The Obama Craze: Count Me Out

[Maddy McCall]

The Obama Craze: Count Me Out


Part of me shares the enthusiasm for Barack Obama. After all, how could someone calling themself a progressive not sense the importance of what it means to have an African-American so close to the presidency? But as his campaign has unfolded, and I heard that we are not red states or blue states for the 6th or 7th time, I realized I knew virtually nothing about him.

Like most, I know he gave a stirring speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. I know he defeated Alan Keyes in the Illinois Senate race; although it wasn’t much of a contest (Keyes was living in Maryland when he announced). Recently, I started looking into Obama’s voting record, and I’m afraid to say I’m not just uninspired: I’m downright fearful. Here's why:

This is a candidate who says he’s going to usher in change; that he is a different kind of politician who has the skills to get things done. He reminds us again and again that he had the foresight to oppose the war in Iraq. And he seems to have a genuine interest in lifting up the poor.

But his record suggests that he is incapable of ushering in any kind of change I’d like to see. It is one of accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to rein in and oppose if we are to make truly lasting advances.

THE WAR IN IRAQ

Let’s start with his signature position against the Iraq war. Obama has sent mixed messages at best.

First, he opposed the war in Iraq while in the Illinois state legislature. Once he was running for US Senate though, when public opinion and support for the war was at its highest, he was quoted in the July 27, 2004 Chicago Tribune as saying, “There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who’s in a position to execute.” The Tribune went on to say that Obama, “now believes US forces must remain to stabilize the war-ravaged nation – a policy not dissimilar to the current approach of the Bush administration.”

More here: http://quartz.he.net/~beyondch/news/nucleus/plugins/print/print.php?itemid=5413

[grantcart]

1. voting for Nader are we?

[jlake]

3. No, we'll be voting for Hillary!

[shadowknows69]

65. Does your brain work in hypotheticals at all?

It is a function most of us possess.

[lojasmo]

68. Good luck with that write-in campaign.

[Critters2]

6. It would be nice to have a Progressive running as a Democrat! nt

[Jamastiene]

26. Nobody said shit about voting for Nader.

The primaries aren't even over yet. So, take Nader and put him back under whatever rock you upturned to find his sorry ass.

[grantcart]

56. Are you aware that the article is from the man that Nader has picked for VP?

In January 2008, Gonzalez, along with several other prominent Green Party members, launched a 2008 Ralph Nader Presidential Exploratory Committee to support a possible Nader candidacy.<62>

On February 28, 2008, Ralph Nader named Gonzalez as his running mate for the 2008 presidential election,<63> only four days after announcing his bid for president. Nader announced that he and Gonzalez would not seek the Green Party nomination but would run as independents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Gonzalez

BY THE WAY THE OP VERY DISHONESTLY EDITED HIS NAME OUT OF THE TEXT AFTER I POSTED MY REPLY


SHAMLESS REALLY

[jlake]

2. K&R

[casus belli]

4. Could you have truncated that to 3 to 4 paragraphs and a link?

I mean, it's sort of senseless to post the whole thing and the link, don't you think? Or couln't you be bothered to parse out some of the more relevant points?

[Maddy McCall]

8. The author requests distribution through email and printouts.

[karynnj]

60. Thanks to Grantcart, we know the author is Nader's VP - doesn't that make it against DU rules to

post their propaganda - even trying to hide it is from them.

Interesting to see that they are using the same distortion of Obama's 2004 view of what to do in Iraq going forward. Obama's position was not at all like Bush's - any more than Kerry's was in 2004. The media that pretended not to see the difference in 2004, recognized the ISG proposals as what Kerry said in 2004 - and it was not at all what Bush did. Obama in 2004 sounded like Kerry, though he added that Bush might not be able to head the diplomacy, because of all he had done.

Now we see the Nader people using the dishonest Rovian Clinton comments that abuse the truth. Thank you Nader and Clintons.

[Neshanic]

9. Reading is FUNdamental. Great post on Obama.

[BzaDem]

5. K & R.

[Critters2]

7. He's my Senator, and has been a disappointment there,

and even worse (MUCH worse) when he was in the state senate. I just don't see the appeal.

Thanks for making these important points.

[MadBadger]

10. THe Problem with this article, is that its written by somebody who is fine with a McCain presidency

[Asia Expat]

15. I think you have a reading comprehension problem.

[MadBadger]

18. Please explain your shot at me. I dont quite understand

try not being rude in your response.

