Barack Obama for President

[cashman]

Yes, Obama is about as black as O.J. Simpson. And trust me, when under pressure, the glove won’t fit, either.

[TheBreeze]

It’s nice to know that 90% of the posters here base their vote on whether someone is black enough or too black or not of the right religion. Jesus. I thought you guys were supposed to be intelligent.

[PerryChase]

partypup makes some good points. But you don’t get anywhere in this country by working against the powers that be. Money is what makes things go ’round in America.

Short of a revolution, no person can become president without the support of the rich and powerful.

A friend of mine is doing a PhD at NYU. He used to be the idealistic type who wanted to work for the common good. Well, he got invited to a gallery opening and some fancy soirées hosted by the rich. He was repulsed yet seduced by how the ultra rich live. Now he still wants to work for the common good; but his ambition is to provide for himself financially and become, at least marginally, part of the privileged class. Can you blame him?

Money and power have a way to co-opt and seduce. America has been using both to keep leaders in the developing world and the Middle-East on our side. Their populations are so anti-American because they feel that their leaders have been “bought” by America. Yet, paradoxically, they are seduced by the wealth of America and many dream to immigrate and live in America.

Now, is it possible to be of the establishment and still work to improve the lives of the masses? Yes, I think so. Once great leaders achieve ultimate power, their motivation is no longer to work for themselves but for a legacy. Unfortunately, great leaders are rare.

Can Obama become a great leader? In my view, he’s the best choice among all the candidates currently running.

[partypup]

“Riddle me this, if Obama is so afraid to rock the boat, why did he speak out against the war back in 2002 when everybody and their brother was for it?”

It is strange that you choose to assail me when I — unlike other posters in this thread — actually have some first-hand knoweldge of, and experience with, Obama. I can’t imagine why you find that so threatening. I find your reference to Swiftboat appalling. Are you implying that I am somehow twisting the truth? If so, please tell me what facts you base this on.

In any event, you claim that I spew a lot of b.s., but yet the only part of a very lengthy post you choose to focus on is the fact that Obama spoke out against the war in 2002 “when everybody and their brother was for it”.

If you think back very long and carefully, TB, you willrecall that Obama actually wasn’t alone in speaking out against the war: he was joined by Howard Dean. Oh, and what did Obama and Dean have in common? Let’s see…oh yes, now I remember. Neither one of them was a member of Congress at the time, so neither one of them could vote for or against the war, and therefore neither one of them was accountable, as the other candidates were and still are.

Speaking out against the threat of war when you aren’t tied to a vote is not nearly as impressive as speaking out against the threat of war when you’re a member of Congress. And now, as a member of Congress, Obama has found himself — like Edwards and Clinton — bound to support our next foray into the Middle East: Iran.

Now riddle me this, TB: why does a self-proclaimed champion of change, civil rights, peace and freedom condemn the war in Iraq on one hand, while on the other hand he waits to unleash the dogs of war on Iran? Here’s a hint: because the path of least resistance in Congress now — as it was in 2003 — is to support an attack on Iran. Demicons and Republicorps all gave Bush a blank cheque to invade Iraq, just as they are giving him a blank cheque to invade Iran now. Obama is not speaking out now, just as Edwards and Clinton didn’t speak out in 2003. Because he is now just as co-opted as they are.

Don’t shoot the messenger. Just consider the message. And please refrain from the use of profanity. It’s unseemly and shows a lack of intelligence. There’s no need to resort to coarse behavior if your arguments are sound.

[partypup]

“Lovely how he treats the folks who raised him”

This is very sad, JG. I can’t imagine how his grandparents must feel to know that they are being shunted aside because they don’t fit into the pre-packaged, Obama-is-really-black marketing campaign. For whatever reason, he seems to feel this country will be more accepting of him as a black man than as a biracial man, which is so unfortunate. If I can’t trust a man to be authentic about his identity, it makes me wonder where else his authenticity is lacking.

[PerryChase]

If I were Obama’s grand-parents, I’d be happy to stay invisible if that’s going to help my grand-son get elected president.

You’d be surprised what people willingly do for their kin. For all we know, it might be the grand-parents’ idea to not go on stage. After all they raised him and contributed to who he is today.

You couldn’t raise a Black child in a white neighborhood by being in-your-face confrontational.

[Anonymous]

Obama is a made for TV sensation who will win the election because he is energetic, youthful, intelligent, perceived as black and an all around nice guy and smooth talker. He will win because he is a breath of fresh air and a ‘rock star’ who gets young voters excited. When you see him speak, you instinctively trust him. None of this means that he is qualified to be President or that he will do a good job. The American public will take one look at his beautiful family and young daughters and fall head over heels for this guy. We need an excuse to feel good about our country again and will seek a President who listens, is not arrogant and makes us feel good when we see him at a press conference. You can talk policy all you want, and you can critique his lack of experience. Obama will energize the Democratic base, enlarge the voter pool by appealing to minorities and young voters and he will appeal to moderate white voters who will say “I really like this guy” without knowing exactly what they are voting for. At the same time, I have yet to see a Republican candidate who can do the same, and in fact the top two contenders are alienating conservative voters. 25% of the voters last round were evangelicals who will not be too excited to go out and vote for pro-abortion Rudy.

