Uniters Not Dividers
Thought this article in the Weekly Recorder was really good. It effectively points out some of my nagging concerns about Obama that I have not had the time or energy to put to blog.
Here's an excerpt:
IS OBAMA THE NEXT GEORGE BUSH?
By Judi Panasik
The Weekly Recorder
April 11, 2008
As the United States sinks deeper and deeper into what may be another depression it befuddles me that scores of democrats who are crying for a change from the Bush administration may be endorsing and voting for a man who is the better spoken democratic equal of President Bush. Senator Barack Obama is the more charismatic grammatically inclined version of the man who is now running our country. The similarities are all there, but are being ignored by the media and the citizens.
Obama, like the last two Bush campaigns is playing off of the fears and concerns of voters with no real merit behind what he is saying.
In Bush’s first campaign Vice-President Al Gore was faced with the rumor that he was for gun control. That was not an issue with Gore but was put out there by the republicans to take away states where gun control would be an issue. Senator John Kerry faced issues on flip flopping, being criticized as an undeserving war hero and a supporter of gay marriages. Ideas again all proposed and distorted by the Republican Party.
You may ask, how is Obama doing this? In his most recent commercials Obama says that he has never taken money from an oil company, insinuating that the other candidates may have. However, no one can legally take money from an oil company for their campaign, which means none of them have.
What Obama doesn’t tell the public is he has received $213,000 in donations from oil company employees according to Senator Hillary Clinton’s staff. People that work for the oil companies also happen to be involved with Obama’s campaign.
Who currently has ties with oil companies and is running our country?
Obama may not be lying but he’s misleading the public to believe that he is above what the others are not. And with all the money he as raised for his campaign I highly doubt it’s all or mostly come from middle class citizens who are struggling to make ends meet, and even his Hollywood following can only donate so much.
Click the link above to check out the full article.
Comments
Stepan,
In your comment you wrote:
Yes, Obama has spent less time in Washington "that" the other candidates...
That should be than rather than that. I only bring this up as you seem to take personal offense at the article writer's lack of editing (which to be fair could just as likely be typos or a failure of the editor of the piece should there have been one...just as your error most likely was.) In the interest of not encouraging voters to make their decision based on syntax alone, I will move on.
Rest assured I am completely secure in my interest in bringing this article to the blog both as a Clinton supporter and a blogger. I do thank you for your concern though.
I really appreciate your willingness to read the entire article too. So much of the problem is that the opposing side's supporters seem completely unwilling to listen to varying arguments. We are all guilty of that I think (including me.)
Whether you agree with the article or not, Obama is running on an "I'm an outsider platform" which was instrumental to Bush's initial campaign and getting *selected* to the presidency in 2000. This platform disturbed me back when Bush did it although I couldn't really verbalize my discomfort as eloquently as I hope to here.
It comes down to this: I have a natural distrust of anyone who seeks to keep the company of those which they publicly denounce. Perhaps Obama is bitter about politics. Perhaps his supporters are bitter. If you believe that politicians by nature are nefarious or machiavellian, why on earth would you choose to become one?
Conversely Hillary Clinton, while having a firm grasp on the nature of politics, actually practices the ideology of hope for the future, for change. I get no sense of bitterness or dislike of politics from her but I do get a sense of change and hope. Politicians aren't by nature evil, or self-centered. They are in a vocation that constantly forces them to make incredibly difficult choices. That consistent pressure to compromise and make difficult choices so that something gets done is part of what makes our democracy so great - even though it's alot of wear and tear on altruism.
When Hillary Clinton speaks I get a sense of her being energized by the process. That excites me because the presidency is a grueling business. You should love it- the presidency, the process, politics if you are going to be working that hard for the next 4 to 8 years.
Posted by: Ithought | April 25, 2008 11:55 AM