As a Senator, Barack Obama had the most liberal voting record. Somehow many moderates considered that Obama’s actions were an aberration and his words when campaigning revealed the underlying truth of Obama’s intentions. That was supreme silliness. Politicians’ words should never be taken at face value.
Obama-con David Brooks is surprised that Barack Obama turned out to be exactly who his actions said he was:
Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice. As Clive Crook, an Obama admirer, wrote in The Financial Times, the Obama budget “contains no trace of compromise. It makes no gesture, however small, however costless to its larger agenda, of a bipartisan approach to the great questions it addresses. It is a liberal’s dream of a new New Deal.”
…
Those of us in the moderate tradition — the Hamiltonian tradition that believes in limited but energetic government — thus find ourselves facing a void. We moderates are going to have to assert ourselves. We’re going to have to take a centrist tendency that has been politically feckless and intellectually vapid and turn it into an influential force.
Good luck turning moderates into a political force. It’s a really tough proposition. Moderates are not generally the committed ideological types necessary carry a cause Moderates also not usually have a single coherent set of ideals, which makes it harder for moderates to agree on a plan of action. But most people are moderate, so at least there is a large base of people to draw on.
