No account yet?
Subscription Options
Subscribe via RSS, or
 
Free Email Alert

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail alert with links to Dallas Blog posts.

New Site Search
Login
Bill DeOre
Click for Larger Image
Dallas Sports Blog
Local Team Sports News
NBA.com: Mavericks News
Texas Rangers News
DallasCowboys.com
FC Dallas News
Stars Recent Headlines
Good News Dallas
Is That What We Want? PDF Print E-mail
by Bill Murchison    Wed, Dec 5, 2007, 01:53 PM

The extended therapy session informally known as the 2008 presidential campaign takes new twists., new turnings.  We might manage, by the time it’s over, 11 months hence, to figure out what we really want as a nation. Though one tends to doubt it. And if we do figure it out, we’ll almost surely change our minds.

Maybe it does take all these months to work out our feelings.  It’s the only possible rationale for watching the candidates so long, so intently.

This week’s story?   Huckabee against Obama in ’08.  Actually, that’s an extrapolation from circumstances, impressions, and statistics.  but we’re pointed that way. Barack Obama as the Democratic candidate, Mike Huckabee as his Republican adversary.  This, thanks to the latest poll results in Iowa, along with a great deal of head-scratching n the media.

Obama-Huckabee is one I’ll believe when it see it, and then probably only after a half a bottle of cheap chardonnay.   Still, it means – get ready – that Democrats are looking for a man who is his own man (and maybe also can Bring Us Together), whereas Republicans are looking for a man of the people.

There is a common thread here with some strength, and we might examine it for a minute.

What people seem to want is something different from what they have.   There’s an awful lot of been-there-done-that to the voter reactions we  read about.  We’ve had the Clintons (and there are those who would say the Clintons have had us!). They just keep circling the heliport: landing,  taking off, landing again.   Nor was Mrs. Clinton, outside feminist circles,  much valued for herself; it was more a case of  two for the price of one.

To Republicans – so I speculate – Huckabee just looks and sounds different.  (May I pause to claim credit for identifying him five years ago as a terrific speaker, with a possible future in the party, after I heard him address some Republican gathering or the other?) He’s got that good old Southern preacher’s cadence, and he kind of socks it to Wall Street.

But do The People  want him  Do they want Obama?  You’ll have to work hard to convince me they do.  “I want to be president of the United States of America,” says Obama.  He’d be the first such president since maybe Monroe. We all know the degree of unity in the United States. Propose something; watch the hit squads go into action.  How long before Obama has to move from glittering generality to sharp-edged specificity?

A little populist rhetoric from a Southern governor can fire up the troops, but a Republican less than committed to free market capitalism – the best economic system in the world – is riding for a fall.

Right now the sheer diversion of  hearing and seeing these two keeps the accolades piling up.  We may soon enough want something else new.  One shouldn’t doubt there’s a sincere interest in unity – given the severe disunity that mars our present politics.  No doubt what we call  populism (though the historians might call it something else) appeals to many.  Yet a deep, and deepening suspicion, grows. It  is that in the internet-24/7 news cycle era, the new and fresh has to be newer and fresher than ever before to hold our interest, because when it quits being new and fresh, that’s all she wrote. ( I’m advised to check out the song charts if I don’t believe it,  but I haven’t been able to understand most lyrics since “I’m Leavin’ on a Jet Plane.”) 

On will go our therapy session for a while.  We’ll figure out in due course what we want, but I wouldn’t count on the sensation’s lasting. Even Hugo Chavez, we note,  is wearing out his welcome in Venezuela, as whoever we elect president will do after a while.  The Aussies last month  threw out their best prime minister in over half a century:  tired of him. For  the familiar, the rooted, the established, the traditional these aren’t encouraging times; which is why you hear us conservatives sighing more often than laughing.

Comments (5)add comment
...
written by RelicMM , December 06, 2007

Conditions in our nation and the world are so bad that we could be mercifully spared an election that could destroy the great American experiment in republican government. God will not be mocked forever.


...
written by michael a. , December 06, 2007

I don't understand why you are sighing. Conservatives controlled all three branches of our government for six years. If you can't get things like you want them in six years, I'm not sure you ever can.

Anybody that hitches their star to the Iraq war will go down; John Howard, Hillary Clinton, John McCain. Starting a war based on faulty intelligence is hardly traditional and so even the mean ole Democrats start looking more palatable when one party runs it all into the ground.

You may get the opposite of that in 2008 when Democrats may control the Congress and the White House and vote in some liberal Supreme Court Justices for good measure. Then conservatives can see how liberals have felt so far this century and the pendulum continues to swing.



...
written by Grr , December 07, 2007

Mr. Murchison,
I do not recall who said the following, but it seems to be true: "the Republicans know it's bad, but they really don't know how bad it is." With all due respect, it is not helpful to draw conclusions from politics in Australia or from the weirdness in south America. What we need to restore our status as relevant is a very smart leader. I'd vote for a smart Republican, but there aren't any running for president. What do we have, really, if we are thinking about our international stature? Senator Clinton. The world would love us for this. Put away the no-nothing "go it alone" policies that have ruined our reputation. Let's be clear, Hillary (and for that matter President Clinton) are not wild-eyed liberals that want to tax you into poverty and allow interspeices marriage. Forget about the evangelical stuff. People, now more than ever, feel free to publicly discuss their faith. God is on every street corner & it hasn't seemed to help. Tell me, regardless of political party, who is the smartest?

Oh, & thank you and your family for your great service to our community.



...
written by Mia , December 08, 2007

The Aussies threw out John Howard because they were tired of him? Does boredom with a leader lose elections? Maybe. I thought conservatives liked "boring." From what I've read, the Aussies thought Howard was too cozy with Bush.


...
written by Citizen Jane , December 16, 2007

I would say Bill Clinton is the smartest president we have had in a long time (able to fill in the NY Times crosswords in pen in 10 minutes, etc.), but does that make him the best? Not by a LONG shot, IMHO. I would suggest looking for the WISEST candidate, not the smartest. Try Duncan Hunter - he was wise enough to vote against the 1986 amnesty bill - against his own mentor, Ronald Reagan. RR eventually admitted that supporting that bill was one of his biggest mistakes.



Write comment
smaller | bigger
password
 

busy
 
< Prev   Next >
 

© 2010 Dallasblog.com, the Dallas, Texas news blog and Dallas, Texas information source for the DFW Metroplex. - DALLAS BLOG
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.