Newsweek's Tomasky: Obama's Screwed Because He Naively Believes in 'Civic Virtue'
To Michael Tomasky, Barack Obama's problem is not lack of leadership or a rigid fixation to liberal ideology.
No, it's just that the president is too darn decent a guy, a veritable Mr. Smith who's gone to Washington, but perhaps in this case without the Capraesque happy ending:
...let me offer a different explanation—one that’s a little deeper. The problem rests in the realm of political philosophy. Obama has beliefs about democratic governance, and about himself as president, that dictate his behavior in battles like the debt-ceiling brawl. These beliefs were a big part of what made him so inspirational to so many people before he won the 2008 election, but they have served him—and his voters, and the country—poorly since he took office, and especially since the Republicans won control of the House of Representatives.
Obama believes in civic virtue, and in the idea that in a democracy it’s the duty of responsible leaders to reason together on behalf of something they all agree to call the common good. The fancy name for this theory of government in political-philosophy circles is civic republicanism: the “civic” part refers to action taken in the public sphere, while “republican” (a small-r republican and a big-R Republican are very different animals) signals a concern with tyrannical majorities and a faith that reasoned debate will produce a balanced result.
The Daily Beast and Newsweek contributor knows that sounds laughable and admitted as such in his next sentence:
You might be laughing already, but the concept has played a crucially important role in American history. Thomas Jefferson cherished and advanced civic-republican beliefs, as did James Madison.
But ultimately, Tomasky seems to lament, a belief in civic virtue is a fantasy and "thuggish" partisanship -- largely the fault of Republicans apparently -- is too ingrained in American political culture to overcome it:
A return to that kind of civic culture is what Obama hoped to bring about—all that talk about transforming politics. And that vision was key to his appeal during, and before, the campaign. The most famous sentence in Obama’s 2004 Democratic National Convention speech—“there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America, there’s the United States of America”—is a textbook civic-republican sentiment. After the thuggish, with-us-or-against-us posture of the Bush administration, it was something millions of Americans wanted to hear, and believe in.
Of course, Obama also has a penchant for red-meat rhetoric that appeals to liberal voters, but Tomasky ignored evidence of Obama's partisanship -- such as his "shared sacrifice" talk that is code for hiking taxes on high income earners -- while portraying Obama as a meek victim of political bullying by conservatives:
It would have been great if Obama’s theory had turned out to be correct. The right wing was always going to savage him, but maybe if the financial crisis had never happened he’d have stood a chance of uniting most of the country and isolating the “he’s a socialist” caucus to the fringe where it belongs. That, however, isn’t the hand he was dealt. So now what? He has to change. I wonder if he’s even capable of it, because discarding these beliefs will mean abandoning the fundamental premise of his presidency. But he has no choice. For one thing, he’s not even upholding his own values. A real civic republican doesn’t pay extortionists, as Obama did in the debt-ceiling debate; he calls them extortionists and leads the country on a better and truer path.
But more fundamentally, he’s in jeopardy. In Brinkley’s words, Obama’s presidency “is failing, and in danger of collapsing.” Lacerating battles await him on the budget (surprise: the debt deal didn’t solve everything!). The economy is grounded. Obama needs to quit trying to transform politics and just focus on winning fights on behalf of a careworn middle class. Otherwise, politics is going to transform him into a nicely intentioned one-term president.
# # #
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
You mean it had nothing to do
Submitted by JeffC... on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:38pm.
You mean it had nothing to do with the president repeatedly insulting his opponents or refusing to agree to significant budget cuts?
That's quite a belief system ya got there, Obie!
Submitted by almostacowboy on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:45pm.
"....it’s the duty of responsible leaders to reason together on behalf of something they all agree to call the common good."
And we all know how the progressives like to name things, like - "The Affordable Health Care for America Act" which will put private insurance companies out of business, take control of hospitals (and doctors) and provide less health care to fewer Americans. Or "The Patriot Act" which allows FBI agents to write their own search warrants. That's pretty "patriotic", isn't it. So, when they "all agree to call [it] the common good" you're pretty much assured it's only going to be "good" for them.
So a civic republican is
Submitted by tcm14 on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:46pm.
So a civic republican is someone who works together but is also someone who calls his opponents extortionists? Which one is it?
