Share

Progressives and Obama: A Clash of Narratives

by: Norman Solomon, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

photo
Senator Barack Obama at a town hall meeting on August 17. (Photo: AFP / Getty Images)

    By now, across the progressive spectrum, some familiar story lines tell us the meaning of the Obama campaign. In a groove, each narrative digs its truths. But whether those particular truths are the most important at this historical moment is another story.

    We can set aside the plot line that touts Obama as a visionary pragmatist who has earned the complete trust of progressives. The belief has diminished in recent months - in the wake of numerous Obama pronouncements on foreign policy, his FISA vote to damage the Fourth Amendment and the like - but such belief was never really grounded in his record as a politician or his policy positions.

    A more substantial narrative concedes Obama has "compromised" on numerous fronts, but assumes he has done so in order to get elected president, after which time his real self will emerge. This kind of dubious projection is as old as the political hills, and inevitably becomes a kind of murky exercise in armchair psychology. All in all, projection is not useful for assessing where political leaders are and where they're headed.

    In contrast, quite a few on the left - some from the outset of his presidential race, others beginning more recently - express appreciable disdain for the Obama campaign. The critiques of Obama's positions on issues are often on the mark. Overall, the fact that Obama brings civility and intelligence to public discourse that would be a welcome change in the White House, does not alter the corporate centrist core of his espoused policies.

    No matter how much we might like to think that people's reasoning and logic are the essence of political judgments, actual experience tells us different: The political stances of many people, including on the left, are contoured around their own internal emotional terrain. And there may not be a lot of sorting through contradictions or analysis of the current historical circumstances.

    Yet, we're in great need of willingness to acknowledge contradictory truths, to sort through them as a means of finding the best progressive strategies for the here and now. While some attacks on Obama from the left are overheated, overly ideological and mechanistic, there's scant basis for denying the reality that his campaign and his positions are way too cozy with corporate power. Meanwhile, his embrace of escalating the war in Afghanistan reflects acceptance rather than rejection of what Martin Luther King Jr. called "the madness of militarism."

    To some, who evidently see voting as an act of moral witness rather than pragmatic choice (even in a general election), forces such as corporate power or militarism are binary - like a toggle switch - either totally on or totally off. This outlook says: either we reject entirely or we're complicit.

    Such analysis tends to see Obama as just a little bit slower on the march to the same disasters that John McCain would lead us to. That analysis takes a long view - but fails to see the profound importance of the crossroads right in front of us, where either Obama or McCain will be propelled into the White House.

    Any progressive who watched the "faith" forum that Obama and McCain participated in on August 16, would have good reasons to be negative when assessing some of Obama's answers. But McCain's responses were vastly more jingoistic, militaristic, fanatical and pro-corporate, while also making clear his enthusiasm for the worst of the current Supreme Court justices.

    In an odd and ironic way, progressives who are unequivocal Obama boosters and unequivocal Obama bashers embrace similar concepts of limited alternatives in electoral work. They seem to rule out candidly critical support of a candidate - viewing such an option as either a betrayal of the candidate or a betrayal of principles.

    But supporting one candidate - clearly preferable to the Republican - should not require a lack of candor about the preferred candidate's defects. And progressive interests are not advanced by claiming, against the evidence, that it doesn't really matter which candidate wins.

    We suffer from way too much political argumentation that seems to be on automatic pilot, either puffing up Obama as a paragon of progressive virtues or denying the real differences between him and McCain. The pretending that follows from faith or dogma is no way to mobilize a progressive movement.

    --------

    Norman Solomon is an elected Obama delegate to the Democratic National Convention. His book, "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death," has been adapted into a documentary film of the same name. He is a national co-chair of the Healthcare NOT Warfare campaign.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

"Clearly preferable to the

"Clearly preferable to the Republican?" How so? Seriously. Is there one fact in Solomon's silly column that actually explains how Obama is better than McCain? No. Now, are there differences between the two candidates? Sure. Are they significant? Hell no. They both support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama says he'd run them better. So what? We don't need better wars, we need our wars ended. Immediately. Is Obama's health care plan better? Not really. It's still going to leave millions uninsured, it won't reduce costs and it will ensure billions more in profits for private health insurers. WORSE, support for Obama is destructive to the far more pressing need to build the mass independent movements which we desperately need in order to win single-payer health care and an end to war and occupation. Solomon is doing the Left a disservice by providing ideological cover for a pro-war corporate tool. Just as he did when he argued voting for Kerry in 2004. Look where that got us. Stop wasting your time on corporate politicians. We will only win progress when we show the government that we are no longer willing to suffer their continual betrayals, raise our own demands and fight for them. Then, and only then, can we win progress--regardless of which corporate tool sits in the Oval Office. (And seriously, are bombs dropped by Obama somehow better than bombs dropped by McCain? January 21, 2009 will turn Obama into the US's newest war criminal.)

Perhaps an African American

Perhaps an African American progressive icon's response - Amir Baraka - would put this in perspective: We cannot go backward or even contemplate it. A revolutionary must first find out what it is the people want, what they need. Unfortunately for some, the definition of revolution is to construct some elitist cultural nationalist, religious or infantile leftist, position, the “further out” the better, so they may claim, since few others will get down with that, that they must be the most revolutionary of all. Too often this is just a means of hiding out from the real work of educating and organizing and settling for being the hippest chump in the closet. What we must be aiming for at the present level of US politics is a Peoples or Popular Democracy, rather than the tongue constructed false democracy real dictatorship (of wealth) that exists today. That must include the replacing of the monopoly capitalist-imperialist domination of US politics at every level with a United Front , which shd be led by the working class in alliance with farmers, the progressive petty bourgeoisie, oppressed nationalities and progressive national bourgeoisie. The loose Obama coalition, as it exists now. See you in Denver, Mr. Solomon - I'm Latina, Queer, Disabled, and an At-Large Delegate for Obama.