[Anonymous]

Osama will fool less of the electorate than Big Bill did back in ’92 (43%). Lots of reasonable, fiscally conservative Democrats (i.e., Southern Democrats who voted for Reagan) voted for Big Bill back in ’92. Osama makes no pretensions to being a ‘New DemoRat’, i.e., fiscally responsible. Hence, he won’t get the support of fiscally conservative Southern Democrats.

He may play in Peoria, but we won’t play in Pensacola.

[Anonymous]

12,000+ national guard troops involuntary activated today for 1 year Iraq deployment. Thousands more troops send back after 1 year tour and less than a year break. How much longer do we have to watch this nightmare unfold?

[Anonymous]

Osama is a ‘pigment of your imagination,’ libs. And, Perry, Osama is a pigmented projection of your very vivid imagination (I bet you think that he’s the next JFK/RFK — two guys who were very clearly not worthy of veneration).

Jeez, I’m off to Mass tonight, tomorrow, and Saturday evening, and you libs just buy a statue and save wear and tear on your Prius:

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=2818040&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1

Get to church, libs, and quit worshipping Osama.

[partypup]

Juice, I agree that the Republican candidates are extremely poor in this race. Please don’t misunderstand me: I loathe all of these candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul and POSSIBLY Bill Richardson or John Edwards. In fact, I believe the fact that so many people loathe the choices and the current administration has actually lead voters to lower their expectations and be less critical than they otherwise would be. We have feasted so long on slop that we are thrilled when we are fed anything that tastes a wee bit better. It’s a horrible position for the American electorate to find itself in, but here we are.

At any other time in American history, a candidate with Obama’s experience and lack of substance would not have garnered nearly so much attention. But we are desperate for heroes and saviors as we have never been before, and that leaves us vulnerable, as you said, to voting for someone “without knowing exactly what [we] are voting for.” Very sad.

My problem with Obama, as I said in my first post, is that voters are being mislead to believe that he can deliver more than he can — or even, as I deeply suspect, more than he truly wants to. Say what you will about Bush, but he makes no bones about who he represents and where his interests lie: with the wealthy elite and corporate America. For that reason, I did not vote for him. It is much, much more difficult to discern where Obama’s true allegiance lies — partly because of his extreme lack of experience, and partly because he’s so much more media-packaged than most candidates that it’s hard to perceive what lies at his core. I’m not a Republican, but I could easily get behind Colin Powell for president because I knew what he stood for, didn’t feel he was schmoozing me, and felt confident in his experience.

I stand beside my earlier observations: having known him, I have always felt there was something pleasant, but terribly insincere about him. When he spoke I felt the satisfaction of having eaten a heavy Chinese meal, then an hour later feeling empty and having to remind myself what I just ate. Granted, that didn’t matter to me much as president of a law review — and I would like to reiterate that I VOTED for him then. However, this concerns me much more in someone seeking the presidency of the United States.

“Obama will energize the Democratic base, enlarge the voter pool by appealing to minorities and young voters and he will appeal to moderate white voters who will say “I really like this guy” without knowing exactly what they are voting for.”

My voting inclinations aside, the question of whether Obama can get elected will, I believe, become largely an academic one. Obama will be the true test of whether racism in this country is alive and well. I think we saw that it was doing just fine in Tenessee last year when Harold Ford was summarily trounced. He was a strong candidate, articulate, extremely intelligent. I would have voted for him if I were a TN resident. But that contest was reduced to race, and even the mainstream media picked up on that. Don’t forget that more of this country resembles Tennessee than Southern California or Chicago.

Lastly, if Obama is truly the threat you believe he presents to the establishment, then keep in mind that voting irregularities can and will probably crop to keep him away from the throne. If the establishment feared little Al Gore enough to enlist the aid of the Supreme Court to keep him away from the White House, I can only imagine what forces will be at work to keep a black man out.

[PerryChase]

partypup, all you’re saying is that you’d didn’t get the right vibes from Obama. Perhaps you were nerdy and Obama preferred to hang out with the popular students. Students can be that way. If that was the case, then of course he seemed aloof to you.

Well, perception is all individual. It’s like people saying that they don’t trust John Kerry because he looks French.

I dislike Katie Kouric and never watch her show. I think that he’s really fake — from her smile to the tone of her voice to her feigned empathy. However, millions of viewers love her personality.

I remember being invited to a fund-raiser dinner because my boss made a significant contribution to the candidate and the party. I went up to say hi to him but he was aloof and hardly spoke to me. Well, my feelings got hurt and I never contributed or voted for that politician again. That politician was Duke Cunningham at the Republican convention in 1996. I was happy when the jerk went to jail.

partypup, you met Obama many years ago. People change in 2 decades. Obama may not appeal to you exactly because of your personal experience with him. He appeals to me and many other voters.

[partypup]

“partypup, all you’re saying is that you’d didn’t get the right vibes from Obama. Perhaps you were nerdy and Obama preferred to hang out with the popular students. Students can be that way. If that was the case, then of course he seemed aloof to you.”

Perry, that isn’t all I’m saying. I made at least four other points in my last post — separate and apart form my personal knowledge of Obama. So please re-read it.

First, let me be very clear: “vibes” play only a very small role in my analysis. I am a lawyer; I don’t operate solely on the basis of instinct and gut feelings; I observe, synthesize data and analyze it critically. I ask questions, probe inconsistencies, and take very little that is said at face value. Before I take action, I have to know why and understand the consequences. So forgive me if I am simply amazed that so many people would vote someone into the country’s highest office because he seems nice and makes people feel good.

I look at it this way: if I am dying on the operating table, I don’t want the good-looking, charismatic, new doctor who talks a good game; I need the the frumpy, quiet one with hands-on experience. In my opinion, America is dying now. Which surgeon do we want to call?

Second, to simply discount me as a “nerd” and Obama as a member of the “popular” crowd makes no sense in the context of law school. We were ALL nerds. No one was popular. We all spent most of our waking hours in the library. To be clear, we are talking about law school, not high school.

Third, I begrudgingly accept that Americans today don’t demand much from their candidates in the way of substance. But for the record, can you please tell me why — as I have repeatedly pointed out, but no Obama supporters seem to want to respond — Obama came out against the invasion of Iraq, but is now ready to take down Iran? Even if we were to presume they both countries have/had WMDs, on what basis does he distinguish Iraq from Iran? I personally think this is perhaps the single most important campaign issue facing the electorate, as another war in that region would effectively render all the feel-good, race unification, lovey dovey talk about the future virtually meaningless. The economic effects would be catastrophic, as would the environmental repercussions.

Are you not extremely concerned about this blatant inconsistency? Because if he becomes President and makes good on his threat against Iran, I fear he will, indeed, bring us all together: black, white, Latino, Musliam, Christian in one big, raggedy, rapidly-sinking boat.

[drunkle]

i think fretting over nuclear “proliferation” is political and intellectual laziness. that nuclear containment is a futile policy of status quo and inequality that ignores the certainty of nuclear acquisition.

i don’t think obama’s comment on iran can immediately be interpreted as “lets go kick iranian ass”. he’s being political and pragmatic; on the one hand, he’s not showing any “weakness” or “fear” by declaring force is off limits. on the other hand, he’s keeping all doors open as an honest admission that diplomacy may not work. it’s the same position that any politician would take in matters of unknown threats. any specific objections that obama had on iraq were actually stated specifically; lack of projection, lack of reliable information, etc.

is it even necessary to take any stand against iran? that’s the underlying question, why is iran being portrayed as a threat.

[partypup]

“Is it even necessary to take any stand against iran? that’s the underlying question, why is iran being portrayed as a threat.”

That is the underlying question, drunkle. But the problem is regardless of whether Iran is an actual threat, to even think about a military strike would be military and economic suicide for this country. If Obama was shrewd enough to anticipate the quagmire in Iraq, then surely he should be able to anticipate the hell that Iran would unleash. I don’t think it’s pragmatic to even consider this option, and I know the majority of Americans would not support a strike.

“it’s the same position that any politician would take in matters of unknown threats. any specific objections that obama had on iraq were actually stated specifically; lack of projection, lack of reliable information, etc.”

Curiously, these same arguments could be made now with respect to Iran. We don’t have any projections or reliable information. Once again, we are speculating as to their WMD capability. There is really no practical difference between the intelligence we had about Iraq and the intelligence we have about Iran. So to take a stand against invading one country while leaving the option on the table of invading the other is inconsistent and hypocritical. My point is that Obama stands no differently from the other candidates on this very important issue, and I believe that is a major red flag. It is one of the few issues on which he has been forced to commit to a position, and his position is quite telling.

As I said in my earlier post, it is very easy to criticize policy and go against the grain when you are not in the position to vote on that policy; it is another matter entirely to stand up against perceptions of “weakness” and “fear” when you are in the position to vote and to be held accountable. Don’t forget, everyone is clobbering Hillary now for making the very decisions with respect to Iraq you say Obama is making: she was trying to be “political and pragmatic”. My point is that Hillary and Obama are cut from the same cloth in that respect; don’t expect changes from Obama that you wouldn’t get from Hillary. Be realistic in your expectations. This man is not going to lead us into a New Age of Enlightenment.

For my part, I want a candidate who will stand up and say, “Iran may be a threat, but the only way we can possibly deal with this threat is through cooperation with the international community. Let’s not repeat Iraq on a grander scale, folks.” But Obama doesn’t have the courage to do that now that his butt is on the line.

BTW, I appreciate your comments, drunkle. They are thoughtful and thought-provoking 🙂

[Author]

Posts