One of my readers looks at Peggy Noonan’s column today and wonders if she’s thinking of pulling the lever for Obama.

I wonder if Sen. Obama, as he makes his climb, understands the kind of quiet cheering he is beginning to garner from some Republicans, and from those not affiliated with either party. They see him as a Democrat who could cure the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton sickness. I call it that because it seems to me now less like a dynastic tug of war than a symptom of deterioration, a lazy, unserious and faintly corrupt turn to be taken by the oldest and greatest democracy in the history of man. And I say sickness because on some level I think it is driven by a delusion: “We will be safe with these ruling families, whom we know so well.” But we won’t. They have no special magic. Dynasticism brings with it a sense of deterioration. It is dispiriting.

#more#

I am not sure of the salience of Mr. Obama’s new-generational approach. Mrs. Clinton’s generation, he suggests, is caught in the 1960s, fighting old battles, clinging to old divisions, frozen in time, and the way to get past it is to get past her. Maybe this will resonate. But I don’t think Mrs. Clinton is the exemplar of a generation, she is the exemplar of a quadrant within a generation, and it is the quadrant the rest of us of that generation do not like. They came from comfort and stability, visited poverty as part of a college program, fashionably disliked their country, and cultivated a bitterness that was wholly unearned. They went on to become investment bankers and politicians and enjoy wealth, power or both.

I don’t think this is quite an endorsement, just an expression that if you’re on the right, there are certain Democrats you prefer that have nothing to do with how liberal or centrist they are. I do agree with the sentiment that I’d rather cover, write about, and participate in a political system with lots of Barack Obamas rather than lots of Hillary Clintons.

Beyond his decency – Obama’s expressed “shame” at the way his 2004 campaign characterized pro-lifers — we can note that Obama doesn’t hide that he’s a liberal. Sometimes his ideas aren’t popular, but he doesn’t try to hide them, or shade them dishonestly. When he goes before Detroit automakers and calls for higher fuel efficiency, you can say, “well, he’s not pandering.” Much like Paul Wellstone, it’s easier to appreciate a liberal who comes out and says he’s a liberal, and who says, “this is why I think my ideas are better,” as opposed to someone who campaigns as one thing and governs as another, then switches back as their reelection approaches.

Debating the Clintons is like wrestling with a marshmellow – there’s nothing solid to grab on to. To tell her that offering driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants is the wrong policy, you have to first pin her down as supporting that policy. Almost nothing goes out of their mouths without being poll tested; they contend no idea, proposal, decision or choice they make is controversial. All opposition must come from nefarious motives.

I would love it if, as Noonan recommends, “Obama should go after them, not a generation but a type, the smug and entitled. No one really likes them. They showed it this week.” But I suspect he doesn’t have it in him.