It's interesting, but over time Barack Obama has come to have a much more sophisticatedly outlined notion of how he'll bring about change. We used to get some pretty vague talk about bringing people together. That's still in there, but now he's laying out a much more concrete vision in which organization and mobilization of the public allow us to overcome the special interest stranglehold in Washington.
« Tied in Texas | Main | Cuba »
Obama's Opening
21 Feb 2008 08:14 pm
Comments (25)
Sounds like there are more Hillaristas in the hall tonight.
Yes, it's good news that Obama seems to be maturing somewhat.
Yes, it's bad news that we may be about to elect someone as POTUS who is clearly going to need even more on the job training.
Remember the last time that choice was made in 2000?
The "priestly" mien reminds me a lot of Trudeau.
Remember the last time that choice was made in 2000?
Yikes. Did you just compare Obama to George W Bush, did you?
Hey look, it's another Hillary surrogate implying that sharing pillow talk with Bill Clinton gives her experience running the country. Yawn.
At no point does it occur to Obama supporters that generally speaking organizing and mobiliizing the public to overcome special interests has a terrible track record for a variety of reasons. Reasons that will exist in an Obama administration. Reasons that Obama has never, ever grappled with.
Perhaps if we just elected monarchs we could avoid this 'on the job training' as much as possible.
This "more concrete vision" of how he'll bring about change is exactly what some people (well, me at least) have been hoping/pushing for in criticizing his excessively vague rhetoric.
I know damn well he's got policy details on his website. But I've been wanting him to make the connection, because I think it makes him a better candidate and more likely to win.
The approach of pouring the words "change" and "coming together" all over his speeches like ketchup has zero chance of surviving intact through November.
"At no point does it occur to Obama supporters that generally speaking organizing and mobiliizing the public to overcome special interests has a terrible track record for a variety of reasons."
Nobody said it was going to be easy.
Obama actually has organized and mobilized people both on the ground and in legislatures, so he knows how difficult it is. But it is also literally the ONLY WAY real change has ever happened in this country. You need public activists and support behind your agenda or it won't go anywhere.
Conversely it is Hillary Clinton (see the 1993 health care fiasco) that did not and perhaps still does not understand this fundamental political truth.
"Special interest stranglehold?" The "people" already do pretty well in this country: half of the federal budget goes to entitlement spending (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security), and most Americans pay little to no net income taxes.
I wish that someone would ask them what they intend to do about the house and senate leadership in order to implement any of these wonderful plans they have. I don't see the Dems coming up with 60+ in the senate. So far as I can see Harry Reid is dedicated to kissing the butt of the Repo minority with phony filibusters and general deference. If that continues, their legislative programs are DOA.
Neither of them has exactly stressed themselves in senate leadership.
Name the last piece of legislation that was passed due to organized public pressure. The left seemed to be pretty organized since Fall 2006 and besides a push on FISA we have not won many.
Reagan had the conservative press and policy shops but little in the way of grassroots and he got almost everything he asked for.
I agree with central texas and skeptic: if you rely on the public in America, 97 times out of 100 you are going to get your heart broken. The Civil Rights movement is the glorious exception, but the way was paved there by 25 years of legal trench work; and people had to die; and the injustice was not subtle; and the majority didn't get its ox gored economically.
Compare the actors and the issues in universal health care or military spending. It isn't so clear, too many people have economic interests deeply connected, the issues are too subtle and technocratic for a public that has mostly been receiving a horrible education for half a century; kids today are perfectly smart, but they are not critical thinkers adept at spotting logical fallacies.
If there's a Depression-level crisis (and that looks like even money these days), then Obamaism has a chance, following the FDR model (and let's not forget that even FDR hit the wall pretty soon and was bailed out by the war)--but absent that, you can forget it.
Doesn't mean we don't try, work as hard as we can, and pray for miracles and grace: but if you think "the public" is going to metamorphose into politically active people like yourself, that's the sheerest projection and wishful thinking. (I speak as someone who organized for teachers' unions and got fired twice: the majority of people are easily intimidated, and they can't afford to take risks.)
I liked Bill Clinton because a lot of his progressive changes happened under the radar: small, clever changes that really helped people but which didn't stick out far enough to get hammered down by a corporate media that is completely in the tank. No, it's not revolution: but it helps people to improve their lives in significant ways (not welfare reform, I grant you; he was better for the working poor, not the really poor). And with enough of that for long enough, you might even have enough consciouness-raised footsoldiers. Are you patient enough for that?
sophisticatedly outlined
That has to be the ugliest construction I've run across all week -- and it's been a week of poring through U.S. government software specs.
swopa:
Thanks for being a liberal blogger who is not afraid to bring that up. I think the comedy writers, now back at work, are going to do a real number on him soon if he doesn't change (heh) his shtick. If they parody the evangelical preacher/rock star/fainting fans thing and it takes off, he may lose the "cool" label. I can imagine many getting real tired of the same exact routine over many months, including many current young fans. Yes, he does show flashes of possibly being able to offer another routine, but will he be able to do it the right way? So many question marks still.