And let's not forget
Submitted by lsudolemite on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:54pm.
a civic republican tells his supporters to "get in their faces" and "bring a gun to a knife fight", and to "punish their enemies" when dealing with political opponents.
You know, the Great Unifier Obama!
Maybe Tomasky meant to call
Submitted by tcm14 on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:56pm.
Maybe Tomasky meant to call Obama a civic re-thug-lican. He must have made a typo.
So was Obama acting with
Submitted by rbosque on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:50pm.
So was Obama acting with civic virtue when he decided that children should be killed in the womb? Even after birth?
"Civic virtue"? He's a lousy 3rd rate Marxist who cannot be trusted with a child's lollypop, much less the defense of this nation.
Isn't it amazing how EVERYTHING is about Obama?
Submitted by lsudolemite on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:52pm.
These are dark times for a lot of Americans. 9+% unemployment. Unprecedented numbers of food stamp recipients, unprecedented levels of debt. People's stock portfolios are worthless, and the price of everything is through the roof. American morale is in the toilet, people are hurting.....And all liberals can think about is how this affects The One's reelection campaign.
And of course, Tomasky seems to think we don't deserve a president of such incredible character. We mortals simply can't fathom the heights of his genius, his talents, his ability to transcend base politics. No, we are all massive disappointments to the messiah, we've all let him down, and we aren't worthy of him.
I'll agree on the last point.
And yet, to hear Obama's explanations . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 8:18pm.
. . . it has nothing to do with him. He blames an earthquake in Japan, turmoil in the Arab world, economic crises in Europe, record high temperatures in America, the Tea Party, and probably genital warts and greasy wax build-up as well.
Even many on the Left are acknowledging that Obama is our National Whiner.
He's a Socialist? Who Knew??
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 6:58pm.
Can you imagine just how hard is for Barack Obama Jr. to keep from grinning ear-to-ear every time he thinks of the "Dreams From His Marxist Father" that have thus far been fulfilled through his Presidency.?
"The most famous sentence in
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 7:07pm.
"The most famous sentence in Obama’s 2004 Democratic National Convention speech—“there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America, there’s the United States of America”—is a textbook civic-republican sentiment. After the thuggish, with-us-or-against-us posture of the Bush administration, it was something millions of Americans wanted to hear, and believe in."
I always thought that Bush's "with-us-or-against-us" statement was always in reference to those who attacked us on September the 11th, and those that might continue to support these terrorist. Do NB's liberal or progressive contributors think that Bush's statement was in reference to politics in America?
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Exactly my thought.
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 12:36am.
I don't recall him acting like that with Congress--even a Democrat Congress. I think I see what liberal meme is playing here: it's that "everyone was afraid to speak out unless they be accused of being un-patriotic".
It's like Democrats with a bout of decency, like to blame that pressure against their most political urgings on the symbol of authority.
It's like most liberals are totally incapable of reading from anything but the liberal narrative.
Obama believes in civic virtue,
Submitted by CarlosS on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 7:09pm.
This kind of civic virtue?
http://nation.foxnews.com/george-soros/2011/08/08/did-soros-make-1b-bett...
Soros should be tried by
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 8:44pm.
Soros should be tried by "Nuremberg II " and put in chains. He has single handedly destroyed more wealth than all the despots of the 20th century.
Civic Virtue =
Submitted by rickbren on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 7:24pm.
blame everyone else but me. . .
Ha ha so this Newsweak buffoon took a page
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 7:28pm.
out of the Bill Clinton/Anthony Weiner book for lying and deceit. The only time Obama is being civic is when he's stealing from the American public.
Thanks 0bama
Submitted by gr29az on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 7:50pm.
For the down grade. First in our history. I guess we can now label you as our first dead beat president
What an honor. I'm so proud.
And first pot head
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 8:56pm.
And first pot head president....
Bubba didn't inhale (but Monika did) and Dubbya...well ...Dubbya is Dubbya..wtf!
P.S. American voters deserve this!
O'batears has been Lincoln, Reagan, and now Jefferson
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 8:52pm.
When he settles on a personality, let us know.
