Obama: The Real Deal?
I don't put much stock in either party's ability to stop the tailspin of our republican traditions, such as they are, from a presidential perch. The Congress, courts, press, and general public must reassert themselves, and in concert (or at least simultaneously) in order to salvage representative democracy and the rule of law.
Presidents have the most power in foreign policy, and the mainstream Dem view isn't all that much different from the Bush crew's. Less obvious about dominance; more careful about force application. But the same script, as has been the case since Truman, regardless of party. I see very little on his site about reigning in the military-industrial complex; in fact, very little on specifics whatsoever. This is tried-and-true politics -- the Blair model, one might call it: "The politics has been taken out of politics." Now, we just want daddies (or mommies).
Domestically, a Dem such as Obama might help to make a big difference, but that depends on whether he is true to his organizing roots or succumbs to the lure or lash of corporate power. I.e., the Demz problem since the decline of unions and the rise of the DLC (which was instrumental in Obama's early rise; Obama returned the favor by supported Lieberman against Lamont when Obama might have made a difference) and multinational globalization, among other things.
Some articles on Obama:
Later: Oh, you gotta love the BBC. They "analyzed" Obama's speech by first stating that he was the first African-American to run for President. Lovely. They failed to note that Obama's reference to his "presumptuousness" in announcing what everyone knew he would announce for weeks now melds perfectly with his last book's title (The Audacity of Hope).
Obama's anti-Washington, I'm-an-outsider stance (common to virtually every candidate for president since Carter, regardless of validity, usually low) as well as his required notification of his Christian faith (ditto) is absolutely par for the course. His "bold" plan to do exactly what conventional wisdom, as enshrined in the Iraq Study Group report, suggested in Iraq (subject to Presidential cooperation, which we all know will surely be forthcoming) is right between the yellow lines, pun intended.
Finally, I find it hilarious that Obama's candidacy is being touted as "a political insurrection in the Democratic party." The Lamont campaign was that, possibly. Kucinich is, possibly. Obama? Not a chance. The only question is whether the BBC correspondent is ignorant or simply selling the event.
Presidents have the most power in foreign policy, and the mainstream Dem view isn't all that much different from the Bush crew's. Less obvious about dominance; more careful about force application. But the same script, as has been the case since Truman, regardless of party. I see very little on his site about reigning in the military-industrial complex; in fact, very little on specifics whatsoever. This is tried-and-true politics -- the Blair model, one might call it: "The politics has been taken out of politics." Now, we just want daddies (or mommies).
Domestically, a Dem such as Obama might help to make a big difference, but that depends on whether he is true to his organizing roots or succumbs to the lure or lash of corporate power. I.e., the Demz problem since the decline of unions and the rise of the DLC (which was instrumental in Obama's early rise; Obama returned the favor by supported Lieberman against Lamont when Obama might have made a difference) and multinational globalization, among other things.
Some articles on Obama:
Later: Oh, you gotta love the BBC. They "analyzed" Obama's speech by first stating that he was the first African-American to run for President. Lovely. They failed to note that Obama's reference to his "presumptuousness" in announcing what everyone knew he would announce for weeks now melds perfectly with his last book's title (The Audacity of Hope).
Obama's anti-Washington, I'm-an-outsider stance (common to virtually every candidate for president since Carter, regardless of validity, usually low) as well as his required notification of his Christian faith (ditto) is absolutely par for the course. His "bold" plan to do exactly what conventional wisdom, as enshrined in the Iraq Study Group report, suggested in Iraq (subject to Presidential cooperation, which we all know will surely be forthcoming) is right between the yellow lines, pun intended.
Finally, I find it hilarious that Obama's candidacy is being touted as "a political insurrection in the Democratic party." The Lamont campaign was that, possibly. Kucinich is, possibly. Obama? Not a chance. The only question is whether the BBC correspondent is ignorant or simply selling the event.