A speechwriter for Reagan and Nixon—who worked at the National Review for four decades—on why he's voting for Obama.
It may be something of a surprise that, as a long time conservative, I now support Barack Obama. In 1968, I was a speechwriter first for Ronald Reagan, when Governor of California, then, as Richard Nixon became the presidential nominee, a speechwriter for Nixon, working at his home office at 450 Park Avenue. I became a senior editor at National Review in 1969, a position I held until recently.
There are common sense conservatives who are prudential, who try to match means with ends, and who calculate the probabilities of gains and risks. But there are philosophical (analytical) conservatives, the most useful being Edmund Burke, whose "Reflections on the Revolution in France" (1790) understood the great dangers in trying to change society through abstract (republican) theory. My first book that dealt with these matters was "English Political writers: From Locke to Burke" (Knopf, 1963).
One thing I know is that both Nixon and Reagan would have agreed with Obama’s speech against the Iraq War… But all the organs of the conservative movement followed Bush over the cliff—as did John McCain.
Republican President George W. Bush has not been a conservative at all, either in domestic policy or in foreign policy. He invaded Iraq on the basis of abstract theory, the very thing Burke warned against. Bush aimed to turn Iraq into a democracy, "a beacon of liberty in the Middle East," as he explained in a radio address in April 2006.
I do not recall any "conservative" publication mentioning those now memorable words "Sunni," "Shia," or "Kurds." Burke would have been appalled at the blindness to history and to social facts that characterized the writing of those so-called conservatives.
Obama did understand. In his now famous 2002 speech, while he was still a state senator in Illinois, he said: “I know that a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, of undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without international support will fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than the best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda. I'm not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars.”
Burke would have agreed entirely, and admired the cogency of so few words. And one thing I know is that both Nixon and Reagan would have agreed. Both were prudential and successful conservatives. But all the organs of the conservative movement followed Bush over the cliff—as did John McCain.
Alexandra Penney is an artist, best-selling author, former editor-in-chief of Self magazine, and originator, with Evelyn Lauder, of the Pink Ribbon for breast cancer awareness. She had a one-person show at Galerie in Berlin in April and her work was shown at Miami’s Art Basel. She lives in New York, has one treasured son in Los Angeles and more amazing friends than could ever be imagined.
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
Steve Emerson is Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism and author of 5 books and countless articles on terrorism. His most recent book is Jihad Incorporated: A Guide to Militant Islam in the U.S.
Max Blumenthal is a senior writer for The Daily Beast and writing fellow at The Nation Institute, whose book, Republican Gomorrah (Basic/Nation Books), is forthcoming in Spring 2009. Contact him at maxblumenthal3000@yahoo.com.
David Blum, former editor-in-chief of The Village Voice and of The New York Press, teaches at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism. In 1992 he published Flash In The Pan: The Life and Death of an American Restaurant. Tick...Tick...Tick...: The Long Life & Turbulent Times of 60 Minutes followed in 2004.
Mansfield Frazier is a native Clevelander and former newspaper editor. A published author, he served as a contributing editor of the Cleveland Tab Newsmagazine, the editor of the Cleveland Call & Post, and managing editor of CityNews, and urban-focused weekly, before changing over to Internet journalism. His regular column can currently be seen on CoolCleveland.com. An avid gardener, he resides in the Hough neighborhood of Cleveland with his wife Brenda and their two dogs, Gypsy and Ginger.
Jeffrey Hart is professor emeritus of English at Dartmouth College. He wrote for the National Review for more than three decades, where he was senior editor. He wrote speeches for Ronald Reagan, when governor of California, and for Richard Nixon.
Jeffrey Hart is professor emeritus of English at Dartmouth College. He wrote for the National Review for more than three decades, where he was senior editor. He wrote speeches for Ronald Reagan, when governor of California, and for Richard Nixon.
Jeffrey Hart is professor emeritus of English at Dartmouth College. He wrote for the National Review for more than three decades, where he was senior editor. He wrote speeches for Ronald Reagan, when governor of California, and for Richard Nixon.
by Jeffrey Hart
Embryonic stem cells would be a wonder for modern medicine if we manage to figure out how to use them. For now only adult derived stem cells (sans controversy) can be manipulated into doing anything useful, while embryonic stem cells just turn into teratomas (benign tumors of all sorts of cell types like hair, bone, muscle, etc.). Thank you for making the distinction by placing "embryonic" prior to "stem cells."
Bravo! Finally, a reasonable voice from a reasonable conservative. I am sad to say that you are in the minority since the GOP pimped itself out to America's religious kooks under the Reagan administration. And it doesn't seem that the party operatives supporting McCain/Palin care to change that strategy. I believe Senator Obama represents, or possibly will represent, a move away from ideology with a capital "I" to problem solving and lower case ideologies.
