Tuesday, January 08, 2008

The Logic of Obama-mania

By Robert Parry
January 8, 2008

Sen. Hillary Clinton is telling Democrats that they shouldn’t let their hearts run away with their heads by embracing the lightly experienced Sen. Barack Obama for President. She says she is the battle-tested one who can best carry the Democratic banner.

“Some of us are ready and some of us are not,” she said in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on Jan. 7 as tears welled in her eyes. “Some of us know what we will do on day one and some of us haven't thought it through enough."

Read on.

6 comments:

micki said...

Many of us are in no mood for a "leap of faith" in this important presidential election.

There is no logic in mania.

Krashkopf said...

Since when does being FIRST LADY qualify as "political experience??!!"

Clinton is 1/3 of the way through her SECOND term as Senator, that gives her a WHOPPING six years more experience in the Senate than Barack Obama.

Biden and Dodd had considerably more experience. Kucinich and Richardson have considerably more experience. But, Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are all relative NEW-COMERS to national politics.

That being the case, I have to go with either the true agent of change - EDWARDS; or "Destiny's candidate" - OBAMA.

Clinton - the "status quo" candidate is LAST on my list.

BernieO said...

I don't know why people think the right wing attack machine won't go after Obama. In fact just today I got an email from a neighbor accusing Obama of being a secret Muslim.
You may think that Bill Clinton was on the losing end of these attacks, but it was really Gore and Kerry who were completely stopped.
The fact is the Swiftboat crowd is alive and well and moneying up. They only way they will stop is if all of us pressure the media to do their job and loudly debunk these lies.

menhir said...

Illusions about Obama....

Maybe you should read his AIPAC speech (march 2007):


http://obama.senate.gov/speech/070302-aipac_policy_fo/index.php

newsfrombelow said...

this is one of the best pieces i have read on what is wrong with the clinton democrats as it relates to insider politics and
its effects on public opinion and
the possibilities of building a progressive alternative.

i hope it is widely shared and read by many.

thanks robert parry for succinct analysis.

Anonymous said...

A post from Alternet.org made me wonder about this Obama-for change-anti-war candidate thing. Obama and Clinton voted the same 257 times out of 267 votes. Does this sound like change to you? I am still wondering why he supported the election of Joe Lieberman over an anti-war candidate. There are also many postings reminding us that Obama voted for every war funding bill in Congress until he decided to run for President (and I guess realized finally that over 70% of the American public was against the war). A recent article on CounterPunch.org, calls him the "Black Hillary". Some choice.