The Obama Craze: Count Me Out

[Algorem]

http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/The_Obama_Craze_Count_Me_Out_5413.html

by Matt Gonzalez‚ Feb. 27‚ 2008

Part of me shares the enthusiasm for Barack Obama. After all, how could someone calling themself a progressive not sense the importance of what it means to have an African-American so close to the presidency? But as his campaign has unfolded, and I heard that we are not red states or blue states for the 6th or 7th time, I realized I knew virtually nothing about him.

Like most, I know he gave a stirring speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. I know he defeated Alan Keyes in the Illinois Senate race; although it wasn’t much of a contest (Keyes was living in Maryland when he announced). Recently, I started looking into Obama’s voting record, and I’m afraid to say I’m not just uninspired: I’m downright fearful. Here's why:

This is a candidate who says he’s going to usher in change; that he is a different kind of politician who has the skills to get things done. He reminds us again and again that he had the foresight to oppose the war in Iraq. And he seems to have a genuine interest in lifting up the poor.

But his record suggests that he is incapable of ushering in any kind of change I’d like to see. It is one of accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to reign in and oppose if we are to make truly lasting advances...

[TooBigaTent]

1. accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to reign in and oppose

Exactly.

[Warpy]

4. REIN in

Reign is what a king does.

Reins restrain a horse and give it directions.

The original article made the same mistake. The editor must've been asleep.

[Warpy]

2. The latest meme, mostly from the right, is that he'll be another Carter

It's something I'm afraid is true, although for very different reasons than the tone deaf fools on the right are braying.

He strikes me as someone who will go into office really trying to please both parties. He will please no one. I don't think he's nearly as nice a guy as Carter was, though, and he might have far fewer daggers in his back before he realizes what's going on. However, he does present the danger of a one term presidency that will effectively be labeled by the far right as a failure, another weakling Democratic administration.

I find both front runners to be deeply flawed candidates. I have no horse in this race. Once they forced Edwards out, I knew hope was pretty much gone for an administration that had a chance of shaking things up, of ending Reaganomics for good.

[End Of The Road]

6. Bravo!

Thanks for stating my opinion better than I could have stated it.

[IowaGirl]

17. I love Jimmy Carter, but.......

he just wasn't able to initiate the change he promised because he really couldn't negotiate around Washington with all its political land mines. I, too, agree that Obama's could easily be another similar presidency because he has to have ticked off a lot of people with his negativism about Washington as it is.:-(

[mwb970]

32. Is the Obama-Carter comparison truly valid?

Carter and Obama both can be inspirational in their rhetoric. In office, Carter showed a tendency to micromanage (did he really schedule the White House tennis courts?). He was smart and could be inspirational but was not very successful as president. (He's been much better since!)

So is the idea that an Obama presidency would be Carter II? Do we know what this idea is based on? I'm open to hearing more about it, but I'm not convinced at this point. Are their campaigns similar? (I worked for Carter in Chicago in 1976.)

[Warpy]

33. Right now it's a legitimate concern

based on his conciliatory rhetoric regarding the hard right in Congress.

It might or might not materialize as fact, but it is a concern.

[Skittles]

45. but still

I see Obama as quite savvy in election strategy, to the point that I'm not sure if he really means what he says or is simply pandering for moderate votes

[abq e streeter]

46. Very good points

I'm supporting Obama, only due to liking Clinton even less. They were and are, our two weakest candidates. The marginalization of Edwards was disgusting...I can only hope that the repub slime machine will be so utterly sickening ( pretty good bet I'd say) that if (IF) Obama wins, he'll already have figured out , finally, who and what the republican party he wants to work with in the spirit of bi, or post, partisanship, really is, and will have been pushed to the same realizations that Edwards had, (and which doomed him to be silenced by the MSM). Sorry you won't be at the Range on the 16th, hope your health is improving...

[stellanoir]

3. Sorry Matt is immersed in cynicism and can't recognize a sea change that is so needed in this land.

His campaign has been masterful.

As a fanatic for Tudor history I keep being reminded of how Queen Elisabeth the first's leadership was so enhanced by the caliber of most of her advisors.

OTOH Mary Queen of Scots really was surrounded by duplicitous, conniving, power mongers. That lack of discernment cost Mary her head.

Just saying.

[aquart]

11. "How much harm can he do? He'll have good advisers."

That's what they told me about Bush. I really really wish you weren't using the same argument. I really, really do.

[stellanoir]

18. The pardoned alumni of the Iran/Contra affair hardly qualify as good advisors.

Nor do Hillary's lot or she would have run a better campaign.

