Ron Radosh

January 21st, 2009 7:24 pm

Obama the Neoconservative?

Yesterday, Gabriel Schoenfeld asked whether President Barack Obama will bring the neoconservatives back to the Democratic Party? It might seem a preposterous question, given that during the campaign the Right labeled Obama as both the most left-wing member of the Senate and as a closet socialist. But, Schoenfeld argues, the themes he has laid out—personal responsibility, the need to support strong homes with fathers active in parenting, a liberal immigration program that welcomes rather than rejects immigrants for their contribution to America—-are themes first brought forth by the original neo-cons when they were still Democrats, back in the 70s during the era of Scoop Jackson and Daniel P. Moynihan.

These issues are very personal for Obama. He was abandoned by his African father, and later by his mother- a woman of the 60s who left him with her parents when she was intermittently away on anthropological exploits. Obama’s search for an identity as an African-American man has led him to value and to create for himself a stable nuclear family. He now appears to be on a crusade to do what people like Moynihan and Bill Cosby were unable to do: rescue the black family.

And in the area of foreign policy, where neo-cons in our own age have been most influential, Obama has echoed many of their concerns, and has adopted his own variant of a hawkish foreign policy. He has emphasized the need to win in Afghanistan, not to allow Iran to go nuclear, and has supported Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas terrorists. Yet, Obama left many of the specifics out; what would he do differently about Iran, North Korea, wiretapping of phones to monitor terrorist chat, etc? Would he, in fact, really do much that was different from the Bush administration?

This question disturbed a left-leaning journalist, TNR’s John B. Judis and probably many others. Calling his speech “a disappointing hodge-podge,” Judis writes that it was too abstract and was neither “original nor compelling.” Judis did not like his call to get rid of “worn-out dogmas,” fearing, it seems, that Obama was just not talking about those of the right. Judis was also disturbed when Obama said that “Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred.” Judis writes: “This strikes me as either boilerplate or an exaggeration of the danger posed by al Qaeda. It is reminiscent of George W. Bush and his catch-all war on terror. Obama and the country clearly face grave problems overseas; but they can’t be reduced to a ‘far-reaching network.’” Really?? And reminiscent of Bush? This, as we know, is about the nastiest smear a liberal could make against Obama.

Page 1 of 2 Next ->

Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.

37 Comments

1. David Thomson:

Barack Obama is an intellectually shallow man. He is now the very busy president of the United States. When will Obama find the time to catch up on his reading? At this point in time, he is an economic illiterate—just like John McCain. I am very concerned about the damage he could cause to the nation’s economy. Is he sufficiently prepared to be the elected leader of this country? Oh well, we will find out soon enough.

Jan 22, 2009 - 5:11 am 2. narciso:

I hope you’re right, Ron, but I fear you are wrong. It’s reminiscent of the Clinton years, but at least then, they had a token presence in Penn Kemble; at USIA. Everybody he has put in power are the ‘realists’ who would pave over Israel for a drop of Saudi oil. Followers of the Walt/Mearsheimer school of Arab greavance appeasement like Samantha Powers and Robert Malley. Martin Peretz has lost his grip on reality I’m afraid.

Jan 22, 2009 - 7:50 am 3. Anton:

“cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent”

Didn’t Nacy Pelosi and company just re-write the rule of Congress to acheive exactly that?

Judis doesn’t think that AQ is a “far-reaching network of violence and hatred” What are they the Boy Scouts?

If Obama is serious he will need to watch his back, his own party will be after his head.

Jan 22, 2009 - 10:07 am 4. David Thomson:

We should never overlook one important fact: Barack Obama is president of the United States mostly because so many guilt tripped white liberals wanted to prove that “I’m not a racist!” He is definitely a product of reverse racism. A white man would have never been elected with such a thin resume. It is indeed very fair to describe Obama as the affirmative action beneficiary. But that’s water over the bridge. Obama is now going to reside in the White House for minimally the next four years. Can he get his act together? How is he going to get the time to do the reading he should have done ages ago?

Jan 22, 2009 - 12:48 pm 5. Richard Wells:

David 1 & 4: curious, what reading should O be catching up on?

