EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Report: Toxic Chemicals Found in Thousands of Children's Products
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- 'The Gilded Age' Statistics Corporations Don't Want Workers, or Anyone, to See
- Time for Big Green to Go Fossil Free
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
Popular content
Today's Top News
Can Barack Obama Become the Jackie Robinson of the American Presidency?
Sixty-one years ago, a truly great athlete broke the color line in America's "National Pastime," which still resides near the core of our culture.
Now the question of whether Barack Obama can do the same for the American presidency has moved to center stage.
Simply put, Jackie Robinson was one of history's most gifted all-around athletes. He mastered five major sports -- football, baseball, basketball, tennis and track. As a complete performer, he may have been surpassed in the Twentieth Century only by the great Jim Thorpe.
It's hard to overstate the importance of Robinson's 1947 debut with the Brooklyn Dodgers. In his first game, he went hitless in three at-bats. But he went on that season to become baseball's first Rookie of the Year. In a big league career that lasted through the 1956 season, he was voted into six All-Star games, played in six World Series, and was once chosen the league's Most Valuable Player.
Robinson was an excellent hitter, a superb fielder and a uniquely daring and successful base runner. He is still universally ranked among the greatest to ever play the game. He was exciting to watch -- especially when he stole home -- and gave baseball an entirely new dimension that had nothing to do with race.
Would the impact of his breaking the Big League color line have been diminished if he had not been such an astonishingly good athlete?
Absolutely. A mediocre career would have rendered Jackie Robinson's name a footnote, rather than the towering monument it remains today. The astonishing quality of his performance greatly accelerated the integration of all professional sports.
So now we must ask: how good is Barack Obama?
There are certain things he seems to share with Robinson. In the contract he signed with the Dodgers, Robinson was obliged to quietly absorb all the racial insults his teammates, the opposing teams and the public could throw at him. This he did with amazing grace.
When later he was free to speak out, he did so with eloquence and effect. He aligned himself with Martin Luther King and Malcolm X.
Though later in life he worked for Nelson Rockefeller and Richard Nixon, the quality of his career and his character served to mute much of the racial polarization that could have made the integration of baseball an ugly failure.
In the long run, Jackie Robinson's career became monumental because it transcended the issue of race.
Linking Obama with Robinson may seem stereotypical. But in the coming campaign, only one thing is certain: no stone will be left unthrown. Whether we want it or not, we are about to be shown just how deep the racial divide still cuts.
When confronted with Jeremiah Wright, Obama displayed remarkable skill. He has absorbed much of the testing brought on by Hillary Clinton. He's indicated he may be willing to reach out to Ralph Nader, and to other diverse constituencies, without which he cannot win.
Clearly Obama is a uniquely gifted speaker. He has thus far run an effective, well-organized campaign, raised big money from a wide range of sources, and sustained a straight face before a thoroughly bought, seriously deranged corporate media.
Obama now must face the Rovian swift-boating thugs of the mainstream GOP. He and his family will be horrifically tested. Does anyone doubt this will be the ugliest campaign in US history?
There are some things working in Obama's favor. Future historians may well note this as the turning point not only for an old way of doing politics, but for the age of white male leadership.
Given the total bust of the Bush Republicans, it's no accident this is the first election in which both a female and a person of color have had a chance to win. What about the Bush presidency would incline the electorate to go for another white guy?
Ironically, this inclination toward a gender/racial shift may have doomed the candidacy of John Edwards. He was clearly shafted by the corporate media, which wanted nothing to do with his populist message, and which was fixated from the start on a Clinton/Obama, white female/black male confrontation.
His southern accent and appeal to white male voters was widely assumed to be a trump card. But Edwards's campaign was haunted by the tainted legacy of failed and/or polarizing southern presidents, ranging from Johnson, Carter and Clinton to the southern Californians Nixon and Reagan, all culminating in the utterly catastrophic Texas Bushes.
History may record that in its anger and frustration, the American people finally turned toward a different blend of race and gender.