He has none of the attributes that made those men good presidents and good men. Other than his teleprompter, his best friend abandons him if does not look into the mirror to remind himself how great he is. And of course, he has millions of mindless media minions to enable his behavior.
Bullschneikies
Submitted by HockeyKid on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 9:34pm.
Obysmal comes from Chicago--the birthplace and incubator of no-holds-barred thug politics. He's never taken a single civil position on anything. His run for the presidency was the first race in which he was actually opposed--prior to that race he used political trickery and slander to remove his opponents prior to the general election. He is the epitome of slimy, underhanded, power politics that takes no prisoners and gives no quarter.
Tomasky is blind.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
it's why he can only campaign
Submitted by MidAmerica on Mon, 08/08/2011 - 9:46pm.
The obama true believers who think that obama is just too nice of a guy are overlooking the fact that he may be a lightweight. obama is not where he is today because he fought and overcame adversity. obama has had the way cleared for him all through his life. So now obama doesn't know what to do when confronted by opponents that he must deal with himself. That's why he 'leads from behind'. He's never learned to be in charge.
It seems that some Republicans agree with that assessment.
Submitted by hayate1 on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 4:31am.
Barack Obama is not a skillful strategist like Bill Clinton. He is not a gifted rhetorician like Ronald Reagan. Nor is he a bold and inspiring leader like Abraham Lincoln. And he can’t seem to shake himself loose from the strings that attach him to the trial lawyers, to big labor, and, surprisingly, to the standard banker-economists who got us into the mess we are in now. But he is an honest man. He is intelligent, analytical, and knowledgeable. And he tries hard to think through the dilemmas which confront us and to tell us clearly and straightforwardly what he wants to do and why he wants to do it.
But it doesn’t seem to work.
Contrast this to the politicians he is up against. When John Boehner at the height of the debt ceiling crisis answered him on the national media he simply did not tell the truth. He said that the president would not compromise, would not take yes for an answer, and wanted it all his own way. But he cannot have forgotten that he had negotiated Obama into far more cuts than Obama and his caucus had wanted, thought wise or even palatable in return for a modest increase in revenue to be achieved by closing egregious and unfair loopholes in personal and corporate taxes. This is the same compromise recommended by the “Gang of Six,” which included the extremely conservative and admirably patriotic Senator Tom Coburn, by the bipartisan Bowles-Simpson group, and by Republican economists like Martin Feldstein. It was the Speaker who, Arafat-like, walked away from that deal because he concluded he lacked the skill or the muscle or the spine to sell it to his own caucus. Let it be said that this compromise included recalculating the cost of living formula for social security—a change every responsible economist recommends—but the equally rigid Nancy Pelosi rejected.
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
"Barack Obama is not a
Submitted by MightyMouth on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 10:28am.
"Barack Obama is not a skillful strategist like Bill Clinton. He is not a gifted rhetorician like Ronald Reagan. Nor is he a bold and inspiring leader like Abraham Lincoln."
Agreed, but he, and the Media, and damn near half the country somehow think he is all dat! The Republicans, like a good parent, need to put limits on the child. If that is "rigid" in your mind, so be it!
Another unattributed post stolen from elsewhere.
Submitted by The Vet on Wed, 08/10/2011 - 6:32am.
First clue - it is not rife with stupid and grammatical errors.
STOLEN from the Daily Beast without attribution. The entire post. Everything except his stolen signature.
Barack Obama is not a skillful strategist like Bill Clinton. He is not a gifted rhetorician like Ronald Reagan. Nor is he a bold and inspiring leader like Abraham Lincoln. And he can’t seem to shake himself loose from the strings that attach him to the trial lawyers, to big labor, and, surprisingly...
Obama is all that, and that is his problem
Submitted by hayate1 on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 4:39am.
He is not a venal, ignorant and arrogant politician who will say anything at all to get elected. He is, however guilty of over-committing to do one thing which he almost immediately jettisons for something else. It is not lying or playing, it is his effort to compromise and create trust.
Read this article from a Republican economist who worked for Reagan:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/08/06/obama-is-too-good-for-u...
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
I love it when a troll starts with name dropping.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 5:50am.
"A Republican economist who worked for Reagan"
My first question is "So what?" That doesn't necessarily mean what he is saying is correct. Do you think we are so stupid to think that "Oh, he used to work for Reagan, so he must be all knowing!"?