Jan 22, 2009 - 1:07 pm 6. David Thomson:

“David 1 & 4: curious, what reading should O be catching up on?”

I might as well suck up to Ron Radosh and encourage Barack Obama to visit this very blog to learn more about the Islamic nihilist threat to the Western World. This alone, in a relatively short time, should help the new president realize that our existential foes are not interested in Negotiations 101 tactics to achieve a win-win agreement satisfactory to all parties concerned. No, they wish to humiliate and defeat us. Compromise is not possible. This is indeed a fight to the death.

President Obama also foolishly adheres to the “FDR saved American capitalism” myth. Sadly, the majority of Americans also embrace this gross interpretation of history. I encourage the new White House occupant, for a start, to read these books:

1.) The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, by Amity Shlaes
2.) FDR’s Follies, by Jim Powell
3.) New Deal or Raw Deal: How FDR’s Economic Legacy Has Damaged America, by Burton Folsom, Jr.
4.) Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt’s America, Mussolini’s Italy, and Hitler’s Germany, 1933-1939, by Wolfgang Schivelbusch

Jan 22, 2009 - 1:58 pm 7. Pajamas Media » Obama the Neoconservative?:

[...] the entire story here [...]

Jan 23, 2009 - 8:39 am 8. John Galt:

This article is total garbage!!!

Jan 23, 2009 - 8:51 am 9. Jim Baker:

Too much hope to believe in this article, Ron. I think Obama is one of the usual collectivist suspects. He will show his ass when he comes down from the mountain top?

Jan 23, 2009 - 9:12 am 10. Richard Wells:

David (6) Quite a list there. I’ve perused the synopses of a few of these @ Amazon. They all seem to be saying much the same thing, so I’d like to think someone in O’s administration (inner circle) has heard or read the arguments. I’m just hoping that whatever decisions are made, they play out to the good of all. We’ll see.

Jan 23, 2009 - 10:40 am 11. Pat J:

From the author – “He has emphasized the need to win in Afghanistan…”
———————————————–
No he hasn’t. From Obama’s inaugural address: “We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan.”

A big difference and a needed one.

This article is most insulting considering the vile path the neocons sent us down the last eight years under Bush.

Jan 23, 2009 - 12:03 pm 12. David Thomson:

“They all seem to be saying much the same thing, so I’d like to think someone in O’s administration (inner circle) has heard or read the arguments.”

This is the question that you must unavoidably ask: what’s in it for them? I have cynically learned that compelling logical arguments may not carry the day if the listener does not perceive that they will somehow increase their power and fatten their pocketbook. The myth that FDR saved capitalism opened the door to the “elites’ desiring more authority over others and it also provided them with lucrative careers. The very day that the consensus viewpoint agrees that Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. did not know what he was talking about concerning the depression era and the New Deal—will result in the elimination of the economic doctrines underpinning the Democratic Party and “moderate” Republicanism. They have a lot to lose!

Jan 23, 2009 - 12:44 pm 13. David W. Lincoln:

Neo-conservative? On which planet?

As long as BHO continues to be as deaf as a post, and as blind as a bat
to those who stick up for the scientific method when it comes to climate change, (for their efforts, they are slagged with the label of
climate change denier by those who continue to copiously imbibe from the koolaid of kyoto) – avoidance of the truth is not an acceptable display of neo-conservatism.

Jan 23, 2009 - 1:58 pm 14. Bilgeman:

Mr. Radosh:

“For now, I wish our new President well in his effort to unite our nation. I hope he intends to move in the direction his words suggest that he will.”

In that case, you might have to support a war against the Sudan.

It is supporting a genocide by Islamic militias against Christians and Animists in the Darfur region.

It is a friendly base for al-Qaeda

It allows the practice of chattel slavery to exist within it’s borders.

Could any war be MORE uniting than this?

Jan 23, 2009 - 4:21 pm 15. Cybergeezer:

Neo-President; Neo-Terrorist; Neo-Democrat; Neo-whore.
So; What’s new?