Mr Hart:
Please do not stop, I can go for a thousand and one nights reading you. A mind like yours can turn me into a Republican.
Your are the balance this Country needs, thanks!
Coherent and convincing in a way that Button's emotion-driven screed was not.
Mr. Hart,
Reading about Burke in the day of McCain, Palin, and Rove is a breath of fresh air. Conservatives need to either clean house in the GOP or start a new party, or become Democrats. Please continue writing, it is a joy to read good sense.
Thank god for abortion. Think of all the "plans" that could have been derailed due to irresponsibility and promiscuity. How much longer until individuals are no longer accountable for ANY of their actions? Also, I look forward to the day in which everyone see's that one person winning an election with a little over half of the nations support is a bad thing.
If you must salve your conscience by labelling Obama as a conservative in your own mind in order to justify supporting him, please feel free to do so. However, I must say that I find your basic thesis -- and your misappropriation of Obama -- to be both questionable and somewhat arrogant. The Obama policy positions that you correctly identify as laudable are not uniquely conservative in nature. To suggest that they are so is disingenuous when so many on the left agree with those same positions while so many on the right have rejected them.Labelling Obama's positions as conservative in this context is to redefine conservatism in a way that would be unfamiliar to most people in the modern United States. Perhaps this is why you had to reach all the way back to Burke -- a figure from another country in another century -- to find a supposed analog that could be labeled as "conservative". As for your dubious assertion that Nixon and Reagan would have agreed with Obama, this amounts to little more than feckless speculation because it is not possible to ask the opinion of men who are no longer with us. Even if true, it simply does not follow that the agreement of past conservative figures with specific policies demonstrates the fundamentally conservative nature of those policies. I predict that ideologues of both the right and the left will find Obama to be a frustrating and a challenging figure because Obama's policy positions tend to be more pragmatic than they are ideological. Obama is about finding common ground in order to solve problems and to get things done; he is not about ideological purity in any form.
Exactly Mr. Hart. This is the first piece I've read that offers a clear view on Obama, Bush and McCain. And I believe, after eight years of Bush, it's time for the U.S. to go home and take care of itself, and to clean up its act. But practicality isn't everything. It took more than purely conservative leadership to make America what it is---both good and bad. I hope that Obama will also have the guts to do amazing things at home and throughout the rest of the world.
The bottom line....
To all you newly registered, young voters...You MUST get out and vote as if your life depends on it. The GOP is hoping upon hope that young voters will follow their usual trend, become complacent or over confident and stay away from the polls. That is their only hope..Be patient and persevere. Stand in those long lines..rain, snow, sleet, rain, cold. Plan ahead...let your boss know you WILL vote, skip that class, take a friend with you......Do what you have to do and VOTE!
Im the man
Guess you missed the whole point about gender equality being dependent on a woman's ability to choose when to reproduce. Still, you make this grand assumption that soon no individual will be accountable for their actions. Because of abortion? Bush hasn't been held accountable for HIS actions, mistakes, and utter irresponsibility- is it because some women choose to have a first term abortion? Are we in Iraq because of abortion, how 'bout the financial crisis? The other point you seem to miss is that wedge issues, like abortion, should take a back seat to true conservative principles, you know like a small government leaving people's private lives the hell alone.
Bravo, Prof. Hart. An admiring former student.
Like the majority of posts so far, I agree that Mr Hart's views have seldom been articulated in the Press; and are certainly well made. I have watched the campaign and pre-campaign intently from England. The characterisation of Obama as a dangerous left wing radical barely merits a response. His voting record alone suggests he is a conservative 'with a small c', as they always say over here. Much of the Republican rhetoric is truly radical: it's an anti-establishment, clean up Washington/big business message with almost no detail attached. It operates, centrally, on gut instinct and eschews analysis, after all, good folk know what's right. Well, the political sophisticates, shortly to be joined by a majority of the electorate, know that politics is more complicated. Obama is conservative in temperament. That is why he did not rush out to solve the world financial crisis. He saw it coming and knew that an instant fix is impossible. Faced with an international crisis, he would respond like another conservative, Pres. Kennedy, during the famous 13 days. Listen wisely, get the best intelligence (rather than make it up to bolster a pre-determined plan), stay cool, decide rationally, ignore hothead advice, analyse the angles. Does anyone here think that's not the way to take decisions?
"Conservative" used to mean not changing something that works unless absolutely certain that the change will result in an improvement. America has learned the hard way that we need policies that achieve the goals we want, not policies that enable the comforting false beliefs of their privileged way of life. Obama is the candidate who understands that Americans want a government that faces reality and addresses the concerns of the middle class: jobs, housing, health care, the environment, and America's integrity at home and abroad. By seeking policies that work for America, Obama is the real conservative in this election.
