I can't remember a time when I've been more infuriated by a columnists article, then after reading your article today entitled "Off-the-record Obama". The article of course is very well written, and well constructed.
I take issue with the entire text of your last two paragraphs, and I will address each issue one-by-one. My comments are in bold.
"Increasingly, Barack Obama appears to be the Candidate of Illusion. He presents himself as post-racial — which is harder to accept than it once was, given his intimate, longtime relationship with a pastor and church that harbor deep and obvious racial anger toward whites." I think there is a term for this, Guilty by association. Massively taking the Rev. Wrights words out of context is one thing, but not even making an effort to get to the truth of the matter helps no one but you and whatever agenda it is you represent. The now infamous comments by Rev. Wright, "God Damn America" came from his sermon directly after the tragic events of 9/11. If you read the entire sermon, you will see that there is nothing racist or anti-American in anything that he has to say on that day. Anderson Cooper of CNN posted this analysis on his AC360 blog. Full Sermon Here
"Obama presents himself as post-partisan — even though in his time in the Senate he has done nothing to bridge the partisan divide, which explains why he has been endorsed by the rabidly partisan MoveOn.org." I love how you end with the endorsement of MoveOn.org, as if to say "see, the crazy ultra liberal group likes him". Who's your audience? MoveOn.org also ran ads during the 2004 election season saying "give Bush the boot". How could they possibly represent the feelings of Americans, when only 28% of the people in this country support President Bush?
"Obama presents himself as post-ideological — even though he was named the Senate’s most liberal member in 2007 by the respected National Journal." Obama has never described himself as post-ideological, that’s a term the media came up with. How can you hold him to label created by others for or about him? Besides that, everybody has an ideology. If he didn't have strong beliefs, he wouldn't be running for President.
Obama is a public critic of free trade — yet his chief economic adviser is quoted by a Canadian official as saying that Obama’s position on NAFTA is politically motivated and insincere." Why are you still repeating these flat out lies? As a "respected" journalist, I would think that the truth would matter more than anything else, and that you would let the facts stand on their own merits, and not create or perpetuate falsehoods. On March 3rd, the Canadian Embassy in Washington released a statement including this, “In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.” Full Canadian Embassy Statement
"Obama speaks about the importance of religious faith in his life and the life of the nation — yet when speaking to a group of rich liberals, he implicitly denigrates people of faith, pairing them with people who have “antipathy to people who aren’t like them” and who harbor “anti-immigrant sentiment[s].” He paints religious believers as folks clinging to crutches to better deal with their desperate lives — only to insist last night that his words were actually a tribute to people of religious faith. So sayeth Barack Obama, “healer of broken souls.” When Senator Obama was explaining to a group of supporters why he wasn't doing as well as he should be in the mid-west states, his explanation makes sense. In context, he is speaking about people being ignored by previous administrations, and being told that the jobs will come back when they haven't. If you read the entire quote it becomes a very different statement, and doesn't seem in any way that he is speaking down to the people of those rural communities. If anything it shows how deeply understanding Obama is to the realities these communities face. Someone who was elitist and "out of touch" would not come to the same conclusions. Here is the first part of the quote most people don’t get to see… “You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
"Early on in this campaign I was impressed with Barack Obama as a thoughtful, inspiring, and admirable (if far too liberal) political figure." Are you saying this to gain credibility with your readers? As though you were a supporter of Obama in the beginning, but now have seen the error of your liberal tendencies? If you were before truly impressed with Senator Obama, how could you possibly let these falsehoods change your mind? There are two possible answers; either you didn't know that what you were saying wasn't true, or you don't care, and you never really liked him.
"As the months have worn on, it’s become increasingly apparent that the candidate is projecting mere shadows on the wall. Our Republic deserves better." You and I both agree on one point... Our Republic does deserve better. It deserves better than the politics of fear and manipulation. It deserves better then persons with the ability to influence tens of thousands of people to misrepresent factual events, and to perpetuate falsehoods. If you truly believe that there is another candidate who is better and more qualified, then talk about that persons strengths. Let the chips fall where they may. The simple fact that you have perpetuated more falsehoods, tells me that you know that he is what he appears to be. Barack Obama IS the charismatic, honest and genuine person who has inspired Americans all over this great country. He is someone who has the ability to bring about great change in this country, and for whatever reason you don't want that to happen. I believe he will win, and I believe that he will change the political landscape in this country. We can do better, and we will do better, and Barack Obama is person who will help restore honor, respect, and Hope to this Great American Republic.
Thank you for reading my response to your article.
Anthony D'Elia Phoenix, Arizona
Not considering myself a "person of faith", it matters little to me what church a candidate attends. Unless that candidate advocates conversion, or social programs based on his own religion or spiritual values, it wouldn't matter to me if the next President of the United States was Buddhist or Hindu or anything else. That being said, for many people this issue is important, especially in the state of Pennsylvania where there is a huge Roman Catholic population. Catholics will fairly typically vote with pro-life candidates, though being aligned with Democrats on most other social and environmental issues. Needless to say, I was extremely pleased to see this new website that just got put online. It’s unfortunate that I only stumbled across it in the Pennsylvania section of this website, but you should all check it out. Roman Catholics for Obama http://www.romancatholicsforobama.com/
For those of us who have maintained faith in Barack Obama's ability to bring people together and unite the country, this only comes as yet another affirmation of that belief. The great news is that finally other Americans are "seeing the light" and realizing that Senator Obama is a true vehicle for change, and the leader we so desperately need. His support is not only growing among Democrats, but also among Republicans.Read the full story herePRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup Panel survey finds a majority of both Republicans and Democrats saying Barack Obama has a better chance than Hillary Clinton of defeating Republican John McCain in the November presidential election.
