[Oe List ...] pulling strings

Tue Feb 5 08:01:37 EST 2008

Obama for me.

Herman

  _____  

From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of W. J.
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 12:14 AM
To: Order Ecumenical Community
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] pulling strings

Marsha, thank you for this. At least you have a clear-headed political bias.
I'm still bewildered. 

For me Obama's something of a political lightweight, if you look at his
Senate record, and yet he may be able to attract a lot of younger voters
who've dropped out of the political process. 

I was around for JFK--I sat near him when he spoke at Duke as a Senator, and
was very caught up in the new political era after 8 years of
Eisenhower--but, after the election squeaker pulled out by Mayor Daley's
deceased voters in Chicago, he didn't really have a national consensus
around his political agenda, nor did he have adequate Secret Service
protection to complete his term. It took LBJ's political horse-trading
skills to get the legislation that JFK could never have won. So if the
electorate votes for "change" in a big way, that doesn't necessarily do
diddely on Capitol Hill.

I've never been a Clinton-basher, and I'd hate to see her lose to a male
candidate of either party just because there are so many Clinton-bashing and
misogynist voters. I also hate to see her stumbling as a former front runner
just because she may lose the minority/young vote to Obama. Not to mention
Bill continually stepping into the spotlight to fuzz over the issue of who'd
be running the show, which arouses a lot of fear and indignation over a
'restoration', further undercutting her need to stand on her own two feet.

I believe the Democrats would have a stronger candidate in November without
Obama zapping Hillary's momentum in the primaries. If the country could just
get behind the option of voting for the first female presidential candidate,
I think it could happen. What fuzzes that over is that the younger political
upstart happens to have a father from Africa, throwing into play a set of
competing political images. And thus the Repubs may "divide and conquer"
just like they did with Gore vs. Nader in 2000.

The worst outcome is that Obama drains the Clinton majority on one end while
the Clinton-haters and independents for McCain drain it on the other, so
that whichever candidate gets the nomination will have an uphill battle
against the forces of the more-of-the-same Republican candidate.

Problem is, Obama doesn't really offer a programmatic political alternative
to Hillary. It's just a personal one. He's saying,"My turn!" while she's
saying, "No, you know damn well it's MY turn!" So it's really about
political egos.

She does have a much better health care proposal that will mandate universal
coverage--something he hates, but she's been working on it since Obama was
barely out of law school (big clue!).

McCain may not be the world's worst nightmare either, but I wouldn't vote
Mr. Green Nader on principle and give the Republicans another term or two.

I'll vote for any Democrat who gets the nomination--I'd even vote for
Zervigon if he were running for Prez--but I can't predict which candidate
can best overcome the conservative voter bias against the very idea of a
woman or black man in the White House.

I think tomorrow's going to be a nose-and-nose battle for Demo delegates,
while McClean noses out Romney. But I don't see a Democratic landslide in
November, and I don't know which way to lean to best influence a potential
squeaker. I guess the moment in the booth will be the moment to hold my nose
and decide.

Marshall

Marsha Hahn <mhahn013 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

I hesitate to jump in on this topic because I'm aware that we have plenty of
non-Americans on this list, and I try hard not to charge blindly down the
America-centric super-highway.  Plus, I'm not sure how much people want to
use this forum to talk politics.  That said, this is an important
presidential race that has the potential for impacting so much of the rest
of the world, for better or worse.  So I'm gonna stick my neck out.

If you are an undecided (American) Democrat looking for input, I offer a
story and some reflections.  Maybe you will find it helpful.  All others,
read on or delete as you wish.  I won't be offended, nor do I mean to
offend.

Five years ago I met Barack Obama when I was in Springfield (Illinois state
capitol) for a "Social Work Lobby Day" (read: social work students wandering
around the state capitol buildings hoping to recognize and introduce
themselves to state lawmakers.)  As luck would have it I was wandering with
a very assertive, politically knowledgeable young woman who recognized Obama
as the Senator from the district that housed the University of Chicago,
where we were students.  We stopped him on the sidewalk and talked for
several minutes.  We were hoping to get traction for some potential
legislation that would benefit social workers and the demographic we tend to
serve.  Obama, it turned out, was knowledgeable about the topic, and gave us
thoughtful, candid advice that included his opinion that the legislation
could not succeed in that year.  He explained why and went on to suggest
ways to position it for future success.  Not one word of BS.  No pandering
whatsoever.  Just very informed, practical, respectful feedback and
suggestions.

