![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
Obama Heads to the RightPosted on Jul 1, 2008
Barack Obama says he was erroneously “tagged as being on the left,” a reputation that served him well during the primaries. Now that he has the nomination secured, the candidate is trying to reinvent himself as a centrist. Take his endorsement Tuesday of one of George W. Bush’s signature policies, the “faith-based initiative.” To be fair, Obama began his public life working with churches to rebuild communities in Chicago, so this isn’t exactly an about-face. He also proposed several reforms that would make the church programs more palatable to his base. Still, the man who was once rated the most liberal senator has recently moved to the right on a host of issues, from the death penalty to that horrendous FISA bill.
Previous item: Georgia Cops to Charge for Their Trouble Next item: Starbucks Going From Venti to Grande Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By Conservative Yankee, July 3 at 3:42 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Maani
You or anyone who believes that a person can climb over the dead bodies of friends and family to atain the presidency of the USA and still remain anything but a politician must still put teeth under their pillow in hope of a quater.
Your argument sounds like the sore-loser crowd I would expect to back the corporate whore \\\
Report thisBy Maani, July 2 at 7:28 pm #
CY:
You ask, “You are going to write in Hill-the-business-shill because Obama lies?”
Unless you are living under a decidedly huge rock, it is becoming apparent that, while Hillary may or may not be more of a “business shill,” Obama is certainly learning those selfsame ropes pretty darn quickly.
As for “lies,” as I have stated before: during the entire primary campaign, Hillary never suggested that she was anything other than a “politician.” Yet Obama made CONTINUOUS claims that he was NOT a “politician” in the “normal” sense - that he did not and would not “engage in politics as usual” - but represented something “different”; the words he used were “character” and “judgment,” and a “new brand of politics.”
Poppycock. He did what was politically expedient to beat Hillary, and has now been shown for the phony that he always was - the one SOME of us saw from the beginning and tried to warn the Obamabots about; the one who is no less prone to lying, spinning, dissembling and obfuscating than the Hillary-bashers accused her of being. But she didn’t CLAIM to be anything else; he DID.
You might find the following of interest. It is something I was saying during the entire Hillary vs. Obama debate on TD:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/opinion/01brooks.htm l?_r=1&sq=david brooks&st=nyt&oref=slogin&scp=2&pagewanted= print
Peace.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, July 2 at 1:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Maani
“For me, this indicates that he stole the primary election by laying about his positions and policies, and pretending to be something he is not.
I may just write in Hillarys name on my November ballot”
You are good for a laugh.. I’m having trouble typing this through my spasims of mirth… You are going to “write in Hill-the-business-shill” because Obama lies?
Hope she can duck-and-cover her way into the White House through all that hostile fire…
I approve, by all means write her in....
Report thisBy Maani, July 2 at 12:14 pm #
Gmonst:
You say, “Those who frequent this site are not representative of the majority of Americans. I really wish it was, but its not. The majority of people dont care that much, only know what they hear on the nightly news (if that much), and are neither savvy nor informed.”
Sadly, I agree. This is really it in a nutshell. Despite the increase in voter registration for the Dems due to the hot primary race between Obama and Clinton - and despite the huge crowds that turned out to see both (though more often for Obama) - it remains all too true that “average Joe (or Jane) America” is NOT informed, certainly not to the degree that most TDers are.
What bothers me most about Obama vis-a-vis Clinton is that at least Clinton was honest about her centrism through the entire campaign. By tacking to the left, Obama was able to portray himself as more progressive. Now that he is tacking to the center again, he is becoming more and more Clintonian. For me, this indicates that he “stole” the primary election by laying about his positions and policies, and pretending to be something he is not.
I may just write in Hillary’s name on my November ballot.
Peace.
Report thisBy rage, July 2 at 10:16 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I have a huge problem with tax-funded corporate welfare checks being doled out to any corporation, particularly faith-based incorporations, since America allegedly claims a strict separation of church and state. That money comes from the unevenly assessed taxes jacked from the paychecks of the few of us left whose jobs haven’t been outsourced. I already belong to a local church which I already support GENEROUSLY! Meanwhile, the schools in my school district are suffering, thanks to the UNDER-FUNDED RUSE Washington calls NO CHILD LEFT A DIME/MIND/SNOWBALL’S CHANCE IN HELL! PLEASE!!!
