Obama: Change for the good
Both candidates would serve their party well as nominee, but in the Illinois senator, there is a potential for change that can only help this country move on and progress.
From the Journal SentinelPosted: Feb. 16, 2008
There is only the tiniest sliver of daylight separating Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the issues, with the notable exception of health care reform.
Even on Iraq, they end up in much the same place: Steady U.S. troop withdrawal, leaving themselves enough wiggle room in case the situation on the ground becomes so dire that more flexibility becomes necessary.
The similarity of views is, in truth, why the candidates return so much to the themes of change and experience.
Our recommendation in Wisconsin's primary on Tuesday for the Democratic nomination is Barack Obama. That's our recommendation because change and experience are crucial to moving this country forward after what will be eight years of an administration careening from mistake to catastrophe to disaster and back again.
The Illinois senator is best-equipped to deliver that change, and his relatively shorter time in Washington is more asset than handicap.
The Obama campaign has been derisively and incorrectly described as more rock tour than political campaign and his supporters as more starry-eyed groupies than thoughtful voters.
If detractors in either party want to continue characterizing the Obama campaign this way, they will have seriously underestimated both the electorate's hunger for meaningful change in how the nation is governed and the candidate himself.
In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board on Wednesday, the first-term senator proved himself adept at detail and vision. They are not mutually exclusive.
On poverty, he eschewed the phrase "war on poverty," preferring instead to describe the task as a long-haul effort. No one should launch a program, fight a battle and declare mission accomplished, he seemed to say.
Instead, it will require continuous and unflagging efforts along several fronts - taxation, education, economic development and, yes, personal responsibility - to make progress. He speaks of strengthening the middle class, helping with child care, early childhood education and ensuring access to affordable health care.
In other words, a broad, nuanced approach that recognizes that problems are linked to others.
Similarly nuanced answers came from questions on manufacturing, trade, school choice, the Great Lakes and energy.
He spoke of turning to alternative energy, not just to wean addiction from oil but to spur more technologies that in turn spur more manufacturing possibilities. We can find "competitive advantages at higher value products," he said, adding that rebuilding much needed infrastructure also can create jobs.
He was a realist, recognizing that no one could likely turn the clock back to Milwaukee's manufacturing heyday. "The percentage of manufacturing jobs to service jobs is not going to be the same as it was in the 1950s," he said. "We're not going to get those jobs back."
Yet he insisted that manufacturing still could become more competitive and the service industry better-paying for its employees.
Which is not to say that we are in lockstep. On school choice, Obama does not see as clearly as we do the intrinsic value in and of itself of low-income parents having a choice.
On health care, we prefer Clinton's insurance mandate, though we recognize that more details are needed. Obama would mandate insurance for children only, a worthy goal, but we're skeptical of his claim that it will get to the same number of people insured as Clinton's plan.
But, again, not a lot separates Obama's views from Clinton's. So why Obama?
It is precisely the excitement that we see in the candidate and his supporters in their demands for change. This promises to alter the political landscape and dynamics for the better, energizing youth for service and involvement as we haven't seen in a very long time.
In Clinton, there is the potential for déjà vu all over again. Right or wrong, she is a polarizing figure who excites all the wrong kinds of political passions.
And even if she didn't, her vote on the Iraq war cannot be explained away as not realizing that the president would take that ball (and blank check) and run with it.
Yes, she has been tried. And much of the antagonism she engenders in the right is simply irrational.
But even without this Clinton baggage and on their individual merits, Obama still has the edge. His experience as community organizer, state legislator, U.S. senator and campaigner who took a dream and became a credible contender measures up well against Clinton's experience as poverty lawyer, first lady and U.S. senator.
The party would be well-served with either candidate, and the historical implications are huge with each.
But in Obama, there is a potential for meaningful change that does not exist with any other candidate.
From: Tim Dickson <tadviv@yahoo.com>
To: Dems2008@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 1:02:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Dems2008] Milwaukee paper endorses Obama
After visits by Obama and Clinton to its editorial
board, perusing their records, and watching the
national and Wisconsin campaigns, and considering
what's best for the country, they have endorsed
Senator Obama.
The endorsement contends that issue differences
between the campaign are minor. However, Obama is
best able to achieve change.
Furthermore, the editorial makes it clear that the
Clinton talking points about Obama are simply false.
In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Editorial Board on Wednesday, the first-term senator
proved himself adept at detail and vision. They are
not mutually exclusive
--- Gabrielle Latham <gabrielled2003@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Senator Obama cosponsored the Secure America and
> Orderly Immigration Act, S-2611, sponsored by John
> McCain. It passed the Senate on May 25, 2006, by a
> vote of 62-36. Republicans largely opposed the
> bill, Democrats largely supported the bill.
> (Curiously, George W Bush, having been governor of a
> border state, has a fairly sophisticated
> understanding of this issue.) Under this bill,
> undocumented persons (my phrasing) who have been in
> the country five or more years would be allowed to
> stay and apply for citizenship, provided they pay
> back taxes, learn English and have no serious
> criminal records. Undocumented persons who have
> been in the United States between 2-5 years would
> eventually have to return to a point of entry in
> Mexico or Canada and apply for a green card, which
> could allow their immediate return. The roughly 2
> million undocumented persons who have been in the
> United States for less than two years would be
> ordered home.
>
> Senator Obama opposed S-256, the Bankruptcy Abuse
> Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. The
> title of the bill is misleading. The most
> significant change in bankruptcy law in 25 years, it
> would require many people filing for bankruptcy to
> repay a portion of their debt under Chapter 13 of
> the bankruptcy code rather than allowing them to
> erase it almost entirely under the more commonly
> used Chapter 7. Those opposing the bill said the
> bill didn't take into account dire situations faced
> by those who face divorce, disease, job loss, and
> other crises. Curiously, Hillary Clinton did not
> vote on this historic bill. (I would just note that
> many of the creditors and banks who benefit from
> this bill have strong ties to New York.)
>
> Senator Obama also voted "yes" on: stem cell
> research (H R 810); modified Patriot Act (H R 3199);
> curtailing ability of plaintiffs to file class
> action lawsuits against corporations (Hillary
> Clinton voted no on this bill).
>
> When Democrats finally achieved a majority in the
> state senate, Senator Obama was elevated to Chairman
> of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee;
> 2003-2004 were the only two years Barack Obama has
> ever been in a political majority in either Illinois
> or (until recently) Washington, D.C. During those
> two years, he sponsored 780 bills, and 280 of those
> were signed into law.
>
>
>
> pappy2126 <pappy8125@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Can you list any of Obama's
> accomplishments?
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
> Gabrielle (Gabe to my friends)
> Do not enter into a battle of wits with an unarmed
> person.
>
> Join with me on Facebook to pledge your vote to
> Barack Obama
>
>
http://apps.facebook.com/causes/view_cause/60533?recruiter_id=13266649&h=shu
>
> Click below to make a donation to Barack
> Help me reach the goal!
>
>
http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/main/texasgabe
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them
> fast with Yahoo! Search.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Dems2008-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Dems2008-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Dems2008-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder