StubbornFacts
Stubborn Facts
Stubborn Facts

Navigation

User login

Subscribe via RSS

Resources

The latest from our partner, the PoliGazette

Blog Roll

The Case for Barack Obama (Or At Least, Why I'm Voting For Him)

Submitted by Rafique on Mon, 11/03/2008 - 6:20pm

This isn't really a secret at this point, but I am voting for Obama tomorrow. I guess this is the official endorsement. I put this off to the end for a variety of reasons, mainly due to a lack of time, but I'm not worried about it being too close to Election Day to influence any votes, as it's clear most here have made up their minds already, and I don't suspect I'll be changing them. No big deal. In effect, this is the answer to the question, "Why are you voting for this guy?"

First off, let's get some preliminaries out of the way. I'm a moderate liberal Democrat, who generally comes from the center-Left, DLC/hawkish end of the Party. I'm pro-life, I think the MoveOn-Kos wing of the party has too much influence, and while I've disagreed with most of his policies, I don't have a pathological contempt for Bush.

Ok, so why Obama? To put it bluntly, I think on most of the core issues that are facing the country right now, I think Obama is best equipped to deal with those issues, meaning he has the policy vision, and temperament to lead. I like the guy. What I saw in him in 2004, and in the early days of this campaign, I see in him now. He's got skills. You may not agree with Obama's economic and fiscal policies, but he has been pretty consistent throughout on the key issues, and not just on the economic crisis. McCain on the other hand, has been all over the place. McCain is not Bush, and I do agree that the Dems have used the McCain as Bush meme a bit too much, but with the exception of earmark reform and talks about a spending freeze, he really hasn't clearly laid out how his economic approach will be different than the standard GOP platform. If you're for that platform, that's fine, but a lot of us Dems see things differently. On the recent economic crisis, McCain has been all over the place. First he said everything was fine, then he recognized the crisis, then he was against the bailout, then for it. He suspends his campaign, and tries to postpone the debate, in what has to be called one of the most ill-executed moves in a while. He tries to paint Obama as being on the sidelines, but Obama always argued that one could deal with the crisis and run the campaign. At the meeting with Bush, Obama was engaged, but McCain didn't say much. McCain suspended his campaign, but sat back in the meeting, and when it came time to actually do what he suspended his campaign to do, he didn't get it done. Surely, the bill eventually passed, but it was a more bloated one. What's my point here? While Obama was consistent on the issue, McCain shifted positions several times on this, and then tried to paint Obama as the big spender, while voting for the bill that he once opposed, not to mention adding another $300,000 plan to buy bad mortgages. Again, mileage is your own, but I think Obama showed real leadership.

What about foreign policy, you may ask. Let's be clear. I, for all intents and purposes am a supporter of the Iraq war. Obama, for all intents and purposes isn't. I wish he was as I am on this, but he's not. I have noticed though, and I'm not the only one to notice this, that Obama has always left wiggle room on his support for ending the war. He has always resisted the more aggresive pullout approach from the MoveOn crew. In fact, although Obama does get a lot of support from the anti-war faction, if they're looking for a Carteresque dove, they're deluding themselves. Obama has always been on target about Afghanistan, and contrary to McCain's distortions, he has it right on Pakistan.

To be fair, McCain has consistently supported the surge, and did so when it wasn't popular. He has my utmost respect for that. If this election were just about Iraq, or if I genuinely felt that Obama would somehow surrender to terror, things would be different. Obama was wrong on the surge, and he has yet to openly admit that, but he has acknowledged its success, for the most part. On Israel, I'll say again that if I doubted for a second that Obama wasn't committed to Israel, I couldn't vote for him. As to Iran, he did prevaricate on preconditions, but I think he has come around to an acceptable position.

The McCain camp continues to bring up Obama's supposed vote to defund the troops. Obama dealt with this in the first debate, but the charge keeps coming up. The issue at hand was not funding the troops, but timetables. Obama voted for the timetables troop-funding bill, and McCain voted against it, because of timetables. The non-timetables troop-funding bill Obama voted against, was because of timetables. I suspect Obama voted against it, knowing it would pass either way. I suspect he was trying to make a political statement, and made the same mistake Kerry made in 2004. Honestly, I would've voted against it, because I don't really support artificial timetables, but let's be clear: The issue at hand was timetables, not troop funding. Obama has a consistent record of voting to fund the war, despite his opposition to it, much to the chagrin of many anti-war Lefties.

On the Russia-Georgia conflict, overall I thought Obama handled himself fairly well, with the exception of one pernicious gaffe, which fortunately he has not repeated.

