To: sarakandel
Sent:Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:43 am
Subject: RE: Check out Op-Ed Columnist - Lurching With Abandon - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com
Did you hear Rachel Maddow taking over for Keith Monday night? She played a few videos of Obama early in his campaign and seemed to want to make the case that he really hasn't switched positions. I heard the AT&T whistle blower on with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now, however, and it made the FISA vote really disturbing.
From: sarakandel
Tue, 8 Jul 2008 2:28 pm
Subject: Re: Check out Op-Ed Columnist - Lurching With Abandon - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com
I know. I am mixed up inside about Obama’s recent actions and this election. When I supported Edwards and saw things more clearly, I consistently felt that Obama was very centrist. I kept reading the evidence that people gave that he was progressive and I couldn’t see it. Finally after Edwards dropped out, Tom Hayden's article convinced me to support him-- Hayden said that endorsing Obama was a way of supporting the Obama movement that would pressure Obama. I was also convinced by the petition written by "Feminists for Obama" who supported him because of his initial antiwar direction, but even they endorsed him with reservations. I remember thinking how disillusioned his young supporters were going to become-- as I was when I was younger ---and that there was nothing that could be done about it.
I suppose I don't feel as badly as others do about Obama now--- I came to appreciate Obama a great deal and felt that his strength was as a community organizer, a bridge who could translate between different worlds, and I still feel that way. Frankly, his support of faith based initiatives feels like one more organizer/bridge tactic---this is one important, practical and publicly supported way to get money into poor communities--- especially many Black and Latino communities. Progressives have a long faith based history, including revolutionaries in South America. Why let the right appropriate that ideology? And many younger evangelicals in the U.S. have become more concerned with social justice and environmental issues.
What concerns me is when I read that Obama promised MoveOn.Org that he would filibuster against FISA. Was he lying? Now I just read a comment at Daily Kos that Obama only agreed to support the filibuster, but not to participate. Is this a semantical difference, a substantive one? If he presented himself falsely I would be worried.
But I'm not sure that Obama is shifting to the right in the way that Bob Herbert wrote in his op-ed piece in the Times on Tuesday, although I found it very interesting that he felt the need to so publicly criticize Obama. And Tom Hayden, who never criticizes Obama, also wrote a piece on Progressives for Obama,(a really great website) warning Obama about the risks of backing away from his commitment to an antiwar position.
While I am not so disturbed, I do feel less passionate. But much worse I think is what will happen to the people who were working for Obama and sending in their small contributions, their sense of betrayal could lead to their staying at home on Election Day. And since he was counting on them --- these new voters--- I don’t know what the consequence will be.... unless he feels he can get so many swing/Republican states....
I think Obama’s current goal is to change the electoral map and help elect people from the swing states to congress--- and moving to the center--- or clearly stating his already held more centrist positions-- may help him with these states--- even if he loses votes, it may help other people running on the Democratic ticket--- which I consider important.
I think some of these states have pro gun positions, hence his moving to the center on guns.... Although here too I think he always had a more complicated view than simply being anti-gun. Yes, as I think about it, some of these views are his way of supporting Democratic candidates. Bernie Sanders, who is the independent/socialist candidate from Vermont takes a pro gun position for this reason too--- and look how far to the left he is. If we have a Democratic president and Congress and a social movement ready to pressure them I think we might be in good shape to bring about change. But I don't know.
There are so many reasons for why Obama is doing what he is doing. Not to mention the fact that the Republicans will paint him as the senator with the most liberal voting record, or a Marxist/Communist as Lieberman said on a radio show--- a scary black man a la Rev. Wright-- unpatriotic--- a foreigner--- they even demanded his birth certificate-- I read that McCain brought someone on board who had used a yellow highlighter to go through Obama's books which are recorded--- and they plan to use phrases from this audio version--- out of context of course--- in ads... all the 527s with all their swiftboating techniques playing on the fears immanent in racist America... So what is he to do? It’s not clear. Maybe he has to decide there is a line or 2 he won’t cross... maybe do something bold to reassure his supporters.
