The liberal case against Obama

If this sounds vaguely familiar, it may be because there was a similar argument in 1980 over Jimmy Carter. Carter too was accused by liberal stalwarts of campaigning to promote a liberal agenda in 1976 only to abandon it while governing and of gutlessly buckling to the right, not only because he lacked political skill but also because he lacked political will. Many liberals felt betrayed then as they do today. But there is one major difference between 1980 and 2012. While Obama will coast to the nomination despite the liberal griping, Carter found himself challenged by the left of his own party in the candidacy of Senator Edward Kennedy.

Kennedy aggressively made a case against Carter that could easily be made against Obama as well: That he is insufficiently devoted to the traditional values of the Democratic Party to deserve liberal support. Which raises the question: Is there a legitimate reason for liberals not to vote for Obama?

Harkening back to that earlier election, Kennedy charged Carter with having abandoned liberalism for expediency. “He has left behind the best traditions of the Democratic Party’’ Kennedy declared, and turned himself into a “pale carbon copy’’ of the then Republican front-runner, Ronald Reagan. As Kennedy saw it, Carter had rejected a real national health care program for an incremental one that Congress could later abandon. He had refused to take on oil companies that were, Kennedy felt, robbing the American people. And he had forsaken the Democratic tradition of using government to put people to work and embraced instead the old Republican mantra of cutting deficits. Many, of course, have made similar arguments against Obama.