Now is the time to be vigilant about Obama

[judy]

I remember how I felt when Bill Clinton became President, following 12 years of Reagan/Bush malevolent presidencies.
Suddenly, Clinton and Gore were talking about compassion, and kindness and straightforward politics, and it was like a cloud was lifting.

And then...then it was "don't ask don't tell", and then the firing of Dr. Jocelyn Elders for saying that masturbation could not lead to AIDS, then a bombing here, a bombing there, little by little, things started falling apart. One of the most disappointing aspects was Clinton's adoption of a lot of right wing rhetoric, sometimes at his detriment. Like responding to accusations of being "soft on terror", because you are not bombing some god forsaken place somewhere.

In many occasions, Clinton could just have stuck to his original ideals and said things like "the Constitution offers equal protection to all. So gay or straight is not part of the discourse when it comes to the military". "Dr. Elders is only saying what can help our young people not get infected", or "you can't fight terrorism with war. War is the mother of terrorism", and so on...instead he adopted the viewing angles of the right wing.

Obama is a great, inspirational speaker, but he is teetering on the verge of adopting all this right wing speak. His speech to AIPAC, his willingness to keep Blackwater in Iraq, and his adoption of the "war on terror" concept scare me.
Of course, he has my vote no matter what, and I think he is a brilliant man (just like Bill Clinton).

But I think we need to keep speaking out against the right wing terminology, and keep calling him out on certain policy statements he makes (such as mentioning the "Iranian threat". We need to do it now. So maybe he will know that we are his base, we are the majority, and we are a lot of his campaign funds.

I believe that he is the kind of person who knows what is right, and all we can do is be here to remind him, and not blindly make excuses for everything he does wrong. Speaking out starts now.

Which reminds me, I heard on some radio station that he was using as foreign policy advisors people like Madeleine Allbright, and some other Clinton advisors...this upset me. If he is to represent change, he should re-hire Samantha Power who doesn't use the WOT terminology and is committed to diplomacy. If anyone at DU has more info about this (the radio announcer could have repeated some baseless rumor...it wouldn't be the first time :) ) Please tell me this was just an Obamaphobic rumor...

[ecstatic]

1. Continue to write, call, pressure him to remain liberal at heart

The same thing we'd have to do with any other nominee. It's an ongoing battle but we're almost there as long as we don't become complacent.

[Catherina]

15. Democracy is our responsibility . Yes WE can! n/t

[MrCoffee]

2. Hear hear! K&R

You may need this, however....

[flyarm]

3. BULLSHIT..IF ANYONE DARED TO PAY ATTENTION BEFORE HE WAS THE NOMINEE

they very well would have known where this guy is going!

too little too late!

[Middle finga]

6. are you suggesting Hillary would have embraced liberal and

progressive ideology more if she was our GE candidate? The media is still right leaning even though the republican party is unpopular. The corporate media would destroy Obama if he tried to be Dennis Kucinich. Getting Obama into office is just one step we still will have a huge challenge ahead of us by trying to change this corrupt corporate media. For instances I hated Obama's Aipac speech but if he would have came out sounding pro Palestine or even handed he would have been ripped to shreds by the shills in the media.

[MrCoffee]

8. I am so very tired of throwing away core Democratic values to win elections

What are we going to have left when we win?

The Military Commissions Act pissed all over the Constitution, but we had to "hold your nose and vote D"

Senator Obama (he's still a sitting Senator, let's not forget) has announced his support for a bill that pisses all over the 4th Amendment.

My nose is getting a bit sore.

[Catherina]

16. Oh go away. Cluster bombs and war votes were an automatic disqualification

Sorry if the messy quest for justice upsets you.

