- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 196
Editor's Choice: 19
The history of American politics has been about those with good intentions having to compromise with knuckle-dragging bigots in order to keep worse things from happening.
That is why the U.S. had slavery for the first ninety years.
This is another such compromise. We're talking about Georgia, remember--a state where triple-amputee war veteran Max Cleland was beaten by a Republican labelling him a friend of terrorists.
Obama needs as many Democrats in the House and Senate as he can get--otherwise he'll be a lame duck president. (Remember, Republicans only need 50% plus one to get stuff done, but Democrats need a filibuster-proof majority.) To do that, he needs to make some ugly compromises. Just as FDR did to get the New Deal, just as Washington and Jefferson and Madison did to get the Constitution passed.
Imagine if Obama backed the progressive (btw in the conservative south "progressive" rhymes with "Communist") black candidate against the right-wing white guy. Imagine how the Republicans would spin that in Georgia, and imagine where that would send Georgia's electoral votes.
Am I defending Obama? Yes, I am--if "defending" means recognizing that he has chosen the lesser of two very evil evils. I don't like what he chose to do but I am reasonably confident that he felt he had to do it to prevent something worse from happening on a strategic level. I also--and this is key--I also am quite confident that he is really, really unhappy about having to make that choice. Those of us in private life have the luxury of sticking to our principles. Let's cut the guy some slack.
