I'm For Obama!

Now that the race has been narrowed down to two Democratic candidates and we face a 22-state primary election tomorrow, I want to state unequivocally that I'm for Barack Obama.

If Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the Democratic nomination and goes up against John McCain I fear it will dissipate much of the energy that has been generated throughout the primary campaigns. It will be a boring race that rehashes a lot of old news.

We'll hear more about Whitewater than we'll hear about Blackwater.

We'll hear more about the Rose Law firm and "Travelgate" than we'll hear about KBR and the shameless profiteering in Iraq.

We'll hear more about Bill Clinton's love affair with Monica Lewinsky than John McCain's love affair with Bush's bloodbath in Iraq.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama is youthful, brilliant, dedicated, and an experienced community organizer from the Southside of Chicago. He has risen to great heights through hard work and perseverance. (With all of the comparisons lately between Obama and John F. Kennedy, we should remember that no matter how talented JFK was his father greatly assisted his political rise from his earliest campaign in 1946 when he first won a House seat. Obama had no one in his life with money and power remotely comparable to Joseph P. Kennedy.)

Barack Obama never supported and has never apologized for George W. Bush's illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. He can take on John McCain directly as the anti-war candidate. Hillary Clinton cannot.

Barack Obama has touched a nerve with people who are outraged by Bush's constant abuses of power. Senator Clinton has been duplicitous in many of those abuses. Once again, the American people are far ahead of the overly cautious Democratic Establishment on the issue of the Bush Administration's criminality.

As far as U.S. policy in Iraq goes, John "the surge is working" McCain is identical to Dick Cheney. (He even looks like Cheney if the VP wore contact lenses.) The aged and decrepit McCain might be a hybrid of Barry Goldwater and Bob Dole but he can make a powerful case that he'd be a "stronger" commander-in-chief than Hillary Clinton. The misogynists in the Republican noise machine will help him drive this point home. Clinton will have to insist over and over again that she is just as "tough" on the "terrorists" in "wartime" as McCain, and her hawkish rhetoric will alienate the antiwar base of the Democratic Party.

Barack Obama's eight years in the Illinois State Senate and his nearly four years in the U.S. Senate give him more direct legislative experience than Hillary Clinton. Clinton has emphasized her 35 years of "experience" over Obama's presumed "naivety." She includes the years 1993 to 2001 as part of this experience. In doing so, she indirectly takes credit for the era of good feelings her husband presided over.

But just as only Richard Nixon could go to China, only Bill Clinton could undermine the New Deal. On November 12, 1999, Clinton undid the Glass-Steagall Act (a hallmark New Deal reform), which helped produce the current financial meltdown. And his "welfare reform" demolished Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). If this is the kind of "experience" to which Hillary Clinton points then I would ask her supporters to explain how dismantling AFDC helped poor women and children in this country?

President Clinton left the Democratic Party in a far weaker position when he left office than when he had entered. He couldn't even deliver Arkansas to Al Gore in 2000 or to John Kerry in 2004. After he retired he played golf and yucked it up with former president George Herbert Walker Bush. Hillary Clinton now promises to send the two bosom buddies out on a "goodwill tour" if she is elected president. That's just great. George the Elder, the man who made it possible for his ne'er-do-well son to become president, out on tour with the "First Gentleman." I guess we can forget about the Hillary Clinton Administration bringing criminal charges against members of the Bush Administration for their many crimes. How could she with Pappy Bush out "touring" with her husband?

If elected president, Hillary Clinton will sidle to "the center" (meaning "the right") as soon as she is sworn in joining Rahm Emanuel and other DLCers in "triangulating" against the progressive wing of the Democratic Party just as Bill did throughout the 1990s. She might not even get that far after the GOP smear machine eats her alive in the general election. As Frank Rich and others have pointed out, Clinton is vulnerable to being smeared as a risky commander-in-chief in "wartime" compared to the "hero" McCain. Clinton's vote in favor of Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq, makes her a very weak "antiwar" candidate, tamps down the war issue in the general election, and opens her up to charges of "flip-flopping" just as John Kerry suffered in 2004. And despite his war record he lost.

Barack Obama symbolizes multicultural America at its best and he might be able to serve as a foil to the race baiting of the Republicans. They fear showing their true colors and being tarnished as racists. (Just go to the Council of Conservative Citizens' web site if you think the Republican Party isn't populated with racists.) The Republicans want to keep those tendencies subterranean. Hence, they will have to be cautious when they smear Obama if he wins the nomination. (Remember what happened to Trent Lott and Don Imus?)

And Barack Obama has another great asset: Michelle Obama.

Rarely in American politics has the spouse of a presidential candidate been as impressive and brilliant as Michelle Obama. I caught her speech she gave in Delaware on C-SPAN and she inspired me even more than her husband. Her speech covered so much ground confidently, poignantly, and succinctly. She is a spellbinding orator. Michelle Obama, like her husband, is a graduate of Harvard Law School and a political force in her own right. She has the potential to be the most politically active First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt.

The Obamas can win for the Democrats in November. And with grassroots support, they can possibly deliver real change in Washington. There is something inherently appealing about a gifted, committed, progressive and forward-looking African-American couple with two young children living in the White House. This November I'll vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who it is. But for now I'm for Obama.

Comments

[stoprollingover]

Thank you for your views, Joe. I also saw the speech Michelle Obama gave in Delaware, and she was indeed spellbinding. I'm a former Kucinich supporter who has become an Obama convert in recent weeks, but that clinched it for me. I'd even vote for HER for president. I want that woman in the White House!

In Barack's speech to Planned Parenthood in July last year, he made the following humorous self-deprecating remarks that were just delightful:

"We've been inspired by these enormous crowds...and I would love to take all the credit for all these crowds myself and to say to myself it's because I'm just so fabulous, but my wife says otherwise! Michelle confirms that these crowds are not about me. It's about the hunger all across America for something different...

I'm here because of my wife who, as many of you know, is smarter, tougher, and better-looking than I am, and many people ask why she shouldn't be the Obama running for president and I explain that she's too smart to want to run for president - she'd rather tell the president what to do!"

[HaroldB]

The difference between a leader and a manager.

a group of people is hacking an new road in the jungle. The manager (Clinton) is keeping the knives sharp and is making shure everything is going efficient and on schedule.
The leader (Obama) is climing the nearby mountain top climbs into the highest tree and looks out over the Jungle.

He shouts:

STOP!!!

WRONG JUNGLE !!!

Hillary is all aboit hacking a perfect road in the wrong jungle.

Obama is the leader with vision that see whats wrong and sets us in a new direction.

Good luck amerika

[DemandTruth]

Very nice. Many good reasons to support Obama. What did me in was Will.i.am's wonderful video - I'd heard about the wave of hope and inspiration sweeping the nation, but I was caught up in my own wave of hope for John Edwards. But that video opened my eyes. People are waking up from their ignorant, apathetic, FOX-Brainwashed slumber thanks to Obama. How about TWO strong candidates in the White House? How about Obama/Edwards and both of their wonderful, intelligent wives heading up this country for the next 8 years. THAT, to me, is inspiring.

GO BAMA!
Yes WE Can!
Obama/Edwards 08

[jonnie66]

OBAMA LOOSES JOBS FOR LATINIOS!
Ms. Obama, VP Chicago Hosp, that charges minorities 6 times as much, isn"t cold hearted enough, she also caused hundreds to loose their 11.hr jobs, to be more efficient she said! In 05, elected to the BOD Westchester-based TreeHouse Foods, she received $12,000 and $33,000 from a subsidiaries, in Nov announced closing its La Junta, plant, that claimed the jobs of 153 workers, most of them Hispanic! Huge blow to a rural town jobs paid a starting wage of $11hr, Company pays top execs like MICHELLE OBAMA tens of millions a year while destroying middle-class America. Raises the question not only about corporate values but about Barrack Obama's own values. Specifically, while he bashes Wal-Mart, why does his wife, make $45,000 and up a year serving on the board of Chicago comp that pays her a very hefty amount of money while laying off mostly minority workers in economically deprived areas? No. 1 customer is Wal-Mart???

