Barack Obama

The Presidential and Vice Presidential debates have always been the most entertaining part of the election season for me. From the past debates that I’m seen, they’ve usually been less about the issues and more about creating an impression to the American people about the personality and character of the particular candidates. My first Presidential debate that I remember is the Reagan/Carter debate in 1980, and I just remember Reagan saying “there you go again” whenever Carter criticized Reagan. Though a lot of the debates seem canned, they do offer a chance to see the candidates perform alone without the handlers and p.r. people, and it gives us a chance to see how the candidates think on their feet. I found on the internet a site that Jim Lehrer hosted for PBS called Debating Our Destiny (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/debatingourdestiny/index.html) that looked back on the televised Presidential and Vice debates and interviewed the candidates to see their thoughts on the Presidential and Vice Presidential debates. As we listen to the Presidential and Vice Presidential debates in these next few weeks, I’ve found this site to be illuminating and it gives me some perspective on the goals and approaches that John McCain, Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, and Joe Biden may take.

This year has been one most interesting election years in my years of voting. The primaries with divervse views represented by Dennis Kucinich, Joe Biden, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul. The contest for the nomination between Hillary and Obama. The resurrection of McCain in the Republican race. The emergence of Sarah Palin. This election season has gone through so many twists and turns. I’m excited by these elections because the Obama, Clinton, and even Palin candidacies are breaking down barriers of racism and sexism. These candidates have faced their share of racism and sexism to break down these barriers and these reactions show how far America has to go to be rid of these vices.

I voted for Hillary during the California primaries, but I have to admit that I didn’t have the same fervor that some of my friends had for Clinton. My mom, sister in law, and several close friends were Hillary enthusiasts and they were deeply angry at the way Hillary was treated during the primaries. I’ve always wondered, “How was she treated that would cause such anger among these women?” An article in the September 13th edition of the Economist titled “The Triumph of Feminism” wrote:

Jesus was a Community Organizer

Quite a ruckus has been raised over Alaskan governor Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican national convention. In particular, the remarks she made disparaging Barack Obama's service as a community organizer in the poor neighborhoods of Chicago, seem to have hit a nerve with grassroots folks on both sides of the aisle.

The response in the blogosphere was quick and to the point, with some groups calling for an apology from the governor. I read those with avid interest, but the posting that really got my attention was a simple slogan that read: WE SUPPORT OBAMA & BIDEN: Pontius Pilate was a Governor. Jesus was a Community Organizer. Speaking as a Democrat and former Seminary student, that one, short statement packs in a lot of history about what happens between kings and commoners and what small groups seeking change are up against. The following is a go at unpacking that statement.

Major social change very rarely comes from the people in power. It finds its voice in the hearts and will of the disaffected and the disenfranchised – those women and men who finally say "enough," and then begin to organize for change.

Yesterday I watched the Republican convention. It was an enjoyable evening listening to Fred Thompson, Rudy Guliani, and Mike Huckabee, even though I didn’t agree to many of the things they said. The highlight of the evening, of course, was Sarah Palin, and I liked her combativeness and personality, even if I didn’t agree with much of what she said either. A common theme among the speakers yesterday was Barack Obama’s supposed lack of experience for the Presidential office as compared to Sarah Palin. It amused me to hear this, but it also got me to want to write this blog about Obama’s experience in government. I got this information from the book The Almanac of American Politics 2008.

Originally posted at Talk to Action.

The Catholic Right, Part Sixty-seven

Democratic presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama choice of Delaware Senator Joe Biden has set off a barrage of invective from the Catholic Right. Why is that?

It effectively exposes the Astorturf nature of their movement.

Joe Biden, the Senior U.S. Senator from Delaware and Democratic Party nominee for Vice President, is a Catholic who attends Mass every Sunday. He is a public servant whose faith informs and influences his politics. He is pro-labor and supportive of the role of government in addressing economic inequities that result from the arbitrary use of power. By and large, he is a liberal whose policy positions generally echo Catholic principles of distributive justice.