Outsourcing America’s public assistance and aid services to religious institutions in exchange for religious voters’ support is NOT the answer. To date, this fruitless church welfare dole has served no worthwhile purpose beyond keeping financially afloat a lot of religious sponge organizations whose need is far greater than the target communities they’re too often abysmally failing, all just to put some undeserving crook into an office of guaranteed public disservice. It’s a faith-based version of giving a wino a bottle ten seconds before telling him which levers to pull in the voting booth. Furthermore, too many local religious groups who qualify for this dole are routinely turned down because they refuse to compromise their message of faith just to be afflictively restrained by the government mandated stipulations tacked to that funding. The institutions who have primarily benefitted from this ruse have been mega-ministries which are already wealthy beyond the Lord’s intent for His Bride. Too often, for the added bonus of some pastor’s inclusion in trivial conference calls with Dumya, just for guaranteeing overwhelming congregational support for Godless Oblivious Pigs seeking lucretive political careers, pro-political right-wing religious incorporations are rewarded government funding in exchange for swallowing whole many faith-defying irrelevant wedge issues and ridiculous GOP talking points. This conniving religio-fascism has not only severely compromised real faith and true religious beliefs, but has undermined our Constitutional foundation. America is now globally notorious for being some new monsterously fanatical cult for a blood stained flag-draped Gospel of an American Theocratic Cross.
For that reason alone, this faith-based grant program needs to be axed to fund other programs more beneficial to our commonwealth! Obama was once a community organizer, able to find water in barren wildernesses. Thus, I would expect him to come with a plan that discouraged resorting to the political bastardy of Karl Rove’s bucks-4-votes scheme, a product of Turdblossom election-tampering treachery on behalf of unfit Dumya, for which Rove still deserves criminal prosecution. Unlike Dumya, however, Obama is fit for Office. What’s more, Obama’s already assured support from reformed and progressive Evangelical Christians who are just as negatively impacted by Bush’s eight years of scorched earth stupidity as anyone else registered to vote. Most institutions of faith recently polled aren’t supporting McCain. Grampers’ ploys and promises haven’t resonated that gingerly with that many members of any faith group or belief system where this level Obama panic is remotely justifiable at this point. So, Obama’s promising evangelicals that he will continue to waste tax dollars greatly needed elsewhere in a budget with a multi-TRILLION dollar National DEFICIT is not only unnecessary as a campaign strategy, but ridiculously fiscally impractical as well. This promise, after the 20th of January 2009, is one Obama is just not going to be able to keep!
Report thisBy Gmonst, July 2 at 10:07 am #
I was and still am an Obama supporter. Granted, I did cringe when I read about this. I am disappointed by it, and I don’t like it. I won’t spin it to some positive for progressives. He is trying to get the conservative vote, plain and simple. McCain is weak with the conservative Christians, and it might be able to get some support from that crowd. In any case I don’t like it. However, I said before that progressives were going to be disappointed no matter who the candidate was. What progressives have to face is that there is a huge swath of this country that don’t see things like we do. Those who frequent this site are not representative of the majority of Americans. I really wish it was, but its not. The majority of people don’t care that much, only know what they hear on the nightly news (if that much), and are neither savvy nor informed. Any popular politician with a chance of winning is not going to be all that progressive. Even if they are progressive, to win they can’t appear that way. I don’t know if Obama is a centrist who tried to appear progressive during the primary, or a progressive who is trying to appear centrist now, but I don’t think it really matters. He remains the best hope for having any movement toward a more progressive agenda in the immediate future. He is not going to satisfy us all the time, but he is far better than the alternative. I don’t include Nader as an alternative, because his die-hard progressiveness makes him untenable as a candidate on the national level. Progressive have to face the fact that we are the well informed and savvy voice of the people, but we are a minority of the people. Our role is to keep pushing and pulling for a better America. Voting for Obama still gives us our best chance at that.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, July 2 at 9:32 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Maani
“It is not self-aggrandizing to say that I (and some others here) feel like Cassandra.”
hardly apt… What you Clinton Trolls were spewing is the garbage that somehow Hill-the-business-shill was superior to any of the other trash…
Instead of patting yourself on the back you should try to determine how this second-rate con-man beat the shit outta your girl.
