He ain’t a saint: A citizen’s guide to Barack Obama
10-Feb-08
Why do Peggy Noonan, George Will and David Brooks favor Obama? (David Seaton’s News Links)
Because they are terrified of Hillary Clinton, that’s why… It is this simple: in recent decades the Clintons are the only Democrats that win elections against Republicans… They don’t want to ever face them again, no more complicated than that. As soon as Barack Obama is declared the official candidate of the Democratic party the voters will be treated to something similar to the old TV show, “This is your Life”…
And below are some of the things they’ll bring out about him. Now, to those who will surely say that I shouldn’t do the right’s work for them, I say you must have been living under a rock for the last 18 years. The information below is already in the belly of the beast, waiting for the right moment to regurgitate all over the “transformation”. And to those who say I shouldn’t “bash” Obama, I say, it’s not bashing if it’s true. How can Democratic primary voters possibly make an informed decision about which candidate to vote for, when they know almost nothing about one of the two who remain?
We Illinois progressives sent Obama to the U.S. Senate, where he promptly joined the Joe Lieberman wing of the Democratic Party. He’s not a progressive. But he’s a master at pretending to be one. “Obama is a company man.”
His economic advisers are very conservative, from the University of Chicago-Milton Friedman school of economics. My favorite economist, Paul Krugman, caught Obama using right-wing talking points on what to do about Social Security and about his health care plan.
His voting record is pro-business and pro-war. He glorifies American imperialism. He flip-flopped on the Palestinians and Israel, and now is AIPAC-approved.
He has shown repeatedly what good friends he is with anti-gay African American preachers.
He misuses history, according to a prominent historian.
He, uh, stretches the truth.
Example:
Trying to sound authentically African-American during a speech memorializing the forty-second anniversary of the 1965 Voting Rights March at the Pettis Bridge in Selma, Obama claimed that his black (Kenyan) father and white (Kansan) mother married and conceived the future Barockstar because of the great Civil Rights struggles fought in Selma and Birmingham, Alabama… (Obama 2007)
Wow. Too bad Barack Obama Jr. was born in 1961, two years before the famous campaign to desegregate Birmingham, three years before the Civil Rights Act, and four years before the famous Selma march!
His chief political adviser is a Daley machine strategist.
And then there’s his Tony Rezko problem.
When are we Americans going to stop getting fooled and fooled and fooled again?
Maryscott OConnor wrote:
We Don’t NEED A Saint: A Response to A Respected Fellow Traveler
Crossposted from MY LEFT WINGWe don’t need a saint: We need a winner.
I know, I know, I KNOW that should not be our prime directive. What use “gaining the world and losing [our] soul[s]“, et cetera et cetera.
But consider, please, the REALITY confronting us:
John McCain WILL be the Republican candidate — BUT ( god for-fucking-bid), Huckabee, a FAR worse candidate, in terms of his political positions, wrapped in religious delusions as they inarguably are, to face than McCain, just MIGHT pull off a “miracle” and then we’d face the most religiously-fervid Republican candidate (excepting GWB, and look what a fucking disaster THAT was) in our country’s history.
Either one of those Republicans vying for their party’s nomination for the mantle of candidate for the presidency would rouse the passions of the religious right (despite their distaste for the “non-conservative” tendencies of either man) as regards Hillary Clinton and their RABID loathing of her and her husband. And YEA, the Christofascist Neocon Zombie Brigade shall emerge in record numbers at the polls to ensure the defeat of “Billary,” “the most LIBERAL Senator in existence” — and all the motherfucking garbage they spew when the Clintons come up in conversation.
Hillary Clinton doesn’t stand a fucking SNOWBALL’S CHANCE IN VIETNAM of winning the Presidency. And with her inevitable defeat would come yet another motherfucking Republican Presidency and the miasma of right wing actions sure to occur thereafter.
For ALL his flaws, foibles and basic human character defects, Barack Obama is STILL PREFERABLE TO HILLARY CLINTON.
In my not-so-humble opinion, that is.
Please: Do not read this essay as an apologia for the inarguable defects in Barack Obama’s positions and arguments AND actions during his career in the political and elsewhere. I know full well he will not be the man I would wish to call my President; I am a left-wing liberal whose preferred mode of government would be a socialist one. Barack Obama is a moderate, something I truly believe to be the route taken mostly by cowards, opportunists and liars. But he is a moderate LIBERAL — whereas Hillary Clinton, giving the lie to her detractors’ accusations, is a right-leaning, hawkish moderate who fits my description of most moderates to a tee.
