stlouisinsite's Blog

     Is president-elect Obama a realist, pragmatic about finding real solutions, or the most liberal senator in Congress?  In less than three months, Americans will begin to see an answer to this important question.

     In truth, in electing Obama, Americans didn't vote for either Obama.  Americans voted for an end to the political fighting that has bogged the nation down for too many years, in the hope that the first-term Illinois senator can be the one to move the nation forward, and forge real solutions to problems like the economy, immigration and foreign wars.

     Obama is thus not so much the face of a new politics as one heralding the end of the old politics.  And this is his real opportunity -- to end the old politics, and move the  country forward in a progressive direction.  And with large majorities in Congress, he has every opportunity to do so.   

     The Republicans failed in part because of the stubborn resistance of Congressional Democrats to Repubican proposals.  But they also failed because of a lack of new approaches in the past election, given their failure.  McCain/Palin offered no new programs of substance to get the nation out of Iraq, to move the economy forward (other than a progressive energy program), or to solve the immigration quagmire.

     Given that Republicans offered little, it's not surprising the electorate would decide to try Democrats, though that party's proposals also were somewhat vague.

     Still, Republicans will have substantial clout in Congress.  Plenty to resist Obama should he prove to be as liberal as some have believed him to be.     

     With a solid victory, Democrats now have a real opportunity to lead the nation in a new direction.  Fielding easily the best Democratic ticket since the Clinton days, and waging an honest, decent campaign, the American people responded by electing Obama/Biden.

     Questions remain, particularly with the limited background of Sen. Obama, in what direction Democrats will go.  But for Obama, if the senator is serious about his stated desire to bring unity to America, and lead in a new direction, he has been given that opportunity by the American people.

     John McCain ran a strong and heroic race, and with Sarah Palin, probably prevented a landslide Democratic win.  But it was perhaps never in the cards for McCain to prevent a Democratic win -- and now Obama will lead.

     For Obama and the Democrats to provide real leadership, and unite the nation -- sorely needed in troubled times -- they must reach out to the middle, and even to conservatives.  Otherwise, we will once again surely have a divided nation.  So Democrats need to avoid if possible severely contentious social issues, and truly strive for unity.  

     In foreign affairs, an honorable exit from Iraq is a necessity, not ignoring the sacrifices made by American soldiers.  In Afghanistan, the Democrats need to make clear early the need NOT to drag America into another long war with an unclear outcome.  To take steps to prolong or expand this conflict could doom their new direction.  

     There is little America can gain from an extended involvement in Afghanistan, other than more enmity from people around the world.  Better, with some aid, to let the Afghanis determine their own destiny, while letting them know support for international terrorism will not be tolerated.

     Obama needs to walk independently, as he did during his successful campaign, and stand up for the American people, not the political interests of his own party.  If he can, the senator can be a unifying force for America, and perhaps, a much loved president.   

     Channeling John McCain....

     "My friends, listen, I'm not George Bush.  I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth.  And I'm not Barack Obama either.  I didn't go to a couple Ivy League schools back east.  But I did graduate from the school of hard knocks.  And I've got the scars to prove it.  Listen, when Barack Obama was in college, I was in the Hanoi Hilton prison.  I've taken the blows. I've taken the hits.

      "But, listen, I'm still fighting for this country.  Look, I know I'm older than dirt.  I know I was practically around at the founding of this great nation.  But, my friends, look, this country is once again under attack, it's very institutions are under attack.  Wall Street is virtually being held hostage by this credit fiasco. 

      "Look, my friends, I want to fight for this country again.  I'm the one that can get this country moving again.  I know this country.  I know how it works.  You put me in the White House and I will end this financial crisis.  I know how to do it.  I've been there.  And I'll end this war in Iraq.

       "Look, I know the American people are tired of this war.  But I know how to end it.  But we're not going to leave with our tails between our legs like we did in Vietnam.  I'll bring the troops home in honor -- in victory.

        "And energy.  Look, it's time we quit sending $700 billion overseas to prop up these foreign regimes.  They don't even like us!  And I know the American people think part of our problem is Big Oil.  But listen, Big Oil has some mighty big shoulders. And I think those big shoulders could be harnessed to help pull us out this economic morass.  Let's let them help get us out of this financial funk, and provide good paying jobs for American workers.

         "I know how to do it.  I've been there.  Look, we don't need the type of change Barack Obama is talking about.  We don't need to change our entire system, we don't need to redistribute the wealth, we need to create more wealth!  And I can do it.  I've been there.

         "My friends, look, Barack Obama is a fine man, a patriotic man.  But frankly, much of his ideology is out of step with our American traditions!  Let's fight for America, and fight hard.  And Sarah Palin is a fine woman.  She's worked hard for the people of Alaska, and as mayor, for her home town folks.  Let's give her a chance to see what she can do on the national stage.

        "Look, I'm the one who can free Wall Street, who can end the war in Iraq honorably, who can preserve the American Way.  You need me in the White House, not an unproven Barack Obama.

         "Give me that opportunity, America.  I won't let you down.  You know me. We need your help and support, America."

         (Editor's note:  Sen. McCain's comments delivered via the invisible ether earlier today.)       

     History may be about to repeat itself in a way most Americans have not foreseen.

     If Barack Obama and the Democrats win as big as it now appears, the real loser will not be John McCain and the Republicans but the ability of the free enterprise system to lift up America from its debilitating dependence on foreign oil.

     There is no way the huge Americna economy can continue to function without oil.  John McCain has proposed a free market solution -- reducing some restrictions so 'Big Oil' can drill baby drill.  The only other real alternative is to continue America's dependence on oil from other sources -- at least into the foreseeable future.

      There is also no way the Democrats will allow this to happen, if they have the power to prevent it.  The idea of 'Big Oil' being allowed to make further profits is simply anathema to these Democrats, who have positioned the industry as some type of bogeyman.  

     Yes, the financial system needs reform.  But hamstringing the ability of America's free enterprise system to find real solutions to real needs --including energy -- is not the answer.

     In 1964, another Arizona senator, Barry Goldwater, ran under the slogan "A Choice, not an Echo."  Goldwater and the Republicans were routed after the senator was painted as some extreme right winger who would launch America into a nuclear Armageddon.

     The result was massive government growth under Lyndon Johnson, including the Great Society, and finally the war in Vietnam.  Today, many of the welfare programs of the Great Society  have been treated as suspect and altered.

     We already know Democrats will push through socialized medicine and alternative energy sources, which will take years to have any effect on the energy problem.  And there will be more, much more.

     Under the Democrats, the ability of the American free market system will be restricted and perhaps permamently destroyed.  The ability of government to further run our lives will be greatly increased.

     This election is really not about change, Bill Ayers, the Rev. Wright or the war in Iraq.  It's really about the American system of capitalism that has brought the nation the wealth and standard of living Americans enjoy today.

     That system of free enterprise will be significantly altered under the heavy hand of Democrats with a president and large majorities in Congress.  These changes will have untold consequences for the American people.

      John McCain and the Republicans may represent the last gasp of the American free enterprise system.  

     When we see America's enemies rejoicing if the Democrats win big, think what they are cheering about. 

     Perhaps they are seeing consequences that we are not.          

     You might be an Obama supporter if you....Here's an updated synopsis of where the candidates stand on major issues, in no particular order:

ENERGY:  McCain says make new energy exploration, and nuclear energy, a priority.  Obama favors a more incremental approach, with more emphasis on alternative energy sources.   ADVANTAGE: MCCAIN

FOREIGN POLICY:   Obama's progressive mind-set and inexperience could run into some trouble here.  McCain is a realist, but some fear he could be as reckless as Bush.  ADVANTAGE: MCCAIN

ECONOMY:  Obama  promises to rein in spending after Bush doubled the deficit.  McCain preaches conservatism without detailing the specifics.  ADVANTAGE: OBAMA

IMMIGRATION:  McCain sponsored immigration reform bill, but seems to have backed off to placate Republican right.  Obama seems to have solid grasp of the issue.  ADVANTAGE: OBAMA

EDUCATION:  Obama unveils progressive plan to reduce college costs.  McCain sticks to rhetoric about making teachers accountable, and competition for public schools, probably an untenable idea.  ADVANTAGE: OBAMA

MORAL ISSUES:  Obama tries to modify far-left position on abortion rights, with some success, while McCain has pro-life record.  ADVANTAGE: MCCAIN

FIRST LADIES:  Michelle Obama shows elegance, while Cindy McCain purrs as a down-home (but rich) wife.  TOSS-UP      

      Simply put, what the truly independent voter must do, is decide which issue, or issues, are most important to him or her.  Otherwise, both candidates have strengths and weaknesses.

       Sleepy Show-Me state voters who tuned into Channel 2 Saturday evening may have been surprised (as I was) to discover a debate between goobernatorial hopefuls 'Jeffco' Jay Nixon and 'Kid' Kenny Hulshof.

       What, we've got state races, too?  With all the hoopla, press hype and general hysteria about the presidential contest, many voters may have forgotten about the barnburner for Missouri chief executive.

       Both Kid Kenny and 'Say Hey' Jay strutted their stuff Saturday.  And, in some ways it resembled the big boys campaign between Free Market Republicans and Welfare Statist Democrats, especially when 'I'll be Your Goobernator' Jay did his best to make a political issue of welfare cuts made by outgoing guv Matt DeBlunt.

       But Jay proved to be much more folksy than the somewhat stiff Kid, and seemed quite passionate, and real, when the debate turned to education policy.  Jeffco Jay wants to make college more affordable for Missourians, a laudable goal.  Meanwhile, the Kid promised free-market competiton for public schools, in the form of more support for charter schools.

       This also jives with the national contest, where Democrats seem to have a firmer hand on the wheel when it comes to educational issues, not wishing to dump public schools quite as fast as many Republicans seem eager to do.       

       Meanwhile, Kid Kenny scored points linking Say Hey Jay to  big contributions from lawyers after they did beaucoup business with the state.  Hardly shocking, though, in the present era...you say, particularly with it being Democrats?

       Moral and ethical issues, like abortion rights and stem cell research, didn't seem to get a play here, unless this viewer fell asleep during that part (a possibility).    

       Overall, it says here "I'll be Your Goobernator" Jay won this debate, though the Kid hung in there, closing with a plea for more honesty in government.

     There's one reason why the Obama/Bill Ayers connection hasn't gained a lot of traction in the presidential race:  it's hardly a surprise.  As a community organizer, who did we expect Obama to be associating with?  Joe Sixpack?  Hardly.

     Bill Ayers was a Sixties radical, and he's a radical today, just of a slightly different stripe.  He hasn't apologized or apparently regretted his earlier actions because he hasn't really changed. 

           As far Obama, he's learned his craft of politics very well.  And his backers can only be pleased.  He can be a radical here to this group, more of a moderate here. It all comes with the territory.

    What Americans don't know, of course, is which Obama we'll get as president.  While Obama preaches a more conservative line on the economy, the senator has virtually no experience in foreign affairs. 

    The McCain rant 'he doesn't understand' seems relevant here.

    And the presidency can be like a box of chocolates.  You're never quite sure what you may get.

    After all, had George Bush campaigned in 2000 on a pledge to invade Iraq, the election would have easily gone to Al Gore.    

       No presidential candidate in modern American history has the radical political background that Sen. Barry Obama has.  And it's quite naive to think Obama's political influences do not affect the way he thinks today -- or the manner in which he would attempt to govern.

       Here's the way author and political reporter David Freddoso put it in his book The Case Against Barack Obama (Regnery Publishing Inc.) "How does he choose his advisors and end up with people who chat with terrorists, advocate reparations for slavery, and praise Hugo Chavez as a champion of democracy?....What kind of diplomacy does he pursue, given that so much of diplomacy consists in reading, understanding, and judging others' intentions and character...If Barack Obama becomes president, his good judgment, or lack thereof, will affect the entire country."  (page 234)

      When he first went to Chicago to work as a community organizer, Obama's salary was paid for by the Woods Fund, today a $72 million dollar political philanthropic organization.  According to Freddoso, the Woods Fund funds many radical causes, including the Arab American Action Network, which currently, the author reports, "is creating an oral history project on 'an-Nakba' - the great 'catastrophe' of Israel's founding."

     From 1999 to 2002, Obama served on the fund's board along with William Ayers, former Weatherman bomber, now remade as a radical education professor.  Obama's ties to Ayers are many.  Ayers has donated money to at least one of Obama's political campaigns.

     And after securing a grant from the Annenberg Foundation to pursue educational reform in Chicago, Ayers' group chose Obama to chair the dispensing of the grants.  The grants didn't go directly to the public schools, but instead to political organizations like ACORN so they could lay their agendas on school kids.

     Regarding an early meeting when Obama began his first political campaign (at Ayers' Chicago home), CNN reported yesterday that Alice Palmer, then the state representative in that district, has denied she organized the meeting.  This has engendered speculation the meeting was perhaps planned by Ayers and Obama, not Palmer.

     And among Obama's advisors, Freddoso says, is Charles Ogletree, a Harvard law professor.  Ogletree has argued in favor of reparations fro descendants of slaves, the author says.

     The Democratic Party had a candidate for president who carried none of this baggage.  Instead, the party chose Obama.  Voters may well ask if Democrats have done a service to America in this selection.          

    Not to bust any bubbles, but what are the bets on how soon an Obama presidency will bring up the genteel issue of reparations for our brethren victimized by the slave trade? 

    This golden goose holds far too many goodies to be dismissed lightly.  And the issue has never received a full hearing from the American people.

    But under an Obama presidency, it very well could.  Even if Obama himself has little taste for the issue, he could still be pressured by certain constituents to bring it up.  At the politically correct time, of course.

   The guess here is around the third year of his presidency might be the opportune time.  Of course, the issue will not be brought up during the current election campaign -- by either of the candidates.

   Part of the appeal of an Obama presidency is the unknown.  Many feel practically anything would be better than the current Republican reign. 

   One can only hope that the admitted newness of an Obama in the White House would prove beneficial.  Regardless of that hope, it will represent -- what else -- a 'change.'    

       So, ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. 