They may also see in Obama what Robinson's coach Leo Durocher saw in integrating baseball. In a legendary locker-room rant, Durocher ripped into some of his Dodger players for their blatant racism.
But then he yelled that Robinson would "make us all rich" by bringing millions of new customers to the ballparks.
Durocher could not have been more right. By virtue of both his demographics and his skill, Jackie Robinson took major league baseball into a whole new world of public excitement, acceptance and prosperity.
In a globalized millennium, Americans must also realize that a person of color in the White House could be essential to restoring our declining fortunes, dumped so deeply in the hole by those endless wars of testosterone and greed. The indicators are everywhere that the good will squandered by the Bush catastrophe could be at least partly restored with a demonstration of this nation's willingness to accept a new kind of leadership.
But Barack Obama cannot be ordinary, or even just really good. To win the presidency, he will have to be as even-tempered and controlled as Jackie Robinson. But he'll also have to be as daring and skilled a candidate as Robinson was an athlete, especially when it comes to the on-going attempts by the GOP to rig the processes of voter registration and electronic vote counting.
And if he does get to the White House, just a well-meaning effort won't cut it. A middling presidency is not enough.
In terms of war, the economy, the environment, energy, infrastructure, education, health care, corporate domination, election protection, and so much more, the United States is essentially in ruins. We have been sunk into a crisis on par with the ones that faced Washington, Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
To truly succeed, Barack Obama -- in concert with all of us -- will need a combination of daring and ability that hasn't really been invented yet.
Sortof like Jackie Robinson stealing home, transforming the game of baseball, transcending the issue of race -- and much, much more.
Harvey Wasserman's History of the United States is at www.harveywasserman.com, as is his Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030. This article first appeared at http://freepress.org.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

112 Comments so far
Show AllIt explains it far better than I also did obviously. Hey ~RSJ~, if you open that link ~ANNIE~ has provided for us, it will explain a lot of things that our 'perfect' candidate has somehow failed to mention.
Check it out!
Do you have any idea how annoying it is for black people to hear that we have to be better, stronger, smarter, faster than any white person in order to be accepted by white people? Not just good, mind you, but transcendent?!?! And, when racist swill is thrown in his face, he must absorb it with amazing grace?!?! And, since this is, disgustingly, the reality, do you really think Obama got to where he is today by just being well-meaning or middling?
Instead of telling Barack to be like Jackie, could you please tell all white progressives, liberals, Democrats, democrats to be like Durocher? Since when did pandering to racism ("hard-working white Americans") become acceptable to the Democratic party?
Trust me -- Barack knows already what it takes for a black man to succeed in America. He's not the one who needs instruction on navigating the waters of white racism.
How about can Cynthia McKinney become our first black President? She's a true Progressive, who is much more in line with progressives & dissidents. Obama "knows" that in order to win he has to deny race, placate Wall Street, accomadate, don't make waves - he's disgraceful! And while we are at it, it's his MALENESS that is important to this author. Why must pundits always choose sports analogies in these discussions? Because, of course, it reinforces patriarchy, and who knows who Althea Gibson is anyway?? We all know women in sports don't matter as much as men (sic).
Obama knows in order to change anything he has to first win, that's not disgraceful, that's intelligent.
WTF ? We've got a half-white dude who grew up in a priviledged family, who became a Senator and is now running for the presidency ... but just because he's half-black he's suddenly compared to every great black person who ever lived ?????
So agree with Rich too on the "maleness" aspect. I think if Obama had been female, he would have been treated like Shirley Chisolm and turned into a novelty.
Hey carmenaw, it's even worse for women. If you're a female presidential candidate you not only have to be smart and competent, you have to look "right", be assertive but not "shrill", laugh in a lilting manner else be accused of "cackling", wear your hair a certain way (no "mannish hair-dos" allowed !), don't wear pants too often ...
At least Obama is congratulated for his achievements and promise. Clinton is scorned for hers.
