Would He Really Have Voted Against The War?

| | Comments (9)

Image courtesy SiFu Tweety Fish and some other folks
who weren't exactly thrilled with Hillary or Barack from the get go.

Didn't ya kinda hope he wouldn't break your heart until next year?

There was something inevitable about Barack Obama pissing off the netroots way before he he let anyone else down. We pay attention, so we're the first to know when his liberal credentials fail our tests.

The primaries are over. We have now entered the battle for the low-information voter. The people who don't or won't even start paying attention until the conventions or later, seeking out the center, the easily swayed. Now to me, this is a tried-and-true strategy that is antiquated and misguided. More people than ever are engaged, paying attention and energized by eventuality that George Bush will no longer be entitled to the honorific, "Still" President.

Centrism and triangulation are strategies, but not ideologies. They do not provide a core set of beliefs, a structure upon which to develop a decision tree. A Centrist stands for . . . nothing. And save for the Villagers on the Potomac, they do not exist in real life.

First he lagged behind all the other candidates on proposing truly universal health care, waited to see what everyone else did on funding the war then followed Hillary's lead after pressure from Edwards and Dodd and shouts from us rabble, took a stupid stand on dirty liquid coal, equivocated on public campaign funding, and I said nothing.

He told the ladies still stinging from Clinton's narrow loss to get over it, and I said nothing.

I took the advice of friends and allies not to bash a fellow Democrat, and when it looked like he had it won about five months before Hillary would admit it, I criticized her for not going along with the program. I never thought he was our best candidate, but to me he was better than Senator Clinton and all her baggage. But he wasn't the liberal champion I want and believe we all need.

He's a parade chaser, judging (very well, I might add) which way the public is leaning and running out in front, but always leaving a safety line so he can walk it back. Smart politics, but hardly inspired leadership. In fact, it's not leadership at all.

Yes, yes. He was against the war and wants us to believe that if he had been in the Senate, on the most highly charged vote in decades with historical significance we can still only guess at five years later, Barack Obama says, "Yes, you can believe" that he would have stood with the brave, principled minority and actually voted NO on the Iraq War.

Balderdash. Not after we saw him leave Chris Dodd out to dry in his fight against immunity for the telecommunication giants.

Folks, he ain't all that special, JUST WAY BETTER THAN THE ALTERNATIVE! If he was more than the projected hopes and fantasies of whatever we want him to be, he wouldn't be so many things to so many people. (John McCain so, so very much worse. He's nothing, so very little to so many.)

I saw a lot that made me wince, but it never seems as blatantly (I hesitate to use the word) calculated -- but close -- as Hillary Clinton. Knowing how important it is to rid this world of Republican Party rule, I said nothing.

Now the guy, my guy, the authentic liberal guy who pushed and pushed and pushed him to do the right things, say the right words and vote the right way (rather, the "left" way actually) wants me to send him money.

I got a fundraising letter from John Edwards on behalf of Barack Obama today -- and I'm sending nothing.


double-plus-ungood Author Profile Page said:

It's probably good to get the disappointment out of the way early. I've never bought in to the nonsense peddled by the usual idiots on the right that Obama was a screaming left-winger. He's actually quite conservative.

But he strikes me as being a hell of a lot more intelligent than the alternatives. So no, he isn't the second coming (or first coming, depending on your beliefs). But he's worth supporting, even with his flaws. As you say, consider the alternative.

That doesn't mean that his feet should not be held to the fire. He needs to know where his core support comes from.

shep Author Profile Page said:

Let's just say that I declined Chairman Dean's request to beat the June 30th fundraising deadline. Feet, meet fire.

shep Author Profile Page said:

OTOH, I did just send a small "thank you" to Sen. Dodd's campaign debt retirement.

Mark Adams Author Profile Page said:

Just to be clear …

I think that Joe Lieberman would be infinitely better than John McCain or any of the other slugs that tried to get the GOP nomination, save Ron Paul and his army of Blimpies and assorted weirdos.

Obama is by no means a perfect candidate, not even (to me) better than Gore or Kerry. He is better IMO than Hillary, at least marginally, and Hillary would have been (and some day might still be) better than Bill.

And Bill wasn’t half bad, damn good in fact.

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:

He told the ladies still stinging from Clinton's narrow loss to get over it...

I've been out of town for several days. I missed that. When did it happen and what exactly did he say?

shep Author Profile Page said:

"When did it happen and what exactly did he say?"

It didn’t:

"However, I need to make a decision in the next few months as to how I manage that since I'm running against John McCain, which takes a lot of time. If women take a moment to realize that on every issue important to women, John McCain is not in their corner, that would help them get over it."

More perceived slights from the aggrieved losers.

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:

An unfortunate choice of words. And I can only begin to guess how bad Rep. Lee must feel. I would have felt the same way if, say, Hillary Clinton had said something similar about Obama and his followers. But after thinking about for a while here's what I found -- there are three issues that I want my candidate to stand for:

1. End the war.
2. Achieve energy independence.
3. Provide universal health care.

Does that mean I don't care about anyting else? No. I just simply care more about these than any others I can think of. Your mileage may vary.

Here's the thing: Obama will have about 18 months to make serious progress on any one of these issues before the campaign for the midterms begins in earnest.

After the midterms, he'll have another few months (at most) to make serious progress on another one of the three before the campaign for re-election begins.

If he is re-elected, he'll have another 18 months to finish up before...he becomes a lame duck.

Three issues. Your mileage may vary.

What are your three issues?

shep Author Profile Page said:

Obama ran a clean campaign and there's nothing Hillary supporters should require of him in the first place. If only Hillary could say the same. Even cockfighting has rules and Hillary stepped over the line repeatedly. Her supporters have a beef with the corporate press - like all liberals and Democrats - but Obama shouldn't be made the scapegoat.

You left carbon off your list. Energy independence, at this point, may be the least of it. We'd better get carbon neutral soon or the cost of gas will seem like no toilet paper on a crashing airplane.

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:

Good point. Carbon neutral it is.

Leave a comment


Two ways to browse: