|
||
Latest Polls Send Message to Barack: Where's the Audacity?
Here's the most recent gloomy news for those trusting in Obama:
Obviously, it's time for him to make his move. He has a problem he can't afford to ignore any longer. Here it is in a nutshell: my informant at the rally for Obama in Washington Square Park, NYC, told me it was the most moving public moment she had ever experienced. But she was talking about the expectation that hung over the crowd waiting for him -- their need to believe. When Obama himself got there, she said, he was just "OK."
That about sums it up. He brings hope because of who he is. But where's the audacity?
The Chris Matthews type conventional wisdom is that he needs to start attacking Hillary -- Chris and his pals want to see a fight. It's good for their ratings. Obama is rightly hesitant to do that. In relation to Hillary, his professorial distinction-drawing manner hits just the right note. His audacity was supposed to be about hope, so trading barbs with her is not the place for it.
Instead, he needs to give rousing speeches built around lines like these:
"If elected, I will go to Tehran, I will go to Damascus... I will address the Muslim people... I will restore America's tarnished reputation... we must not be the global bully... we must be a responsible global citizen... only then can America truly lead."
Or
"Some immigrants may be illegal, and that has to be dealt with. But no immigrant is an alien. That concept has no place in my religion..."
Or
"Terror is not an enemy. Terror is a tactic. It threatens the peace of the world. The same technologies that created a global economy make terrorism a global threat. We must confront and dismantle this threat together or it will persist against us separately as far into the future as the eye can see."
Or
"God gave us this Earth to care for. We have failed. When I am President, the Environmental Protection Agency will become into a cabinet level department on a par with State and Treasury. It will be given a global mission, and I am going to ask Al Gore to be that department's first Secretary."
Obama must risk sounding idealistic and naive. That risk authentically belongs to audacious hope, almost by definition. It was built into his candidacy from the beginning. If he takes that risk he will be free.
And besides, that classic moment is upon him -- what's left to lose?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Some immigrants may be illegal, and that has to be dealt with. But no immigrant is an alien. That concept has no place in my religion..."
Oh Please!!!! Are you seriously kidding me? Try using a line like that in any Iowa town where the meatpacking plant and livestock BigAgro CAFOs now employ only illegal aliens and folks will simply mock you. Just 15-20 years ago meatpacking paid a decent wage. Likewise Dairy, Beef and hogs were raised by most family farmers. When was the last time you were out to Iowa or Wisconsin???
Illegal Alien is the correct legal term. "undocumented worker" or even "illegal immigrant" is dead give away of Open Borders agenda political correctness speak. Audacity my ass!!!
As far as surrounding himself with the best and brightest.. obama has done that. Samatha Power is brilliant. Ziggy is an foreign relations legend.
Look at his list... the best and brightest clearly recognized brilliance and were attracted to obama.
Guys like this do not understand the american electoral process.
Obama will win Iowa, then NH , then South Carolina, then Nevada... and on to super tuesday with a ton of momentum.
As I heard this morning, the polls in Iowa reflect the true nature of this race and in Iowa it is dead even.
yet these so-called ''experts'' continue to ignore a pattern that has repeated itself every election since 1980... some experts.
They are projecting their own desires for a subway series for their own gain in pub... has nothing to do with election reality.
I recall that earlier this month, a poll came out showing Obama having a 4% lead over Hillary Clinton in Iowa. This story ran for about 1 news cycle in the MSM, only to then be replaced by Hillary leading Obama by 6%. What then ensued in the next few weeks was an absence of the mentioning of Obama's lead, and an almost avalanche of stories speaking only of Hillary leading. Then, in the same new news cycle, the national polls began to ramp up that Hillary had an insurmountable 20%+ lead over Obama and a 30%+ lead over Edwards.
If anyone doubts that the Hillary machine isn't manipulating these numbers, then they haven't been watching the way power works in the American political system. Hillary is made to seem to be the leader and after awhile she is seen singularly as the leader.
And, in our American media system where little examination is given to facts, data and records--Hillary is free to describe herself as leader even though she has exampled no clear instances of when, what or where or how she has championed such qualities during her tenure in the US senate?
The real question is not one of audacity, but that of credibility--or more crudely, "Where's the Beef?". Obama has all the charisma and vision of another JFK. However, Kennedy built an impressive Brain Trust around him of the 'best and brightest' in every major issue area. This imbued his candidancy with an aura of experienced wisdom that backed his charimatic vision. Obama has repeated made the mistake of addressing issues with only items from his relatively thin personal resume, and thus making him a lonely voice in the wilderness.
Great Post!
I hope he follows your advice.
The thing about that rally in NYC that disturbs me the most is, he missed some very important votes that day, Sept 27, 2007 so he could go to that rally. Some of the votes he missed included the vote to give Bush permission to call Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization (the first step to war against Iran). He had the chance to prove that he is indeed 'the anti war' candidate and the AUDACITY to miss that vote! In 2002, he wasn't in the Senate for that 'war vote against Iraq,'but what about in 2007?
I've noticed that at Obama's pep rallies, there really aren't too many that includes question and answer sessions. I know, because I've seen him five times.
For those who say he's taking on the Democratic Leadership Council, I ask "since when?" His mentor is none other than Joe Lieberman, the past chair. He's close friends with former Congressman Harold Ford, the present chair. And, he promises to vote for expansion of CAFTA ... making him a free trade (corporatist) Democrat.
Regarding his leadership in the Senate, I am still waiting for him to go across the aisle and work with the GOP as he's promised, to form a consensus to bring our troops home.