I'm not a bit interested in Obama becoming a sports metaphor. I'd be more interested in him fulfilling the dreams of King, Cesar Chavez, and the too-soon-departed Robert F. Kennedy.
He will come nearest doing this if he invites Mrs. Clinton to go with him and share in it.
What has Obama actually done to warrant such comparisons ? And how does a half-white priveleged guy fulfill Dr. King's dreams ?
atheist,
It's not what Obama "has done". It's what he "is doing" in coalition-building that is important.
In the slavery legacy US, there is no such thing as "half white". Most African Americans have some percentage of Caucasian genes in their gene pool. If you don't look entirely white, you are considered to be black for all practical purposes.
I think that his genetic background is being over emphasized. He is not in the lead b/c of his ethnicity, but in spite of it. He is simply the best candidate out there. I already voted for him and that was in largely "hard working white working class" Colorado. He "slam dunked" Hillary here, and it wasn't because he has an X and a Y chromosome- i.e. - male. (Sorry for the sports metaphor)
Personally, I'd prefer Jackie Robinson was the Demo candidate.
Wasserman's usually astute analysis is spoiled by his obvious sexism/gynephobia.
The latter part of his piece is wishful-thinking by an erstwhile progressive. The unfortunate truth is that neither Democrat can undo the damage Bush, Bush, Reagan and Nixon have done in the past 40 years. It will be a long time before we are rid of the Reagan judges on the appellate and district federal courts, who have more power now as chief judges, and continue to rule for the Empire and against reproductive choice and affirmative action and just plain people. Our spineless Congress will not overturn all of the bad laws enacted since 1994 and before. The new president will have a hard time fixing the gutted departments and agencies, because even with good appointments at the top, the finest & best civil servants have been forced out, quit in disgust, etc. It will take a generation of good hires to fix that problem. And, unfortunately, neither of them has the values of the Green Party, so they will be repaying their Wall Street and corporate lobbyist supporters with the usual favors.
We have to figure out a way to wake up the MSM-watching public to see what is going on and be willing to sacrifice to change it. It may be that the deep recession we are sinking into will finally inspire the people to be that fed up.
"kem" if obama is not killed before the general election he is going to win the presidency....once people start seeing the real mccain (he's a paper thin,flip flopping,bush clone wanna be)mccain is like a roach...when the lights come on,he's gonna start srambling for cover.......the only WAY he loses is because people DON'T WANT A MAN OF COLOR LEADING THE COUNTRY (RACIST PURE AND SIMPLE) unfortunately,that's the world we live in....but,our time is coming,the neo-cons can't stop this train...
jlover wrote: "the only WAY he loses is because people DON'T WANT A MAN OF COLOR LEADING THE COUNTRY (RACIST PURE AND SIMPLE)"
This is a total racist cop-out ! I did not vote for Obama and it has nothing to do with him being half black. I am voting for Cynthia McKinney, she's black !
But you Obamabots will cry racism if he doesn't win. Instead, you should be blaming his mangled campaign which so thoroughly turned off the Clinton supporters, many if not most will refuse to vote for him. Quit whining and start courting or you're going to lose.
"atheist" man,i must have hit a nerve......THE TRUTH HURTS ...HURTS REAL BAD.....yeah,i know who cynthia mckinney is...and her chances of winning in november are between zero and never...i don't care you who vote for... obama's "mangled" campaign....he beat hilliary fair and square.....i'll take obama's mangled campaign over hilliary's no money,debt ridden, media saving,LOSER campaign anyday...obama is going to win in november.... mccain is the GOP'S puppet ...mccain is a paper thin,flip flopping, bush clone wanna be...mccain will act like a roach come debate time...when the lights come on,he'll be srambling all over the place...
atheist:
Obama's "mangled campaign"????
What would an effective one look like? If the Clinton supporters are "turned off" maybe it's because they are losing to a superior candidate who has set new standards in effective organization, volunteer recruiting, and wide-spread fund raising.
Don't eat any more of those sour grapes.
Obama won the strong Republian based Red states. He recieved over 90% of the balck votes and of course that's not racism. He won where there were several colleges in a state and he recieved the college student votes. He won in all of the caucus states.
He lost ALL seven of the states a Democrat will have to win in November if we want to have a Democrat in the White House. He lost big time in them. Those are not my opinions, that's what happened.
There is no runaway election here, it's very close between Obama and Hillary. If the Florida, Mchigan votes are counted, Hillary leads in the popular vote. Hillary offered to pay for a re-do election in Michigan and Florida and Obama refused that. ___ Why?
If the Michigan and Florida votes are not allowed at the Demo convention, they might as well all go home and not even bother about the general election. We cannot afford another Republican in the White House now. If Obama loses just three of the seven swing states, as he has lost ALL of them to Hillary, he will lose the general election. Those are not MY opinions, it's how it is and has been so far and race is not an issue with me. I feel the same way ~Atheist~ does about that.
Kem:
I give you the Florida votes. The Dems were cornered by the Rep. legislature and governor. AND, Obama was on the ballot. But the Mich. Dems. did it to themselves, and Obama was NOT on the ballot. How do you count Hillary's Mich. votes when her principal opponent wasn't on the ballot? Maybe Putin, or Mugabe, or Pinochet would think that was OK, but I don't!
I just realized that I'm totally sick of the phrase "transcending race". Sorry, but as soon as race is mentioned, it cannot be transcended. We would only transcend race if we stopped mentioning it.
Hey fligloot, why wasn't Obama on the Michigan ballot ? Wasn't that his own decision ?
Hi ~FLIGLOOT~ you mentioned how Obama raised a lot of money, almost all small contributions he says and that's what many believe. ___ ~LOL~
The truth is, he has so far recieved over $131 million from PACs,___ the exact same PACs that have contributed to Hillary and McCain, only Obama recieved a lot more. ___Check it out.
If he actually had a well run campaign, he would have swooped Ohio and Texas, California and New Jersey. Obama won the caucus states, that's the whole story. He didn't win any states that he MUST win in November. That will be another story. Again, those are not MY opinions, it's how it is. Sorry, but sour grapes is irrelevant.
Obama has a very good chance to be the Mikhail Gorbachov of the 21st Century.
Revolutions do not happen when life is intolerable for the citizens. Revolutions happen when things have been bad but are getting better, but not fast enough.
When it is clear to people what needs to happen but the nomenclatura keeps holding back improvements, people get impatient and do a little overthrow type thing.
If things get wierd in the US this could happen to Obama. He could be the next to last President of the former United States.
Right, Kem, the caucus states. The states that disenfranchised voters by upholding an unnecessarily grueling voting process which favors the young, single, and healthy. How many elderly or disabled or single moms unable to afford child car could wait in line for hours to get in, then participate for several more hours ? How many people couldn't take the entire day off just to vote ? The Dem party should ban caucuses. I think it should also insist that all states hold truly closed primaries, so that only registered Dems can vote. (I would be excluding myself, btw, I always vote Dem but I'm not registered Dem.)
I agree with you totally on the Michigan votes ~FLIGLOOT~. So does Hillary.
That's exactly why she offered to pay for a re-election in Michigan and in Florida. BTW, it was Obama's choice to remove his name from the Michigan ballot. He was well aware he would lose there, those were not caucus states and it is also why he refused to go along with another primary election in those states.
RE: Do you have any idea how annoying it is for black people to hear that we have to be better, stronger, smarter, faster than any white person in order to be accepted by white people?
It is more annoying if you consider yourself as smart as the white person in question than it is if you are actually smarter.
RE: It's hard to overstate the importance of Robinson's 1947 debut with the Brooklyn Dodgers.
Jackie Robinson got his start with the Montreal Royals, the minor league affiliate to the Dodgers. And Jackie Robinson got the start, not because he was the best black baseball player at the time but because, out of the best of the best, he was the one best able to keep his cool while receiving racial taunts - in Branch Rickey's opinion.