I had never heard of this man before, but I was so taken with his candor and
intelligence that I came home raving to Pat (husband) about this fabulous
state senator I'd met.  When he ran for U.S. Senate the next year I
supported him, needless to say.  Illinois may lean Democratic overall, but
when you get outside Chicago there are a heckuva lot of Republicans in this
state.  Those Republicans voted for him in droves.  White farm folks from
little towns downstate loved him.  (It didn't hurt that the Republican Party
lost its first candidate to a sex scandal, and then imported someone from
Maryland in a ridiculously misguided attempt to put up their own "black"
candidate.)  Obama won with 70% of the vote.

My reflections:

Obama does have the capacity to unite the country and appeal to people's
better natures.  Inspiring people is not just wishy-washy stuff.  It's good
and it's real.  It energizes people and has the potential to engage them
into positive action.

Obama is appealing to young people.  This is a very good thing.  We need
them to engage.  They're next in line to be in charge.

Obama is not perfect.  Politics is never a perfect process and compromise is
an essential factor in getting anything done.  That said, Obama seems to
have held onto his center pretty well.  I'm betting that he can move some
dirt.  He has been attracting smart, seasoned policy people (including some
from the Bill Clinton era).

If nothing else sways you, then consider the pragmatic view.  If you're a
Democrat and you want to win the White House then for God's sake, vote for
Obama.  McCain is very likely to be the Republican nominee.  Polls indicate
that in a McCain-Clinton race, McCain would attract most of the independents
and some Democrats, while Clinton would attract almost no Republicans.  In a
McCain-Obama race, independents would be split.  I'm betting that Obama can
get a lot of those independents and some of the Republicans.  Also, Obama
has coattails.  He can help other Democrats win.  We need a filibuster-proof
Senate.

Okay, now go and vote your conscience.  I'll still love you no matter who
you choose.

Marsha Hahn

  _____  

From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of W. J.
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 6:28 PM
To: dialogue at wedgeblade.net; oe at wedgeblade.net
Subject: [Oe List ...] pulling strings

I'm bewildered. I was for Hillary, but the more I look the scarier he gets.
Did you read about the Kazakhstan uranium deal in
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?em&ex=1202187600
&en=d99ce5d428ceda0f&ei=5070>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?em&ex=1202187600&
en=d99ce5d428ceda0f&ei=5070 ? 

  <http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/01/31/us/31donor1.600.jpg> 

This ain't more Borat yuk-yuks, folks. This is misusing political clout, big
time, to benefit cronies. And he can do it in spades if he's sleeping with
her (supposedly) in the White House and travelling the world on corporate
jets. Not to mention his overriding Hillary's opposition to endorsing the
corrupt regime in Kazakhstan. Sure, let him make her foreign policy. We know
the governments in all those --Stans are corrupt, right? <wink wink> And OUR
government officials are all squeaky-clean--at least the Democrats are,
right? So what else is new? 

Take a look at this guy's string-pulling fingers:

  <http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/01/us/01clinton.600.jpg> 

If you read the NYT about Oh-bama, you get the message that our prince of
righteousness is in fact, unwilling to confront the new-kew-lur Powers That
Be in Illinois that pay his bills. 

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?ei=5070&em=&en=
546128723b04748a&ex=1202187600&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1202083210-4Acur2iU7ibBlsZax
REYMg>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?ei=5070&em=&en=5
46128723b04748a&ex=1202187600&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1202083210-4Acur2iU7ibBlsZaxR
EYMg

So my vote comes down to: which is the least worst of all these evils? We
know that, hey, the Demo's are gonna throw their political weight around to
benefit corporate interests just lke the Republicrats. Only they may have a
slightly more populist tinge, if Edwards makes it to V.P., of even if he's
dumped.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/opinion/01krugman.html?em&ex=1202187600&e
n=bef391f10ddb3713&ei=5070>
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/opinion/01krugman.html?em&ex=1202187600&en
=bef391f10ddb3713&ei=5070

But folks, it's all in the vote-swinging political rhetoric, all in the
flash of the Kennedy dynasty vs. the Clintonian dynasty, all in the glitz
and the star power that hooks the younger generation, all in the promise of
anything other than last year's Republican pizza.

So what it comes down to for me is: Mr. Oh-bama can wave the flag, but I
fear he's pretty much a lot of hot air where the rubber hits the road. I
guess I'll have to hold my nose and vote for Hillary, in hopes that she can
grow the cojones to restrict him to the usual First Lady tea party stuff in
the East Wing. But I'm not betting on it.

Marshall

_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080205/c95b1916/attachment-0001.html 