There is of course the question of experience, or rather Obama's lack thereof. compared to McCain. McCain has an impressive record, and is a veteran on the battlefield, and in Congress. He is a man of honor, and sacrificed immensely for his country. Obama doesn't have that resume. He just doesn't, and there's no getting around that, but I believe he does have the temperament, policy vision, and judgment on the key issues, moreso than McCain. Heck, maybe it's just that I agree with Obama more, but I don't think so.

Let me say though, that both these candidates have their flaws. Obama is hardly perfect, and has some issues. I am concerned about the possibility of an unfettered Democratic majority in Congress. The Pelosi-Reid era hasn't exactly lived up to its expectations, and while I don't doubt his sincere belief in bipartisanship, he doesn't have the record that McCain has. McCain has a clear record of bipartisanship, not to mention opposing his own Party, and Bush. Obama doesn't have that much of a legislative record, but he does have good relations with many Republicans (and not just the ones endorsing him), and he has worked with Republicans in the State Senate, as well as the U.S. Senate. He was President of the Harvard Law Review, let's not forget. My concern, to the extent that I am concerned, isn't that Obama won't work with Republicans, but whether he will be able to oppose his own party when necessary. Say what you want about Sarah Palin, she has opposed her own party. The thing is, I'm not really sure about her record of working with Democrats, though. McCain to his credit, has done both. Obama has resisted many of the impulses of MoveOn.org, and he did defy the Party leadership and campaign for Lieberman in 2006. Yeah, it's thin I know, but I'm willing to gamble. After all, how Left can Obama really go, with Blue Dogs in the House, and many Red-state Dems in the Senate?

Again, I'm concerned about the card check bill, and the possibility of the Fairness Doctrine coming back, but I'm willing to take the risk.

As to the negativity of the campaign, I freely cede that neither candidate has been pure. The Obama campaign has put out some questionable ads, and one or two that were kind of sleazy. As I see it though, most of Obama's ads have been policy-based, while McCain's ads have been straight-negative for the last three months, and many were just straight up personal attacks. Obama has never questioned McCain's patriotism, or belittled his military service (at least not intentionally). The McCain crew and his supporters have gone personal on everything, and I may be the only one who feels this way, but in the last few months, it's been over the top. True, many Obama supporters, and in certain instances Obama himself have brought up the race card, but it seems that they've gone after Obama on everything but race ("palling around with terrorists," real America vs. fake America, Obama is a liar, Obama is a socialist, etc), and it's gone beyond the pale, in my book. I will not lay that blame for the lunatic conspiracies (Obama as Muslim invader, phony birth certificate, Bill Ayers as ghostwriter of Obama's book, Obama's logo, etc) on the McCain campaign, but McCain and Palin have launched some beyond the pale attacks, and frankly it's beneath a man of McCain's character.

This is running long, so I'll wrap this up. As for Obama's alliances, at the end of the day, they don't bother me that much. He did flip on public financing, as I said before, that's the one typical politician move I cannot defend. At the end of the day, though, despite his weaknesses, I believe he is the man we need right now. He is not however, the Messiah. Many of his supporters are drunk with hero worship, but in the end, he's just a man, a mere mortal. If you're expecting him to heal the breaches of the universe, prepare to be disappointed. He may be running as a new kind of politician, but he's still a politician. He's run an impressive and historic campaign, but he's made mistakes.

I was technically undecided up until late September, although to be honest, I've leaned Obama's way most of the time. I've seriously considered backing McCain many times, and I think what took me so long was that I still contend that the choice is between two decent, patriotic men. I say one more time that McCain is an honorable and decent man, and despite my issues with his campaign, he still has my respect. As for Sarah Palin, my view of her has diminished over the last couple of months, but she still seems a decent person, and she does have a record.

Many will justify their votes against Obama because of the pro-Obama bias in the press, and the press has made quite the fool of itself this election cycle, but to borrow a phrase, you punish the press for its failures, not the candidate(s).

If Obama wins, he will be the first black President. As an American, and as a black man, that is a great thing for me, but that's not the reason I'm voting for him. The fact that he's made it this far is proof that the barrier has been torn down, and if Obama loses, it won't be because America is a racist country. It won't be because America didn't want a black man to be President, rather they didn't want this particular black man, for a variety of reasons. Will racism be out there? Surely, but I think most Americans won't stoop to that. Sue me, I'm an optimist.

And that's what I want to end this on. If Obama wins, this republic will survive. Yes, it will. If McCain wins, this republic will survive. If Obama loses, I'll be disappointed, but I'll get over it. If he wins, I won't gloat (although I fear others might).