The uproar over Sen. Obama’s plan to keep President Bush’s White House Office of Community and Faith Based Initiatives from the left of the Democratic Party shows the growing split in the nation’s largest political party. This is a split between the vocal and to their credit active liberal wing that icons like Howard Dean, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Russ Feingold, and more. It is clear that they are at odds with their inter-party rivals who are quickly gaining attention as progressives with leaders like Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Chuck Schumer, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and more.

This week while progressives, who use to call themselves moderates, praised the new position of the Junior Senator from Illinois to make outreach and involvement with communities of faith a cornerstone of his campaign and if elected administration, liberals led by the Executive Director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State took it to the trash. However Obama’s plan and the reaction by the very group that propelled him to the forefront of the parties nomination for President who why so many people refuse to own the liberal label. They are wrong!

From Newsmax, a far right news project, here's a promo for a new book which attacks Obama as an extreme liberal:

The Case Against Barack Obama

The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate

He's the media's darling, the fresh face of the Democratic ticket. But what does Barack Obama really stand for — and will his extreme liberal agenda and complete inexperience in global affairs endanger the country? That's what David Freddoso, investigative reporter and National Review Online columnist, examines in The Case Against Barack Obama. In this shocking exposé, Freddoso explores the reality behind the rhetoric, the plans behind the promises, and the faults behind the façade, revealing:

• Why Obama's inexperience and extreme left-wing voting record is more dangerous than any threat we face today
• Why the Rev. Wright debacle reveals Obama's poor judgment of character and deceitful nature
• Why it won't be politics of change with President Obama — it will be liberal politics as usual

Freddoso exposes the real Barack Obama: a typical big-government politician, the #1 most liberal U.S. senator, and — if he were commander in chief — a serious threat to our national security.

----

Is Bob Barr a "Looney Tune"? I don't think so. He may be a nasty attack dog for the manner in which he went after the Clintons, but that's personal ugliness, which is matched by other ugly aspects of his personal life. (You could look it up.) However, in terms of policies, I perceive some good stuff in his very brief issues statements. Some of it sounds more progressive than what Obama has proposed.

My main problem with the Libertarians is that I think they completely misunderstand the nature of our corporate-based economic and political system. Therefore they buy into the notion that we have a "free market". They assume that this hypothetical free market will always work its magic. Always for the good. Just get Big Government out of the way.

Nevertheless, despite seeming to be oblivious to the problem of corporatism, Barr and the Libertarians aren't conscious corporatists. They hate taxes so much that they want to end "corporate welfare". However, they're corporate-enablers in that they want government to get out of the way and let the high rollers play.

The part of the "Cut Big Spending" section of Barr's platform that refers to the military reads like this:

* The federal government must take the lead in making significant cuts in spending.
Focusing on earmarks risks distracting attention from the broader problem of a

Given the racism that Obama is confronted with, and that presumably will become more prevalent and vicious later on in the campaign, it's a lot easier for Nader to make a (nuanced) commitment to Affirmative Action than it is for Obama. So don't take my posting of this part of Nader's platform as a criticism of Obama for not stating a position on Affirmative Action. Rather, it's a defense of Nader from the charge of "racism".

Obama has suggested in one of his debates with Hillary Clinton that affirmative action in higher education might switch from a focus on race to one on class. See http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/04/17/qt and http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/05/12/kahlenberg. That's probably a viable way to go for all forms of affirmative action. Class has been under-emphasized for too long, so that's a plus for those of us who think that "class consciousness" is a good and necessary component of progressive strategies for change. A broad and expanded program of affirmative action based on class would be of practical value to African-Americans, although many are wary that they might be short-changed in its politically sensitive implementation. And there's some loss of historical consciousness and sense of social responsibility if the idea of "reparations" is embedded so deeply in a class-based program that reparations disappears as a distinct factor.