The spice of life will still

The spice of life will still reside in simple pleasures after Obama is elected. Even if a new administration would boldly cut itself from the past which has led from there to here, and on. Could it? Before the people were ready? Our task is humble education for a mighty future. Cordially, Garrett

I really thin he should pay

I really thin he should pay some attention to his base. He can not win by crawling to a right wing minister who sets him up by feed the Republican the questions and then lying about him being in a "Lock Box". If Obama keeps tacking to the right I will sit out the presidential vote and he can claim his %18 of the christen right that might vote for him.

I am not an Obama supporter.

I am not an Obama supporter. I place him slightly higher on the 'acceptable, but not good' scale then Hillary, but that is not much of a compliment. I am going to vote for him however - assuming the election is not decided without any help from Hawaii. If it is a done deal, I'll cast my vote for McKinney who believes in the same things I do. What a disaster this whole election farce has been for the Progressive/Left voter. To add insult to injury, I have to read comments by idiots calling Obama 'a Marxist/Leninist Ideologue" etc. Only in my dreams!

Mr. Solomon is correct; Sen.

Mr. Solomon is correct; Sen. Obama is the choice and I see no other in this election cycle . One can certainly mark other names, including write-in choices, for President in this general election. Mr. Obama was not my candidate, but I intend to vote for him as the nominee come November. This is known as a "live option" rather than a dead choice with no reverberation in the real world.

I've been an Obama fan ever

I've been an Obama fan ever since Edwards didn't make it. But lately I am seriously considering voting for Nader - for the reasons above. I am wondering "will he really bring change"? I'm not so worried about McCain cuz even tho he's a nut, he won't be able to do anything with the pending Democratic Congress. We would just have to suffer four more years . I'm tired of seeing victories. I want to see change - BIG TIME.

The real question for people

The real question for people who see the corporate ownership of America for what it is, is this: how can the nation be brought back from the current precipice of disaster to a place from which genuine progressive changes can be advanced? Those awaiting a candidate who mirrors their critique of the national nightmare will be waiting until pigs fly. Those who claim to see no difference between Obama and McCain have allowed their cyncism to override both idealism and pragmatism; these are very different candidates. On the level of what many regard as pure pragmatism, Obama's presidency will halt the destruction of the Supreme Court, assure a faster withdrawal of forces from Iraq, and attract to Washington considerably more intellect and integrity. As an idealist, I am interested in creating the conditions in which real change can take place. Because such change requires a public inspired to believe that such change is possible, Obama's victory will help raise expectations. From such raised expectations mass, powerful social movements are born. Rick Raznikov

I am so tired of voting for

I am so tired of voting for the so called "lesser of two evils." I have done that all my voting life and what do we have, more evil then ever before. Who would have ever guessed it would get this scary. I must take a stand and vote my values because if I do not then there will never be a chance of another party having any input. Fear is an awful motivated and I want to be motived by faith, faith that if I vote my values perhaps change will come. Norman and the PDA have high hopes and I truly wish I could share that hope but watching Obama changing more and more every day makes me realize the only hope I have is to help a third party have some clout. The saddest part of all this is watching my so called Progressive Friends exhibit so much fear and watching that fear turn against others who feel the way I do. My vote is for Cynthia Mckinney - Green Party Candidate.

My heart is with Mr. Hart

My heart is with Mr. Hart here, but my mind is on what we lost when Al Gore, who received the same kind of "what difference is there?" bashing, couldn't win the electoral college--or didn't feel enough mandate to stand up for a recount. The next two Supreme Court members were a disaster that'll mark lives, especially poor women's lives, for a generation or two. Not to mention the war in Iraq and the lives it's ruined, here and abroad. And Gore himself didn't turn out to be so bad after all, did he? Leftist as I am, I am nonetheless aware that the global-scale problems we face are more and more rooted in climate change and the scarcity of resources that Gore's environmental platform would have done--might still do--do--much to alleviate. Obama can be pressured by liberals and progressives. McCain cannot. Our problems are far too grave and urgent to sit back and let a senile madman and his mad henchmen take over, while we continue to build a little revolution to take over from the top someday--in the midst of World War III, or is it IV?

Come on, people, really!

Come on, people, really! Clearly BHO must tack to the center in order to be elected. "Nicholas Hart" (above) is so off the mark: 1) BHO does NOT support the war in Iraq; 2) BHO has a health plan, while McCain has zip; 3) there is zero evidence to suggest that BHO will not accede to single-payer health care, once elected. We can wait until hell freezes over for us all to conclusively "show the government that we are no longer willing to suffer their continual betrayals, raise our own demands and fight for [corporate politicians]." Or we can suck it up, vote for BHO, and then keep the pressure on. In my view, there is no choice: the alternative is stasis (best case) or disaster with a McCain presidency. [And I've not even considered the hope for a Dem majority in the Senate, too!] If we lose this chance to advance our cause, then shame on us!

This binary process

This binary process diminishes the process. I will probably vote for Obama, despite the corporate militarism he exhibits, simply because I will go crazy listening to the pitchfork mob for another four years. The fact that Obama is mixed race tempers him in my view, and the rush to make him "black' ignores his upbringing, his heritage, and his experience. That is just one of many mistakes that many are making about just about everything. I could never vote for McKinney, and I could not sit this one out. I am grateful that Clinton didn't get in, if only because she plays the Republican game too. Perhaps if McCain is rebuffed, we can have a national investigation and truth council about the true agenda of the corporate Wrecking Crews.

I'm not well motivated by

I'm not well motivated by fear but yes, I'll be scared into voting for the 'lesser of two evils' again when I'm in the booth, but I'd take a punch in the face over a knife there any day. It has little to do with my true political stance, however, which is much more accurately represented in grassroots democratic organization. The more I am frightened into your sham political "participation," however, the more I yearn and work for the real thing. And that feels great.

Obama has my vote, but I

Obama has my vote, but I stopped making donations and tore his bumper sticker off my car following his FISA vote. Wish I could have the enthusiasm I had before, but that's the best I can do for now.

There will never be a true

There will never be a true revolution anywhere until and unless the poor people arise with the demand that "Enough is Enough". What passes as "revolution" is one group of elitist's trying to replace another group of elitist's in self sustaining power monopolization. Throughout history they have operated under the time honored principle.."To the victor goes the spoils." If that principle remains true, then I say: "The poor shall inherit the earth!"

"In an odd and ironic way,

"In an odd and ironic way, progressives who are unequivocal Obama boosters and unequivocal Obama bashers embrace similar concepts of limited alternatives in electoral work. They seem to rule out candidly critical support of a candidate - viewing such an option as either a betrayal of the candidate or a betrayal of principles." thank god for Solomon's realism. Hello folks, voting is just one tool in making change. It is neither the be all and end all, or just a fig leaf for corporate power. Anyone who thinks sharpening the contradictions is the way to go is a fool who has never been laid off. What is it with Americans and their righteousness? In and out of church they have to do what feels morally correct or politically correct. Keep your eye on the ball, the point is to get the republicans out and minimize the damage that the democrats do. Organize. Publicize. Embarrass. Shame. Strike. Sabotage and of course VOTE. OF COURSE Obama is a centrist, his politics are the same as the Hil, but he offers a chance at forcing change. Let's be realistic and work with what we have got. Unless of course you want more to be correct and right than make change.

In 2000 I was a relucant

In 2000 I was a relucant Gore voter. In 2002 -2003 I learned how much the country had lost. A stolid "liberal" from the American power elite (Gore) would have not directed the response to national trauma (9-11) into a frenzy of guns-blazing consitution stomping revenge. The corborate and global big guys will always have blood on their hand. But face it -- they get more of their way when they get pop support here in the USA. And they do. Even now, Bush is more attacked as a loser (incompetent ass-kicker) than a liar or figurehead for unitary-government enforcers like his VP. So "tone" and "culture" can be decisive in the direction we take, despite the fact that "we" would still have lots of work to do if Gore had made it past the Supreme Court -- As we will with Barack. A day before Solomon, I wrote down my extended narrative on his subject, called "Do Prophets Run for President?"(http://davichon.wordpress.com/tag/obama/) It was not as positive as this post. I said, hyperbolically, that Obama should fire half his advisors and put Cornel West in their place -- because I think things are already that bad that we may not have much future under a Barack-led American Empire.

If you believe in your heart

If you believe in your heart that an Obama presidency would change the course we're on in any significant way, then by all means cast your vote for him. Personally, I'm tired of the "well, maybe"'s and rightward swerves (which, I think, are indicative of things to come) and I'll be sitting this one out. The day the left can admit that its agenda has been severely compromised, and doesn't feel the need to convince itself that the candidate du jour really isn't so bad, is the day that it moves closer to achieving its goals. I believe that day is still a long way off.

The left (of which I have

The left (of which I have always been one, and still am) labors under the illusion that the ballot is a 'statement,' and that you lose your integrity if you make a pragmatic choice. Let's wake up. We are a MINORITY. I like Obama because he has learned and perhaps can teach us that we can compromise without losing our souls. In fact, compromise is the only way we will ever get SOME of what we want. And perhaps the planet can survive if we all let go of our pet ideals, which bring nothing but polarization and deadlock! This is a critical time. So much hangs in the balance.

Obama (& Solomon) will be

Obama (& Solomon) will be stronger if there is a significant movement away from business as usual and toward a real new institution that stands for and moves for the pratical ideals that many Obama voters really want. FDR didn't do his good just out of the goodness of his (or Eleanor's) heart- there were also huge numbers of people in the street looking at serious alternatives to his system. Nader has abandoned the attempt, but the Greens still struggle on and that is why I will vote for McKinney: to keep all the necessary paths open to a future.

I think Barack has forgotten

I think Barack has forgotten all about his Progressive base. He is leaning too far to the right and I am uncomfortable with many of his statements over the last two months. He has my vote by default, but I fear he will not represent my values. Voter fatigue is setting in pretty strong over this way. I'm sick of all this garbage already.

Obama slippery.

Obama slippery.

I sure have read a lot of

I sure have read a lot of "spoiled brat rhetoric" in the blogs above. "My way or the highway?" So many of these folks have not been listening to the man, they have been listening for what they want to hear and when Obama doesn't read their script they whine and threaten to squander a vote - which means one more for McBush. Democracy is not a game, even if politics is. Our Constitution is under attack by administrative imperialists. We all need to vote for whomever we feel will help the nation to restablize 'cause, like it or not, ONE OF THESE TWO GUYS IS GOING TO RUN THE COUNTRY FOR THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. Maybe the whiners can understand that the simplest bottom line choice is between a brilliant, thoughtful community organizer who listens to advisers and the American people or one who failed his mission and became a hero thereby who will continue the same stubborn short-sighted myopic world view of the last eight years. How about choosing between a family man and one who cheated on his wife if that's what floats your boat. But choose and choose responsibly. No one knows what a President will face in office or exactly how he will respond but at least Obama will use his trademark calm and reason to respond to problems and challenges while McCain will continue to use his hot tempered black and white reactions - as usual, my friends.

Obama for me is a real

Obama for me is a real dilemma. Like some who have posted here, I am sick of voting against the greater of two evils again as I have most of the time for 40-odd years. I always felt uneasy with O's high flying generalities. When the chickens came home to roost they were mostly the same old almost unpalatable hens well past their laying days. So he turns out to talk like one more corporatist-militarist, albeit a bit more moderate than some, rather than the moderately progressive new blood I and others took him for earlier. Thus, I am sorely tempted to vote for McKinney. She won't win of course, but why should I continue to line up once again with sheep waiting to be sheared? ON THE OTHER HAND, McCain is scary as hell: apparently senile; so deep in corporate pockets he can't see daylight; eagerly servile to Bush and the neocons; and bent on turning the Supremes into Scalia's lapdogs. So, however much O has disappointed me, Mc (or whoever turns out to be his puppet master when what passes as his mind goes entirely) is a sure recipe for disaster. So I guess I'm one of those wimps who's undecided but leaning to O. Would be really fine if something happened before the election to help me feel better about voting for the first (half) black President, because I just might not.

Oh grow up already 'Tired of

Oh grow up already 'Tired of voting for the lesser of two evils' !!! I'm with the"Progressive in CT". A vote for McKinney is a vote for McCain no way around it! Please take your well meaning and well grounded desire for change out of the presidencial voting box this time so we have half a chance at seeing some sanity return to the presidency!

There are many ways Obama is

There are many ways Obama is less-worse than McCain, but here is an overriding moral way: he didn't make air raid after air raid on the people of another country, including those valiantly defending it from foreign intrusion, as McCain did in the prolonged "operation rolling thunder" that killed and maimed scores of thousands of Vietnamese people. Only a monster would kill all those people for such a vile purpose as ruling their country at gunpoint through puppets, only a monster would hail him as a “war hero” and only a monster would vote for him. Hasn’t McCain killed enough babies already?

1) I will not vote for a

1) I will not vote for a representative of the two party ruling class consensus. If Obama is elected, tens of millions of naive Democrats will fall back to sleep as they did under the imperialist, conservative Clinton. They will take refuge in the illusion that "the nation's great national nightmare" is over and relax believing that the promised land of solutions to war, health care, social security, corporate corruption, a mythical land of peace and justice and the American way is only a couple years of hard Democratic work away. That is a pipe dream. 2) Under Bush, much severe damage has been done here at home and abroad. I don't need to enumerate the list here. But remember this, the U.S. populace is largely a non-player except in its role of confused electoral legitimizers of the global brute military power wielded by the US two party ruling class consensus regardless of which faction is in power. It is the people of the rest of the world who are every day less confused, from the millions marching in Europe (albeit unsuccessfully) against US war in Iraq and Afghanistan to the peoples of Latin America one after another successfully electing governments of the left, most overtly opposed to US imperialism. 3) I will not be shamed, brow-beaten, guilt-tripped or rhetorically manipulated into casting my vote before ruling class swine. I will once again vote for the alternative candidate of my choice. I invite each of you to do the same and bring as many others with you. The electoral field is not THE battlefield but it is a battlefield. Fight upon that battlefield and win on it. If not this year and if not in 2012 and if not in 2016 and if not in .... Don't give your vote to those who will then use the "legitimacy" of the system you voted for to carry out further dismantling of the social net at home and further imperial adventures abroad. 4) May courageous people around the world continue to show the people of the United States how to fight ruthless powers, how to act with courage in the face of illegitimate governance, and how to establish solidarity with other peoples. May they help us understand that nothing is obtained from the powerful and ruling class that is not obtained through hard work, sacrifice, and clarity. 5) Which every ruling class representative -- McCain or Obama -- is elected, get ready to continue fighting the system and the dead weight millions who still believe, in their never ending lack of analysis and lack of courage, that this system presents the hope of real change for the people of this country or the world. It does not.

To engage in any discussion

To engage in any discussion about the two presumptive candidates for President is, like going to the Polls, a futile exercise of sham democracy. Both corporate candidates ought to be entirely ignored and met with silence. On Election Day, the most genuine and eloquent democratic exercise is to simply stay home and save the gas.

As Tip O'Neil said, change

As Tip O'Neil said, change means losers and nobody wants to lose, so there is no change. The only way things will really change is with a revolution that Americans have no time or stomach for. The last group to really stand up to Washington and the money interests that drive the the politics of the country were the Confederates and look what motived them. God Bless the CSA

Barack Obama is just

Barack Obama is just following precedent and signing up to the one party state and leaving the electorate that votes for him behind as he gradually gets closer to real power. The American political system has been re-engineered by the military-industrial complex over the generations to eliminate the influence of the voter on government beyond actually voting. Lobbyists for corporations and foreign countries hold power after that until the whole PR election jamboree starts over. I hope he does some good

I am simply stunned by some

I am simply stunned by some of these comments. Politics is the art of the possible, not the ideal. To vote for anyone but Obama is to vote for another four years of the Bush disaster. If progressives wait around for an ideally pure candidate, we will never have a chance to pull this nation back from the edge. Nader in Florida put Bush in the White House in 2000, which gave us 9/11, Iraq and all the corruption that followed. Voting for a third party candidate in 2008 will accomplish the same thing.

Won't get fooled again? This

Won't get fooled again? This is why I get disillusioned with progressive politics. Here we have a reasonably progressive black man (yes, it matters) who stands a good chance of winning the US presidency, running against an overt fascist... And some of you people still have a hard time deciding how to vote? It will always be a choice between the lesser of two evils. Human beings are imperfect by nature. Show me a perfect candidate and I'll show you a brain-washed voter. Regardless of who wins the election, Exxon-Mobil will still be the largest corporation in the world, corporate rights will still take precedence over the rights of individuals, and our electoral system will still be a mockery of true democracy. It's understandable if you've become so cynical that you think your vote doesn't matter anymore, but you would be wrong. It matters. If McCain wins, and you didn't vote for Obama, you will have only yourself to blame.

The difference lies in how

The difference lies in how we deal with anger. When conservatives get angry they go and bomb somebody, when progressives/liberals get angry we attack each other. Bush and the MI complex have got us all furious enough that we are ready to self-destruct. When we do, get ready for more bombs.

Obama has consistently moved

Obama has consistently moved away from all of his progressive stances ever since he gained the nomination. These moves are not to gain votes, 70% of the population was against the FISA vote he cast. He is moving to the right because the corporate power is pushing him that way and the left is not pushing back. The fact is, you gain no political power voting for whoever the Democrats nominate. There is absolutely no reason, or historical president, to say that a candidate will move to the left once elected. They are pushed there by an organized movement. If the left cannot push him during the campaign, we probably won't after the campaign. Obama only gets my vote when he campaigns on my issues. I know I can't get everything, but I require a few important ones.

I'll make it real simple:

I'll make it real simple: With Obama you have the chance of getting some change, with McCain, no chance. Actually I believe Obama will change this country for the better.

After the evangelical

After the evangelical "debate" I want to know how I can be the moderator of a presidential debate? Here is my first question: At a time when the economy is in the toilet, prices are skyrocketing , wages are stagnant, unemployment is increasing, millions of Americans are losing their homes to foreclosure, we are deeply involved in two unwinnable wars - and saber rattling for a couple more - in a supposedly free country, how much time do you think a President should spend focused on what happens in American bedrooms? McSame, or McShame wants more of the same. I too am less supportive of Obama than I was initially - after Kucinich and Edwards dropped out - and I still think he offers some change.

What I think we really need

What I think we really need is some strong glue that binds us and hurls us into coalition building. From this development, we may then put forth our very own candidates to run for all possible offices, from the local to federal levels. Obama is simply too corrupted by money that the corporate powers- that-be constantly throw at him, so there is no question in my mind that he is destined to do their bidding, if he becomes president, and to mostly ignore the wailing complaints of the increasingly impoverished masses. McCain too constitutes an extremely poor choice for president, as his presidency would virtually insure a third term for Bush foreign and domestic policies. Under McCain, the suffering of Americans would be set to increase exponentially and the implementation of his notion of interminable wars would likely damage the heart of America to such an extent that it would ultimately lose its capacity to function. In other words, as long as we've got McCain, we don't need Osama Bin Laden. On the other hand, Obama as president will owe an enormous debt to those who contributed millions to his campaign. Some of these rich campaign donors wish to run an oil pipeline through Afghanistan to the coasts of Pakistan where it can be made available to Western interests, but the Taliban are disrupting this possibility. Therefore, Obama would likely increase American troop levels in Afghanistan to counter the Taliban disruption, while steadily decreasing American military personnel in Iraq. As such, Obama himself is not necessarily a war-monger for profits, but many of his donors certainly are. In each of the two preceding months, June and July, Obama raised more than 50 million dollars, the vast majority of which probably emanated from corporate donors, so O is clearly in the process of being bought despite the fact we all know there is no way he can defeat McCain without such donations. Obama as president then becomes just another corporate president who perceives the needs of the people as secondary to donors who made substantial contributions to this campaign. Again, I see the main questions as, "What glue substantially unites us in the understanding that we are weakened by petty distractions that divide us, but strengthened by the knowledge of our commonalities that bind us.?" We are a fallen, weakened nation because we are divided from one another. This is neither Obama's nor McCain's fault; it's in fact largely something the people themselves have failed to adequately address. Unity is what the American people don't do well; it is their tragic achilles heel and in fact the polar opposite of their materialism. We desperately need in America an extended discussion of who we really are and how who we are has contributed significantly to Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr. presidencies. Such presidencies of course have brought us to the brink of disaster. In the end, we ourselves must change before the direction of the country will change.

Obama’s got my vote

Obama’s got my vote because he would support and sign reforms in labor law that could go a long way in building a real grass-roots movement for every-day people. He would appoint an NLRB and judges, and not just at the supreme court, who would better protect the interests of the poor, working and middle class and the constitution. Maybe some of you can wait out another republican regime for people to rise up and vote in the truly virtuous candidate (the one who agrees with you 100%). I just think a lot of people on the margins (not necessarily you) will be the ones suffering the most from a McCann presidency - deeper cuts in social programs, pro-wealthy tax-“reforms” and bankruptcy laws, school reforms like NCLB that punishes the poorest schools, etc, etc.

Remember when Howard Dean

Remember when Howard Dean was the exuberant "I'm different" candidate? It seems so long ago. The black hole of the DNC/DLC swallowed him up. Joe Trippi still answers his mail though. The Democratic Part needs a new, progressive charter. Yes, it will remain a colaition of groups with differing specific interests. But if it cannot formulate itself as at core a progressive party, then it is nothing but a docile herd commanded by stifling powers at the center of the DNC/DLC black hole.

A Malleable President? It's

A Malleable President? It's fun to watch ourselves as progressives become so torn over this candidate. Yes, he's said some lovely things and yes, he's voted for some abominations, particularly the recent FISA bill. But among the distinctions and nuances of the candidates, he is the only one who is 1) electable 2) at least gives lip service to integrity and transparency and 3) has shown himself willing to tack with the prevailing winds. Our job is to ensure the prevailing winds are those of substantive change. Like a complete overhaul. We might call it World 5.0. http://world5.org

For the last time, Ralph

For the last time, Ralph Nader had nothing to do with the theft of the 2000 presidential election. Governor Jeb and Katherine Harris paid a company $4 million taxpayer dollars to throw tens of thousands of people off the voting lists, the overwhelming majority of which were working class and/or minorities. Then a partisan Supreme Court said, 'we don't count votes to decide elections' and that was it. Nader is a convenient scapegoat, but why aren't you mad at David McReynolds for garnering about 800 votes in Florida, more than the 'winning' candidates margin of 'victory?' Obama is a much more palatable alternative to McCain despite his fealty to corporatethink, but here's what's going to happen: The media will continue to cheerlead for McCain, there will continue to be international incidents designed to scare people into voting for the war criminal--sorry, war hero--, and the gop election stealing machine will be working overtime. Plus the great unsaid: a lot of Americans will simply not vote for a person who is not white, especially for the top job. Obama's chances are slim. I personally don't think that the ruling elite in this country will allow him or anyone else to significantly change things. Change won't come until forced.

Yes, J. Cole, our votes

Yes, J. Cole, our votes matter to some extent, but please keep firmly in mind that five Supremes voted to give Bush the presidency in 2000. That simply means, no matter how you conduct your analysis, that only five votes mattered. We too have enough sense to know that the ATM machines used for voting can be "easily" rigged and that a myriad other shenanigans will be pulled in November to assure that the number of voters is reduced "significantly." I urge you to go to Brad blog or blackbox voting, Bev Harris' website, to inform yourself on this issue. These voting machines were designed for the unexpressed purpose of being hacked and they've been hacked to death since 2000. We now have congressmen holding office who wouldn't be there without the help of hacked (carefully programmed) machines and other efforts to cheat the voters. Yes, you have the right to go and punch the ATM, but in many places around the country, there is no possible way for you to prove that your vote was counted. Lots of people around the world 60 years ago, abhorred Stalin and his heavy-handed methods of controlling people, but he was right about one thing: "The right to vote is not nearly as important as who counts the votes." Do you know who counts the votes in America? We the people have nothing to do with all this counting. In most cases, the voting machine companies themselves count the votes and tell us who won/lost; they also program the machines, and this gives them enormous power as it is they who determine who are leaders will be.

I really don't think anyone

I really don't think anyone here is advocating voting for McCain. It seems as well that we're split over whether we support this ridiculous two party system. As for me, I don't. I'm not waiting for a presidential candidate who represents me because It doesn't seem like that's going to happen. I'm going to continue organizing with real people, not politicians.

What I see are millions of

What I see are millions of disenfranchised Bush pushers. Some how they have scurried around the huge concrete blockade placed in their head by years of neocon propaganda and see a glimmer of the damage their misplaced vote has caused. Now most are not in favor of 4 more years of georgie boy all thought they were fooled twice by him. Unfortunately the extreme right wing value system just doesn't make room for a "Leader" of color. So they make elaborate excuses for voting for some obscure candidate instead of actually making a difference. Just like the obscure excuses they've made for georgie low these 7 and a half loooooong years..........

Obama is NEITHER progressive

Obama is NEITHER progressive NOR pragmatic. So, if the greatest imagination had by Solomon onwards to the right (or left or whatever soundbite direction still works for you) is that a Republican defeat is some sort of victory, y'all missed your chance with Hillary (bigger balls than Obama). Obama will only win with a McCain meltdown, which could still happen. Meanwhile, I'll vote for McKinney (good ideas, AND when your knee-jerk NPR friends ask if you voted for Nader, you can say NO!). But, HEY, Democrats, you probably still have a chance at Hillary if you want it...

The discussion here shows

The discussion here shows the dilemma for progressives and other leftists. Both sides have valid arguments, and, while I will be voting Green, I will not disparage others who choose to vote for Obama (or against McCain). The struggle does not end witht he election, nor with the inauguration.

Until the citizenry of our

Until the citizenry of our democratic collective of sovereign individuals demands responsive government, it simply will not happen. While it is convenient to put the sole responsibility for the debacle in Iraq on the White House, the inconvenient fact is that the invasion was launched because those of us opposed, in a small but significant majority, allowed the war to happen. Essentially, on February 15,'03, and in the weeks leading up to the invasion, too few opposed to the war showed up to create the political pressure that the M.S.Media, and congressional members could not ignore. This enabled Bush's dismissal of "special interests", and they were off and running.( I've crunched the numbers: as few as 10% of the number of citizens opposed would have brought 12 million people into the streets across the country.) As this pertains to Obama, being purely a politician rather than an actual leader, there is certainly a reasonable expectation that he would respond favorably to political pressure for a democratic agenda, but we citizens will have to make it impossible for him to ignore, or it simply will not happen.

Oh, Oh, you people are

Oh, Oh, you people are scaring me. I learned the lesson of a lifetime by failing to vote for the lesser of two evils in 2000. My vote for Nader was a very bad idea. Never Again! Look what my protest vote wrought. On election day 2004 I was sure Kerry would win. I tore his bumper stickers off my car and threw them in the trash because I wouldn't need them any more. I went to the polls and voted for Kerry. Then drove other Dems to the polls. Happy and relieved that the long, dark night was coming to an end!! That evening I went to the Dems victory celebration party(held in a big convention hall with no windows). When the returns started to come in I got sick and went home early. On the way out I ran into a dark storm, sort of like the one so long ago on Good Friday afternoon, when the curtain was rent in two--a harbinger to things to come. Please go vote for the lesser of two evils, or you'll be kicking yourself like I have been doing for the past 7 years.

Norman Soloman says "The

Norman Soloman says "The political stances of many people, including on the left, are contoured around their own internal emotional terrain. " Well, Mr. Soloman, as a delegate for Obama, I bet it goes well with your emotional terrain to justify voting for him even though he doesn't represent your values. Guess what, it is a binary switch, you vote either for real change (Nader or McKinney), or you vote for fascism (the slow march or the fast march, as you say). I'm not a delegate for Obama so I find it pretty easy not to vote for his slow march to fascism. Yes, I will blame people like you when we have no more rights left in a decade or two. Is there ever an election year where they don't play on our fears to perpetuate their system? Howard Dean said he wanted to reform the first-past-the-post electoral system we have, back in a 2004 debate with Nader. He's chairman of the Dem Party now and he's done nothing as far as I can see, in the way of instant-run-off voting, etc.

Contradictions are claims

Contradictions are claims such that if one is true, the other can't be true--'We have killed innocent civilians in Iraq' and 'We have not killed innocent civilians in Iraq', for example. When a pundit says '... we're in great need of willingness to acknowledge contradictory truths', that's nature's way of telling you it's time to find a better pundit.

It looks like the

It looks like the consituency of fear may be extra large this election season. Who knows what will happen when fear is the dominant emotion in play? Don't blame the people who vote for a candidate who shares their values for throwing the result up in the air. When people are afraid they try all sorts of things to feel better about themselves and their fear-based choices. Like approaching it ideologically, or "pragmaticly", or with great anticipation of suffering if the other guy wins, or so-called compromise which isn't really compromise but a lowering of expectations, yet again. The time is past for compromise, and all the fear won't change anything. Neither will staying home and doing nothing. That's the worst fear excuse; hiding under a rock and pretending it's not happening. The corporate candidates are well supported for a very practical reason, and choosing your candidate based on fear is not practical. It's lame. There are no candidates you can elect and then tune out. But that's exactly what has happened, and what will continue to happen when one of the two major party candidates is elected. There needs to be a transformation of the election mindset that isn't about winning or losing a contest but expressing the will of voters through representation. Third party candidates can contribute greatly to the national dialogue, and must be allowed to debate the major party candidates. You infrequently hear about that, even in the blogs, because it's a football game, there aren't three teams in a football game, are you crazy?. When corporate candidates are elected, the People lose. You can bet on it.

"Perhaps an African American

"Perhaps an African American progressive icon's response - Amir Baraka " Quoted earlier.. I agree with Amiri Barakas statement generally, however, what he is describing is fundamentally different than what has evolved to be the "progressive movement" in this country over the last three decades. Generally its nothing like the populist united front he describes and represents, instead, college educated propagandists trying to out shout the right with Leftist (centrist) anti corporate narratives. (the politics of which I agree with) I have not heard Obama...nor the progressive base, move toward a bottom up, inclusive definition of Democracy instead of the educated classes and cultural workers on the left and right competing with one another to better manipulate the people through media. This infantilization of the broad passes which would constitute a real Democracy cripples any effort to build the type of society progressives claim to want. I'm not convinced that the issue is educating the population as much as progressives being willing to be educated BY them. The progressive complaints about Obama seem to me to be more about their having convinced themselves of his being a coming progressive messiah instead of a politician. So no matter what he did or said it would haven been a disappointment. Bush changed from a compassionate conservative to a Right wing idealog. Let's hope Barack changes from a neo-liberal centrist to a left wing populist. One beyond the current "progressive" narrative.

PLEASE, EVERYONE, LISTEN UP!

PLEASE, EVERYONE, LISTEN UP! This election is not about our precious progressive politics, whether or not Obama is progressive enough or corporate-free enough, etc.. It's about: are we going to continue down the road of a complete fascist takeover of America, toward a police state with fewer and fewer constitutional protections and rights. Because that's where we are headed now and this will continue and intensify under McCain. Obama sees what's going on and right now he is just trying to get elected in this screwed up country that has lost sight of its own ideals. Obama still has ideals, still has a good deal of moral integrity, and he actually listens to the people. Please don't squander your vote this November. Again!, this election it is more imperative than ever, since now the neocons have had 8 years and they have gotten firmly entrenched in all the government institutions. Obama is not one of them.

With Obama as president,

With Obama as president, there is a decent possibility that he would do a good job and accomplish some good things. Barack Obama could make life much better for most Americans. With McCain as president, there is very little possibility that he'd do a good job or accomplish anything. He'd very likely be another four years of Bush. So there you have it: Vote Obama and have a chance for a much better America. Or vote McCain---or vote for a third-party or stay home---and have absolutely no chance of things being any different than with Bush. The choice is pretty clear for me.

fascist corporate takeover

fascist corporate takeover of America... The problem I have with the current progressive narrative is that it presupposes that the current corporate takeover is new. From its inception this nation has been caught between rule by the wealthy and its proclaimed populism Jackson (the genocidal murder of Indian nations) broadened the definition of Democracy to include more of the people. But the notion of this being a Democratic state has always been largely a myth the the US told itself. Will Obama keep corporate power from becoming complete hegemony? No. Not as long as the left doesn't trust the people enough to organize them instead of looking upward to what has become largely a ceremonial position anyway. The people must change. Then the state will change...not vice versa. Maybe Obama can institute policies that renew civic engagement, start some conversations, and get the people involved enough to demand change for themselves. I think that's all we could hope for.

Thank you J Cole… Why do I

Thank you J Cole… Why do I have this sick feeling that the progressives are really in line with keeping fascist republicans in power? Why do I get this sick feeling that the republicans are able to manipulate our progressive dialogue until no one votes and they win again? Really, can we afford 8 more years of republican anything? Think about it folks, the republicans are united… the progressives just fall apart in the end, they know it, they just throw a little bone in the ring, and the progressive dogs begin to tear apart anyone that is half progressive. Brilliant! Gawd(ess) help us all! If McCain wins, it will be the end of us all, Truthout discussions like this included…

We have to come to terms

We have to come to terms with the realities we have. All viable candidates will be representatives of the rich/corporate world, focused only on short-term profit, using We the People only as a tool to achieve personal goals. This is why the US is a dying nation. America's founders made it very clear that government must be a tool of the people, not the other way around. Our last and only chance of survival as a relatively free nation requires that we get up out of our chairs, start actually talking to each other, organizing, and MAKING government serve the people. I don't know if we're inclined to do that. I do know that no movement has ever gone forward, or can go forward, without leaders, and we don't seem to have any.

I was VERY relieved my 21+

I was VERY relieved my 21+ active duty yrs were DONE when gwb & co. executed their coup in '00. My wife gags that HER retired certificate for her 30+ active duty yrs has gwb's fake signature at the bottom. And we were BOTH stunned in disbelief that EVEN AFTER 4 yrs in total power, Americans actually ELECTED 'w' & co. in '04 by what, a 5+ million or so MAJORITY?! Face it folks ... the USA has GOTTEN EXACTLY WHAT IT VOTED FOR in '04 ... the debacle in '00, no matter how criminal, being superceded! No matter how many issues we think are 'key' ... there are now THREE Supreme Court Justices who'll retire during the next prez's term ... & how many horrendous decisions against our individual & collective liberties have been decided by 5-4 in the last 8 yrs? As much as I'd like to write in my vote for Stephen Colbert, I live in VA & reality says I'd be aiding mccain & the neocons by doing so. Can the USA afford 3 'prez' mccain ADDITIONS to the bench that TRULY decide where the usa will be headed? A 3rd party vote or 'sitting this one out' are simply NOT VIABLE options. The first gives 71-yr old mccain & HIS v.p. the edge (can anyone REALLY think john mc can make it a full 8 yrs?) ... & the other, i.e., 'silence', constitutes assent (as my H.S. Business Law teacher taught me in the 60's). 'Progressive in CT' hit the nail on the head: "Come on, people, really! Clearly BHO must tack to the center in order to be elected. ... there is no choice: the alternative is stasis (best case) or disaster with a McCain presidency. [And I've not even considered the hope for a Dem majority in the Senate, too!] If we lose this chance to advance our cause, then shame on us!" Also: "Those willing to give up essential liberty in order to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety." - Benjamin Franklin And now that I've submitted this, I won't be surprised in the least if someone fm the fatherland's dept of homeland 'security' &/or the IRS come knocking on my door! However, I'll let them know that I've ALREADY BEEN to Gitmo, Cuba - as a brand new Ensign aboard ship & even BEFORE it was turned into a torture camp!

I've been on the front lines

I've been on the front lines of community organizing and working for grassroots social change for the last 45 years. It's been a constant challenge of swimming upstream against double-speak, dirty tricksters, racism, sexism, and the loss of money, laws and programs that benefit those that the elite despise who are at the bottom of the ladder. You all can enjoy your "sturm und drang" and the accompanying hair-spitting. In my experience, all you will have to show for your effort will be another Republican administration. It may not make a difference to you, but it puts yet another mountain in front of those of us down here.

frontline grassroots...

frontline grassroots... Thankyou. I have been trying to describe the difference between interpretations of a better society "down here" when compared to the "progressive narrative" but have yet to find a way to do it that isn't absolutely dependent on the same old infrastructure which benefits more from glossing things over than having the hard discussions. Henry Labouchères Brown Mans Burden still rings true. Which the progressive narrative about from everything from the war, to the prison system, to Guantanamo ignores. The uncomfortable conversations are necessary...not a sign of disunity of a lack of "peace."

Once again we are asked to

Once again we are asked to vote for the lesser of two evils. Whether to vote for a man likely to escalate the military effort in Afghanistan and another man equally likely to do the same. Whether to vote for one man in the pockets of corporate America or another man equally indebted to big corporations. With Obama we supposedly get a kinder and gentler lackey for big corporations and special interests. What sealed the deal for me was Obama's choice of Biden as VP. Biden is no better than Dick Cheney when it comes to having any concern about the people of this country. Instead of a progressive VP to offset a very conservative President, we have an even more conservative Senator. The same US Senator who pushed through legislation to insure that when individuals declare bankruptcy their credit card debt remains. Studies show that most of the time this credit card debt and even the bankruptcy is the result of the individual's inability to pay for catastrophic medical bills. So we have a corporate medical care system that will not accept a patient without a credit card on record and then when the patient receives an outrageous bill (that is far higher than the negotiated rates charge medical insurance corporations) and is forced into bankruptcy, Biden's bill insures that this debt will follow the person to the grave. How is that for closure? Save the individual so they can continue to be a wage slave to the medical and banking corporations of this country.

2 Retired Navy Officers ~ I

2 Retired Navy Officers ~ I was traveling thru DC in Oct of 2000 and I recall reading in the local weekly (or one of them, or whatever) that there were several people who wanted to vote for Nader but knew that their state (readership bigger than just DC) might be instrumental in the election. What they did was pledge to vote for Gore if someone from a non-swing state voted for Nader. I always admired this tactic because it allows the best of both worlds...giving Nader his due while attempting to prevent a madman from becoming president. I send out a call to everyone who reads Truthout to take heed from this advice. If you are a 3rd party supporter but don't want to see McCain become president, hook up with someone on Myspace or here or whatever and exchange promises to make both of your votes count for something. Please, Nicholas Hart (et al) , please, take this to heart. I live in Idaho and I voted for Nader in 2000, for this reason specifically. I knew that Bush would carry Idaho but not other states. At this point I'm truly not a Nader supporter but that is only my personal perspective. I respect those who want something better (if impossible). Also, regarding "2 Retired Navy Officers' " comments, I'm not so sure that a less-than 60 Dem majority will be as much of a downer if we have Obama for President. Right now we need 60 in order to be filibuster-proof, but the Senate majority doesn't follow through with filibuster threats. I'm willing to bet the major reason they don't call the republican bluff is that W would veto whatever legislation anyway so it doesn't seem worth the time (opportunity cost of doing something that might actually pass). If we don't have a veto-threat for a progressive agenda, the Senate might just grow some guts and call their bluff. Just my two cents.