His environmental stance is spotty at best. He's taken PAC money from the coal industry, touting liquid coal as being 'clean' and he's pro nuclear industry. I personally don't know too many environmentalist who believe those two industries are clean.
obama is a punk. WHY is he even in this race?
He is making an Al Sharpton type "statement." And he will relegate himself to Al Sharpton type tyrades and protests after his fifteen minutes of fame.
~!@
The fact that Obama has outraised all candidates in primary dollars, both democrats and republicans, kinda places in perspective your childish comment.
You are wrong on several counts.
The Senate vote on the Kyl-Lieberman resolution on Iran was on Sept 26th. Obama did not miss it in order to be at the NYC rally which occurred on the 27th. (Obama was present on Sept. 25th when the vote was originally scheduled to take place. However, Harry Reid pulled it and said the vote would be postponed indefinitely. Obama then traveled to NH. Reid mysteriously rescheduled the vote for the next day.)
Regarding the environment: The League of Conservation Voters says "Senator Barack Obama has put forward an aggressive plan that would point America in the right direction toward a clean, renewable energy future, reduce greenhouse gas pollution and reverse the disastrous policies of the current Administration...With the Obama plan in place, America would boldly regain its footing as a world leader in environmental protection and clean, renewable energy production."
BTW, where was it that you saw Obama speak these 5 times?
I don't understand why the MSM doesn't dig up all the trash on the Clintons of which there is a cesspool of info i/o pusing Obama to put his gloves on and start swinging.
Its funny. We finally get a statesman i/o a politician and everybody thinks he's a loser.
I would think after the horror of the Bush Admin, people would want a new leader, a new leadership and not a lobby loving, divisive lawyer who thinks she deserves direct ascendancy to the Bush throne.
Go Obama!
While all kinds of impatient criticisms abound, Obama's probably doing exactly what he should be doing at this point in his campaign. Not getting overwhelmed with too much at one time; staying on point; and, not taking too much oxygen out of the room by being "audacious". (Don't muscles to cramp up later!)
Hope he does well. If things progress on the same trajectory, I believe he'll be VP this time around.
WRONG
As a DEM their latest escapades with the FISA
Bill, the Armenian disaster, the phone companies, etc. will cause the DEM Vote to split. I, for one, will not vote for the DEMS
unless Kucinich gets it - Ron Paul sounds good to me too, otherwise it will be 3rd party, any
3rd party!
We are lucky that at least one of the political parties that we depend on to choose candidates for president is giving us choices that are competent. Whichever Democrat runs, of whatever sex, race, or religion, will be a candidate worth voting for. They could, in unison, make one hell of a good cabinet. In times of crisis, we are lucky that good people have come to the fore to face the challenges that are thrust upon us.
As Mr. Zengotita has said, if Sen. Obama resorted to a dirty, Republican-type campaign, he would be shaming himself, and the whole democratic process. If he wins the nomination, let it be because he was the best primary candidate, not because he hired a Karl Rove look-a-like.
"if Sen. Obama resorted to a dirty, Republican-type campaign, he would be shaming himself."
YES and we don't want him to do that. What we are WAITING for is for him to say what he stands for, and so far it has been vague.
The only proper product of democracy is continuing democracy, although even when liberty for the many may be a tyranny to the few, the vision of and justification for democracy is to strive for the most liberty for the most people. The compass points of liberty, fairness and meritocracy are one and are the same true north that has driven the best of men and of governments for two and a half millennia.
To be a citizen of this land is to have inherited this truth, that no aristocrat or dictatorial power will bend the will of a people that have been nurtured at the breast of lady liberty.
This is the audacity of hope in our current circumstance, that no league of the pining aristocratic class that hopes to resurrect a monarchy can be suffered by a people whose very existence is a negation of that goal. Hope is the foundation of aspiration and endeavor, and without them is simply a wish upon a star.
Democracy is the antithesis of personal wealth and personal power, that is why it works to level the world for the most disadvantaged to become what it is that they could be.
Patronage, abetted by aristocracy, is the most arch enemy of freedom and its concomitant commerce.
Can the people, the press, the candidates, not see that we are in a fight for the existence of liberty and that we are all fighting for the same thing on different paths? The only thing that seems to matter is who will pay for and who will have liberty, a question that has been answered already, in 1776.
Yeah...Obama campaign sure is "gloomy" these days...I guess that explains how he raised $2.1 million in less than 3 days earlier this week.
Gloomy indeed...lol.
Did Clinton have her boys send that money over to help Obama take votes from Edwards?
Naw..she tallied up a nice sum of her own using Chinese dishwashers in Chinatown. Dim sum anyone?
Obama's quasi mythical statements remind me of the "thousand points of light" imagery.
We don't need no stinkin' imagery. We need concrete solutions to real problems and someone with solid experience.
Obama has insight, he has vision but he can't convince enough people to trust him with the America Presidency. I wholeheartedly support him as a vice president so he can get more experience, more of a taste of the what the world is about. I am confident that in the distant future he will be a fine president. Not now.
I agree, although I have spent the last year and a half supporting Obama for Pres. I have relunctantly come to the conclusion he is not ready. If he won't fight for the job, why should I believe he'll fight was anything he says he believes in? I am supporting Edwards and should Edwards choose Obama as his VP, I'll happily support that ticket. Edwards doesn't give a rat's ass about ruffling the Corp lobbyists feathers or the HMO's and Insurance giants. Their uncapped greed is destroying our country and Edwards is willing to kick them out of the process- everyone else seems scared to fully rid us of their influence. Edwards 2008.
Obama is great.
So is Edwards.
But the polls tell you what?
Hillary is our leader.
Why hate?
Come-gradulate.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
