Better than JFK

[barking_iguana]

chemoelectric asks what anyone could se in Barack Obama. Simply, it's that he is the best person to turn back the 'governemnt is the problem' nonsense that was started by Reagan (with the ground prepared by the revolutionary Left of the 1960s) and which has become the dominant public perspective since 1994. Obama is the only candidate of my adulthood who could (and would) utter the modern equivalent of ask not... and not be laughed at and not flub his lines.

I don't know which issues Obama would be energetic on. I think he would be more eager than i'd like to compromise. Just like JFK. But Obama is capable of moving the nation is ways that would last beyond his presidency. And if we are to defend this country from creeping dictatorship, we need a public that remembers that ownership of the government is something worth fighting for. Edwards may or may not be able to convince the lower middle clas of that. I have my doubts. Obama can convince the middle middle class.

That doesn't mean I'm necessarily supporting Obama. I like Dodd, Edwards, and Obama. And they all have their faults. They also all have assets that deserve respect.

Comments

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

I didn’t ask what people see in Obama; I asked what do people see in him besides his pretty face and voice and his ability to deliver a good E plabnista. The reasons you give are that he could have delivered a JFK speech well and that he can deliver convincing speeches to the middle middle class. But I already knew that people saw speaking stature and effective E plabnista in Obama.

Not that it is bad to have that in a politician, mind you, it’s better to have that capacity—but where’s the beef? Something other than his ability to speak.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

I’ll give you an example: Dennis Kucinich refusing to privatize the Cleveland electric utility. That was a remarkable achievement and it paid off for him politically, in the long run.

[avram]

Also, he's the only Democratic candidate polling in the double digits who didn't vote for the Iraq War.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

He didn’t vote against it, either, so it’s a wash.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

Tell me how you think Obama would do in delivering JFK’s ‘mind your own religious business’ speech that Mitt Romney just parodied as a hate speech.

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I think he'd do quite well. Obama's the only politician I've heard who acknowledges non-belief in a positive way. In the very swame speach that you misread and despise him for.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

Okay, show me where in the speech.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

Here is the speech: http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal/

Where in it does he address non-belief in a positive way?

The word ‘atheist’ appears twice, the first time in reference to Obama’s father. Is the second appearance positive?

Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn't the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment.

Hmm. Let’s call it neutral.


The word ‘nonbeliever’ appears once, acknowledging that nonbelievers can be Americans. I suppose that’s positive, at least compared to George H W Bush’s once stated opinion that atheists should not be considered ‘as’ US citizens.

Obama refers to people of ‘no faith at all’ a little further down, essentially to suggest that people should conduct civics (represented by the abortion issue) in secular terms. That’s good advice, and I guess it’s positive towards atheists, in that it isn’t negative towards them. I suppose not many politicians have gone out of their way to imply, vaguely, that atheists are actually capable of ethical reasoning.

I guess so, I guess it is positive, in that Obama doesn’t leave out the atheists in his recitation of ecumenical boilerplate.

But wouldn’t Obama have to weasel his way through parts of JFK’s speech, after having made his Christianity a major part of his political identity? Here’s some of what JFK said, for instance:

[C]ontrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic.

And how does Obama get past the following?

I ask you tonight to follow in that tradition—to judge me on the basis of my record of 14 years in Congress—--on my declared stands against an Ambassador to the Vatican, against unconstitutional aid to parochial schools, and against any boycott of the public schools (which I have attended myself)....

JFK could say that with a straight face, while Obama would look like an idiot, having just gotten into the Senate long enough to start up a Presidential campaign and dodge ‘controversial’ votes: ‘I ask that you judge me on the basis of my record of 2 years in Congress and stuff I did in the Illinois state legislature’. What an immature loser he would look like, even though he is older than Kennedy was.

[polydad.livejournal.com]

One of the reasons I'd still prefer Kucinich, Dodd, or Gravel is that I still think Barak would be better as a Supreme Court justice than as President. Edwards isn't a favorite of mine, but I could certainly live with him as Prez.

best,

Joel

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

What qualifies Barack Obama to be a Supreme Court justice?

[tayefeth.livejournal.com]

He's breathing? That seems to be the only necessary qualification these days, looking at what's already on the bench...

After reading Obama's book, I'd really prefer if he stayed in the Senate, because he might have a fighting chance of turning the Senate back into an effective check on the Presidency, but not if he's President.

[chemoelectric.livejournal.com]

That’s a good idea. I haven’t read his book but he just seems to me not yet mature enough, at least. He needs more time to develop more wisdom, if he will.

It’s like he doesn’t even want to bother being a senator. Edwards at least served a full term before grabbing for the presidency, and he had the wisdom to give up his Senate seat in the process. He turned out to have been much wiser than John Kerry.

Different people develop at different rates. Bill Clinton had a kind of ‘Rhodes Scholar’ worldliness, for instance.

[tayefeth.livejournal.com]

I highly recommend his book.

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I've reasd his first book. You're talking about his second?

[tayefeth.livejournal.com]

Yes.