[Asia Expat]

20. I don't think I was rude.

[MadBadger]

37. OK, you still didnt explain yourself.

[Asia Expat]

43. From what I have noticed...

you are one of the more level-headed Obama supporters on DU.

Matt Gonzalez made some very good points in his piece.

I think in reality you agree with his positions more than Obama's.

But we live in a two-party system so he becomes irrelevant.

Do you really think he is OK with a McCain presidency?

Attack what he said rather than attack him because he is from the Green Party.

[MadBadger]

48. I have zero respect for him and Nader. So when I see him criticizing Obama, I see the same as...

I do for a RW tool.

[MadBadger]

35. Delete

[karynnj]

63. No, you haven't put the pieces together

This is written by Nader's VP and is designed to spin off the left from Obama. They would, of course, do the same for HRC. They are using the Clinton claim on Obama's 2004 Iraq position to attempt to do this. It was a lie then and is a lie now.

What this actually does is demonstrate the impact of the Clintons - to win a nomination that is progressively out of her grasp, she has given the Nader people ammunition to spin people off on one end and the McCain people ammunition to spin them off at the other. Obama must and will fight both these attacks.

Obama at this point is the likely Democratic nominee - posting attacks from the Nader campaign is very likely against DU rules.

[rodeodance]

30. So, according to your 'logic' anyone who dares criticize Obama wants Mccain in the WH!!

[MadBadger]

36. The writer of this piece is Nader's VP Candidate. Both of them have no problem if they ruin us

[rodeodance]

39. SO??---he is right on!!

[Maddy McCall]

42. He's a progressive Green. His criticisms are fact-based...

supported by fact.

[earthlover]

57. McCain...isn't that the dude Hillary said was better than Obama? Words to that effect

Gee...I thought Hillary used to be a Democrat. What happened?

[oldtime dfl_er]

11. This is an important piece

I would like to see a point by point rebuttal - in the same cool and semi objective tone - because to me there are some convincing reasons here to wonder about Obama. I am most concerned about his relationship with Joe Lieberman, but there is much food for thought here.

I am the first person to say that the bar for being president is so low right now that no one should be dismissed purely on shortage of experience. But when we have two outstanding choices, why not go with the one who is slightly more outstanding? And from what I've heard, Hillary would make better use of Obama -- should she win the presidency -- than he would make of her.

[karynnj]

64. Obama connection to Leiberman

is less than the Clinton's connection to him. Bill Clinton went to CT in August 2006 at the end of teh primary and before a large, well covered rally gave Leiberman a full throated, exuberant endorsement speech that was more effusive - by far - than those he made for either Gore or Kerry. He detailed and praised many things that Leiberman had done in his Senate career, something he didn't do for Kerry. He then made robo calls that went to most of CT. This is far more than Obama, like I think all Democratic senators except Feingold and Kerry who stayed neutral in the primaries, primary endorsement.

Are you aware that Lamont endorsed Obama in early February a day or so after Kerry did?

[rodeodance]

12. LONG time ago!!

[MS Liberal]

13. I saw her tonight in Mississippi

She was great. You have picked a winner!!!

[ExFreeper4Obama]

21. A Winner?

She will lose the pledged delegate count and popular vote. The only way she can win is to overturn the will of the people. Dean, Pelosi, and the remaining super delegates have said that its not gonna happen. Your candidate is a.....

[emilyg]

53. Yes. A winner.

[Maddy McCall]

22. I heard about it!

Hope you had fun!

[rodeodance]

31. are you talking of Hillary?

[LadyVT]

47. Please post about it! :) Hillary 08!

[TacticalPeek]

55. Me, too. She was fabulous.

She gave a good speech and won some votes, imo. The crowd was roughly 50-50 in support, or maybe even leaning more toward Hillary, which are great numbers for her.

You could tell the Obama folks were a little down from the no-show by their guy.

Man, Hillary radiates intelligence. I'd heard that of course, but sensing that aura is something else in real life.

I think she has a chance to work here and make a surprise.

:patriot:

[IndianaGreen]

14. Nader/Gonzales!

How low can a Hillarista sink! It wasn't enough to have Hillary endorse McCain over Obama.

[Renew Deal]

16. Wow, so you use a guy running for another party to attack Obama?

How desperate of you? How predictable of you? Another DINO for Hillary. Congrats!

[IndianaGreen]

23. Since Hillary said that McCain is qualified to be President and Obama is not

Why not have a Hillarite use Nader's running mate to attack Obama?

