obligatory reaction post on Obama’s healthcare address
To start things off, I should say that I’m not particularly sympathetic to the Dems’ lackluster efforts at healthcare reform. I’m willing to be persuaded that a robust public option would promote healthier outcomes and control costs better than the status quo, but it seems to me that a plan wholly dependent on subsidizing massive insurance companies to make up our health coverage shortfall will a) do nothing to limit costs and b) is extremely vulnerable to regulatory capture. That said, a major political speech demands mindless political commentary, not actual analysis, so here’s my two cents:
Obama always manages to come off as a very reasonable guy. Even his verbal tics – the “uhhs,” the “you knows” – help add to the impression that he’s a smart, earnest fellow who’s genuinely interested in thinking things through and finding the best possible solution. This aura (for lack of a better word) is particularly effective because his opponents spend so much time demonizing him as a radical Afrocentric Marxist (or something), which is wildly at odds with the calm, sensible persona he projects on national television.
Tonight, Obama leveraged this public persona to good effect. He came off as genuinely informed, eminently reasonable, and concerned only with making incremental changes to the current system. Anyone bracing themselves for a full-throated defense of a radical agenda that exists only in the minds of the World Net Daily crowd must have been reassured to hear a president who seems so calm and collected.
I think this dynamic is unfortunate, not least because there are plenty of substantive criticisms worth airing against Obama’s healthcare agenda. But instead of shaking our heads in amazement at the sheer chutzpah of the president’s claim that reform won’t add one dime to the deficit, the next few weeks will probably be spent talking about death panels and socialism. This will have the effect of encouraging everyone who is already against healthcare reform to redouble their efforts to sink Obamacare while persuading approximately no one else that handing over gobs of money to the health insurance industry under the guise of “reform” is a bad idea.
N.B. – In the interests of full disclosure, I spent the last half of the speech splitting time between Obama and FIFA 09.
Why do you frame any commentary on the speech as “mindless,” when you obviously write to make a comment? I would have preferred a more FDR style speech in which the President didn’t play nice to conservatives, but I am nonetheless impressed with Obama’s effort to place this moment of health care reform within the history of American liberalism. For quite some time, we haven’t had a president with even a knowledge of history, let alone a willingness to place his agenda squarely and publicly within a historical tradition. He should have hit this point home more forcefully — socialism? I’m talking about American liberalism this century people! — but in any case his civility and his openness about history is welcome to me. Why should one be evasive? Where do you stand, Will?Report
About the only people I hear mentioning the word “socialism” these days are the people criticising the use of the word “socialism”. I really don’t hear much regarding Obama’s Afro-centrism either. I read and listen to a lot of news and commentary, and most of the criticism is directed toward progressive policies. I hardly ever judge a speech by style because it’s so misleading. Most of Obama’s critics concede he gives a reasoned, calm speech. I was struck last night, not by anything in Obama’s speech, but by the mechanical emptiness of it all — the responses, all of it. A lot of the recent criticism of Obama has been mostly about his failure to effectively perform his job — it’s a nice diversion to think crazy people are still yelling “socialist”, but that fringe faction has been effectively marginalized — Obama supporters, or just objective commentators, are going to have to address the real concerns — progressive policies and confusion in government right about what to do with the economy, healthcare and the wars.Report
Clearly you don’t hang out with actual Republicans. My office is full of them, and “socialist” is a word I hear from their mouths several times a day.Report
Of course you do. Are you harrassing me, or flirting?
I actually meant in the media and on political blogs, which is what I thought the comment referenced. But, yes, if I go to Ida’s Truckstop Cafe for breakfast, I’m likely to hear people call Obama a “GD socialist — that SOB is out to get us, fellas” — “You’re damn right he is!” — “Did y’all hear he was setting up detention camps?” — “No, shit? Well, he’ll have to get past Ol’ Betsy (his endearing name for his shotgun on the rack in back of his Chevy pick-up, dontcha know) if he thinks he’s goin’ put me in a detention camp.”
But, back to the national conversation on blogs and such — I don’t really read much about the socialist angle — certainly not the Afro-centrim angles — but I’m open to links to prove me wrong.Report
Mike –
The Afrocentric Marxist stuff was intentional hyperbole. Although I do hear the ‘socialism’ stuff thrown around quite a bit.Report
Remind me again how much of the national conversation actually takes place on blogs. Compare and contrast that with the amount that takes place in the office, over the water cooler, etc. Granted, I work in DC, so politics comes up a lot, which may bias things, but I’m guessing my experience is not that atypical.Report
I don’t know about where other people work, but my work tends to be populated with folks who say stuff like “that’s a pretty big word” unironically. Not just here, but at my last three or four jobs. Discussions centered around who was or was not like Hitler and who was or was not interested in protecting The Children (either from terrorists or from disease). There was very much as “The Broncos, right or wrong” thing going on. At least in my old jobs.
Blogs contain a conversation insofar as it’s a lot less likely to be made fun of for using words like “insofar”. (“Hey, are you gay or something? It’s in so far!!!”) On top of that, it’s possible to put together a coherent essay in response to reading a coherent essay. At my various jobs (which, again, may not be representative), people pretty much figured out whether you wanted more of The Children to be safe or whether you didn’t care about them and, at that point, the conversation was over.
But, again, maybe it’s different at other places of business.Report
I don’t think it is. And, to be clear, when people I work with call Obama a “socialist” (which they do with alarming regularity), it’s much more like when Joe the Plumber called him a socialist than it is a detailed understanding of the philosophy of Marx and the ways in which that philosophy was implemented in Europe in the 20th century.Report
You are absolutely right, Ryan. I don’t know what i was thinking.Report
YOU LIE!Report
Hey – that’s my line!Report