[Danger Mouse]

34. boo fucking hoo. if you expect me to believe clinton would've been some liberal hero...

then all i have to say to you is :rofl:

[WillyWonton]

40. Bingo, flyarm!!!

It was only going to be a matter of time before Obama (touted as a new and different kind of politician...hmmm) would have to disappoint some of his supporters who thought he could do no wrong. And those of us on DU who knew this day would come were of course branded as racists for not blindly supporting Obama. Obama has made too many promises of hope and change, and I believe many of his supporters will be disappointed in the end when he can't fully deliver. We are seeing the start of this here today.

[griffi94]

4. it's a bit late to be vigilant now

he's what we have. we can support or not support him, but our ability to influence him will probly take a back seat to his courting indies and moderate repubs.

[Douglas Carpenter]

5. I VERY strongly support Sen. Obama, but I never had any illusion that he shares my views on a number

of issues. He is a slightly center-left centrist.

I was disappointed by some of his comments since achieving enough delegates to assure the Democratic nomination. I knew the AIPAC speech would be painful. But it was unfortunately more painful than I expected.
And the reaction among Arab-Americans and Muslim Americans and of course in the Middle East was one of shock and disbelief.

But when all is said and done, he is the only effective opposition to the crazy extremist of the right-wing of the Republican Party.

They hate him so much for a reason.

If we want to move the country toward a genuinely progressive agenda, it cannot be done in one single step.

[Catherina]

17. Well said. I have few illusions abut his centrism

and the two things you mentioned were a hard kick in the gut.

For every step they took to the right with a complicit bi-partisan Congress, I push with all my might for steps to the left even if it won't happen overnight. We have nothing to lose by forcing steps to the left while we work on the ground to clean house and rebuild.

[BlooInBloo]

7. *Always* is the time to vigililant with our leaders. Some smart person said that once.

[ruggerson]

9. Sam Nunn is the very individual who screwed Clinton

and forced DADT.

Amazing that this monster's name has resurfaced.

[JoFerret]

28. Very true

backstabber right winger/ centrist then. What's changed?

My guess is that this mere kite flying on the part of the campaign.

[Evergreen Emerald]

10. To rehire the divisive Samantha Power would be to act differently

than he speaks. He is about unity--not division. Samantha Power may know a thing or two about politics, but based on her actions, I cannot say she is committed to diplomacy.

[MrCoffee]

11. Then you don't know a thing about Samantha Power

You cannot say she's committed to diplomacy? That proves your complete ignorance on the subject.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrCoffee]

18. Ignoring the emotion, Samantha Power is my nerd-crush

I :loveya: her. I do.

[Evergreen Emerald]

26. Her actions prove it.

She is the one who said ugly divisive things. She is not a diplomat!

[JoFerret]

29. She is - without doubt - brilliant

She did misspeak. She retracted. I accept that retraction at face value.

[Evergreen Emerald]

33. I define brilliant differently. And I would think that to rehire someone

so divisive would be a mistake.

[JoFerret]

35. Fair enough

But I hope there is a role for her. If not a role then a place for her voice to be heard.

She really did retract her absurd misstatement. It was a partisan mistake.

[shadowknows69]

13. Get him into the White House and then be vigilant.

He's still better than choice B.

[MarjorieG]

32. Very wise.

[Catherina]

14. Best from the heart thread I've read in a long time!

I'm with you Judy, right down to Samantha Power

Rec'd

[MarjorieG]

19. Now is NOT the time to deny support to Obama. Let's understand reality of what co-operation means.

Obama will fight whatever becomes overly corporate that denies us fair play and a true reading of the Constitution. He is not the imperial president.

Samantha Power will be back. Susan Rice is amazing. Obama does listen to everyone, and the Madeline Albrights give security to that branch of voters.

People and Senators who want progressive change, which will be incremental-at least to begin changing the mindset of Americans, are very excited about the prospect of Obama. As much for his ability to listen to all sides, but coming up with good judgment. He is above all, to my mind, a pragmatist-but not Clintonian.

Do we want results or do we want purity?

[starroute]

21. It's not about denying support -- it's about *using* our support

Obama is able to opt out of public financing only because he knows he can raise hundreds of thousands from people like us. Think about that -- that gives us leverage. It ought to give us influence on his positions and his associations. We are his base, and he needs us.

