In full disclosure, I want to say up front that I did not vote for Obama. But I am hopeful that he will be a good President. McCain's excellent concession speech last night reminded me what really makes America great. It is the characteristic that has made America one of the most durable and dynamic democracies in history. Our country's strength is its embrace of multiple ideals, national debate, opposing forces, and checks and balances.
The optimist in me wants to believe Obama when he said last night that he is my President, that he represents all Americans--both those who voted for him and those who did not. I was impressed by Obama in January 2007 after President Bush's State of the Union speech. Harry Reid, Hilary Clinton, and Nancy Pelosi were all interviewed after the speech, and none said anything but partisan rants for their pet projects and against the other party. However, Obama's response was different. Obama was complimentary of the President's health care proposals and was happy that some of the President's proposals could achieve some objectives that he agreed with. I have noticed this pattern from Obama after other previous State of the Union speeches.
A New York Times article, "Obamanomics," by David Leonhardt from August 2008 makes a strong case that Obama is both more left-wing and more right-wing than most people realize--a characterization that Cass Sunstein cleverly termed a "University of Chicago Democrat." Obama has also shown a taste for surrounding himself with academic economists. Leonhardt reports that James Heckman, a Nobel Prize winning economist, said of the Obama campaign, "I've never worked with a campaign that was more interested in what the research shows." I take this as further evidence that Obama might truly be the multi-polar politician that he purports to be. (This raises a political economy question that Jason is probably best at answering: Which is better, a President divided between the far left and far right or a centrist?)
In summary, I was inspired by McCain's speech urging America to get behind and work with our new President, regardless of whether we voted for him. These words came from the mouth of a man who has spent the last two years fighting Barack Obama. Only in America can we engage in such a heated national debate of ideas and still be on the same team. I will be extremely impressed--but only slightly surprised--if Barack Obama can make good on his promise to listen "especially to those who have differing views."
A New York Times article, "Obamanomics," by David Leonhardt from August 2008 makes a strong case that Obama is both more left-wing and more right-wing than most people realize--a characterization that Cass Sunstein cleverly termed a "University of Chicago Democrat." Obama has also shown a taste for surrounding himself with academic economists. Leonhardt reports that James Heckman, a Nobel Prize winning economist, said of the Obama campaign, "I've never worked with a campaign that was more interested in what the research shows." I take this as further evidence that Obama might truly be the multi-polar politician that he purports to be. (This raises a political economy question that Jason is probably best at answering: Which is better, a President divided between the far left and far right or a centrist?)
In summary, I was inspired by McCain's speech urging America to get behind and work with our new President, regardless of whether we voted for him. These words came from the mouth of a man who has spent the last two years fighting Barack Obama. Only in America can we engage in such a heated national debate of ideas and still be on the same team. I will be extremely impressed--but only slightly surprised--if Barack Obama can make good on his promise to listen "especially to those who have differing views."
