A Wise Bob Herbert Discusses What Happens "After Election Day"

I have used a few blog entries to challenge the increasingly popular belief among liberals that Obama's likely victory represents the demise of the GOP and social conservatism. I believe that one's relative comfort in society, determined by the extent to which he or she suffers from racial discrimination, sexism, homophobia, or economic injustice likely shapes and informs how the person views this subject. I have not found any commentary by persons of color, for example, which accepts the notion that Obama's election would mean that the nation has transcended conservatism, racism, and other social ills.

Today, Robert Herbert, a New York Times columnist, joins a growing group of progressive commentators who seek to inject a healthy dose of reality into contemporary liberal discourse. Herbert says that liberals need to focus their attention to what must happen "after election day," and he rejects the argument that merely electing Obama settles the score with conservatism:

Americans have to decide if they want a country that tolerates . . . debased, backward behavior. Or if they want a country that aspires to true greatness — a country that stands for more than the mere rhetoric of equality, freedom, opportunity and justice.

That decision will require more than casting a vote in one presidential election. It will require a great deal of reflective thought and hard work by a committed citizenry. The great promise of America hinges on a government that works, openly and honestly, for the broad interests of the American people, as opposed to the narrow benefit of the favored, wealthy few (emphasis added).

I agree wholeheartedly.

PS: I wrote this entry before the end of Election Day. If Obama actually loses, my argument applies with even greater force.

Related entries:

Strong Support for California Anti-Gay Measure Proves That Many Blue-State Voters Embrace Red Agendas
2008 Is Not 1964: Why Liberal Mania and Conservative Panic Are Nothing But
Melodrama
Split Ticket? What California's Battle Over Same-Sex Marriage Means for U.S.
Liberals
Blacks Less Optimistic About a Coming Liberal Utopia
A Sober Look at a Democratic Sweep

Blacks Less Optimistic About a Coming Liberal Utopia

In a series a blog posts, I have criticized the idea that Obama's election and the expansion of Democratic control in Congress means that the nation has swung to the left and that the Democrats can use their power to implement a very liberal agenda (see these links: Democrats and Social Conservatism; Sober Look at a Democratic Sweep; and 2008 Is Not 1964). This argument overlooks: (1) the lack of a coherent liberal ideology among the new "Obama Generation" of voters; (2) the fact that McCain led Obama in many polls prior to the Wall Street implosion; (3) that Democrats have only won three presidential elections since 1964; (4) that even in blue states, like California, Democrats still embrace socially conservative agendas; and (5) many new Democrats in Congress will come from conservative states and have run on conservative political platforms.

I have also observed that most of the commentators I have noticed announcing the death of old white male heterosexual power are members of that very demographic. Women, people of color, gays and lesbians, and the poor are far more guarded about the prospect for sweeping change in the lives of disadvantaged people. A couple of news articles confirm (at least anecdotally) that people of color remain cautious in their optimism surrounding the election; many of them do not even want to allow themselves to believe that Obama will win, despite his lead in the polls. They certainly have not predicted that the nation has fundamentally rejected conservatism. For further analysis, see the following articles: New York Times and Dallas Morning News.