After strongly supporting his candidacy for the Senate, I have spent much of the past two years resisting the idea of a Barack Obama Presidency. A few weeks ago, however, I decided to vote for Obama.
Ironically, my decision was based upon considering the proverbial "3:00 a.m. call" that was supposed to undermine my confidence in Obama. In this case, however, the 3:00 a.m. call was not a terrorist attack, but instead, it is the current economic crisis. Given we live in a globalized economy, a global economic crisis becomes a national security crisis, and not dealing with it effectively could very well lead to instability and political chaos, particularly in emerging and developing markets.
Over the past eight weeks, John McCain has not shown the interest or the temperament to deal with this crisis. Instead he vacillates between reactionary populist rhetoric and ideological platitudes, while his running mate Sarah Palin demonstrates the same lack of curiosity that George W. Bush perfected. This is deeply disappointing, but in someway should not be surprising given that through the course of this election McCain increasingly abandoned the straight talk that made him appealing to Independents like me, until by this point he must be unrecognizable even to himself.
On the other hand, Obama has shown discipline, open-mindedness and a desire to understand the complexity of this crisis. He and his economic team do not seem constrained by ideology and seem to understand that while the government has to be cognizant of moral hazard issues, it cannot ignore the resulting suffering across America as the economy tries to recover. I believe that Obama and his team are our best chance at minimizing this crisis and putting the global economy on a more stable, sustainable path to recovery.
At the same time, I remain deeply skeptical with regard to Obama's commitment to reforming government and I simply cannot reconcile the chasm between Obama's vision for America with his vision for Chicago and for Illinois. For America, Obama paints not only an inspiring vision of where we want to go but also, an equally compelling vision of the means to get there, one based on transparency, integrity, and unity. Back home in Chicago and in Illinois, however, he willingly embraces and endorses those most associated with the corrupt and unethical means that have resulted in our three largest governments being under Federal investigation, hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars being wasted (potentially billions when you include pensions) and a culture of fear permeating the political process. To me, there is something terribly ironic (and possibly disingenuous) in the fact that Obama (as well as many of his closest advisers and largest fundraising bundlers) has a greater hope of changing a place relatively unfamiliar to him, Washington, D.C., than he does his own backyard.
Amongst the most important lessons we can learn from the Bush Administration failures and the current economic meltdown are that truth, integrity and accountability matter and that ignoring them when it is convenient (which generally means when it is to our benefit) is not only wrong, but also dangerous and potentially disastrous. If Obama continues to tolerate unethical and illegal behavior amongst his friends and in his party and continues to believe that the "ends justify the means" so long as the ends are the one's he supports and benefit him, then his rhetoric will have been more sanctimonious than substantive. If, however, Obama is willing to hold his friends and both parties to a consistent set of behavioral standards, then he will be that transformative leader many (including me now) have the audacity to hope he truly is.