OPINION:
OP-ED:
The recent trend among some Republican political types - to pander to Democratic backlash against criticisms of Barack Obama - has been cast by some media pundits as a shrewd way of capitalizing on the runaway popularity currently enjoyed by the Illinois senator. Perhaps most notably exemplified by Oregon Republican Sen. Gordon Smith - whose re-election campaign just weeks ago ran an ad hailing Mr. Smith’s collaboration with Mr. Obama on environmental legislation - this strategy is a textbook case of doing right for all the wrong reasons. And ultimately it won’t work.
Usually, across-the-aisle cooperation is a welcome breath of fresh air in the age of partisan gridlock that has crippled Washington in recent decades. Both sides would do well to build on common ground and get things done, rather than run back to their respective caves every time an ideological issue gets stuck in their gullets.
I am inclined to empathize with some Republicans’ displeasure with the Bush administration’s handling of the war on terror. Even staunch party stalwarts have found themselves bitterly debating the conduct of the war. I would even go as far as acknowledging the usual abandon-ship mentality that accompanies the end of an administration, and sympathizing with the panicked souls seeking a soft landing on the minefield of anti-administration sentiment that seems to have gained ground over the past couple of years. But handing Mr. Obama the tactical high ground in the general election merely to score points in state and local contests might put the Republicans at a long-term disadvantage - even if they manage to win those races.
The reason is simply that attempting to ride Mr. Obama’s coattails to victory gives Republicans a poor vantage point to criticize the Obama camp in the unlikely event that he actually takes the White House in November. An Obama administration, if the Rev. Wright episode and other missteps are any indication, is sure to be filled with its share of foibles, follies and just plain wrongheaded policies. What happened to the good old days, last seen at the end of the Clinton administration, when party politicians would rather fall on their swords if necessary to bring about a sea change in politics rather than pander to the opposition because they fear they’ll lose their own seats (to another member of the same party)?
If appealing to loyalty is not enough, perhaps an appeal to common sense will suffice. Just look at the Hillary Clinton campaign for an example of winning the battle and losing the war. Faced with a then-popular Bush administration riding high on its response to the tragedy of September 11, Democrats such as Mrs. Clinton and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts bowed to pressure to be on the ’right’ side of the war issue. They puffed out their chests and dressed their doves up in hawk suits to try and capitalize on the electorate’s righteous indignation and fear over the threat of terrorism. They caved in to all sorts of policies that they now decry - the Patriot Act being chief among them.
What happened? A freshman senator from Illinois with almost no track record and little Washington experience stole the nomination from right under their noses. Because Mr. Obama could cast Mrs. Clinton as pro-war and himself as anti-war from the beginning, he retained the moral high ground in a campaign rife with backhanded (and frontal) mudslinging and racial innuendo. And, more importantly, he won the nomination.
Moreover, as much as Mr. Obama is a likeable candidate - and I will readily admit that he is - we must not get so starry-eyed over his image that we lose sight of the policies he represents. This is the guy who promised unconditional dialogue with a hostile dictatorship in Iran. He would impose government-funded health care on an already broken federal medical regime. Obamacans, as they are now known, risk losing the farm merely for a night out on the town with the captain of the football team. Is it really worth it?
The issues before the American people right now are public and pressing: record-high energy costs,a housing industry in protracted crisis, and, yes, going on three consecutive quarters of negative economic growth (I hesitate to invoke that hated, politically unpopular “r” word). The Republican Party must not try to don the colors of the Democrats to try and fool the electorate into voting its way. It must present unique, distinguishable solutions to the challenges facing Americans.
While, the Republican Party must adapt to change, it has to stick to principle. After all, principle is so termed because it implies ideas that will stand the test of time, not merely mimic momentary sentiment. Republicans once wore their badges proudly, unafraid to take one on the chin for what’s right. But now it seems some of them are willing to abandon their posts and coddle up to the opposition hoping to catch a little stardust.But Obamacans should be cautioned that when the star falls, as eventually it must, the only thing that will be left on their shoulders will be merely dust.
Armstrong Williams’ column for The Washington Times appears on Mondays. “The Armstrong Williams Show” is broadcast on WPGC-AM 1580 in Washington and XM Satellite Power 169.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.