I understand he's trying to solidify his position as leader of the Democratic Party, and that means making nice with a lot of Congressional Democrats, party elders, and Clinton-era figures. Nobody knows to what extent he's just being nice and to what extent he's actually listening to them and preparing to bring them into his administration -- but we can't just wait and hope for the best.

The bottom line is that none of that high-level hobnobbing will win him the election. Frankly, the Democratic Party has a lousy track record when it comes to electing Democratic presidents. What will win it for him is us, and our contributions, and our volunteers, and our protecting his back against GOP smears. He has to know that -- but he also has to know that he can't take us for granted.

We are owed a seat at the table. We are not an army of spear-carriers to be left sitting outside while the high mucky-mucks make the important decisions. They work for us, not the other way round, and we are the source of whatever power they are granted.

We are the people, and if we can't count on a guarantee of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, then what is any of it worth?

[judy]

23. Well said!!

I think you hit the nail right on the head.
:)

[Cha]

24. Then we should be writing

Obama about FISA..and posting on DU.

[judy]

25. Why not?

I write Obama about FISA, and other topics as well, and so should we all.
Why can't we post it on DU?

[Cha]

27. I edited my thread because

it wasn't what I wanted to say..you must have gotten there first. I'm sorry..writing and posting..thanks for your thread, judy.

[judy]

22. To be honest, what I really think is that

purity gets results!

And what I mean by purity, is not an absolute blind devotion to principles. But a great and strong commitment to the values stated by the philosophers who created the system of government of this country would be a great start.

I don't mean to deny support to Obama.
But I do respond to emails from his campaign, and I do say what I think about his positions, to the campaign and to DU. This is what I mean by being vigilant.

In the famous words of Lord Acton:

"I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption, it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

That said, I hope Marjorie's optimistic views of who he is and what he will do are correct. I'll keep my fingers crossed, and his feet to the fire before he gets to the White House, and I'll keep on supporting him as well!

[MarjorieG]

31. I understand out front, pushing on issues, but also energy misspent on not getting Obama elected.

Judy, maybe because I've seen these cycles more times than I like to remember, but grown-ups who can work the issues, the people, and come out pushing for the best, is a rare thing. It is about judgment and smarts, telling us what we don't want to hear, as Obama said he will do. Many voters, Dems, misunderstood the same qualities in Kerry. (This is not an opening to bash Kerry.)

We are spending too much time talking to ourselves on these blogs. Let's register voters, and talk up Obama. The 527s are coming at us, and the McCain's base, the media, will not be fair.

I've worked in election reform for the past five plus years, and the ID laws, electronic machines, and worse laws forbidding audits, give me panic attacks. Legislatures quietly go to central counting-electronic-which opens it up to errors at best.

It took 10 years for Katherine Harris to get the laws giving her the power in 2000. Then all the planets joined, Sequoia delivered bad paper during the recount, deliberately, all on TV saying we need computers-even Georgie, to kick start the electronic voting, giving us HAVA.

Already we hear how Obama will win the popular vote, but McCain the electoral vote, which could mean stealing those few states necessary.

Whatever we've been doing is changing the Democrat brand, the now unfrightening progressive, no matter how much the message of tax and spend liberal, with Obama is the most liberal (as our candidates always are), is still put out there. We've made gains for the future, and party-building.

I don't want to hear we're holding back funding, or using ignorance of the election mechanics and fraud to think this going to be easy. Get involved with your local election integrity organization. Be a poll worker. Although we need to solve these problems before we go the polls.

We need to win now, with this candidate!!!

[AZBlue]

20. We must not lose focus of the most important goal: a Dem WH & Congress.

That's not saying we should give everyone a pass. But that goal must always be considered and kept top of mind.

[Diamonique]

30. Exactly!

Dems always veer to the center/right after they've become the nominee. It's the only way to get elected. Obama can't get elected with only liberal votes.

