Pinning Down Obama on the Political Spectrum Reveals an Audacity Without Ideology

Washington Post commentator, E.J. Dionne Jr., offers his very insightful observations that: "For the past two years, Barack Obama has made it hard for anyone to pin him down philosophically." Dionne writes about a man who: "... has spent his adult life tilting left while courting conservatives. That's how he won his very first campaign, for president of the Harvard Law Review." So Dionne gives credit to Obama for following a meticulous approach to gaining power that allows him to have his own particular political views he expresses in a non-ideological and pragmatic manner that allows him to gain supporters who might have very different political views from his own. Dionne adds of Obama: "He has been known to call himself a "progressive," and when he occasionally uses the word "ideological" in reference to his own leanings, he clearly casts himself as somewhere left of center." This is not new information since Obama often used these references to describe himself as he campaigned for president. But Dionne adds a a very significant qualifier to Obama's political persona: " Yet most of his references to ideology are disdainful and dismissive. In discussing his economic stimulus package, he speaks of judging his proposals by how many jobs they produce and how quickly they will move the economy. Other criteria are inadmissible." Dionne skillfully identifies "at least three keys to understanding Obama's approach to (and avoidance of) ideology." The first principal identified by Dionne accounts for Obama's sharp and analytical mind demonstrated by "his simple joy in testing himself against those who disagree with him. Someone who knows the president-elect well says that he likes talking with philosophical adversaries more than with allies." This facet of Obama was witnessed in action just a few evenings ago when Howard Kurtz reported that Obama traveled to the home of conservative commentator George Will to have dinner with Will, and seven other conservative personalities including; Larry Kudlow, Charles Krauthammer, Bill Kristol, David Brooks, Paul Gigot, Peggy Noonan, and Michael Barone. Kurtz reported of the "three-hour dinner conclave" as an opportunity Obama to have: "charmed eight of the right's most prominent commentators, mixing small talk and policy debate in a move that mesmerized the media elite." Kurtz also added comments from Larry Kudlow who remarked of Obama: "He's making good on his promise to reach out to Republicans and conservatives and this post-partisan stuff, whatever that means,... I was very impressed. He's a nice guy, terribly smart, well-informed, great smile. He just really engaged. He said he likes to know the arguments on all sides." Kurtz quoted Michael Barone for having said of Obama: "an attractive person in a small setting. It's harder to hate someone you've had close contact with and who has pleasant characteristics." Dionne describes: "This part of him was once the detached writer and professor who could view even his own life from a distance and with a degree of abstraction. Seen with perspective, after all, the ideological differences in the United States are rather small. We have no major socialist party, and when it comes down to it, even conservatives are reluctant to dismantle our limited social insurance and welfare programs." Dionne concludes his discussion of the first "key to understanding Obama's approach ..." by remarking that: "Obama's anti-ideological turn is also a functional one for a progressive, at least for now. Since Ronald Reagan, ideology has been the terrain of the right. Many of the programs that conservatives have pushed have been based more on faith in their worldview than on empirical tests. How else could conservatives claim that cutting taxes would actually increase government revenue, or that trickle-down economic approaches were working when the evidence of middle-class incomes said otherwise?" Dionne shifts his attention to the "second key" to appreciating Obama's approach to politics: "Right now, being empirical is in the progressive interest. Note that data show that the parts of the stimulus package most congenial to liberals (increases in unemployment insurance and food stamps; fiscal aid to the states; government spending on public projects) are also the parts with the most economic bang. In other words, progressives don't need ideology to make their case." Dionne digs further into his observation to provide an historical perspective: "In this respect, at least, Obama is rather like Franklin D. Roosevelt, who dismissed the conservative economic doctrines of the 1920s. "We must lay hold of the fact that economic laws are not made by nature," Dionne quotes Roosevelt: "directly countering the central premises of orthodox economics." Roosevelt goes on to say of economic laws: "They are made by human beings." Dionne follows by adding his assessment of Roosevelt's practice: "Thus did Roosevelt make pragmatism and experimentation enemies of conservative ideology." Obama, wearing a smile as he stands on a mountain of data, is doing the same." Dionne arrives at the third key and observes: "Obama's anti-ideological talk is not just a vehicle for progressive inclinations but the real deal. Obama regularly offers three telltale notions that will define his presidency -- if events allow him to define it himself: "sacrifice," "grand bargain" and "sustainability." Dionne provides well chosen illustrations to explain "sacrifice," "grand bargain" and "sustainability"to flesh out what is integral to what Obama means by provided Dionne's well thought out example that: "To listen to Obama and his budget director Peter Orszag is to hear a tale of long-term fiscal woe. The government may have to spend and cut taxes in a big way now, but in the long run, the federal budget is unsustainable." Dionne explains: "That's where sacrifice kicks in. There will be signs of it in Obama's first budget, in his efforts to contain health-care costs and, down the road, in his call for entitlement reform and limits on carbon emissions. His camp is selling the idea that if he wants authority for new initiatives and new spending, Obama will have to prove his willingness to cut some programs and reform others." Dionne moves next to identify what is meant by the "grand bargain" Obama speaks of to explain that: "The "grand bargain" they are talking about is a mix and match of boldness and prudence. It involves expansive government where necessary, balanced by tough management, unpopular cuts -- and, yes, eventually some tax increases. Everyone, they say, will have to give up something. Only such a balance, they argue, will win broad support for what Obama wants to do,..." The first two "notions" of "sacrifice" and "grand bargain" prepare us for the "sustainable" that Dionne explains as the "notion" that for Obama will: "... make his reforms "sustainable," the other magic word -- meaning that even Republicans, when they eventually get back to power, will choose not to reverse them." Having fit together Obama's "audacity without ideology," Dionne proclaims that Obama's approach to governance "... is riotously ambitious. But it's worth remembering that in November, Americans elected a man who counts "audacity" as one of his favorite words."