Jackie Robinson's Minute:
http://www.histori.ca/minutes/minute.do?id=10218
Jackie Robinson's radio Minute:
http://www.histori.ca/minutes/minute.do?id=13545
RE: but just because he's half-black he's suddenly compared to every great black person who ever lived ?????
My friend thinks he looks most like Abe Lincoln (sp?) - and you can sort of see it in the cheeks and in the tall stature.
As far as I know, no one has ever compared Obama to Billie Holiday - though that might be Son of Cain's (McCain) game plan.
We've had enough of sports analogies and even 'win one for the Gipper.' I am still hearing Obama praise Reagan's rhetorical style, and now he's standing there with John Edwards, talking about a new coalition of Democrats, Independents and Republicans, etc. If anyone else had said that, he would have been laughed off the stage.
Not to mention trying to trade on Edwards' populist agenda. Sorry, Hillary's already done that and won big in the most 'populist' areas. I'm not sure I can bear watching the Democratic party turn its back on blue collar, older Americans who have been its backbone in the guise of courting Barack's ephemeral "new coalition." He has the money, for sure, but what is that really about, trickle-down liberalism??
Of course black people are voting for Barack, and I don't blame them; it's about symbolism as much as anything else. And about time for some new faces in Washington, yes. And I still hope the Democrats can think clearly enough to put forth brains AND charisma, Clinton AND Obama before McCain and the Republican machine with a very successful 40-year track record just clean our clocks--again.
It's not about black or white, it's about the murky grays of a shadow government that no longer listens to it's electorate once elected, (if you can call it an election when "superdelegates" and court rulings are the deciding factors).
Wow, I've been laughing my ass off for months now at article after article that attempts to tie Obama to various people in recent history who are well regarded. We've seen "Obama is MLK","Obama is RFK","Obama is JFK", "Obama is FDR" just to name a few. To me, these are all blatant attempts to take a person who's done nothing of impact in his own life and make gullible voters think that he is more than he really is.
But this one really has to take the cake. Obama is Jackie Robinson? Are they @#$@#$% kidding?
If Jackie Robinson had come to the Dodgers with millions of dollars of corporate sponsorships backing him, if Jackie Robinson had come to the Dodgers already selected by the elites of baseball as a pre-made star, if Jackie Robinson had come to the Dodgers with a massive PR campaign promoting as if he was a rock-star, in fact if Jackie Robinson had been largely the creation of such a PR campaign .... then maybe this comparison might be valid.
But to me, all this does is signal that the Democrats will drop even lower to try to find new ways to con voters into voting for this shill for corporate-government.
For an antidote to this junk, try reading this excellent article on Obama and his backing .... http://www.counterpunch.org/martens05062008.html
Try going to a caucus sometime. They are as close to democracy as we get in this country. I'm amazed there are people who want to ban them. That's a truly stupid idea.
Yeah, they could probably be improved. Maybe have some alternate times and total the results to make them more inclusive.
But, here's one key point. In a caucus, everything is very transparent. You can look around the room and everyone can count how many supporters each candidate has. You can see 72 people in the Obama corner and 31 in the Edwards corner and so forth. As such, they are, in today's America, the only form of election that produces honest results that can't be questioned. So, what, instead people want the easily-rigged vote counting computers to tell us who wins just like in every other so-called election?
Oops, should have added to my above list "Obama is Gorbachov". Wow, the BS just keeps getting deeper.
The problem is this. Obama has not proposed one serious change in America and said for sure that he will do this if he becomes President. Everything Obama proposes is pure corporate-party line. Heck, he even continually brings up Republican ideas like privatising social security, continuing to massively increase Pentagon spending ... and he keeps saying over and over again how wonderful Reagan is and how he plans to invite Republicans into his government. How the heck someone gets from a very-status-quo platform like that to "Obama is Gorbachov" is just mind boggling.
