Comments on: Tricky, Not Transformational http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=tricky-not-transformational n. the principle of good order<br /><br /> "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:25:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: adam http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/comment-page-1/#comment-9642 adam Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:15:27 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/#comment-9642 " He is pretty far to the left, and his nods to the right are essentially head-fakes." Indeed, Obama is able to do this on a host of issues (2nd amendment, abortion, etc.) where he gives rhetorical succor to the conservative position (or at least showing an 'understanding' of the conservative position) while being a fairly paint by numbers liberal. This drives some partisans on the left, Paul Krugman comes to mind, absolutely nuts. ” He is pretty far to the left, and his nods to the right are essentially head-fakes.”

Indeed, Obama is able to do this on a host of issues (2nd amendment, abortion, etc.) where he gives rhetorical succor to the conservative position (or at least showing an ‘understanding’ of the conservative position) while being a fairly paint by numbers liberal. This drives some partisans on the left, Paul Krugman comes to mind, absolutely nuts.

]]> By: Daniel Larison http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/comment-page-1/#comment-9641 Daniel Larison Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:23:18 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/#comment-9641 That's a fair point. My point was that many conservatives have defined what a "transformational" candidate would be in just that way. I don't think Obama promises anything that would foster "new solidarity between the working poor and middle class, be they black, Hispanic, white, blue-collar, service sector or poor white collar," either, though I agree this is what he's claiming to offer. That’s a fair point. My point was that many conservatives have defined what a “transformational” candidate would be in just that way. I don’t think Obama promises anything that would foster “new solidarity between the working poor and middle class, be they black, Hispanic, white, blue-collar, service sector or poor white collar,” either, though I agree this is what he’s claiming to offer.

]]> By: M.Z. Forrest http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/comment-page-1/#comment-9638 M.Z. Forrest Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:09:48 +0000 http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/03/19/tricky-not-transformational/#comment-9638 I've read this post a few times now. The whole point of transformational thinking and new paradigms is precisely to leave the prior terms of debate. That is how we can say Pearl Harbor was a transformational event. Whatever agreeing with the Republican positions on social disintegration in the black community is, it is not not transformational. We need to at least get the premise right if we are going to debunk the argument. The transformation being argued for is a new solidarity between the working poor and middle class, be they black, Hispanic, white, blue-collar, service sector or poor white collar. Whether he can achieve that goal is a whole other matter. I don't see how this speech hurts him in attempting to make that paradigm shift. That the culture wars may indeed continue is not an indictment of the speech so much as an indictment of the campagin strategy. I’ve read this post a few times now. The whole point of transformational thinking and new paradigms is precisely to leave the prior terms of debate. That is how we can say Pearl Harbor was a transformational event. Whatever agreeing with the Republican positions on social disintegration in the black community is, it is not not transformational. We need to at least get the premise right if we are going to debunk the argument. The transformation being argued for is a new solidarity between the working poor and middle class, be they black, Hispanic, white, blue-collar, service sector or poor white collar. Whether he can achieve that goal is a whole other matter. I don’t see how this speech hurts him in attempting to make that paradigm shift. That the culture wars may indeed continue is not an indictment of the speech so much as an indictment of the campagin strategy.

]]>