As for me, I have voted for Obama in my state’s Primary, and I FULLY EXPECT to vote for him in November. Despite the rigged game set up by the Democratic clique in the DNC and the DLC , I predict Obama’s victory in this extraordinary campaign season: he WILL win this primary — and he WILL win the Presidency.
Posted on 10-Feb-08 at 3:35 pm | Permalink
Buck Naked Politics wrote:
An Illinois Progressive’s View of Obama…
Posted by D. Cupples | I wouldn’t be upset if Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were to start re-unifying the now-splitting Democratic party — or if they formed a ticket come November. I’ve read about Clinton’s baggage for years, so I doubt I’ll be…
Posted on 11-Feb-08 at 1:00 am | Permalink
caro wrote:
>>Hillary Clinton doesn’t stand a fucking SNOWBALL’S CHANCE IN VIETNAM of winning the Presidency
Except that I think it’s she who does have the chance. And don’t go by the recent polls, please, we’ve seen how unreliable polls can be.
Everything about Hillary Clinton’s life is known and has been raked over the coals innumerable times. The mainstream media are most likely to yawn when someone tries to bring up Whitewater again.
Obama, on the other hand, is fresh meat. After the Clintons were so viciously attacked, progressives thought that Mr. Boy Scout Al Gore was untouchable. The right made him into a serial liar. We were told that John Kerry couldn’t be attacked because of his war record. They made mincemeat of that. Obama is transformational, so they can’t attack him? Puh-leeeze!
How many times does it have to happen before we stop thinking that someone can come along who can’t be attacked, and put up as our candidate the meanest, toughest, SOB or DOB we can find who will push the right wing back into that well deserved obscurity they enjoyed in the 60s, which I remember well.
I believe that Hillary Clinton is much more likely to be that SOB than Obama. That, and because her platform is more progressive than his, is why I voted for her last Tuesday and why I will contribute at least $10.44 to her campaign tomorrow. I wish it could be a lot more.
Posted on 11-Feb-08 at 4:14 pm | Permalink
caro wrote:
>>I wouldn’t be upset if Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were to start re-unifying the now-splitting Democratic party
I absolutely agree. What would make sense is Clinton/Obama. Then, after eight years, Obama could be elected president.
If Obama really wants to be transformational, he will agree to that.
Posted on 11-Feb-08 at 4:57 pm | Permalink
blue4green wrote:
Obama is a disaster. It feels like all the former Republicans Right Wingers that felt bad after they voted for him are supporting Obama in that same cult way.
Ignoring facts and repeating campaign slogans as if it means something.
They use the same rhetoric as Right Wingers when you point out all the bad things they do, they resort to “OK, they BOTH do it”. Always making excuses.
Obama is such a Corporatist and has sold his votes. People are using the Right Winger hate talk on Hillary and they don’t even know WHY? That’s pathetic.
Period, Hillary is more progressive. Her policies, her issues, her solutions. Obama is another Reagan puppet the Corporations can’t wait to put in place. Symbolism at it’s finest.
Obama campaigned for his US Senate seat in 2004 on 2 things. The Dumb War (people actually think he was in the Senate to have voted against it in 2002….that’s how much they pay attention) and the “injustices of the Patriot Act”. Obama spent his 2 years in the Senate, before running for Prez already, voting to keep the war and the war funding going. PERIOD, REALITY. He even voted against the one Bill that would have ended the war, Feingold/Kerry June 2006 to “redeploy our troops and allow Iraq to form their own political solution” he voted “NO”! And on the US Patriot Act’s “injustices”….he voted FOR the REAUTHORIZATION of the Patriot Act.
He voted for Cheney’s Oil and Nuke Energy Bill (his donors…Exelon Nukes was very happy with that) HILLARY DID NOT.
Obama also voted against capping interest rates on a key Bankruptcy Amendment, that would have stopped the Financial Companies from gauging as they are……Hillary voted for it.
Obama also voted against a law making sure trade policies could not be weakened and he was a deciding vote , 60 to favor businesses stripping away protections for America and the people. Hillary voted for it.
So don’t go repeating false accusations you seem ready to repeat blindly.
And for those who wish to make more excuses, “ok Obama really is a republican (as he is now also talking about privatizing Social Security and Schools, besides his lack of health care and his economic policy) light, just make sure he does the will of the people and hold his feet to the fire”, I say what part of reality are you ignoring here? Maybe like the last 8 years….even including this latest episode on FISA courts where our Senate rolled over for a president that has an approval rating of 19 pct and ignoring the strong majority of Americans.
Posted on 21-Feb-08 at 12:50 pm | Permalink