Ooops, now I have to add "Obama is Caesar Chavez" to the BS list. Wow! That one is even more incredible. Can someone point to anything specific that Obama proposes that would help the lives of a group of poor, abused people like migrant workers? Heck, does Obama ever even talk to migrant workers. When I hear he's been in CA these days, he's always talking to rooms full of rich people looking for contributions.
Obama, the candidate of Wall St who seems to have a serious crush on Ronald Reagan .... he's really Caesar Chavez? Ha!
This is really getting incredible. Is there any lie the Democrats will not trot out to try to con people into voting for their pro-war, pro-corporate government candidates?
Yes ~SAMPSON~, caucuses can be improved upon and they should be. The problem is, they weren't improved upon for this election.
Hey thanks for posting that link at 6.37pm, that's an eye opener for those who don't know the real score of Obama versus Hillary. I believe a lot of people are beginning to suspect that they've been conned.
Let see, we've got a political system that's been so completely corrupted by corporate interests that only the pro-corporate candidates can be seen as possible winners. Then we are told that its so important that we support a 'candidate that can win' that our only choice is to support the corporation's candidate.
But, the problem is, even if that candidate 'wins', we all lose.
Rule #1. Never, ever vote for a candidate you see on TV. There are two ways to get on TV. One is to pay for the ad with boatloads of corporate money. The other is to have corporate media put you on TV for free. Either way, that means that the candidate you see on TV is going to support their corporate backers if elected.
Either way, that means you lose.
Are you sick of seeing your tax dollars get funneled off to one corporate con after another? Are you sick of all the rules in society being tilted towards corporations? Are you sick of your jobs being sent overseas because some corporation can make an extra buck that way? Are you sick of toxic and unsafe goods being imported? Are you sick of people being sent to die in wars that only benefit corporations?
QUIT VOTING FOR CANDIDATES YOU SEE ON TV! If they win, you lose. Period.
Obama supports the "Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007" (s. 1959). He and his wife Michelle are on the Council on Foreign Relations and have close ties to people involved in the Bilderberg group.
Sounds like he not only supports the fascist global new world order elitists but he's also a member of that cabal.
You folks supporting Obama's false promises of change and hollow rhetoric are going to be seriously disappointed if he should become president.
One thing, among many, that amazes me is hearing people complain about the "unitary executive" yet rest all of their hopes on this Obama character, thus advocating a "unitary executive" of their own. sigh
Obama is just another NWO shill who happens to be charismatic and eloquent, a wolf in tailor made sheeps clothing.
peace
RE: if Jackie Robinson had come to the Dodgers already selected by the elites of baseball as a pre-made star
Jackie Robinson sort of was - he played in the Black leagues before playing for the Montreal Royals. Jackie Robinson was picked from a handful of the best black players in the league as sort of an experiment. Jackie Robinson had to be successful - not only in playing baseball but keeping his cool or else it would be decades before anyone even thought about letting a black player play in the major leagues.
And, by the time Jackie Robinson made it onto the Dodger's lineup, he was already a star. And we can't count Jackie's Oprah (Branch Rickey) as totally enlightened since there was money to be made if one could sign these excellent Black Players in to the major leagues - and who would they be more apt to sign with - the team that gave Jackie Robinson his chance.
Obama, like Jackie Robinson, has the future of the next 40 years of not-completely-white riding on his performance in the White House. If Obama screws that up, then the black, the hispanic etc would not be considered for top job for a long time. The racists Avi Lewis talked to figure that Obama is a godsend for this reason - they think that they can use him to further their KKK agenda.
RE: For an antidote to this junk, try reading this excellent article on Obama and his backing ….
And here we are comparing Obama to Warren Jeffs - a man who Winston Blackmore compared to Jim Jones.
RE Backing ...
I don't like that about either Obama or Clinton - though the system is set up to encourage it.