Who you gonna vote for in the fall?
Report thisBy Maani, July 2 at 9:11 am #
There is a scene in the film “I, Robot” in which, after the robots have already begun taking over, Will Smith, who has seen this coming from the get-go, comes to the rescue of the psychologist who has been denying that anything was wrong with them. As he blows away her now-menacing service robot, he looks at her and says, with unchecked anger, “Somehow, ‘I told you so’ doesn’t quite cut it.”
It is not self-aggrandizing to say that I (and some others here) feel like Cassandra. However, while it does not surprise me that not a single one of those TD Obamabots who were caught up in the perfumed haze of Obama’s rhetoric has weighed in on this thread, I don’t really feel like saying “I told you so,” but rather find myself hoping that they are okay; that the psycho-emotional blow of finding that their candidate is just as big a liar, spinner, dissembler, obfuscator and “politics as usual” politician as any other has not caused them to seek solace in “the bottle,” drugs or suicidal ideations.
That said, if Obama keeps this up - tacking to the center, reneging on campaign promises and stated policies, engaging in “politics as usual” - he will have no one but himself to blame if he loses to McCain. Indeed, the backlash has already begun, even on his own site:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/politics/02fisa.h tml?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1215018398-uznKpKFH0julsOrNq6fn3g& amp;pagewanted=print
It is true that Obama remains better than McCain. However, instead of any REAL “hope” or “change,” it looks like Obama will simply become the lesser of two evils.
What a shame.
Peace.
Report thisBy wish i knew, July 2 at 7:22 am #
Obama’s vocal primary objective has always been to bring the country back together. He simply can’t get into office and do that from the left - there are too many people who have been, and continue to be obscenely brainwashed from the likes of fox news and rush limbaugh (who just purchased a private jet and is making $38 million/year now - but i digress).
Report thisYes, we all want someone who is not “playing politics”, but while it may be the way to earn our respect, it’s simply not the way to win an election against the GOP election machine.
At this point I believe Obama trusts his supporters to trust him to get elected, and he is now working on breaking the strangle-hold the neocon GOP has had on religion in this country.
I’m NO fan of religion at all. Personal spirituality aside, I do not believe in religion as an institution myself. But if Obama wants to try to remind the faith-driven “flock” out there that they have been scammed for the last 7 years, and pick up some votes in the meantime, and god forbid if he were to even manage to harness the power of religion to actually do GOOD in this country (as it should if it followed it’s own tenets), then I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and see what happens. The Supreme Court is on the line, and at this point any other choice would equal a McCain presidency - and that is UNACCEPTABLE to me.
By Van, July 2 at 4:52 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
One gets the feeling that the group posting comments here consists of the few remaining relics from a pre-faith based era..
Report thisObama defines himself as the ultimate Hybrid...or as Cher used to say..."Half-Breed"....
He’s half black, half white....he’s got Christian and Muslim stuff going on....gets anti-Bush, but then goes gun toting and religious…
What’s next, he takes clues from Michael Jackson and becomes a partially white woman?
By troublesum, July 2 at 4:25 am #
Even the campaign slogan is a lie. It should be changed to “MORE OF THE SAME”. And god damn Nader for handing the election to the republican wing.
Report thisBy dihey, July 2 at 4:17 am #
Obama has handed the Republicans an opportunity to win big in November and safeguard the future of the party. Fortunately for him they are much too dumb to grab the pot of gold. Leave the wooing of evangelicals to Obama! The Republicans should immediately forget about wooing the evangelicals themselves and switch to “Schwarzenegger Republicanism”. McCain should ask Maria Shriver from the Kennedy clan to become his Vice President and promise not to run in 2012. If she accepts Obama will lose 49 states and may count himself lucky if he can win Illinois.