Jan 23, 2009 - 5:21 pm 16. Shawn:

Bilgeman:

You go ahead Rambo. I will never support the Democrats in any war. They deserve every knife in the back for thier performance against the Reps.

Jan 23, 2009 - 5:46 pm 17. Markus:

David,

don’t you think that laissez-faire and financial deregulation have really taken a beating intellectually as a result of the current meltdown? You can’t blame everything on Barney Frank!

Even Greenspan, who knows the works of Ayn Rand by heart, acknowledges that he was wrong in thinking that the financial markets did not need oversight: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html

Regarding Radosh’s article, he’s correct in the sense that the neocons and the liberal internationalists that rule the Democratic foreign policy establishment agree on the same ends, abstract universal ideas like “democracy” and “freedom” and “globalization” which are thought to be more important than cultural, religious and ethnic ties that traditionally brought people together. Also, an committment toward the continued deindustrialization and secularization of America. The quintessential example of someone who could be very comfortable in both the “neocon” and the “liberal Democrat” camp would be David Brooks.

Jan 23, 2009 - 8:06 pm 18. Suzanne:

If Obama des indeed wish to “rescue the black family”, perhaps he should rethink funding abortions overseas and his promise to pass the FOCA, which will kill even more black babies.

Jan 23, 2009 - 8:43 pm 19. Robert Hurley:

Cybergeezer – Neo-wingnut

Jan 23, 2009 - 8:50 pm 20. RAP:

“turn the Republicans into the stupid party” They already are the stupid party as McCain-Palin proved so brilliantly last fall. The Pubs would do well to get rid of the neo-cons like Radosh. They are America second people(we know who is first). They are as loyal to America as the man Radosh wrote about Julius Rosenberg.

Jan 23, 2009 - 11:45 pm 21. David Thomson:

“don’t you think that laissez-faire and financial deregulation have really taken a beating intellectually as a result of the current meltdown? You can’t blame everything on Barney Frank!”

But I do blame Barney Frank and the Clinton administration for most of the mess. The forcing of lending institutions to provide mortgages to minorities with poor credit histories open the flood gates. Soon afterwards, many white people demanded roughly the same deal. There was no turning back.

Alan Greenspan is also married to ultra left-winger Andrea Mitchell. Please note that he hesitates to be precise about the regulation needed to keep matters under control. I am personally not against regulation per se. We instead need to be wary of overkill regulation.

Jan 24, 2009 - 12:27 am 22. Post-inaugural thoughts « The Y Files:

[...] Obama’s emphasis on the role military force has played in maintaining American democracy.

Jan 24, 2009 - 1:15 am 23. Real Clear Politics - News - Elections 2008 - Opinion - Commentary - TIME:

[...] by Obama’s emphasis on the role military force has played in maintaining American democracy.

Jan 24, 2009 - 5:22 am 24. Mike2:

Good article. Maybe we are going to see a new version of triangulation and that’s why so many Clinton people are in the new administration.
———————————-
Who is John Galt?

Jan 24, 2009 - 5:31 am 25. SAF:

Mr. Radosh:

You raise interesting points. Its amazing how inflamed some are on this forum. As it turns out I live in America and hope Obama does very well even though I didn’t vote for him.

I agree with you that many of his statements are conservative. And I think another point of your article is the question mark at the end of the title. We will see soon enough if it is just hollow rhetoric or does he put things into action.

But Obama isn’t wrong in these statements; people have not taken responsibility for all their actions. I was impressed years ago when Cosby had the stones to criticize the black community. It paved the way for Obama.

Time will tell.

Jan 24, 2009 - 8:32 am 26. Bandit:

Good job RAP – you can go back to rereading The Protocols now.

Jan 24, 2009 - 10:18 am 27. David W. Lincoln:

As long as too much freight is placed upon ideology, and not enough freight is placed on the other ways to get us to the future (the schools of history), we will continue to see cultural poverty by those who claim BHO is a
neo-con.

Then again, I am not an American, so I use a different prism to view life.

Jan 24, 2009 - 11:23 am 28. deguello:

Obama a neo-con? Sure, and Bush was America’s Churchill,Brittany Spears a paragon of motherhood,and Robert Reich a Navy Seal. Conservatives need to stop taing drugs and begin to take action to oppose this Hugo chavez wanabee!