Michael John Hamdani showed me the true Hillary Clinton - and that was when I wrote her off.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/820466/posts
John Edwards would have made the best President of the bunch. Even Kem agrees with that, don't you? Then again, you haven't been asked that question lately. :evil
May Elizabeth get over her cancer and become what every First lady of her calabur should be - either Secretary of State or, more importantly, a Congress Person.
If you think your only choices were Obama, Edwards or Clinton, then you're already screwed.
Like I said, you should automatically exclude any candidate that you see on TV.
Wasserman, you're against nuke power; written eloquently about its dangers.
Why the heck, then, are you writing this Obama stuff?
Obama was running against another Democrat in those "big" states. They are states that almost always go Democrat and will again in the general election.
The emphasis on race in this article made me uncomfortable.
You sure about that Heavy runner? The last two times Ohio, West Virginia and Texas went Republicn to name just three of the seven "big" states and most of the states Obama won always go Republican. And with the screwing around in Florida and Michigan, with the hard feelings now, they'll probably go Republican this time. Those are "BIG" states BTW. The demo has to win six of them to beat McCain. Hillary will win them, Obama won't. That's just how it is not mey wish.
What's with this EVIL word you put after my name ~VAUDREE~?
KEM PATRICK and Samson go to the fridge and get yourselves a beer. There are others out there with some intellegent ideas to share. Come back and rant some more around 3:00 am when the insomniacs need some entertainment.
I like Obama because he is young and has young ideas. I like him because he looks like my half white kids. But most of all, I like him because he is intelligent, calm and doesn't seem likely to start more wars. I cannot say the same for McCain or Clinton. (Clinton is intelligent but belicose) As for being disappointed with my choice should Obama be elected, I will wait to see. I KNOW I will be disappointed and broke if McCain wins.
The first and only Catholic President was taken care of, but he actually tried to change course. If Obama stays the course, he should be fine. That means No Change.
Race is important to the office historically but really Obama should be viewed on merit. Hillary, we know has merit. Her gender shouldn't matter outside a historical footnote as well.
Hi ~GLK~ got the beer, thanks for the idea. Now please tell me exactly what it was I posted here that makes you think that I wouldn't vote for Obama?
I posted where Obama got his votes, and where he won and where he lost. I posted that I think McCain will beat him and why I fear he will. I agree with the link Sampson offered about where Obama gets his money and there are other links that list 'exactly" where he got the rest of it. He got it from PACs and he said he doesn't accept PAC money and berats Hillary and McCain because they do. That's troublesome, is he honest? He Don't appear to be.
So then you come on and get smart mouth and rude because I posted some actual facts and the truth. You say You like Obama because he's young, calm and won't start any wars and so you're going to vote for him. Good for you, I'm going to vote for him also if he's the Demo nominee.
I believe Hillary has a whole lot better chance of beating McCain though and that's my opinion, based upon intelligent evaluation of how the voting has gone in the primaries. You don't have to be real intelligent to see the score.
And if you wish to call that ranting, suit yourself, it don't bother me at all what you think of me. I would never say that I think you're a loud mouth, self centered idiot.
Hillary is best up against McCain. Why deny the obvious.
Better have a beer ~Cannuckistani_Joe~. Don't state the obvious here, you'll be ranting.
Kem - it is a sign that I'm joking or not being completely serious, not that I would like to see you in a red suit with horns, a tail and a goatie.
RE: I like Obama because he is young and has young ideas. I like him because he looks like my half white kids. But most of all, I like him because he is intelligent, calm and doesn't seem likely to start more wars.
Like like Obama, but I like Edwards much much better.
I look for signs as to whether a candidate is more likely or less likely to give us more Maher Arars and Omar Khadrs.
Both Obama and Clinton want to change NAFTA but I get the impression that Clinton wants to change it into the SPP wishlist with her talk about removing impediments to trade. One such impediment of trade is that each country has different standards - and I am not just talking about the "harmonization of the jellybean" - but about how much and what kinds of pesticides can be used on certain foods etc. Obama, on the other hand, says that what he wants to put into trade agreements (including NAFTA) is increased worker and environmental protections. Whether either mean to keep their promises, both want a second term.