Report thisBy-the-way, I am not a “Schwarzenegger Republican” just in case you want to know. I am still considerably to the left of him.
Hey, Cyrena, are you in Obama-mourning? I miss your pieces which have called almost everyone an idiot that disagreed with you. Are you now disagreeing with your former self?
By troublesum, July 2 at 4:11 am #
So by October he’ll be ready to sign on to torture ("I’m no bleeding heart liberal"), 100 years of war in Iraq, an assault on Iran, and a $2 trillion defense budget. The Party gives us a choice between two identical candidates. I feel like I’m living in Moscow, circa 1960.
Report thisBy Conservative Yankee, July 2 at 3:57 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Another job opportunity for pedophile priests and ministers. Too long these pious folk have done their buggery for free, now, under the Obama/Bush doctrine they get a fair wage for all that hard work.
Now that’s “Change you can believe in”
Report thisBy expat in germany, July 1 at 10:02 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
As an early supporter of Obama, and an atheist, I was disgusted by his vocal support for faith-based initiatives (which clearly subvert our separation of church and state). When my absentee ballot arrives, I will fill it out with a heavy heart. Perhaps the Illinois senator is only playing the usual games to get elected, and once in office will remember why he ran in the first place. Perhaps.
Report thisBy Fadel Abdallah, July 1 at 7:26 pm #
Those who earlier thought that Obama was a savior who represented hope for new America should get ready for more disappointments as we get closer to the election day.
Obama is simply an opportunist power-loving politician, like everyone else. He just happened to be black and of modest background, who through the circumstances of luck and fate joined the ranks of the powerful elitists whom he necessarily must serve in order to be elected and accepted.
Report thisBy Outraged, July 1 at 7:04 pm #
Article quote: “Obama also chose a different emphasis for why religious charities are an important answer to solving poverty and other social problems: because they better know the people who are hurting, instead of Bush’s argument that religion itself is a transforming power the government must not be afraid to harness.”
Is Obama speaking of the same tax-free entities, coffers filled to the brim who have denied these very SAME PEOPLE, even their OWN adherents a share of the booty? The very same organizations who offer (maybe) a cot in a gymnasium to the WORKING homeless while their leaders sleep in mansions and embark on holidays in private jets? Sadly the only thing these organizations know better than the government is how to rape the fragile indigent even more efficiently than the rogue leaders of our nation.
In a backdrop of paintings and gold ornaments they crucify the poor with scanty bowls of soup or maybe some used socks for their frozen feet. And as they zap the only ounce of dignity from those they claim to defend with precisioned rhetoric, they hail their debauchery and thievery to the world as comfort.
Shame on Obama.
Report thisBy Reubenesque, July 1 at 5:25 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
In my opinion this is more of a vote-loser than a vote-getter for ‘Bama Man. Third party looking better all the time.
Report thisBy Van, July 1 at 5:07 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
‘I Believe in an America Where the Separation of Church and State is Absolute’
September 12, 1960, address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association
John F. Kennedy
While the so-called religious issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here tonight, I want to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election; the spread of Communist influence, until it now festers 90 miles off the coast of Florida--the humiliating treatment of our President and Vice President by those who no longer respect our power--the hungry children I saw in West Virginia, the old people who cannot pay their doctor bills, the families forced to give up their farms--an America with too many slums, with too few schools, and too late to the moon and outer space.
These are the real issues which should decide this campaign. And they are not religious issues--for war and hunger and ignorance and despair know no religious barriers.
But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected President, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured--perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again--not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me--but what kind of America I believe in.
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.
I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish--where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source--where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials--and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all........
Report thisBy kath cantarella, July 1 at 4:33 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Oh no.
He’s not listening to his contituents. Obama you are a ‘representative’, not a king.
The American govt is conservative, not because most of its people are, but because that’s where the money is, on the conservative side. It’s the poorer people who need the steward in govt, not the rich. The rich have more than enough power already. Especially the filthy-rich churches and the power-freaks who appear to be running them.
I doubt Obama needs to be seen as conservative to get elected. Maybe he thinks otherwise.
He’s still better than a warmonger. He’d have to start an unnecessary war to lose his ethical advantage over McCain. But this is why i don’t like politicians: a long long history of disappointment. They are generally such weak people. Allow exceptions for people like Kucinich. (Who can’t get on TV.)
Mr O, you may be smart and cute, but you’d better start representing the people who’ve had no representation since the office was stolen from Al Gore in 2000. They need you.
Someone needs to explain to the US conservatives that social democracy is not the same thing as socialism, not even close, and that rampant capitalism is not the same thing as freedom or fairness, not even close. They are obviously making too much money to care what’s right and wrong. And they will go to church now and then and feel pious.
Report thisBy dihey, July 1 at 4:21 pm #
If Obama really believes that religious organizations will not use my tax money to proselytize and discriminate in hiring, he must also believe that I am a complete idiot. I believe, however, that I am not an idiot.
Report thisBy Van, July 1 at 3:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
With the Obama pronouncement that he’s a Faith Based Spin-Off of George W. Bushel, all “secular Americans” who believe in the separation of church and state, are invited to take a trip to Hell in a Hand Basket. Obama has decided he’s Jesus H. Christ.
Report thisHey BHO, are you also offering a firing squad to atheists?
By Elizabeth, July 1 at 3:16 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I’m starting to seriously look at the third party candidates such as the Green Party. Yes, it is a “vote” for McCain, but it is NOT saying I want same ‘ol, same ‘ol. It is also telling the Democrats that they have to clean up their act. Obama obviously thinks we on the progressive side have nowhere else to go, so he can safely pander to the right. We need to start changing the Democrats model of how to win. How about standing up for the American people, being truly honest with where we are, and cheerleading the way forward.
Report thisBy Lilith, July 1 at 3:12 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Gone, possibly for ever, are the days of working and more substantial presidents and candidates. Before you all jump on me, I am thinking of presidents like FDR, JFK, Eisenhower, Trueman, Lincoln, and nearly all the early presidents before 1840 or so. What we have now and have had since Nixon is a sham, a disgrace, and the laughing stock of the world, and rightfully so.
It’s funny, I never embraced Obama, I was not voting for Clinton, and don’t even get me going about McCain and all. It was that I just had no hope left, no real feeling that this would be any different. I have lost faith in the process, in this era, and in the near future. I am afraid that KenDen is right about it taking a major disaster to change things for the better on the grand scale, but I am afraid that it will be civil war and not much less than that to make those changes, and it breaks my heart. It also scares the hell out of me as well.
Weeping quietly for what has been lost and what it will cost us to regain!
Report thisBy Alan, July 1 at 2:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Well, we’ve been snookered again folks.
Report thisIt’s just like the election in
“Moon Over Parador”. Sims dressed in red, or
Sims dressed in blue is still Sims, the
dictator. “I’m just a gun-toting holy-roller
from Harvard"(sic!)
By KenDen, July 1 at 2:49 pm #
I’m not sure what the hell to do this coming election. I know I don’t want to have McBush in office, a vote for Nader is a waste, and now it looks like Obama is taking a hint from Bill Clinton to move as far to the right as you can to get elected and then stay there while in office. I’m beginning to think that the only way a progressive can get elected is if we go through another crash like the one in 1929 and the subsequent depression. Speaking of depression, I think I feel one coming on.
Report thisBy Kevin James, July 1 at 2:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You’ve seen noting yet!!
This is the United States of America, the only Imperial superpower in the world. Did ya’ actually think they were going to have a regime change, did ya...??!!
Hey it’s just a New Improved packaging, one a little more appealing to the Arabs and everybody else we’ve been pissing off for at least 8 years if not much longer but the product is still the same.. maybe even inferior. That remains to be seen!!
I am just waiting for the apologists to give us their spin!!
Report thisBy dick, July 1 at 2:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
We have the power elite and the masses. Obama is one of the power elite, of course. He will say anything which he believes will help him get elected, as will McCain. No matter what he says, however, a vote for McCain is a positive, definitive sign by the masses to continue the present course. I’ll vote for Obama, hoping , but not expecting, a little change.
Report this