Jan 24, 2009 - 2:35 pm 29. Bud Simmons:

Maybe he’s a closet Limbaugh listener
He doesn’t want anyone else to listen so he’s not exposed
Bud

Jan 24, 2009 - 2:52 pm 30. Bilgeman:

#16 Shawn:

“You go ahead Rambo. I will never support the Democrats in any war. They deserve every knife in the back for thier performance against the Reps.”

Turn around, ace, and look at the mural that resulted from my post going right over your head.

Obama may want to prove his chops as a “strong military” type of President. (Personally, I don’t buy it…but he might think it a necessity to being re-elected).

As I look around, I see that Sudan would offer some very advantageous political reasons for making war upon them.

Basically, these can boiled down to 3 questions:

1) Do you approve of Islamic terrorism?
2) Do you approve of state-sponsored genocide?
3) Do you approve of chattel slavery?

All three, as I pointed out, are present TODAY in the Sudan.

Even the Euro-weenies might get onboard for that mess…they’ve dithered about it, along with everyone else, for long enough.

And when we win, Obama will have been the Emancipator of the Sudanese slaves.

We already know this guy models himself on FDR, and here’s a chance for him to stand in Lincoln’s company…legacy-speaking.

If the O-bots keep kissing his behind as fervently as they have, I can see him being seduced and start thinking those kinds of Big Thoughts.

Jan 24, 2009 - 9:34 pm 31. Pat J:

Obama a neocon? I don’t think so. He’s the neo-fascists worst nightmare.

Fuck John Galt.

Jan 24, 2009 - 9:41 pm 32. Time » Blog Archive » A few belated post-inaugural thoughts:

[...] Obama’s emphasis on the role military force has played in maintaining American democracy.

Jan 24, 2009 - 9:56 pm 33. chris call:

My only major gripe is that he didnt seem to notice the line about corruption and the silencing of dissent… was directed (most likely) more toward Mugabe and other one-party state tyrants in Africa and Central Asia, perhaps Latin America. And if we need to liberate someone, it’s the long suffering North Koreans or the Burmese. Let the Russians and the Chinese deal with Sudan, oh wait, they already are.

I think you all need to drop the ideology when looking at Obamanomics. First, I suspect he is of the Chicago school variety, tempered a bit by his stays on the left (oops I mean east) coast. Pragmatism doesnt invoke ideology (likely why its often juxtaposed with a lack of principles in most people’s minds), it takes baby steps rather than big leaps (though a few big leaps might not hurt…eg. energy infrastructure, entitlements, etc.) and it is always cognizant of context in all its vagaries. It’s uncomfortable for these reasons, but I think most of the American people could stand a softer step in our very heavy shoes.

Thanks for allowing my post and i hope the new administration defies your expectations.
Chris

Jan 25, 2009 - 3:55 am 34. quasar:

RAP #20 “they are America second people”

You hit the nail on the head!
I couldn’t agree with you more!
Took the words right out of my mouth!
RAP…you’re a f*cking genius!

Jan 25, 2009 - 5:06 am 35. quasar:

In the very near future, BHO will be redefining the “con” in neo-con. Con man or convict: take your pick! If he strays too far he’ll piss off the extreme left. When the MSM turns on Him, it’ll be ugly. Between Mrs. Obama’s bogus hospital “job” in Chicago, Rezko Realty, million dollar records cover-up (birth, college, passport,etc.) something is certain to jump up and take a huge chunk out of His ass.

Jan 25, 2009 - 5:34 am 36. Flynn:

It truely is amazing how people’s mind can change when they get the full brunt of the from the Intelligence community, and the Joints chiefs. you’d have to be a fool not to recognize the daily threats to America.

Jan 25, 2009 - 9:56 am 37. DWMF:

Obama is the USA’s Tony Blair. He is assiduously raiding the conservatives’ wardrobe. Conservative ideas will only be the sugar on the Clintonite pill he is aiming to peddle.

Jan 26, 2009 - 3:26 am