How will you make change happen?

They can debate the details of their policies all they want but nothing will ever get passed or changed unless one of them can end the partisan gridlock.  Corporate special interests only get their way when half of us fail to participate.  They divide the rest of us and pit us against one another and that’s how they win.  If someone was able to unite enough of us, the power of corporate special interests would become irrelevant and we could begin repairing the damage caused by a corporate run government.

I wish they would focus all the debates on: How will you make change happen?

How will you reach across the divide to unite a governing coalition that can get things passed and move our country forward?

I don't see how Hillary’s polarizing nature or Edwards’s heated rhetoric can get it done.  Obama is the only one with the skills; track record and inclination to get new people involved in the process and bring Independents and good government Republicans together to make real change and progress happen.

Hillary’s approach has been to take the most money from corporate lobbyists and pay lip service to curbing corporate special interests but then ignoring the problem completely.  Edwards is making the case that corporations will not negotiate their power away, you have to take it from them but Edwards has no public record of even trying to curb corporate influence.  

Obama's approach  is not based on negotiating with corporate special interests it is based on reaching out to get new people involved in the process along with Independents and good government Republicans and to unite them and heal the partisan division.  With a united coalition, corporate special interests become weak and irrelevant.  

Obama has a track record of success doing exactly this but part of that approach includes not picking fights which can stifle the process.  Making millions in corporate lawsuits are not the same as public policy or legislation.  I would submit that while I agree with what Edwards has to say about corporate power, I don't believe his approach is effective and he does not have a track record of public policy success to show he can do what he says he wants to do but Obama does.

Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 - (Obama/Coburn)
Requires public access to all government spending (earmarks, grants, loans and contracts)  
http://en.wikipedia.org/...

1998 Illinois State Gift Ban Act (Obama)
"Heralded As the Most Sweeping Good-Government Legislation in Decades"
http://www.barackobama.com/...

•  Tips?

  Thank you

  by Todd Smyth on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:11:29 PM PDT

•  Making change

  Well reasoned diary.

  I'm going to first make change by busting my butt to get Obama elected.  Old fashioned campaigning.   Hit the streets hard.  We are running out of time! I'm going to keep focused and committed.  Damn, people, long years of government waste and corruption.  Let's take this thing back now.  

  by CupofTea on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:17:22 PM PDT

  •  Excellent!!

    by Todd Smyth on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:18:56 PM PDT

  •  all I can do is vote and send $ this time...

    it's kind of killing me....because I can't stand watching this. I REALLY want him to win and I'm REALLY upset about the Clintons, who I used to like....

    by Buffalo Girl on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:19:45 PM PDT

•  How? Well, not by voting "present" 129 times.

  We need a leader, not an issue-dodger.

  by PhillyDem9 on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:20:06 PM PDT

  •  Read, debated, debunked

    Move on, nothing to see here!

    by oscarsmom on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:24:19 PM PDT

  •  out of 4000 votes

    A whopping 3%.

    by bumblebums on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:40:14 PM PDT

•  Just not Hillary

  Have others forgotten the Clinton years?  How the Republicans rallied together and opposed his every move for no other reason than because it was him?  Let's remember, Hillary has attempted to get a health care proposal passed before.  Is it not possible that her current plan will face the same opposition and for the same irrational reasons?

  My God, our country needs serious help.  Our current political system is stuck in the doldrums of party warfare.  We are in major need of a jump-start, and having a Dem nominee who is not a Bush or a Clinton would be a great way to do that IMHO!

  Good diary.

  by oscarsmom on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:23:26 PM PDT

  •  The health care proposal was a well

    intentioned move which was policy driven. Because the policy wonks developed it in a complicated way, it confused many people who supported it. But there were other reasons.  The insurance companies did not want to lose their profits, people who were comforable with their insurance plans were unwilling to change and the country wasn't as bad off as they are now. The physicians, always a conservative group, balked as well.  Today things are quite different, except for the insurance industry still concerned about their profits.  The country is more willing to embrace some change.  All three of the candidates have proposed incremental changes that in time will change the dynamics of this issue. I wish you wouldn't simply blame Hillary for this mess. If you would read articles by Ezra Klein of the American Propect you could get some insight into this issue.link

    by hairspray on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 03:44:03 PM PDT

•  I found this disturbing...

  from Tim Noah at Slate

  Edwards served a single term in the Senate. Obama served eight years in the Illinois state Senate and is halfway through his first term in the U.S. Senate. Clinton is about to begin her eighth year in the U.S. Senate. Going by years spent as an elective official, Obama's 11 years exceeds Clinton's seven, which in turn exceeds Edwards' six. But it's a silly calculus. They all come out about the same, even when you factor in Clinton's youthful work on the House judiciary committee's impeachment inquiry, her membership on the board of the Legal Services Corp., her chairmanship of the Arkansas Educational Standards committee, her crafting of an unsuccessful national health-care bill, and her sharing Bill Clinton's bed most nights while he was Arkansas governor and president of the United States.

  SNIP

  Clinton's claim to superior experience isn't merely dishonest. It's also potentially dangerous should she become the nominee. If Clinton continues to build her campaign on the dubious foundation of government experience, it shouldn't be very difficult for her GOP opponent to pull that edifice down. That's especially true if a certain white-haired senator now serving his 25th year in Congress (four in the House and 21 in the Senate) wins the nomination. McCain could easily make Hillary look like an absolute fraud who is no more truthful about her depth of government experience than she is about why her mother named her "Hillary." Dennis Kucinich has more government experience than Clinton. (He also has a better health-care plan, but we'll save that for another day.) If Clinton doesn't find a new theme soon, she won't just be cutting Obama's throat. She'll also be cutting her own.

  by Buffalo Girl on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:23:29 PM PDT

  •  So if McCain wins the GOP nomination how

    do you see a Obama vs McCain contest shaping up?

    by hairspray on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 03:46:10 PM PDT

    •  well, Obama would have an easier time

      because he's not running on so-called experience, and it's much easier to connect McCain to "politics as usual/George Bush" vs hope/change/new era. Plus, McCain has gone head to head with McCain and McCain became somewhat unhinged, which is something he is notorious for behind the scenes.....

      by Buffalo Girl on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 03:54:31 PM PDT

      •  Maybe, but I think McCain's experience is more

        authentic than anyone in the Democratic camp other than Richardson and McCain appeals to the Independents.  That is a problem for Obama. If there is a McCain vs. Clinton the issue will be who will be the best on Iraq/security.  More women than men hate the war according to statitical polling I have read. It is pretty substantial. I think 58% of women against Iraq vs. only 42% men were in that mode. That means that more women will buy a woman candidate vs McCain IMHO.

        by hairspray on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 04:01:46 PM PDT

    •  Change vs 4 more years of the same

      McCain represents a variation of more of the same. His death grip on spending 100 years in Iraq and teetering old age will be very hard to sell to a majority of people.  Obama is young and vital and offers a new book and a new direction without the baggage of 25 years of Senate votes.

      by Todd Smyth on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 04:10:17 PM PDT

•  Be the change

  Instead of spending hours locked in political battles that most of the country could care less about be the change the you want.

  - volunteer - build a business - stop global warmeing - mentor a child - find a GOP friend and engage with them on the issues, learn their perspective (or visa versa)

  Shaun Dakin
  StopPoliticalCalls.org

  by shimane on Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 03:03:58 PM PDT