:eyes:

[jillan]

24. Just curious - what does your bumper sticker say?

Or should I be afraid to ask?

[IndianaGreen]

27. Reading the Hebrew letters from right to left, it says Barak Obama

I have such a bumper sticker on my car!

:-)

[rodeodance]

28. Il-logical premise on your part.

[rodeodance]

38. Ha Ha--many Obama fans bring the like of Hannity-Rush on DU as 'evidence" again Hillary!!

[Maddy McCall]

40. I'd rather quote a progressive Green's criticism of Obama than a rightwinger's criticism of hillary

...which Obama supporters frequently do.

[karynnj]

66. You mean right wing sources like the Senate record, HRC's own words,

and any MSM source of information?

You mean rightwingers like Kennedy, Leahy, Dodd, former Senator Bradley, Kerry? (They are all significantly to HRC's left.)

[Maddy McCall]

73. Nope. Rightwing sources like free republic, Rush, Hannity.

[karynnj]

74. never used them - don't even go there --- ever

[busymom]

17. Excellent post...thanks...

I think there's some buyers remorse out there now too...

[IndianaGreen]

29. You do realize that the author is Ralph Nader's running mate...

Since Hillary already said she prefers McCain as President rather than Obama, perhaps she will say the same thing about the Nader/Gonzales ticket.

[Maddy McCall]

33. I'd rather quote a Green critic of Obama than a rightwing critic of Hillary...

like you Obama supporters frequently do.

[ExFreeper4Obama]

19. Count me out of the Hillary craze

Why should I vote for a fear mongering traitorous Republican loving politician? No thank you.

[rodeodance]

25. Highly REC--and keep for REFerence.

[Ichingcarpenter]

32. You choose to ignore the connections

between Bush, McCain and Clinton, either on purpose or ignorance.

That disturbs me, more than you pointing out mitigating faults you
might see in Obama.

Now, why don't you look at the connections between the Clintons and
McCain? Let alone the connections between Bush II and Clinton?

Sorry, from what is left in the field, Clinton stands, stained, bloodied,
a liar and whose cloth of valor has been despoiled by her connections
and collaboration to the real enemy, ........the fricking Republican Party.

[rodeodance]

41. You can your own thread for that. as that is another topic.

Now, why don't you look at the connections between the Clintons and
McCain? Let alone the connections between Bush II and Clinton?

[Ichingcarpenter]

44. Your life is a copy and paste of your repartee and existence.

as are your snappy retorts.

You know, of course your "Glory Days" Springsteen quote for your Candidate
doesn't mean shit? That You totally misunderstand the song?

Watch out, "rodeodance" is fast becoming the clown of her own rodeo
that no one, but an follower of a sadist sport will pay attention to.

[Maddy McCall]

45. Your game: divert attention and then insult.

That's very assholeish. Typical for Obama supporters.

[Ichingcarpenter]

49. No, don't answer for her, she insulted me, I answered

I asked you a question?

Why do you deny the connections between the Clintons, Bush and McCain?
That have been pointed out by researchers?

[Maddy McCall]

50. Start a thread on the topic.

It'll be fun. Instead of running around like a spam monkey posting the same thing over....and over....and over.

[Riley133]

34. Thank you for posting!! nt

[rodeodance]

46. Obama says to stay in iraq until stabilized:

“There’s not that much difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who’s in a position to execute.” The Tribune went on to say that Obama, “now believes US forces must remain to stabilize the war-ravaged nation – a policy not dissimilar to the current approach of the Bush administration.”

[Neshanic]

51. To be honest, both Hillary and Obama will keep us in Iraq, the Obamaunits

just can't make that compute.

[karynnj]

67. The rest of the quote dealt with how he would do everything differently

This is the same Rovelike trick that the Republicans and media did in 2004. They took Kerry's substantive Iraq plan (detailed in his NYU speech) and ignored the content and said it was like Bush's plan. Point 1 was a regional conference - something passed in a 2006 sense of the Senate resolution that was added by voice vote to the defense authorization (from Kerry/Feingold) - but still not done. In 2006, the same media magically recognized the ISG recommendations like Kerry's 2004 plan.

John Kerry, who was there in 2004, has said this claim abused truth when Bill Clinton said it. The Clintons knew they were lying and I suspect Nader's VP does as well.