Kevin E.:
Good challenging comment, very well put.
Yes, it's bad news that we may be about to elect someone as POTUS who is clearly going to need even more on the job training.
HRC has shown you she can run anything...how? Her ability to mobilize and organize a campaign? Her penchant for valuing loyalty over a well run campaign...another heckofajob Brownie Prez? Her health care slam in the 90's?
You learn how to be Prez by being Prez. Because you know where the copy machines are in the West Wing doesn't mean you can organize and run anything.
"At no point does it occur to Obama supporters that generally speaking organizing and mobiliizing the public to overcome special interests has a terrible track record for a variety of reasons."
Terri Schiavo. FISA.
Two things to this...first centraltexas has it right. It is Congress that is mucking things up just as badly as GW. Reid is ridiculous, and Pelosi is hamstrung (or ceding) to Reid.
The job of the Prez is to present his/her agenda and then convince a mostly recalcitrant Congress to enact it.
That's why Obama has the best chance to get anything done. He will not alienate, polarize like she will...he will at least listen to reasonable voices and will use his obvious ability to convince people that his agenda is correct.
Can't you just imagine HRC confronting Congress in her own amenable way and not getting everyone right of progessive pissed off...she would be another GW in it's her way or the highway.
Look at how she was stomping her feet tonight in the debate about health insurance. She would approach it all that way and find many of the brick walls we're faced with today.
She would make a better chief of staff than Prez. She's a wonk, not a leader. We need good wonks in government too.
"...and most Americans pay little to no net income taxes."
Fred, I'm looking at the income and tax payments stat spreadsheets I periodically download from the IRS. You're claiming that >50% of those filing are getting tax breaks and/or Federal payouts that basically neutralize their tax bill.
If you can direct me to authoritative sources that would buttress your statement, I'd be appreciative.
One thing to keep in mind is that President Obama is likely to have a Democratic House and Senate with bigger majorities than today. That is going to make "change" a whole lot easier, and might even make "bipartisanship" somewhat academic.
I would propose that the "nuclear option"
on judicial nominations be threatened, in the way it was done to us by the Frist Senate.
Once we're "mobilized" and "organized", aren't we just another special interest?
NOW, the ACLU and the NAACP began as political movements, but the spokesmen for the movements quickly became more visible and important than the movements themselves.
All of these groups do important work (and occasionally make really stupid mistakes) but the permanent revolution never lasts. And the organizations they leave behind become just another feature in the Washington landscape.
Shorter Clinton Dead-Enders:
"No We Can't"
Seems that Obama's shift to 'substance' on the basis of political change is well timed.
Given his biography, it's not as if he couldn't deliver 2-3 unscripted 1 hour 20 minute lectures on the basis for grassroots change -- with proper citations of Alinsky, et. al.
But the last serious Illinois contenders for the presidency provide a cautionary lesson on the dangers of professorialism.
It's interesting to note, by the way: the weekend-long (free) Camp Obama training sessions of last year are being reprised: I just got an advertisement from the NC volunteer group for 'Camp Wellstone.'
I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw a lot more of these trainings, particularly in the red states.
And, Obama has successfully introduced the true notion that a Hillary Administration augurs nothing but stagnation and paralysis.
Obama’s efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.
The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten’s of billions.
Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/
Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.
Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.
Two years ago, Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin “Tony” Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.
LIKE FATHER LIKE SON --
Recently, Obama's campaign staff have been vetted by the IRS to disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges — Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and disclose Obama's MUSLIM Farrakhan mob connection to Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church are trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Obama should stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It’s time to introduce this false, fake Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke "GLORK" Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He is MAD!!! --
OBAM YOU'RE NO JFK --
"GLORK" Obama looks like Alfred E. Newman: "Tales Calculated To Drive You." He is a MUSLIM "Glork" He's MAD!!! Alfred E. Neuman is the fictional mascot of Mad. The face had drifted through American pictography for decades before being claimed by Mad editor Harvey Kurtzman after he spotted it on the bulletin board in the office of Ballantine Books editor Bernard Shir-Cliff, later a contributor to various magazines created by Kurtzman.
Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It’s time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek.
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/
Comments closed March 06, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
People have called Obama's demeanour in debate 'professorial'. I'd say it's priestly. Look at his hands.
I wish he was using your point about our policy on Cuba lending glamour to its tyranny.
Posted by burning flock | February 21, 2008 8:22 PM