For example, Manitoba does not allow one to run certain cars unless you have an immobilizer installed so if you buy the car in the States and drive it over the boarder, you are driving it illegally. Harmonization could prevent Manitoba from making such demands on cars driven in Manitoba, even though we do have a problem with joy-riding youths.
BTW - anyone notice that McCain said that he was going to bring the troops back five years after taking office - this means that we have to elect him a second time to see whether or not he is going to keep his promise. And Presidents cannot serve a third term so McCain has nothing to lose by changing his mind.
RE - Race and Gender
Until the concept of a Black President becomes commonplace, all Blackish, Latino etc Presidential hopefuls will be judged by how Obama performs - for better or worse.
No one is going to say: We are not taking a chance on electing another white guy because we took a chance with Bush and he screwed us over. Because white Presidents are commonplace, we will not judge white people in general on the performance of one white guy the way that we would judge the first man or the first woman president.
As such, both Clinton and Obama are Jackie Robinson - each carries on their back the way we will judge any other female or not-completely-white person who makes a bid for the Presidency.
If Jackie Robinson took a hissy fit because some racist made a very vulger string of inappropriate remarks or, worse yet, allowed the taunting to influence his play, it would have taken another 50 years before another black man was given the chance to play in the major leagues. History would not have judged it as a personal failure on Jackie Robinson's part but as a sign that blacks did not have what it too to play with the big boys.
One also needs to wonder why Jackie Robinson started his career in Montreal, rather than some American team. It may be because Canadians, though racist, were not as blatantly or openly so.
RE: Clinton versus Obama
This is the Primaries - people take sides. Everyone get use to it.
~VAUDREE~ Robinson started his career in Montreal because that's where the baseball team that hired him to play ball was located. Nothin to wonder about.
Don't get your dumb devil joke at all BTW. You are wierd though, so will let it pass like gas.
Interesting analysis, and it brings with it a bit of truth and wisdom. The comparison to the career of Jackie Robinson is rather appropriate, but don't think for a minute that Barack is any less skillful as a statesman and humanitarian than Jackie was as a baseball player - - they are both stars in their own right. It is also very fortunate for Barack that the G.O.P. has begun already to unleash its Rovian and Swift-boating dogs on the attack. Barack can be thankful for this early opportunity to blunt their spears and come out smelling like a rose. Hopefully, the next step (after the nomination is sewed up), will have him select John Edwards as his running mate to sew up the one constituency that the "expert pundits" portray as Barack's Achilles Heel. Besides that political consideration, John Edwards would also be eminently qualified to be the President of the Senate, and help Obama's Administration's programs through Congress - - John knows the ropes!
Personally, I suspect that Obama and Edwards are going to run together, regardless as to what Edwards is saying now.
But that's just a prediction, and predictions don't always come true.
What is true, though, is that liberals tend to spend more time fighting each other than they do fighting conservatives. Obamabots? Reminds me of the Kucinichniks labels that used to be thrown around here, back when Kucinich was still a candidate. How about Clintonians? McKinneyites? Naderovians? How many more cute little nicknames can we throw at each other so that anyone reading these posts will think none of the nonRepublican candidates are worth voting for?
So do the Republicans know the ropes and they will have a ball with Obama, a double ball if Edwards is the VP pick. You see, during these Democrat primaries, the Republicans are just watching and waiting, like duck hunters sitting quietly in their blinds. Duck season opens in August and it ain't gonna be pretty.
good to finally see some healthy scepticism of Obama's chances in November.
did anyone notice that the MSM declared Obama the winner way back after Iowa?
count me a sceptic as well since I remember the MSM helped sell us the bush/Cheney/neoncon war using 9-11 as a pretext to bring about this nighmare of the past 7 years - perhaps I can be forgiven by the Obama supporters for being wary of the MSM bearing the gift of Obama?
Sampson thanks for the link, KEM PATRICK did you vote for Reagan? :-)