[aquart]

28. Take care, dear.

Many of Obama's staff are former Clinton staffers.

I wouldn't want you to choke on that hypocrisy.

[IowaGirl]

23. That's a hoot! That's exactly.....

what my moderate Republican friend told me about Bush, too. :rofl:

[libbygurl]

38. The similarities between * and O are starting

to reveal themselves, eh?

[leftofcool]

5. many of us

have done much research and drawn the same conclusions. I do like him and I do believe he is sincere but change and hope are abstract concepts. You can have all the desire in the world to make changes but if you don't have the experience in knowing which buttons to push on the right people, nothing will change. If you have Congress controlled by the opposite party, nothing will change if you can not unite both parties. I want very much to believe that Obama can unite the parties, but truthfully, there are a bunch of old white haired men on Capitol Hill who like to make laws in our name, without our permission, who will never give an inch. Hope is a wonderful thing but hope will not get blood pressure medicine to the little old lady next door to us who so desperately needs it and can not afford it because she can't afford a prescription drug plan and medicare doesn't pay for pills. And this is not just a problem for Obama. It would be this way even for Clinton.

Left of Cool

[griffi94]

9. i agree with everything you wrote

i would also add that while i realize everyone is eager for change, nobody gets to a position of any real power without having made compromises, and when those compromises come into play imo it severely reduces your chances of being an agent of real change. obama couldn't have become the overnight sensation he has without the support and approval of the msm and a fair amount of corperate interests. he is skillfully bringing the youth vote into play, but i question whether the youth vote can be relied upon to remain loyal when, after the primary, obama is forced to move to the center. as an adult voter and something of a cynical bastard i expect whoever we elect to disappoint us to one degree or another. i try to pick candidates that i think will be more effective than ineffective, and who can move the ball more or less down the middle of the field. i understand fully that there will be positions taken that i personally dislike and compromises made that i won't agree with, but that's the nature of politics.
with the obama message of being all things to all voters, there's no way he can deliver, so who get's thrown under the bus first. if it's the youth vote will they go back to being uninvolved in the process, if it's the independents and conservative democrats, will the democrats lose the gains in congress thay've recently made in red states like VA and CO. ok there's more i'd say, but i have to retrieve one of my kids from the bus stop.

[libbygurl]

39. 'but that's the nature of politics.'

Precisely. Why some pretend that saints succeed in politics is beyond me.

And your other comment about O being all things to all people is spot on. He's the one saying anything to win, and will likely disappoint a lot of supporters.

[rodeodance]

27. yes, nicely put thanks.

[IowaGirl]

34. Clinton has a history of crossing the aisle.....

to get support. Obama does not. So Clinton might have better luck than you think.

[Hydra]

7. The Obama enthusiam drives me nuts

It would be different if Obama were a different person- but he's doing what he needs to for him to win the WH. Once that happens, the people he will help are the people who helped him get where he is- people like Joe Lieberman.

Change? Hope? Not from within the beltway.

[bpeale]

10. yeh, remember the meme "dancing with them that brung ya"

ditto for obama

[smoogatz]

22. Right. Because all the other options are so much better.

:crazy:

[sniffa]

24. Wow

I can't believe I've missed one of these posts by you.

Well, better late than never. :hi:

[katty]

8. change can, but most often does not happen overnight and

either candidate will inherit massive dysfunction. I like that Hillary really knows the players and has already been through the wash, rinse and dry cycle several times-she is still standing.
Obama has much to offer, what, exactly that will turn out to be - is still, obviously, unknown. However, if you sense the risk is worth taking, he is intelligent and I must say he did very well going up against Hillary last night. I think either one will have to face the dirty dealing GOP attack machine head on. Right now, my view is, it is imperative that the Democrats win this election.

[aquart]

12. The Democrat is going to win.

THAT's when the trouble starts.

And smooth platitudes don't cut it for me.

And then to find out they were recycled smooth platitudes...

I would be so overjoyed to be wrong about this man. But I look at him and all I think is Televangelist.

[katty]

16. i hear you, points well taken - struggling with this now

[IowaGirl]

26. Amen......

And he's amazingly good at passing the plate...:rofl: or :cry: ???

[avrdream]

30. Yeah, me too.

Inspiring speaker until you start to read the entire passage from that Bible. In BO's case, that Bible told him to put Donnie McClurkin out on tour and I cannot forgive him for that.

