Don't Get Tough, Barack
Well, this is not the National Basketball Association, where a player whos deemed soft can drop a dozen slots in the draft. You play basketball, Barack, so you know why it matters underneath the basket. But this is not the NBA. Or the NFL. This is politics, where getting tough and acting tough matters not because it has to matter, but because people say it matters. But maybe it doesnt. And maybe thats the new politics that you are talking about.
It goes beyond politics to policy. One of Jimmy Carters biggest mistakes as president came when he listened to the pundits who told him it was time to get tough. He seemed weak. Never seem weak ran the conventional wisdom. So Jimmy Carter exercised American muscle in Nicaragua and destabilized its politics. George Bush is one tough honcho and showed us how tough he is when he gloated over his possession of Saddam Husseins gun. Yes sir. We are big, strong and tough.
The conventional wisdom goes further. Not only does one never show weakness, but one never talks to foreign potentates you dont like unless you know from the outset that the result will be a win. Dont want to embarrass yourself. Dont want to legitimize that tinhorn dictator by talking to him. Its better to maintain the arrogance of American power and let the world know that we talk to whomever we want, whenever were ready.
This was the policy that you questioned many months ago. The pundits declared that it showed your inexperience, but instead it demonstrates why youll be a president who at least has a chance to restore our standing in the world. We are, perhaps, the worlds most hated nation. Or close to it. This is the challenge for our new president, and youre the one most likely to change that. Not because youre black. Not because you went to school in Indonesia. Not because of who you are, but because of your approach to politics.
This is why you understand that to stick our Democratic heads into the sand and refuse to recognize that Reagan brought new ideas to Washington is to carry partisanship to the point of foolishness. Reagan did have new ideas, new ways of thinking about government. You were right to remind us of that. Its good history, and it reflects a willingness to give credit where credit is due. Its also called generosity of spirit, a characteristic that is precious scarce in Washington. And it also is called learning from the opposition, one of the major qualities of good leadership.
So dont do it, Barack. Dont get mean. This isnt war. You believe youre the person most able to defeat the opposition in November and to provide a new approach to leadership. Hillary Clinton sincerely believes that she deserves the opportunity. The two of you generally agree on most substantive issues. By August youll need to work together. And a year from now, at least one of you will likely still be in the Senate, playing an important role in bringing change to Washington.
So lets do it differently this time. Lets acknowledge that we have two strong Democratic candidates, both of whom are decent individuals fully capable of governing. This is the politics that you stand for and stand by. Its not war; its not about whos the toughest dude on the court. A strong leader listens, collaborates and understands the virtues of generosity and collegiality.
This piece was distributed for non-exclusive use by the History News Service, an informal syndicate of professional historians who seek to improve the public's understanding of current events by setting these events in their historical contexts. The article may be republished as long as both the author and the History News Service are clearly credited.
comments powered by Disqus
- Thomas Piketty accuses Germany of forgetting history as it lectures Greece
- Greek ‘No’ May Have Its Roots in Heroic Myths and Real Resistance
- 150 years later, schools are still a battlefield for interpreting Civil War
- Where are America's memorials to pain of slavery, black resistance?
- Richmond split over Confederate history
- Historian: "I don’t want my students to simply choose sides in a polemic between heritage and hate"
- Did a historian who said he’s a victim of McCarthyism get the story wrong?
- Stephanie Coontz’s work on the history of marriage cited by the Supreme Court.