I knew he would do this.. they always do. Why do so many now seem surprised and ready to rail against him? He's doing what has to be done in order to get into the White House. That is our goal! Don't let yourselves be distracted.

Support him and back him 100% or we'll end up with McCain!

[Raksha]

36. Obama reminds me very much of Bill Clinton during the '92 campaign.

All that charisma, all that promise and hope that "this time" things will really be different. And then all the disappointments that set in later--NAFTA, welfare deform, "don't ask, don't tell," etc. The DLC agenda in its dysfunctional glory.

That's why I've said repeatedly that I like Obama but don't trust him. He'll have to earn my trust, and he can only do that with actions--not with rhetoric and charisma.

I've been taken in before. "Fool me once..." etc.

[slipslidingaway]

38. Chris Floyd article - it might be of interest to you

Chronicle of a Craze Foretold: A History of Hope and Hype
http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1538/135

This is the ending paragraph.

"...These are hard, heartbreaking times. A deepening and entirely justified despair has spread across the country, and the world, like a toxic cloud year after year after year. Who would not look for hope whereever they could find it, who would not respond to even the slightest possibility for positive change in such a situation? I'm not here to gleefully and cynically pour cold water on anyone who sees a glimmer of hope in the candidacy of Barack Obama. I am in no way a purist, or an idealist, or an ideologue. I don't pronounce anathema on "lesser evilism": people must act and vote according to their own conscience. I'm only saying this: know exactly what you are supporting, and what you will really get for that support. And for God's sake, hold every politician -- every politician -- to the most rigorous standards of skepticism, the most rigorous analysis, the most rigorous examination of what they say and do -- and the genuine implications of their words and actions."

[Cleita]

37. To be fair, he will only be as liberal as Congress lets him be.

I think Clinton would have been more liberal with a Congress that had at least either the Senate or the House with a democratic majority. He didn't have that for most of his term. I will reserve judgement until Obama is actually at the helm of state and we know whether Congress has got his back or not.

[slipslidingaway]

39. Excellent and I agree, link to an article I read last week...

http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1538/135

This is the last paragraph.

"...These are hard, heartbreaking times. A deepening and entirely justified despair has spread across the country, and the world, like a toxic cloud year after year after year. Who would not look for hope whereever they could find it, who would not respond to even the slightest possibility for positive change in such a situation? I'm not here to gleefully and cynically pour cold water on anyone who sees a glimmer of hope in the candidacy of Barack Obama. I am in no way a purist, or an idealist, or an ideologue. I don't pronounce anathema on "lesser evilism": people must act and vote according to their own conscience. I'm only saying this: know exactly what you are supporting, and what you will really get for that support. And for God's sake, hold every politician -- every politician -- to the most rigorous standards of skepticism, the most rigorous analysis, the most rigorous examination of what they say and do -- and the genuine implications of their words and actions.


As for the new team.

Change? Obama's foreign policy team is old Clinton hands

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/41485.html


Barack Obama met Wednesday with a new national-security advisory group that includes many of former President Clinton's top advisers, saying that if he's elected president he'll return the nation "to a pragmatic tradition of American foreign policy, which has been so ably advanced by the people in this room."

With former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Warren Christopher and former Defense Secretary William Perry signing on to a panel already heavy with former Clinton administration officials, Obama continued to consolidate the support of Clinton loyalists after his defeat of Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination...

They include former Clinton National Security Adviser Tony Lake; former Assistant Secretary of State Susan Rice; Greg Craig, the former director of the State Department's Office of Policy Planning; former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder; former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig; and former Deputy National Security Adviser Jim Steinberg.

Several former Democratic members of Congress also are in Obama's working groups: David Boren, former chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; Lee Hamilton, former chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the vice chairman of the 9-11 commission; Sam Nunn, former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee; and Tim Roemer, a former House member and 9-11 commissioner..."