The rethoric of old GOP politics is coming to an end. The torch of hope in today's america is opening the door to restore fundamental social rights and deter corporate privileges. The Cheney/Bush duet of the last eight years has provoked pain and distress beyond imagination. This is time in history when the kind of McCain rogue campaign ballyhoo that one time might be excused can no longer be justified. Million of americans today are facing real economic and political woes. The Cheney/Bush overt anti-American misleading and devilish behavior needs change. I am confident Obama and his entourage are well placed to restore the strength and the well being of the whole nation. Alas McCain is no more no less the incoherent expression of those eight years wreckage we all know.
hardrain
abortion isn't the only way that women can choose when they reproduce. abstinence and birth control being two of the options, but I'm sure that you were already aware of that. Abortion has nothing to do with the financial crisis, but the core issue of irresponsibility and accountability is. How many CEO's and upper management have been held accountable for our current crisis? How many politicians? If there are never any consequences when is it going to end? How many bailouts for companies that have made poor financial decisions? If GM goes down the need for vehicles doesn't go away and someone will come in to replace that business. Why do we need to bail them out as they are requesting? That's the stance that Republicans and conservatives should be taking on this issue. It won't get 'em elected, but at least it is in line with the core principles.
The New Politics... (sans labels).
Regardless of its dubbing by pundits and professors and polsters, the new politics, which Obama is spearheading in rhetoric and in practice, mostly, is one that doesn't allow "sides" to own issues.
This is evidenced by a couple of factors:
-the brilliant campaign run by the Obama team that casts wide appeal across the spectrum of political thought
-the terrible, slow, accusitory tactics of the McCain team that embrace all things Bush.
-The simple fact that lots and lots of smart people, conservative and liberal both, wholeheartedly endorse the former.
I don't think we'll be able to call an Obama admin. liberal or conservative, republican or democrat. As a registered independent, that makes me very, very optimistic.
Social Security is working well? Are you crazy? Its hemorrhaging! I won't see a dime of the money I've already put into the current antiquated system. Social Security, in its current form, was never meant to support a population of today's scale, especially when the average lifespan of Americans has increased so much over the last 70 years. Privatized Social Security is a great idea and one I fully support. If you're worried about the rest of Americans being too ignorant to invest wisely, make a default T-bill investment option for their privatized accounts. Its not that hard! And you really show how little you know about investment if you take a snapshot of market conditions and make a blanket insinuation that Social Security would be horrible because of it. Market investing is for the long term! People would be much better off in a market with lifetime average returns of 9.2% than T-bills at 4.2%. Even with portfolio values cut in half vis-a-vis the current crisis, the returns would still be at T-bill rates!
Thank you for your words, Professor Hart. As a conservative and Republican who has become utterly disgusted by the GOP these last 8 or 10 years, and doubly disgusted by the McCain Palin campaign, I find this essay heartening. The fact that so many conservative intellectual lights are coming out for Obama or distancing themselves from McCain and Bush gives me hope that, whatever happens to the GOP, Conservative principles are not dead and will find a political home somewhere. Most of the comments left here are also encouraging.
However, two comments are quite unintentionally humorous. Neither Rainmaker nor closethistorian seem to understand the intellectual tradition of conservative thought, nor that it even has one. Indeed, the ill-informed and aptly named closethistorian takes you to task for mentioning Burke while "appropriating" Obama. How dare you sully his hero by admiring him!
Thank you for keeping the flame alive. It is painful to watch our great experiment in democracy devolve into name calling and posturing, especially when the positions taken are logically inconsistent and focus on trivial issues. Obama does speak common sense, to use a Reid/Paine rather than a Burkeian term. Coming together, personal responsibility, appealing to the better interests in us all, opposing not all wars but dumb ones ... these are ideas that will enrich the American political dialogue. Thank godness the stars are aligned to bring a thinker back into the White House.
InTheMan,
Abortion is not necessarily the result of irresponsible behavior. Pregnancy can happen even when birth control is used.
Abstincence as social policy would be ineffective given social reality. Of course abstinence can be chosen by individuals, and encouraging abstinence is fine. But millions of responsible people consider sex a basic part of their relationships. Its unrealistic to think the majority will become abstinent because of a government program encouraging them to do that.
Abortion itself is most often a decision of responsibility. Studies show that women who choose to end pregnancies almost always do so for very good reasons directly related to their inability to be a good parent at the time of pregnancy. The most common reasons include being too young, not being financially stable, being single, etc. This is also reflected in the demographic shift of less crime a generation after Roe vs Wade reduced the number of children born in poor family situations.
Finally, given that a large part of the country do believe abortions are moral and responsible, the conservative thing is to let people make their own choice, while maintaining the freedom of speech for those who wish to discourage abortions.