And that's it. Go vote, if you haven't already.

I shouldn't be the first one to comment probably

I shouldn't be the first one to comment probably as there are many who have been on here a lot longer reading your posts but Well done Raf. While I will be voting for the "other guy", thank you for taking the time to give your rationale. Up front, clear and honest. Nice.

In that same vein, I'd like to thank all the bloggers for taking the time to post blogs and for everyone who replied to them. I've really enjoyed them and learned quite a bit as well.

Should be interesting tomorrow. Any bets on it actually being wrapped up on the 4th?

Any chance to quote "Serenity"

"Should be interesting"

"Define 'Interesting.'"
"'Oh God, Oh God, we're all gonna die'?"

(No offense to Raf. I just can't miss an obvious chance to quote the Big Damn Movie, Serenity! *g*)

*Yes, really, Simon's wife. Envy or pity me. ;)

Hey, it's always apt to quote Serenity! :-)

"In the world you will find tribulation, but be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world."

John 16:33

Serenity - The common link!

"Why vote for the lesser of two evils??
Niska/Crow - 2008!"

Always good to have someone around to get my (many) references! *g*

*Yes, really, Simon's wife. Envy or pity me. ;)

Rafique, that took some

Rafique, that took some courage. While I don't "come down to it" where you do (nor, indeed, for that matter, where Simon or Tully do), I still do appreciate your post, and I thank you for it.

Nicely done, Rafique. You

Nicely done, Rafique. You have my utmost respect even though I disagree with a great deal of what you wrote- basically, where you state the concerns I generally come down on the opposite side in almost all cases.

I do agree that the Republic will survive no matter what although it may not be in the form that I'd prefer. And honestly, regarding an Obama win, it wouldn't even concern me much at all if it weren't for the environment of Dem Congress (which you accurately point out contains some moderate Dems but the leadership doesn't give them enough respect IMO) and a compliant press and public still infected with BDS.

hawks and dawgs

Yup. The composition of congress is worthy of concern. As I've stated to Alan over at donklephant, I'm joining him on the Obama wagon with a seat by the door.

I'll leave aside an accounting of why I took that seat to focus on its conditional nature. To please me Obama has to be ready to start disappointing the left by being somewhat as balanced as he has occasionally suggested he intends, as well as by backing off on his most expensive promises.

I'm a deficit hawk ready to ally myself with the blue dogs of fiscal conservatism. I'm prepared for Congress to overreach by believing its own spin and thereby misreading the actual message of the people. If congress tries to lean hard left, I expect blue dogs will stand up and try to coral things. If Obama doesn't respect the blue dogs, and rubber stamps expensive new programs, I am quite simply off his wagon. If this ocurs, hopefully the newly arrogant liberal wing of the democratic party will be so foolish as to try to Liebermanize the Blue Dogs. If they do that, I expect it to hasten the disintegration of the soon-to-be-alleged liberal mandate.

In my fantasy, the blue dogs splinter into a larger independent caucus. I don't know whether this would lead to the establishment of a 3rd party or to the GOP getting whigged over the next generation. Either outcome would suffice.
__________
I have often said, and oftener think, that this world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel. -Horace Walpole

RE: C Stanley

I do agree that the Republic will survive no matter what although it may not be in the form that I'd prefer. And honestly, regarding an Obama win, it wouldn't even concern me much at all if it weren't for the environment of Dem Congress (which you accurately point out contains some moderate Dems but the leadership doesn't give them enough respect IMO) and a compliant press and public still infected with BDS.

THAT's exactly why I'm fearful.

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink

The GOP problem - "Si monumentum requiris, circumspice"

"if you seek his monument, look around you"

my short take on why to vote for Obama as I have to run off to the phone bank, so it's only one from column A and one from my column B.

The current state of the country is clearly a monument to 8 years of a Republican presidency and to that McCain has not offered much in the way an alternative. He still embraces the GOP economic ideology yet this is where it's taken us. The tax cuts(which targeted mainly the wealthy and business interests) didn't work as advertised, neither did the deregulation or the privatization. All of which McCain ultimately supports, including those tax cuts he originally objected to(I think they took him down to the secret basement and showed him his plant).
McCain has not given us any idea who would be in charge of Interior, Homeland Security/FEMA, Justice, FDA, to name a few, all of which have been failures to some significant degree. So where's the change?
Because otherwise we're just throwing the same solution at the same problem and hoping for a change in the result - a familiar definition of insanity.
McCain's choices of tactics or VP left a lot to be desired. I haven't seen so much resume puffery since I was taking applications for videographers.
years ago. Couric interview said it all. Palin's not ready, at least not now. Her judgement and ethics are also questionable. I'm sorry but taking a per diem at HOME?!?!?!? McCain's campaign has a lot to answer for. The whisper campaigns that result in a third of of Texans believing Obama is a Muslim?!?!?! is an utter obscenity. What will he do to repair that?Nothing.
Finally, we'll still be stuck with a Justice department that does not seem to be keen on legal accountability of those in power.

Why Barack Obama? I'd like to add to Rafique's list.
He earned his way to the top of Harvard Law school while his opponent was at the bottom of the Naval Academy that his father sent him to. Obama, who had the choice of the best law firms in the country and became a community organizer and learned from the ground up the workings of community dynamics and the role of local government, the limitations of what can be done but also how to get things done on the community level. As an aside, apparently Obama hung out with a lot of conservatives at Harvard Law School to learn from them and to learn how they thought and worked.
So here's a bright guy with a lot of intellectual curiosity and, as we now have seen over the past two years, able to use what he has learned to run the most disciplined and effective campaigns people have seen in years. Maybe the best ever if some of the numbers I'm hearing are right.
So that's one of my quick intellectual reasons.
This may be the last time anyone ever mocks "community organizing". Somewhere Saul Alinsky is smiling. Kudos.

The next one is gut level.
This country is in need of a transformative experience. Nothing will say change to the world, to our country, like electing Obama. Nor will anything else provide a chance to break from the past 8 years like he will. I differ with Rafique in that if he gets elected the Democratic Party will owe him and Barack will have two years to deliver. After that he'll be more at the mercy of the House and Senate Democrats unless he's done real well.

gotta go.

I looked around me, and saw

I looked around me, and saw no monuments from either ticket. It's not an incumbent year. But I can play at Latin too!

Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.

My personal HO is that an elected Obama would be a doormat for the Dems in Congress. But I could be wrong.

yet Bush was the real deceiver

with a Presidency totally at odds with his pre-election rhetoric. I don't see this as a major problem with President-elect Obama.

The monument was in regard to the Bush presidency and the labors of Hercules that faces Obama (or would have faced McCain )

Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job
WASHINGTON?African-American man Barack Obama, 47, was given the least-desirable job in the entire country Tuesday when he was elected president of the United States of America. In his new high-stress, low-reward position, Obama will be charged with such tasks as completely overhauling the nation's broken-down economy, repairing the crumbling infrastructure, and generally having to please more than 300 million Americans and cater to their every whim on a daily basis. As part of his duties, the black man will have to spend four to eight years cleaning up the messes other people left behind. The job comes with such intense scrutiny and so certain a guarantee of failure that only one other person even bothered applying for it. Said scholar and activist Mark L. Denton, "It just goes to show you that, in this country, a black man still can't catch a break."

Well Max,

Well Max, if the Lusitainia can put a damper on Wilson, I think 9/11 kinda put a glitch in W's plans, too. And the elephant in the economic box is not just deregulation, but too much consumer debt coming to a head

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink

No offense Marcus, but your

No offense Marcus, but your points added are pretty layman. All based in the muck. If you vote based on rumor, half-truths and plain balls-to-the-wall sexism... well, sorry.

http://generationpatriot.blogspot.com

lesseee

could you be more specific?

Too many assumptions for me

The problem, Maxtrue, is that it's all *presumptive*

BECAUSE he was schooled in Harvard Obama's SUPPOSED to be smart and have conservative viewpoints

BECAUSE he chose community organizing rather than a rich law firm to work in, he's SUPPOSED to be kind

Have we seen any *actual* proof of this?
I have....

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

THIS article was why I decided to change my tune over Obama> Not as much a tune inasmuch humming...

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink

My congratulations to you

Congratulations Rafique! And, of course, congratulations to President Elect Obama and Sen. Biden.

I'm happy for you

Out of all of the Obama fans (including my mother) your argument has been the most through and responsible. Personally I think O should have had more experience and had to explain the Gross Parc housing project, hence my cynicism. But I do hope that people support him, even when he has problems.

Rachel

I brew the beer I drink
ps - at least your guy won:P
but hey, I finally got to do what I should have done in 2004 - wrote in Joe Lieberman for president :):)

Recent comments

Advertisements
StubbornFacts.us does not endorse the content of any advertisement

Featured Movie

Syndicate

Syndicate content

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 2 guests online.