"Obama," she added, "will be the president who finally ends the era of fear that has been used to divide and demoralize our country.""Bravo Kamala.
Read the full article here
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression..."Full text of Senator Obama's 2002 speech: click hereThe choice becomes more clear every day. Support the Movement to change Washington and bring integrity, common sense, and good judgement back to the Whitehouse. Show your support today!Be proud that Senator Obama is the best choice for America's future.
Every day there seem to be new endorsements for Senator Obama. This one came Monday, but I think it's important to recognize the emotional nature in which people endorse Senator Obama. Maybe that's not the right way to put it. Perhaps one could observe that there is almost a ineffable quality to the feelings people have toward Barack Obama. People are excited again, people are feeling confident in what he has to say, and people are genuinely hopeful about what his Presidency will bring to our nation.
Here is an excerpt from a group calling itself Progressive Democrats for America, and their statement of endorsement for Senator Obama posted online Monday. I especially love the last sentence."We did not foresee the exciting social movement that is the Obama campaign. Many of us supported other candidates, or waited skeptically as weeks and months passed. But the closeness of the race makes it imperative that everyone on the sidelines, everyone in doubt, everyone vacillating, everyone fearing betrayals and the blasting of hope, everyone quarreling over political correctness, must join this fight to the finish. Not since Robert Kennedy’s 1968 campaign has there been a passion to imagine the world anew like the passion and unprecedented numbers of people mobilized in this campaign." http://blog.pdamerica.org/?p=1815
There's something that's been bothering me about this issue with these two states since the very beginning. The problem I have is that the blame is never fully assigned at where it belongs, which is not with the candidates, or even the DNC, but it's the State Party and the State Governments who decided to go against party rules. That's right. Ultimately in Florida for example, you have a Republican Governor, and a Republican controlled legislature who voted to change the states primary date. They knew that by doing so that their delegates wouldn't be seated at the nominating convention. They chose to not go through proper channels and get their primary date changed the right way, and because of that the DNC said that the democratic delegates would not be seated at the convention. This was plainly understood by the states when they made this decision, but they went through it anyway. So why then is the media not talking about this? Why are there articles in Time magazine saying that Howard Dean is going to cost the Democrats Florida? Read TIME article Here Why is Hillary Clinton allowed to say that Barack Obama is Un-American for delaying the re-vote process in Michigan?
I think it's yet another example of the media over simplifying complex issues. What if Puerto Rico wanted to move its primary date up to January 1st? Would the DNC let them? Would the RNC? Maybe, if they went through proper channels to do it. If every stated wanted their primary on the same day, the candidates would never be able to campaign in each of the states. The state primaries and caucuses are spread out to make it more accessible and fair to the candidates, and to the people who vote for them. With the information age, and the shear size of this great nation, it would be literally impossible to campaign and spend quality time in small states if every one's primary was moved closer together. The sad thing is that while Hillary Clinton says that Senator Obama is Un-American to not be supporting a re-vote in Michigan, people are still willing to vote for her and can’t see past her political rhetoric. They can't see that if the roles were reversed, and she was behind in those states, she would be making the exact opposite point. She is an opportunistic un-principled politician, whom I strongly don't support for the office of President of the United States. I hope that somebody can get through to the media and have them start focusing on the real issue here; that Florida and Michigan brought it upon themselves. Or that rather their governments did, and neither the candidates nor the national party are to blame for this fiasco.
I read a blog post of Anderson Cooper's on his AC360 website, basically showing the context of the Rev. Jeramiah Wright's comments. It's quite telling, and shows that this man is not a radical, but has deep, and legitimate, concerns about the wars that we wage in this country.Read the blog entry, which includes text from the 9/11 sermon of the Rev. Wright. Read Article
And in other great news, Bill Richardson endorses Obama. Hopefully John Edwards will follow suit before PA.
Until the DNC convention in 2004, I hadn't heard of Barack Obama. I, like my friends who watched him then, wished so much that he was the nominee in 2004. Thankfully we only had to wait until now.
I had the opportunity to be at a campaign rally in Phoenix, Arizona the week before super tuesday and hear him speak. That day, I was inspired. It was the first real time that I have ever truly felt that we might have a President who we could trust, and who represented the very best values and ethics of this nation. He has the right vision, and I truly believe in him. I've never been able to say that about a politician before, but I really do. He will be the kind of President that FDR was, where if he asked the nation to sacrifice to make itself better, we would follow him. He has the charisma, the personality, the charm, the intelligence, and the humility to renew the greatness of America.He is what we need. He is what I want from a leader. He is bringing a renewed sense of HOPE for our future, and he makes me proud to be an American.Thank You Senator Obama.