[ConcernedCanuk]

13. Well, I think with the electoral system ya got, Obama is your best bet - Who else is there?

.
.
.

I think what will, or won't make the difference if Obama wins, will be who the VP is, the SOS, AG, and other top people.

If he gets the right combination, Obama COULD make a heck of a change.

Slowly, mind ya.

Obama may be about to inherit a sick horse - and he needs to get it healthy enough before he can ride though the dung-heap that the Bush Gang is gonna leave behind.

Get it together Dems,

The whole world is watching . . .

And praying.

[Old and In the Way]

14. I'm expecting that Barack will set the table for real change.

While a candidate that runs on outlawing the Republican Party would appeal to me, I don't think that's the way to get elected. What we really need is a candidate that can get us a Senate majority and have the ability to sell real change to the American people....leapfrog the Republican obstructionism and vault over the media framing of the issues. What happens in the trenches is up to us after November....keeping the pressure on our elected Democrats to go after the treason and corruption without fearing where the evidence takes us. Barack has impressed me with his ability to get people excited about change and I'm willing to roll the dice with his nomination.

[aquart]

29. Define "real change."

This should be a knee slapper.

[avrdream]

35. Ah the "change" word again.

A female President is also a change.

[Usrename]

15. This argument does not make much sense.

I don't know anyone who is claiming that Obama is somehow vastly different on the issues. So, what is there to be learned from studying his voting record? It's no different than any of the other leading Democrats, including Hillary.

What the heck are they talking about with this stuff? The two share the same goals, that should be obvious by now.

Any real disparity that exists between Clinton and Obama is only in their uncompromising difference over tactics and methods.

Hillary doesn't think there is anything wrong with the way Washington lobbyist control the agenda and the legislation. She likes it. She thinks the lobbyists are there speaking up for the public good.

Obama sees a whole lot wrong with this system, especially the part about how it is all set up to ignore the needs of the people.

Voting record? It makes me wonder if there is another campaign going on that other people are watching.

[Kokonoe]

19. I'd like to reign in and oppose political powers that

are incapable of ushering in any kind of change. Obama opposed the war when others did not. Now Matt Gonzalez wants us to forget.

[depakid]

20. the Class Action "Fairness" Act

Onewof those areas where his credentials, ironically, serve him poorly.

[smoogatz]

21. Okay, you're out.

I love all this crap from DLCers about how Obama's just too damn centrist for them. Oy.

[Stuckinthebush]

25. It doesn't matter what his record is now

We are faced with two potential candidates. Clinton and Obama.

In terms of stated policy there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them (no matter what half the DU:P posts say).

Here is the reality:

Obama has a better chance at beating McCain than Clinton does.

She may be more qualified or have a better record on some things but dims da berries.

Obama beats McCain and Clinton loses to him.

Both are fine and would make fine presidents. I think that most Dems would agree with that.

[susankh4]

31. Thanks for another good resource!

Is this the Matt Gonzales, who ran on the Green Party ticket in Cali? I couldn't tell for sure.

If so, he is a good resource.

And it's about time people start speaking up about the runaway train we seem to be on.

[Imagevision]

36. Compared to Bush and Billary? I'll go with Obama....

[DogPoundPup]

40. Hillary is a 'hothead' ... so is Bush!

The world is 'sick to death' of this type of "hothead" governance. I've decided on Obama.

[libbygurl]

37. K & R.

:kick:

[s4n1ty]

41. Very first point in this article is based on a provable lie

I did 3 minutes of digging on the very first point made in that text, namely that Obama "said there wasn't much difference between his position and George Bush's position on the war."

I thought you might be very concerned to know that it is a deliberate misquote according to Media Matters, a progressive media watchdog:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801140002

I haven't fact-checked the remainder of the article, but if the very first claim is suspect I suspect the remainder of the article should
be treated with equal suspicion.

I would suggest that you watch the following video by Larry Lessig, a Stanford Law professor, in which he talks about this kind of attack as
it relates to the decision of whether we should vote for Hillary or Obama:

http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/02/20_minutes_or_so_on_why_i_am_4.html

[DogPoundPup]

42. Thanks for debunking...

and doing the legwork required to be educated and educate others. Much appreciated!!!!

[Skittles]

44. "at this stage" certainly changes the context

it is indeed misleading to omit those three words

[mitchtv]

43. Real change?

More nuclear power plants? He has quietly dropped his advocating on this. I remember from the debates his position was to the right of Edwards and Hillary. Oh well, I guess its not important. No one has pinpointed his closeness to the industry or his half baked energy plan utilizing nukes