Someone out there was asking WHAT Obama's supporters see in him (positing that most Obama supporters don't even know his positions on issues).
Speaking for myself, in this current race, I support Obama because:
1. The US needs an antidote to Bush. He has divided our nation, isolated us from the rest of the world and damaged our Constitution and our security. I understand that some don't agree, but that is what a HUGE number of Americans believe the facts to be. And we long for an Anti-Bush. Perhaps Obama's strongest selling point is that he IS the anti-Bush.
2. Obama's not Clinton. For many of us, we think the Clintons are part of the Problem. The Clinton years were very much part of a troubled system that encourages corruption and a two party system that is dominated by policies that are pro-corporation and anti-everyone else.
Even though Clinton would EASILY be better than Bush (and she would definitely be a great improvement - practically anyone would be), she is still a terribly divisive, individual beholden to the Democratic machine and a corporate agenda and many of us quite frankly don't trust her.
3. But besides NOT being Bush or Clinton, Obama's right on many issues. For instance:
a. We DO need to end this war in Iraq as humanely as possible. It is a matter of national security. It is a matter of trying to begin to salvage our economy. We are hemorrhaging our economy in pools of blood in Iraq.
b. We desperately need to affirm that the US DOES NOT SUPPORT TORTURE. Period. (This would be a point in both McCain's and Clinton's positions, too, but I think Obama most strongly voices this position.)
c. We have got to address our energy problems. Oil supply is on its way down and Oil demand is on its way up. It is WAY past time to begin to address this soon-to-be crisis. I'd like to hear Obama come out stronger on this, but he's at least looking in the right direction.
Obama is by no means a perfect candidate, but then no one is. I can promise without a doubt that he will not solve our problems. I'm not even hoping that he will.
I'm just hoping he will begin to slow down the problems we're already causing/participating in. That he WON'T appoint gas industry people to solve our energy problems, coal industry flaks to oversee the coal industry, that he will begin to at least consider living within our means and living responsibly, not foisting environmental and global crises off on our children and their children.
For starters, this is why I'm supporting Obama at this time.
10 comments:
Dan, it's interesting that the first two items on your list are things that Obama is not, rather than what he is, believes or proposes. Is that really reflective of your thinking in choosing him?
I expect that you will be posting about positions on health care and immigration and economic problems?!?!?!?
We need your thoughts.
Your items 'a' and 'b' will soon be footnotes in history. As to item 'c', I've paid attention to what Obama has to say, read his website and those of his supporters. Just where are you getting that Obama is advocating us living within our means??
Just the opposite! He's proposing hundreds of billions for sort of New Deal 2 CCC. We as a whole don't have the means to support the vast numbers of socialist drones Obama has in mind.
As to energy, he has not addressed the problem any more (nor even as much) as Clinton or McCain. He still has the 'head in the sand' mumblings about ethanol, wind, and solar, business as usual in auto-wonderland.
Many see us now heading for the greatest economic depression in our history. Whoever is in office takes the hit, it will be on his watch. Whichever party and policy and political philosophy is in place will be discarded for the lifetime of those who live through these economic times.
Guess it would be good if that were Obama. But it's little odds.
It looks to me as though the Bushites will be tying the hands of the next president no matter who it is. Perhaps we should take a look at congress and replace them.
I support Obama simply because he seems to be able to rouse the people to action. We are a government of the people, by the people and for the people and we need to remember that. Yes, we can.
brd, believe it or not, I have no strong opinions on health care (other than I think we ought, in general, to take care of our health, that we - not the gov't - ought to have the freedom to make those decisions and that I don't like insurance companies).
My views on immigration is that I'm not at all convinced it's a big problem and that I am convinced that the US has some ownership of the increase in illegal immigration since our "free" trade policy changes of the last ten years.
My views on our economic problems is that they're tied to our overconsumption and our creating a fossil fuel-based economy that is not long term sustainable.
On any of these issues, I'm not sure that any of the candidates are looking at the sort of solutions that I might favor. But, between the three candidates, I distrust Obama less. He seems less indebted to Big Money and Big Corporations and Big Political Parties than the other two.
And Marty, I reckon that's partially why I'm partial towards Obama, he seems able to unite and lead people in ways that I am hoping will be less harmful than the other two.
If our economy starts to crash because of hyperconsumption and dependence upon oil and the sorts of policies that all three of these advocate to one degree or another, I'm thinking that Obama has less ties to the Old Ways of thinking (Trickle down, Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Business, what's good for Ford, sorts of solutions) and more confidence in him leading us in better ways.
Which is not to say "supreme confidence," just more confidence than I have with the other two.
And more confidence in Clinton than McCain, for what it's worth.
Eleutheros said:
Whichever party and policy and political philosophy is in place will be discarded for the lifetime of those who live through these economic times.
I tend to agree that the potential for our economy to head south is large and will be largely due to the policies that we've had in place for the last 50 + years, through Republican and Democrat leadership.
If that happens, I want the person in power to have fewer ties to corporations and business as usual, as I've noted above, and to be prepared to lead us in new directions. I think Obama is that person (of these three candidates).
McCain just voted AGAINST a senate bill that would explicitly ban waterboarding as torture (flip-flopping from his position in Nov.--clearly trying to woo the rightwing) while Obama voted for it. Clinton, though she was in the neighborhood, couldn't be bothered to show up to vote.
Clinton is superior to Obama on healthcare--but not on anything else.
You care to offer why you think Clinton's healthcare plan is better than Obama's? As stated earlier, I don't really have much of an opinion on that matter at this time, mainly to not knowing as much about how they compare.
Clinton's healthcare plan, which was modelled on Edwards, mandates everyone be covered--this is step one to a single-payer system. (We have to do this as a 2 step in the U.S.--otherwise healthcare reform will be crushed as happened in '92). Obama's mandates coverage for children, but not for adults, believing that if we make it affordable, adults will buy it voluntarily. He worries about fining those who do not buy (like with not buying driver's insurance) and, instead, is offering incentives to purchase either the govt. program or an employer based one through subsidies.
Clinton's plan is closer to Mass. plan that is now stalled in Calif. It has problems, and can be a giveaway to HMOs, but gets us to singlepayer status quicker than Obama's.
On the other hand, Obama's chances of getting any healthcare reform passed are greater than Hillary's. On every other issue, I prefer his views to hers.
Post a Comment