We are not group think mobs like the majority of Democrats.
What is Obama?
He has zero experience.
He has held more fundraisers than the red cross.
He has blamed others so much that I believe he suffers from this.
Not to mention the illegal wars he is in charge of.
Not to mention his public response to the Tennessee floods and the BP oil spill.
We Are The 53%
"He is not a venal, ignorant
Submitted by MightyMouth on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 10:33am.
"He is not a venal, ignorant and arrogant politician who will say anything at all to get elected"
Ok then point to ONE position or stance he has taken where he has not been at least one of those descriptors.
How many time you gonna link that one dumbass Beast article?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 11:02am.
By my count this is like the 5th time. I'm glad it gave you a woodie, but the guy is not a "Republican" anymore than Dick Morris is a Democrat now.
Enough already. Nobody cares.
He's not an economist either.
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 11:15am.
Charles Fried is NOT and never was an economist. He was Solicitor General for Reagan. Last time I check, that had nothing to do with economics.
The mental midget apparently missed this, which BTW is from his own beloved Daily Beast:
Charles Fried teaches constitutional law at Harvard Law School. He was Solicitor General during the second Reagan Administration,
Right
Submitted by hayate1 on Wed, 08/10/2011 - 4:20am.
I apologize, he is not an economist. Too hasty, my research. The point I made is still valid and true.
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
The two thinnest books in the
Submitted by MikeB on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 10:17am.
The two thinnest books in the history of the universe would be "The Civic Virtues of Barak Hussein Obama" and "Barack Hussein Obama's Greatest Accomplishments". Both books would consist of one page with both sides blank. And of course both books would be required reading in American Schools.
Baloney!
Submitted by Wildcatter1980 on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 10:40am.
My first thought when I read the headline.
Only the pinheads of the liberal secular progressives and their sycophant lemings would even think the Tea Party is responsible for the financial mess the government and the country is in.
--
If you want to know what liberal secular progressives are really doing, just listen to what they are accusing others of.
Recommended reading: Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg
TACTICS TELL US THE REAL PERSON
Submitted by reelman46 on Tue, 08/09/2011 - 2:11pm.
AUG 9.2011…Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks to a packed crowd during a Town Hall meeting Aug. 8 in Nashua, N.H. Republican 2012 contender Mitt Romney’s campaign is calling “disgraceful” actions reportedly planned by the Obama re-election campaign to portray the Republican frontrunner as “inauthentic, unprincipled” and “weird.”
Politico reported Tuesday that the Obama team is planning a “ferocious personal assault ” and character assassination on Romney, who it suspects will become the eventual 2012 Republican nominee.
“Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney,” a prominent Democratic strategist close to the White House told Politico.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/09/romney-calls-disgraceful-obam...
=====
WHEN THE UTOPIAN SOCIALISTS RUN…ITS NEVER EVER ON THE RESULTS OF THEIR TOXIC POLICIES!!!
=====
SCHEXNAYDER’S POLITICAL LAWS
LAW 1:
All the national democrats have are distractions, lies and smears to push or protect their secular socialist policies.
(toxic policies demand these tactics so they NATURALLY MUST use them daily.)
LAW 2:
The national democrats (aka SECULAR socialists) have no ethical or moral boundaries.
(so you should never be shocked by what they NATURALLY MUST say or do)
http://theconservativecrawfish.wordpress.com
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish<
Which
Submitted by hayate1 on Wed, 08/10/2011 - 4:26am.
of the Republican candidates will run on accomplishments? Which of the right wing media will talk about accomplishments instead of spending their time falsifying peoples records, facts and reality?
Sure, Obama will attack his opponent, he learned that it works well from the Republican play book. That is exactly the point the Reagan lawyer made.
"Facts are not decided by how many people believe them. Truth is not determined by how loudly it is shouted."
Obama learned to attack his opponent---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 08/10/2011 - 5:09am.
from the Republican playbook, huh?
You are so full of crap, hayate, that the smell must cause your eyes to water.
A liberal loaded with absolutely nothing but lib BS talking points, and even knowing and expecting that you will spout inanity after inanity, your manure output is still mind boggling.
MD