A Meltdown?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

The case for Obama - sort of

Barack Obama as president of the United States may very well disappoint us. He is essentially a mainstream member of a center-right political party. His cautious record in his short tenure in the Senate, his proposals on foreign policy, Iraq, health care and the economy are in many ways almost indecipherable from Hillary Clinton's. It almost takes a policy wonk to parse and tease out their differences. However, his association with a fire-breathing black minister is vastly unimportant as is his past associations with shady rascals like the indicted Tony Rezko. In Obamba's meteoric rise to political stardom he had to make nice will all sorts of unsavory characters – they all do. But he is not a racist for having listened for years to Reverent Wright's vitriolic sermons (which to me is are rather entertaining.) In fact in attending Trinity United Church of Christ gives Obama a sort of 'street cred' among African Americans. The law abiding ones go to such churches. It's no big deal. Plus his speech in defending himself was a masterpiece in oratory and honest political communication (and he did it without tossing his old preacher over the side.)

Obama has done something remarkable. He has bridged a gap between blacks and whites. He is a black politician but without recourse to “identity politics” - that bane of the left. Compare his style to Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton. They are never for a minute not a black politician, never a minute without a totally racial oriented agenda lurking just beneath the surface. It's part of them. It defines them. And turns it off most non-blacks. Obama can be that if wants but most of the time he is something else - a politician with a message for change. And he is not any more or less corrupt than any other US politician for having known some Chicago 'operator' or a secret hater of whites for having gone to Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church. Serious politicians must rely powerful connections (and the campaign donations they lead to) like regular ordinary people rely on air. His past (as with everyones) simply leaves chinks in his armor that are there to be exploited by enemies and opponents.

The question at this point is how much collateral damage has been inflicted by the stubborn, recalcitrant Clinton forces in their rear-guard, last ditch battle for the nomination? And how much of Clintonian dirt can be recycled by a formidable Republican slime machine later in the year? Remember what the legitimate media, which is bad enough, won't quite do (even Fox), a whole coteries of GOP allied hate mongering bloggers and “independent” right-wing ad hoc hit teams will gladly do. And once in circulation the scandal-whore corporate media will take up full force. Many fear it could make the cranky old warhorse, John McCain, an actual contender.

In any case the hope with Barack Obama is that he represents a major departure, symbolically if nothing else, from our imperialistic, corporatist, neoliberal, neocon, neofascist (yes, we have all at the same time) recent ugly Bushian past. Unfortunately there is no real evidence that he is willing to actually take on the corporate-right wing monolith, that is the military-industrial state its variants. Sure he is a riveting speaker and pushes all the right emotive buttons. Yes he seems to be promising to end our disastrous and grindingly expensive occupation of Iraq, but he will leave troops there (the enduring dream of Iraq becoming a compliant 'US client state' in the Mideast is still alive and well in both parties.) He appears to be uncritically pro-Israel, which make serious Mideast negotiations difficult. Also he says he will expand the military – great, it already eats up over half our national budget. His universal health care proposal is not single payer (as all other developed countries' systems are). In fact his proposal is weaker than Hillary's as it will leave participation voluntary. In fact according to economist Paul Krugman his proposals are actually less progressive than Hillary's.

Yet who can stand the thought of President Hillary Rodham Clinton? Ugh! Her and Bill's inherent decency and basic character have been called into question as they take the low road in a last desperate grasp for the nomination. It's ugly. And who wants a re-run of the triangulating Clintons – always grabbing at right wing policy positions and isolating their progressive left flank. Sure, Hillary would face a different political milieu than Bill did; and a Democratic president would be able do more and would not have to pander so much to the right. But anyone (even McCain) would be a breath a fresh air after eight long dark years of monumental Bushian blunders and a frenzy of Constitutional shredding. People now want change. They are sick to death with Republican ideologues (except, of course, the ever lower taxes part.)

What now exists now is a unique and important, historical opportunity to actually turn things around. The whole world is watching. A young, mixed race articulate leader could bring us together globally. He could start to repair the damage to US credibility and image. He could be a real world leader. Maybe if Obama gets in, he will suddenly tear off his rubber mask and low an behold we will have Che Guevara or somebody like that, somebody really radical in the best sense of the word. What with global warming, a possible economic collapse, a shredded Constitution and being mired in not one but two wars, it will take some real to-the-roots originality. Thomas Jefferson is supposed to have said that we need a revolution every 20 years. Aren't we are sort of overdue? If not Che Guevera, maybe at least Obama could 'metamorphosize' into an African American version of FDR and we could crank up another New Deal – the Green New Deal 2.0. Maybe we are on the cusp of something big. I sure hope so.