To this point, I had not been much of a fan of Barak Obama, unlike many people.
The reason why is that I thought that the media buzz and 'hype' surrounding him was just a manufactered thing and not really earned. Quite frankly, I was unimpressed by his apparent track record in various areas. For example:
- He voted to confirm Condoliar Rice despite her open mendacity and contempt towards Congress. (He may have voted to confirm other awful Bush appointees as well - memory lapse).
- His public personna seemed to follow in the mushy, middle-of-the-road, say-nothing, "centrist" terroritory the few times that I had seen him talk.
- On "Meet The Press" with Tim Russert, he used the forum right before the 2006 Elections to criticize the Democratic Party for their "spending habits" (who created the deficit-?) and then praised Bush (would-be-Dictator, Invader, Torturer, War-Profiteer, Constitution violator, etc. ) for being a nice man. This was not exactly the best message to put out there right before the Election.
However, I recently watched Obama give a speech in Chicago that was aired on C-Span (last Sunday) in clear and total rejection of the Iraq War and about Foreign Policy and I was, for the first time, impressed. I had never heard him speak out at any time before so forcefully and so clearly in opposition to the Bush Foreign Policy (of shame).
No, he did not possess the rightous indignation of an Al Gore or a Howard Dean. But he sure was not Hillary Clinton out there either. I thought as I heard him speak, okay he gets it. In addition to speaking against the War, he also alluded to all the wasted money and tied it back to Roosevelt's desire for Americans to have the inherent right to Economic security.
Here is a link to an article about the speech: http://www.mercurynews.com/...
I thought as I watched this that Obama may just be the best hope for 2008 after all and I came to the conclusion that, yes, he should indeed run for President in 2008. In fact, he must run.
A quick look at the field:
- Barak Obama: Has the charisma, popularity, quite clear and unapologetic about opposing the War, represents a certain economic hopefullness, may also play in one or two Southern States. He also is a unifying figure and "the first black President" is a compelling storyline and get-out-the-vote magnet.
- John Edwards: nice guy, too nice to be President?, his speeches are long and story-telling (in a boring way) with little hard-core meat & potatoes policy or even clarity. Rarely takes risks and rarely never says anything that memorable. Won the debate with Dick Cheney but didn't really put him down in his place. Too lightweight?
- Al Gore: the best policy guy, the best technology guy, has the fire when needed, and clearly is the most deserving. However, for whatever reason, he remains a polarizing figure to many in the middle. And that slight "lisp" of his doesn't serve him well. May not even run.
- Hillary Clinton: She's been AWOL on the Iraq War and even now supports a military attack on Iran. Unlike Kerry and Edwards she has never shown any remorse or regret or reversed her position. She seems happy and comfortable with NeoCon Foreign Policy and repeats their talking-points and their language. Who then, will she inspire now? The Right-Wing will never like her and the liberals are restless. She remains a polarizing figure and making friends with Ruppert Murdoch isn't going to change that. She's left at best as just an unauthentic, go-with-the-flow, mushy, middle-ground figure and at worst Joe Lieberman in a dress.
- Wesley Clark: Could be a serious candidate if he can create a solid campaign organization. Talks too soft to be "a General" but he does know his stuff. He seems at times, however, too pliable one minute cautioning against the War then the next minute urging on Bush & Cheney. A Obama-Clark ticket would probably be ideal but Clark would not accept a number two slot.
- Howard Dean: Too happy with his DNC job which gives him something to really scream about.
- John Kerry: He came very close in 2004. In fact, he actually won Ohio and the race but the media will denigrate him now as damaged goods. He is not the War-Hawk that some people make him out to be and could have made a fine President. His moment may have passed.
- Chris Dodd: He's old and he has little charisma, but I did see him give an impassioned speech in CT (on C-Span) where he rightously defended the U.S. Consitution and took Bush to task for condoning Torture. May be a dark horse.
- Now that Russ Feingold is out of the race, there is little excitment anywhere else in any of the other names mentioned. Joe Biden was for the War before he was against it (if he is?). Vilsack has no charisma and what for policy? Evan Bayh .. yawn.. the rest of the field is just more DLC mush that offers no real message to even run on.
The public is ready for a straight-talker (and I don't mean John McCain) that will speak truth to power and confront the madness of the last 7 years. Obama is smooth enough to do that. However, is he bold enough to do that?
Given the fact that the GOP candidate is going to be: a) John McCain, b) Jeb Bush, c) Mitt Romeny, or d) Rudy Gulliani -- the only horse that we have that can really create lots of attention and compete and represent a clear alternative, and who isn't yet damaged goods, is Barak Obama.
He's our best hope.