[jonnie66]

The Obama campaign has criticized Hillary Clinton's candidacy as another example of dynastic politics. But now that Obama is playing adopted son of the Kennedy clan, that argument falls apart. Kennedy mystique Is so much JUST hot air. Obama, new? Change? Going back to the Kennedy Camelot Era does not benefit anyone in 2008 - or could even survive with the media probes and questions that are asked today. The Kennedy's have been legally less desirable since JFK. Old Joe and his money?? Questions about his involvement in some of those early elections. All the affairs and nepotism in JFK's cabinet - at least one brother and brother-in-law. And their next generation has certainly made their share of questionable choices, charged with rapes, murders etc... Amazing Ted is shaking his finger at the Clintons! Caroline stayed away from the political arena because she didn't want to align herself and her children with this messy history

[diamondprynzez]

Thank you for your tidbit about Michelle Obama. She's a great asset to the Obama campaign, and she will undoubtedly champion the causes of modern women even more than a President Hillary Clinton ever would.

[thicky]

If one wants the present Bush regime held accountable for their crimes, than a Clinton is not your candidate.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/Print/2008/013108.html

". . . A more likely explanation was that the Democrats wanted to avoid a nasty fight with Republicans over the Reagan-Bush legacy. In early 1993, the Democrats, especially President Bill Clinton, saw a battle over history as a distraction from his domestic priorities. [For details, see Robert Parry"s Secrecy & Privilege.]

Clinton adopted a tolerant attitude, too, toward George H.W. Bush"s unprecedented decision on Christmas Eve 1992 to pardon six Iran-Contra defendants (another scandal which implicated Bush and could be viewed as a sequel to the October Surprise case).

Clinton was equally disinterested when new evidence emerged in 1996 about Bush"s role in the Iraq-gate arming of Saddam Hussein, and in 1998 when the CIA"s inspector general compiled damning evidence on how the Reagan-Bush administration had protected drug traffickers linked to the Nicaraguan contras.

Instead of demanding the truth about these crimes and holding people accountable, the Clinton administration found it easier to sweep these unpleasant matters under the rug. One of Clinton"s rewards was a cozy relationship with the senior George Bush.

Now, the congressional Democrats seem to taking a similarly permissive approach toward the crimes of the junior George Bush."

[grendl]

Mr. Obama can win. If the New York Giants can defeat the mighty Patriots, if Roger Federer can be felled in Australia, then this surely is the year of the underdog, and that's precisely what the Senator from Illinois represents.

Those who fear another slaughter at the hands of the GOP, well, you've allowed fear to get the best of you. Your cynicism belies your cowardice. It takes strength to show hope in this country, in this time, when those on the other side of the aisle have relegated it to a four letter word, or just a city Bill Clinton came from.

Yes, it takes just as much hope to endorse the first woman president as well. But should her bid fall short, don't punish the party by withholding your vote for a man you've convinced yourself is a charlatan making empty promises merely to assuage your own ego, and condemned out of hand out of an overriding need to be right.

Winning starts with belief, as Eli Manning stressed in his post game press conference. Hard work, confidence, and an unwaivering belief in yourself. Those who don't believe in Barack Obama's ability to make good on the promise of a better future are only speculating, just as much as he is.

But his belief is founded on a belief not just in himself but in the innate goodness of the American people, and our ability to rise up against tyranny when absolutely necessary, a belief bolstered time and time again with solid examples of heroism, the heroism to change, from this country's very inception, through the Civil War, World War 2, and Viet Nam, a wrong we eventually recognized and attempted to right.


Lets deem this the year of the underdog, the rebel to the status quo, and let all detractors spout their statistics, use their illicit means to tape our practices, parade their star quarterbacks in our faces, and say fuck them anyway. Yes, we can win.

[bluegrasstafarian]

Thanks, Joe for laying it out for us like this! Among the most coherent argument for Obama over Clinton i've seen yet.

[vbond]

THANK YOU!!!