[emilyg]

52. k/r

[TacticalPeek]

54. "accommodation and concession to the very political powers that we need to rein in and oppose"

My. Problem. Exactly.

I smell a Joe Lieberman/Harold Ford 'can't we all get along' sellout brewing.

Also, a very easy target for the R's in a general. But I'd absolutely vote for him against any R in a general. But Lord, please spare us that.

Thanks for the valuable info, Maddy.

:patriot:

[Yossariant]

58. Solid, excellent article. Thanks, Maddy McCall.

:yourock:

[karynnj]

59. That article uses the same cheap shot both the Clintons have used on

Obama's 2004 position. The very conservative Chicago Tribune extracted paart of a quote. Obama's position was similar to John Kerry's, and he went further to explicitly say that not only was a concerted diplomatic effort needed, but given all that had happened, George W Bush might not have the goodwill needed for it to work. Where he said he agreed with Bush was only in agreeing that we needed to stabilize Iraq. This is the same nonsense the Republicans and media played in 2004 - saying that Kerry and Bush had the same plan. They didn't and the media was quick in 2006 to realize that the Iraq Study group proposals were essentially what Kerry proposed in 2004 and 2005 - and it was then very clear that it was NOT what Bush proposed or did.

Nice to see the Clintons following in the steps of Karl Rove.

By the way, Hillary Clinton could learn from John Kerry how a good Democrat speaks about McCain. He was on Larry King and made an excellent case for Obama, speaking of his vision on Afghanistan and Pakistan in addition to Iraq. He praised Obama without mentioning or attacking Clinton. Then when King asked him about McCain having been one of the first to defend him on the SBVT, he turned the question to the benefit of all Democrats - answering yes, saying that they were friends and that they had worked hard together on the POW/MIA committee - but that McCain was on the wrong side of history on not just Iraq and foreign policy, but on the economy, healthcare .....

[Maribelle]

62. Kerry went on national television January 28th and said Floridians votes would not count.

After practically every single elected official in Florida including Governor Crist, both US Senators, and most US Representatives, most state-elected officials had for months stressed the need for Floridians to understand their vote on January 29th was critical and would count? After Florida tax-payers spent millions mailing information to each registered voter? After Floridian tax-payers spent $25,000,000 for the January 29th primary?

Having worked with many dedicated Floridian Democrats in 2004 for the Kerry/Edwards campaign, I and too many other Floridians were totally appalled that Kerry would stoop this low because his boy was behind in the polls.

Kerry's word is now pure disinformation, you simply cannot believe what he says. And his destruction to the Democratic effort in Florida will cost Floridians dearly in the years to come.

[karynnj]

69. Kerry is completely in favor of giving both FL and MI representation

if it can be done under rules agreed to by every one - as he made clear on Larry King just last night.

Kerry did not have anything to do with the FL and MI mess. Blame the state parties and the DNC. The point is - you can't set up rules then change them. That was what HRC wanted to do. All Kerry said before that primary, as a surrogate for Obama, was that the DNC policy was that this primary would not count. That was exactly the truth. He did NOT say it was a good idea - nor was he in any way involved with that decision. As to what your Senators, representatives and Republican governor said, it was the DNC that made the rules, not them, so if they were saying it would count, they were the ones guilty of disinformation. (I wonder how many people contributed to Nelson's campaign, as i did due to Kerry's email.)

It was not Kerry's decision whether or not the FL primary would count - it was the DNC's and EVERY candidate had agreed, at least tacitly to this months before - which is when HRC should have objected, but she didn't.

Kerry's reputation for honesty and integrity is far above that of either Clinton - that's just fact.

By the way, on the same Larry King, he set a high standard fro speaking about how the candidates would do as President. He made his case for Obama, without negatively commenting on HRC. He also did what HRC failed to do on McCain. Though the question was on McCain defending him on the SBVT (which McCain did once), Kerry transitioned it to say, that though he and McCain were friends and had worked hard on the POW/MIA issue, McCain was on the wrong side of history, not just on Iraq, but on the economy, healthcare .....

As to Obama's 2004 Iraq position - Kerry is completely right. The Clintons were engaging in Rove-like tactics.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

61. me too

[SeaLyons]

70. Thanks Maddy

Hillary will prevail.

[GarbagemanLB]

71. Yeah, in losing the nomination.

[SeaLyons]

72. In your dreams

[kid a]

75. what do you expect him to say...he's running against her...duh~!

I'm sure Hillary isn't on the Obama Craze, but she will be in JUne.