value is inspiration. I think you know me well enough to know that I’m not a wide-eyed kid. That said, I think that the ability of a politician to inspire is, and rightly so, an important skill when they’re looking for the job of leading the free world. I think the U.S. needs an inspiring leader. The myth of the US is just as important domestically as it is abroad. I don’t think we should insist on the mundane or discount the “inspiration” factor of a politician as quaint. Inspiration matters. I’m a policy wonk too, and as a friend once told me, “I like the fact that Bill Clinton is willing to fight dirty for me.” Well, I think that Obama’s ability to be shady, coupled with his ability to inspire, instead of being contradictory is a necessary skill set for the highest office.
Rob_N
July 18th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Robert, it’s unclear whether Mike was talking to you or I.
I agree with your reply though, in principle.
More specifically for me, Mike, I agree with Obama’s proposals in the main — thus my support for him. My driving political value (there’s a lofty phrase) is more about progress than inspiration, leaving our nation and, if we can, our world a better place for my kids and (I hope) future generations.
Obama doesn’t “inspire” me to some higher level… Rather, I support his proposals and recognize that I he supports many of the same values and principles I do.