Kossack Broderism: It's NOT The Certainty, Stupid!

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Jul 11, 2009 at 16:00

As with Broder himself, the diary depends on a simplistic, schematic false equivalency of left and right, which ends up praising shallow centrism as a fount of deep wisdom.  Given its origins, it does not end up outright endorsing center-right policies as if they were centrist. It simply praises Obama, so that as he compromises further and further, it will have exactly the same effect, praising him for his centrism as he moves ever farther right ... unless, of course, progressives reject this argument, and pressure Obama so that he does not drift further and further right.  What's more, it even goes so far as to label this centrism as "true liberalism."

In this diary, I want to challenge the simplistic terms of AZDem's narrative about certainty, and I want to propose an alternative framework--the Enlightenment framework of critical reason, which an August 2003 congressional report found to be under sustained attack by the Bush Administration.  While AZDem wants to push the narrative that other Kossack liberals have run amuck with Bush-like certainty, deludedly attacking Obama for his anti-Bush willingness to hear all sides, I propose a radically different view, one that's much more grounded in the nitty-gritty of the actual historical record.

In my view, the problem is, quite simply, that Obama has not consistently committed himself to re-establishing and rehabilitating the framework of truth-seeking in policy-setting and communicating with the American people. My problem with Obama is not that he listens to conservatives, but that he accepts as valid conservative claims without empirical foundation, while at the same time ignoring progressive points of view--even when well-founded, and when representing substantial majority opinion.

New Broderism: Apathetic Youth Face Voting Barriers

by: Michael Connery

Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 13:24

Cross posted at Future Majority.

In the Sunday Washington Post, David Broder - the Dean of political journalism and purveyor of Beltway conventional wisdom - put pen to paper and produced this utterly useless column about young voters: Breaking Through to Voters.  I wish that my tongue-in-cheek title for this post were a joke, but sadly, this seems to be the conclusion reached by Broder, who is widely regarded as on of the most influential and knowledgeable pundits in the Beltway.

Within the space of 700 words, Broder manages to repeat the false meme that young voters are apathetic, mention that young voters face barriers to participation (without really describing what those are or how to remove them), and claim that young voters "distrust government" without exploring what that distrust entails or how far it actually goes.  The only redeeming factor of the column is Broder's (correct) conclusion: "Young Voters respond when treated seriously."  It's ironic, because his own column fails to give young voters the credit and respect they deserve.

Addressing Broder's points one by one: