Obama and the Courage of our Convictions

A year or so ago I wrote a book entitled The Courage of Our Convictions. It urged Democratic leaders to restate the principles that guided the party successfully through the age of Roosevelt (1932-1968): commitment to national community, security alliances, citizen obligation, and equality and justice. Only when our principles are clear can voters know who we are and identify with us and can we develop persuasive and effective policies,and programs. Principles, policies, programs.

The Iowa caucus results seem to support this ideal. Senator Obama is a man of principle. He is committed to restoring a sense of national community to America. He believes in restoring our security alliances through active diplomacy and engaging those who disagree with us in constructive dialogue. He restates the requirement that we all give something back to America, to become engaged in the public arena, in the national interest. And, most important, he is the walking embodiment of equality and justice.

Already the Obama candidacy has sent a powerful message around a watching world: The torch has been passed to a new generation of American leaders, and we don't care what color it is.

As one who has struggled throughout a lifetime for restoration of idealism to American politics, I can only smile, and perhaps shed a tear of happiness, that our time may have come.

This is a new day in America. Let's call it hope.

Comments

[eddiestardust]

Senator, I am sorry but I must disagree.

Sentor Obama is someone that I don't particularly trust yet.

I trust Senator Edwards a lot more.

[factanonverba]

As one who has never picked a winner, I admit that my track record is poor but inspirational is not a word I would use to describe Mr. Obama. Dangerous is a better one. Foolhardy is another. More of the same old same old only in a nicer packaging. Let me review my history of failure: 1980 John Anderson 1984 none of the above 1988 Paul Simon 1992 Paul Tsongas 1996 Clinton but by default 2000 Bill Bradley and 2004 Edwards. I won't write off 2008 just yet. True change is John Edwards.

[rodeogirl]

My man Bill came in fourth. It is a great day.
No other canidate supports an Equal Rights
Amendment, Native American rights and ending the war today. He has the diplomatic chops to
exercise America's power and influence the way we all dream of. With words, not weapons.
Thank you Iowa

[bethinCary]

I share that sentiment with you Mr Hart.

[darkladyofala]

I've been disappointed with the youth of this country for some time; but, the turn out in Iowa last night was something to behold.
I watched C-Span and other channels; I was happy to see so many young faces.
Boomers, generation X and generation next were in attendance at the Dem. caucuses; and, that gives me hope, not a minute too soon, I just turned 60!
So here's hoping they stick to it across the country; I'm glad, at least, I lived to see a son of Kenya and Kansas have a real chance, about time, to be elected as our president.
We have to turn out in droves; if we want real change in the WH and in both houses.
I'll always be a Deaniac; and I still support Edwards. However, last night has actually made this old girl believer again! Peace out.

[patriotscholar]

It is nice to see Americans choose a candidate who identifies more with their wishes. However, when all the hooplah is done, it is likely that there will be two candidates chosen, one democratic and one republican, that are hand-picked by the real powers, the CFR and Tri-Laterals. Bet on it.
And Mr. Hart, you know this to be true. Elections are becoming a contest between the ordinary American and the elite power brokers.

[Levittown]

Obama is good but he is controlled by money interest. If elected the voters will see at the end of his first year he will have changed very little domestically, the big tax benefit to the top 2 or 3 % will still be there and foreign policy has not progressed in a manner to cause us to feel more secure. As far as prosecuting the members of the Bush administration and the contractors for crimes in Iraq and here at home Obama will " look ahead " and let the past be the past and forgotten, Unl;ess Congress acts the last eight years will be only a notation in the history books

[The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker]

Wow. One CFR member (Gary Hart of the "New World Order") writes about another CFR member (Obama, a CFR member whose campaign is being paid for by the Bilderbergers of the NWO) . . .

. . . and the crowd cheers.

I weep for America. Folks, say hello to the North American Union and your NWO Overlords. I like Barak Obama (truly) but if he ends up in the White House he and his whole family will find out what it feels like to be owned like slaves. This is not the kind of "character building" I'd wish on anyone.

All these comparisons to Kennedy are so apt! Just remember what happened to JFK within a month of telling the Bilderbergers and the CFR to go to hell.

[glitzqueen]

If you're such a fan of idealism and the "age of Roosevelt," Senator Hart, why are you prepared to subvert the democratic process with the "Oklahoma 15" in order to achieve a so-called "unity government" -- even if it takes running Bloomberg on his billions that could steamroller anybody?

I was shocked to see your name among those supporting this end-run against the will of the people, unless we wind up with candidates whom you and your little group approve of (Obama being one of their special pets).

FDR, let me remind you, was effective not because he played ball with moneyed interests but because he opposed them for the good of the people. His approach was as far from bipartisan as you can get, because then -- as now -- the corporatists had our system thoroughly rigged to their benefit.

Fellow-readers, in case you're unaware of the meeting planned for next week in Oklahoma, during which a small band of global power brokers and political has-beens plan to draft a platform they expect candidates to buy into (on fear of their running an independent), please do yourselves a favor and see yesterday's post by "skyblu" at www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shaw/reading-the-pictures-_b_79149.html, then see the "Washington Post" article it references (particularly the excellent comments posted by outraged readers, of which my favorites are, "Want UNITY? Vote OUT Obstructionists! Congress is the Problem! The Special Interests shop there!" and "This is nothing more than a plot by the corporate elite to blunt real economic reform.").

With thanks to "skyblu" for calling this to our attention.

[DaveNelson]

I must admit that, despite the fact I am supporting John Edwards, I got a body rush seeing Obama and his family in the Iowa's winner circle. It is the kind of scene I have dreamed for America since childhood and I haven't felt a similiar reaction since I stood with a certain Senator from Colorado when he defeated Walter Mondale in the NH primary 1984.

I believe that Obama is a man of courage and conviction. Call me jaded, but after seeing what they did to Harold Ford in his Senate race, I expect the same or worse for Obama.

I have stood stunned to see so many of my fellow citizens silent and passive throughout the last seven years, that I am of little faith that they could make this historical leap.

I feel the restoration of America's integrity and standing in the world, the need to address poverty and the struggles of middle-class Americans and the global climate crisis are too important to risk another four years of a Republican controlled White House...like I said I am disillusioned and I don't trust the American electorate.

[jsarets]

The Obama campaign has established its game plan: if he can generate high turnout, especially in the under-30 crowd, then he's virtually impossible to beat.

I think this is exactly the candidate the Democrats want in the general election. Someone who gets people excited, gets the youth excited, mobilizes a broad coalition, and can convert the nation's anti-Bush sentiment into a down-ticket landslide that dramatically shifts the balance of power in Congress.

This is the candidate that's going to shift the demographics of the general election, the only one who can get as many

[ultomatt]

Speaking of convictions, what do you think the odds are that Obama, or anyone else, will pursue criminal charges (with convictions hopefully to follow) against the Bush crime syndicate? I'd say roughly zero. Mr. Hart, and I'm sure Obama and others, are all about moving on, not looking back, giving America a "new beginning". There's nothing new in America, including beginnings. All taking this tack produces, is more (and worse) criminals in the future.

If you support the concept of law and order, then you must support indicting and trying for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against the United States and the Constitution, this vile gang of thugs who stole the Presidency and then proceeded on a campaign of murder and mayhem in the middle east. It's that simple. There's right and wrong, and moving on without holding these criminals responsible for their crimes, is wrong. Letting them get away with this historically unprecedented level of criminality, only emboldens the next group of thugs who are salivating to kill more civilians, and spread more mayhem across the world (that would be the likes of ALL of the Republican Presidential candidates...not to mention a few of the Democrats).

Convictions are a wonderful thing, especially when they get criminals off the street, and far away from the innocent people they so enjoy murdering.

[curiousasheck]

Sounds nice but idealism alone won't pay the bills, repair our crumbling infrastructure and manufacturing base, bail out the markets and banks, restore investor faith, the treasury,
on and on and on.

Lets be real here. Not ONE candidate is being honest about economics.

[getoffmedz]

Dear Gary Hart - your sentiment is well and good but the Obama and Huckabee wins merely mean Iowa wants CHANGE!

Now, let's see if the rest of the country wants change?

Everyone is sick to death of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.

[JohnCitizen]

CONGRATULATIONS TO IOWA AGAIN!

America should congratulate Iowans for doing their duty again, that is, picking the worst possible Democratic candidate, as they have done frequently including John Kerry in 2004. Part of the problem is the crazy Iowa caucus system, but the biggest factor is allowing Republicans to help pick the Democrat who they think is easiest to defeat. Someday, just maybe, America will have a primary system where the real swing states (right now FLORIDA and OHIO) decide who the candidate is? Of course, that would be logical, meaningful and ridiculous. Now instead, we get the government we deserve!