I'm losing interest and I think a lot of others are too. I barely watch MSNBC these days—even Olbermann- how is that for losing interest??? I send you fewer emails on this subject. The other day I thought I would watch Chris Matthews for a few minutes but got turned off. Matthews and Howard Fine were going over McCain’s most recent energy ad which criticized Obama for being against nuclear power and off shore oil drilling. And then Fine said that McCain's position so proactive... it could help him. No critique of the policy. At least I can feel reassured about Obama here. He says that he is for nuclear power if we find a safe disposal method for nuclear waste (and since there is no safe method, there will be no nuclear power.) Talk about turning the clock back on 20 years of movement building if this decision were reversed.
Writing this letter does make me think about Obama differently again. Maybe if I go back to thinking about Obama as a community organizer creating bridges I can rethink some of his current positions. He has never fit into a typical progressive mold, which I like.... he is able to reach more people... he is a communicator. Maybe it is possible to see how what he is doing right now is a way of negotiating progressive possibilities... have to give this more thought.
Sara
To: sarakandel
Sent: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 2:43 pm
Subject: ....really thoughtful analysis/comment on Obama and where we are now
Sara, Liked what YOU wrote. I'm not bothered by the faith based initiative. I see it as you do . But I’m bothered by Obama’s position on the death penalty.
Obama has said in the past that he can accept the death penalty for certain heinous kinds of murders and for certain heinous child molestation crimes. From everything I've learned about him, I can see how he could make --- and mean -- that statement about certain heinous crimes deserving the death penalty. He is SO "into" the idea of understanding EVERYONE's feelings, and showing that they make sense in some way (the big tent/organizer's approach). And it is true that society is reasonable to be outraged at certain crimes. But not, in my opinion, to impose the death penalty. It's his way, maybe, of saying, "Yes I feel your pain and anger. I'm not going to dismiss it and tell you you're just caught up in a bad ideology."
But in this case, the Supreme Court's decision on the death penalty for child molesters, I think that approach went too far, really too far. ESPECIALLY since he had the easy cover of saying that (at least some) advocates for abused children were against it -- not wanting to put kids in the position of having to give testimony that might send someone to their death (especially a family member!). That guilt is too much of a burden for a child. And it could easily make it much less likely they would testify. He could have taken the opportunity to talk about the whole problem of the sexualization of children in our culture, our media and also about the need raise awareness of the fact that most molesters are within the family. He could have talked about preventive measures like new ideas for "internet safety" education and controls for parents. Was he afraid of being Dukakis-ed on this? He could have come out showing his strength, dignity and ability to grapple with this complex issue by coming out against that ruling...
I'm bothered by the FISA position too, but maybe it isn't so bad -- He did have a "nuanced" explanation... But I can't imagine Al Gore voting that way -- after hearing his January 2006 speech on the violations of the Constitution and grave threat to our liberties-- it was so powerful and impassioned.
Your message really was helpful to read. Gore may not have voted for FISA, but he is a white man, and he is not running for president. On all these issues Obama is suspected of being a foreigner, non patriotic, the stereotypical Black man, a communist, and now even a flip flopper.
I think your email expresses almost exactly my feelings about him and the situation and where I am (including the same trend in my behavior with MSNBC). You put together a set of complex, not-so-simple ideas into a very nuanced, thoughtful analysis.... one that remains open-ended as I think an honest analysis must at this point.
We DON'T know all the possibilities and exactly how all this will turn out in the election and afterwards. Anyone who thinks they are sure how this will all play out is, I think, mistaken.
From: sarakandel
Tue, 8 Jul 2008 2:28 pm
Subject: Re: Check out Op-Ed Columnist - Lurching With Abandon - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com
I would like to reiterate your last point: between the right, the pressure from the social movement left, the vagaries of world events, Obama and his team's response, this is a complicated process.... there is so much that can happen.