'The better angels' side with Obama Comment from Historian J. Ellis

[1776Forever]

I found this comment very telling and wanted to share it:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ellis19jan19,0,3818349.story?coll=la-opinion-center

'The better angels' side with Obama

The candidate's appeal to a more unified electorate rings historically true.

By Joseph J. Ellis
January 19, 2008

Alively debate has developed in these pages and in the blogosphere about the viability of Barack Obama's politics of hope. Critics of Obama's promise to bring us together -- blue states and red, young and old, women and men, blacks and whites -- have described his vision as a naive pipe dream that would be dead on arrival if he were elected president.

Central to the critique is the claim that Obama's message flies in the face of U.S. history, that partisanship is, as one critic put it, "the natural condition of politics." Zero-sum, "I'm right, you're wrong" battles are fundamental to the republic. From the beginning of our history, so the argument goes, an Obama-like message has been a rhetorical veneer designed to obscure the less-attractive reality of irreconcilable division and an inherently adversarial party system.

While you can certainly marshal evidence to support this interpretation, very few of the so-called founding fathers (save perhaps Aaron Burr) would agree with it. And the first four presidents -- George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison -- would regard it as a perversion of all that they wished the American republic to become....

Let the argument about the viability and practicality of Obama's major message go forward. But as it does, even his critics need to acknowledge that he is not a weird historical aberration. His message has roots in our deepest political traditions. Indeed, it is in accord with the most heartfelt and cherished version of our original intentions as a people and a nation.

Historian Joseph J. Ellis' latest book is "American Creation."

[Frances]

1. I want the country to unite as well

But using Reagan, who was a successful and subtle racist and union-busting corporist, as an example of a good leader is not unifying in my opinion.

And saying that the REpubs were the party of ideas in the last 10-15 years when their main ideas were less regulation (and more corruption and waste--think New Orleans, crony contracts and kickbacks in the form of campaign contributions, more global warming, more e-coli, more mine disasters) and less taxation of the super rich (and an ever increasing gap between the haves, Bush's base, and the have-nots) is sick.

[1776Forever]

2. I can't disagree and do feel that Obama should have been more explicit in his remarks

I would hope Obama would comment again with more in-depth analysis on what he really meant when he said this.

It is evident however that the Reagan Administration did get a lot of malicious programs through with just his charm - which is really unfortunate that so many people were affected in a bad way by them and still thought he was looking out for the middle class!

I detest Reagan and his legacy!

[Frances]

3. I hope Obama figures a way out of this box

because I will vote for him in the general if he is the nominee.