| Balkinization   |
|
Balkinization
|
Friday, June 20, 2008
Obama, McCain and the Permanent Campaign
Guest Blogger
Jeffrey K. Tulis
Comments:
Mr. McCain is the master of the permanent campaign. Since his failed 2000 primary bid, McCain has been living on front of the cameras establishing his "marverick" political brand (which is just a variation on the Clinton triangulation). This nonsense from McCain about ending the permanent campaign is really part of his ongoing campaign to appear to be the maverick.
I'm not following. What is the style of governance foreshadowed by denouncing NAFTA and promising rather unequivocally to terminate it when campaigning for union votes in the rustbelt, then flip-flopping and supporting it when interviewed by "Fortune" in the general election campaign? Or by calling for a unified Jerusalem when speaking to AIPAC, then "clarifying" that the candidate didn't mean that? It seems like flat-out pandering to me, although I suppose moral cowardice is an alternative, even less attractive explanation.
Do "permanent campaigns" have something in common with "permanent bases" in Iraq? Political campaigns are a continuum of the major political parties, if not directly the candidates. Upon election, the primary thought of the elected official (and his/her supporters) is reelection. Consider the Representatives come up for reelection in two years. For Senators, even though it's 6 years, the need to fund for reelection starts with day 1.
Perhaps John McCain, possibly because of his age, may not be focusing on reelection to a second term. (I am not predicting that he will be successful this November.) This may be "straight talk" but I wonder who's moving his lips. And wouldn't this make him a "lame duck" from the git-go?
Excellent post Prof. Tulis.
Unlike Bush and McCain, Barack Obama is honest in ways our politicians rarely are. (May that be the one thing he does not change.) And how weird -- Bart's found something we can agree on. My own take on McCain is simple: He's a victim of torture and other war crimes who's spent the last six and half years aiding and abetting torture and other war crimes for political purposes in violation of the laws of the United States. As such, he is morally unfit to hold any position of public trust, end of story. The same is true for most Republicans.
charles gittings said...
And how weird -- Bart's found something we can agree on. I am fully aware of the weaknesses of the various GOP politicians. Mr. McCain is no different from any other politician. Their first priority is generally to get re-elected, thus the permanent campaign. You really ought to get the stardust out of your eyes concerning the Dem politicians in general and Mr. Obama in particular. Honesty is not one of Mr. Obama's strong suits. I have had a great deal of fun with Mr. Obama's various revisionisms and prevarications over at my blog if you would like a primer. However, we do not need to have that debate here.
Stardust??
I'm just looking at war crimes and war criminals here Bart, you included, and there's nothing sentimental or imaginary about it. I don't regard you people and your subversion of the law any differently than than I would an armed robbery or a rabid dog: as menace to public safety.
Obama writes a couple of virtually substance free books that talk vaguely about audacity and a "politics of hope" wherein we are exhorted to renew our "faith" in an idea with no definition. He runs a campaign where he hammers away at hope and new politics and about being a movement. People get turned on and forget to ask him any questions or push him on any issues. Then he talks straight to them about why he disagrees with the gas tax. Oh wow. Then he talks unstraight about why he likely won't filibuster on the FISA legislation. But, by then, people have put so much faith in him, they just can't bear to be pissed off. So to you he looks like he's introduced governance into political campaigning? Frankly, I'm not sure I follow. But even if you're right, it's governance as usual and whether it's in the campaign rhetoric or the actual governance, it's no change at all. I guess it just looks better to some people.
Post a Comment
hysperia http://alterwords.wordpress.com
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers
Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009)
Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009)
Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009)
Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008) Neil Netanel, Copyright's Paradox (Oxford Univ. Press 2008)
David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007) Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007)
Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007)
Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006)
Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006)
Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006)
Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005)
Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |