Today marks the final day of Bill Kristol's column in the NYT op-ed section. I'll miss his wackiness and illusory comments about this country as a center-right nation. Who can forget his quoting newsmax's faulty reporting on BO's presence for Jeremiah Wright's incendiary sermons? Even though the son will never compare to the father's inspiration, he seems to be a light for conservative thinkers at some level.
Nevertheless, he said something today that I agree with:
"The answer lies in the hands of one man: the 44th president. If Reagan’s policies had failed, or if he hadn’t been politically successful, the conservative ascendancy would have been nipped in the bud. So with President Obama today. Liberalism’s fate rests to an astonishing degree on his shoulders. If he governs successfully, we’re in a new political era. If not, the country will be open to new conservative alternatives."
I think Kristol's wrong to invoke the well worn liberal-conservative dichotomy, but if Obama proves wildly successful, he could lay the ground for a shift in policy thinking away from the market-obsessed, neoliberalism that erupted with Reagan. Just as Ike, Nixon, and Ford tolerated and, in some cases, bolstered the New Deal, Clinton wasn't a dramatic turn away from Reagnism and Reagonimics. Obama has a steep hill to climb. If he can make it through two terms, right the ship, demonstrate the permanence and necessity of his administration's policies, then he has the opportunity to build something new. It's far too early to tell what that new entity could be, but "success" is a pretty low bar and his achievements might not have to be monumental.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
only thing i would disagree with is that "success" is, in this case, asking quite a bit. while i don't think that the parallel some have drawn between this election and that of 1932 is quite accurate, obama undoubtedly walked into a touchy situation and will be expected to produce quickly.
you ever watch kristol on fox news?
Post a Comment