And Now Obama?

[IndianaGreen]

And Now Obama?

by Bill Fletcher, Jr.

So, we are faced with this enigma. Some people, including some writers for The Black Commentator, are adamant that Senator Obama should not be supported and that he is a fraud. Others, including some writers for The Black Commentator, argue exactly the opposite. I am not going to argue the position of Solomon and suggest splitting the baby, but I will argue that critical support of the Obama campaign is an appropriate approach to take. Let me suggest why.

*First, and not in order of importance, the reality of the US electoral system and the state of progressive movements, is that we are a ways off from having a candidacy that is anti-racist, anti-sexist and anti-empire - at least a candidacy who can win. Unfortunately, we are in a period where we are compelled to address the lesser of two evils. In that sense, while I do believe that we could have had a winning candidate who was better on the issues than is Senator Obama, no such candidate prevailed in the primaries.

Second, there is little question but that Senator Obama has helped to ignite excitement and an electoral upsurge, though I would not describe it as a movement, at least not at the moment. This becomes a space in which progressive-minded people can and should be pushing the content of progressive change, rather than relying on mere rhetoric.

Third, the color line. While I adamantly object to those who yell - in support of Senator Obama - that “race does not matter,” the reality is that a successful Black nominee, not to mention an elected Black president of the United States, lays the foundation for a different discussion on matters including, but not limited to, race. This does not mean that a Black person automatically makes the environment more progressive (does anyone remember the name Clarence Thomas?) but it does mean that an individual who is liberal-to-progressive can open a door for discussion. We should not expect that he will walk through that door, but others of us may very well be able to.

My conclusion, and I offer this with great caution, is that critical support for Obama is the correct approach to take. Yet this really does mean critical support. It means, among other things, that Senator Obama needs to be challenged on his views regarding the Middle East; he must be pushed beyond his relatively pale position on Cuba to denounce the blockade; he must be pushed to advance a genuinely progressive view on the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast and the right of return for the Katrina evacuees; and he must be pushed to support single payer healthcare.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/264/264_african_world_and_now_obama.html

[thevoiceofreason]

1. I'm an Obama "zealot'

And I agree

[lurky]

3. Critical support is all I offer any candidate.

Uncritical support is for Republicans.

[ProSense]

2. "he must be pushed beyond his relatively pale position on Cuba to denounce the blockade"

I guess that's the answer: now Obama!

Clinton, like Edwards, cannot match Obama's position on Cuba.

[IndianaGreen]

5. Hillary's position on Cuba and Venezuela is the same as that of John Negroponte

Who would want more of the same? Replacing Bush with Hillary would be akin to changing the name plate in a cubicle without changing personnel.

[mitchtv]

4. he must be pushed to renounce Nukclear power

pushed to be strong on Social Security
pushed to do right by Gays
pushed to prosecute administration law breakers
BUy him some roller skates already

[Yossariant]

6. yeah, he's as strong as Reagan on Social Security. Identical, in fact.

:puke:

[K Gardner]

7. Speaking to a group for Q&A , he said he wouldn't be a perfect president, but "I will always

listen to you". He said sometimes he'd get things wrong, and "you'll get mad at me", but said we'd always try to learn from each other.
(paraphrased, still looking for the transcript)

It was one of those moments when you just KNOW this man has the wisdom to Listen, the humility to Learn, the patience to Try and Try again to get it right if he gets it wrong. It was one of those moments when you know, in your heart and in your gut, that this is the next President, the next truly Great and Historical leader of the free world. Someone who can also be a "friend". And someone to whom you can make suggestions like this and know they will be taken seriously.

Excellent post and I agree ! And I know he will work WITH us on this and much, much more.

[EffieBlack]

8. "The Black Commentator?" Oh, I don't think so.

[Johnny__Motown]

9. As long as the same caution is used when deciding to support Clinton, I agree.

[IndianaGreen]

10. We already know what we will get from Hillary.

It is highly unlikely that as President Hillary would deviate one iota from the corporatist and imperialist agenda she followed in the US Senate. Hillary will never raise the issue of justice for Palestinians, much less pursue a Middle East settlement that would require Israel to give up Arab land taken in the 1967 War. Hillary will continue the disastrous US policy of enabling Israel's imperialism in the region, including maintaining an occupation force in Iraq as a counter to Iran.

In Latin America, the wife of the man that kept the School of the Americas open, will pursue the Bush policies with renewed vigor. Hillary will unleash the CIA and the military to reestablish American hegemony in the region.

In light of the reactionary policies of the second Clinton Administration, what will progressives be doing during Hillary's presidency? Here are some of the highlights:

March 2009 - National antiwar marches on the 6th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2009 - National antiwar marches on the 7th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2010 - National antiwar marches on the 7th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2010 - National antiwar marches on the 8th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2011 - National antiwar marches on the 8th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2011 - National antiwar marches on the 9th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

March 2012 - National antiwar marches on the 9th anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.

October 2012 - National antiwar marches on the 10th anniversary of Iraq War Resolution.

[Psyop Samurai]

11. Every time I end up at Black Commentator...

...I think to myself, "I've got to start reading hear more often - they really know their stuff".

Finally, as of today, they are in my "Key Sites" bookmarks.

Thanks.

[stillcool]

12. I agree ..

and I think every person elected to public office demands scrutiny. And there lies the problem. Participation can not end the day after the election. Somehow people need to learn organizational skills and stay involved in the political process. That is the only way, any change will be effected.

[donkeyotay]

13. I can ascribe to "critical support"

I am not enthralled with Obama, yet there is no one else left in the race who can offer the chance - slim, but a chance - that we can accomplish anything good for this country. I have my doubts about him, doubts most summed up by the "Money web" at opensecrets.org. http://opensecrets.org/pres08/moneyweb.asp?cycle=2008

It shows bankers such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, DLA Piper, UBS AG, Lehman and a company called National Amusements, owned by Sumner Redstone. (Oddly, none of the details are available on this contributor, so I don't know why the company is listed on the Money Web, but pulls up no info when queried.) This, in combination with support from people like Warren Buffett, Paul Volcker and Ruppert Murdoch, doesn't fill me with confidence.

Here's Sumner's previous choice for prez:

Media Mogul Maelstrom
THE VIACOM CEO ENDORSES GEORGE BUSH AND SETS OFF A DEBATE ABOUT POLITICAL PARTISANSHIP
By Johnnie L. Roberts Newsweek Web Exclusive
Oct 4, 2004

after Sumner Redstone, who controls CBS-parent Viacom, enthusiastically endorsed President George W. Bush. From a "Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal," Redstone told an audience of CEOs in Hong Kong in late September, "because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on." In the widely-reported remarks, he added: "I vote for what's good for Viacom."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/55035