   After all, you may say, what do we stand to lose? 

     The master manipulators of the market and the media are on the march.  The Wall Street Greed-meisters, backed by President Bush, corrupt Congressional leaders and others, are practically demanding Americans fork over $700 billion so they can minimize their losses -- and once again, maximize their profits.

     Wisely, Congress -- including 90 Democrats and more than 100 Republicans -- has said 'no.'  For this exagerrated crisis is really about much more than economics -- it's about the freedoms Americans too often take for granted.  And these greedmeisters will take your freedom away as easily as they're now grabbing your wallets.

     This is a fight for freedom -- not in Iraq or Afghanistan or wherever else our 'leaders' may decide we need to go next -- but right here in America.  

     Democrats and Republicans do need to get together and come up with some answers -- and some serious backbone.  As Congress is now doing, this rush to pass legislation, along with the doomsday scenarios, needs to be seriously shoved right back at them.

     A solution, yes.  A sellout at the expense of our freedoms, no.

     We do not need government of the few (Treasury) calling the shots.  

     And since when do Americans need the Europeans to tell us what to do?  This stuff is getting seriously out of hand.  This is the Bush Second Act, with the Iraq War Ride to Nowhere being the first.

     This one is the Ride to Hell, from which there might be no coming back.

     Let's hope the congressmen who have opposed this shell game continue the fight.    

    It can safely be said that both presidential contenders performed up to, and probably beyond, their capabilities in the First Presidential Debate Friday.

    The debates serve an outstanding purpose in getting the candidates face to face, and in the fast-moving format, probably draw many viewers who perhaps up to this point have not played real close attention to either of the candidates. 

    Ironically, the strongest issues for each candidate may not be what most expect.  And these issues were on display during the debate.

    Sen. McCain displayed probably considerable more knowledge and depth than some had expected.  And it's perhaps the economy, not foreign affairs, that could provide the boost he needs to win the presidency.  For McCain has promised a massive thrust forward for the U.S. economy, propelled by the need for the nation to become much more energy independent.

    But that issue has been overshadowed in the past week by the cry from Wall Street that a massive bailout from the government is needed immediately to avert an economic Armageddon.  And that is not good news for the McCain campaign.  And McCain hardly mentioned Friday his plans to reinvigorate the economy, an issue that could prove potent for him.

    For Sen. Obama, foreign policy can still be a key positive issue for him.  In making the case for a somewhat less strident foreign policy, that will improve America's image -- and standing -- in the community of nations, Obama was at his strongest point in the debate Friday. 

    That point is Obama's issue, and one he perhaps feels most passionately about, and he scored on the issue.  Obama wants to project a friendlier face to the world -- and if he continues to stress this issue, it could prove crucial to his success.

    McCain, however, very deftly handled Obama's criticism of the war.  The war veteran correctly said the point now is how the nation will extricate itself honorably from the conflict, negating considerably Obama's point about American entry into the battle.        

         Obama must still also overcome doubts as to his readiness, toughness and real passion to handle the international terrorist threat. 

    For McCain, the issue could be he wishes to do too much.

     While Americans may recognize that as presidential timber the inexperienced Illinois senator Barack Obama is at best of average stock, given the exigencies of the moment, Barry 'O' may well be on his way to waltzing to the White House.

     Seeing a bunch of belaugured Wall Street honchos blithering to Congress about desparately needing a $700 billion handout hasn't helped the case of John McCain and the Republicans.

     The shrewd McCain has of course been backpedaling like an avalanche is headed his way since becoming the Repub's nominee, remaking himself as 'Maverick' McCain instead of the Washington insider he more commonly is seen as.

     And McCain has run from the Bush legacy faster than Brer Rabbit being chased by the big bad wolf.

     Indeed, the final legacy of the Bush administration, a $700  billion bailout of Wall Street, may be the last gasp of Big Money.  Looking worriedly in their rearview mirrors, they see Obama and the Dems bearing down on them.  In no way are the Dems, if they control both the presidency and Congress, likely to be nearly as friendly to Wall Street as the Bushies --  big business themselves -- have been.  

     The current financial crisis -- a mixture of fear, panic, and outright greed along with some real need -- seems made to order for the Democrats.  They can pull off their best shot at being for the people, pulling out all the rhetorical stops.

     Of course, about this time next year, Americans may be wondering just what we have gotten with this new group of left-leaning Demos.  

     And Hillary Clinton may have the rest of her life -- along with Al Gore -- to rue and wonder how their respective runs for the presidency came up just a little short.       

        Conductors on the George W. Bush Presidential Express Train to Nowhere apparently feel that once was not enough.

    Having taken the American public for a torturous and costly ride with the Iraq War, now, in the waning days of the Bush presidency, these same folks want one last time to take your money -- to the tune of about $700 billion.

    And Congressional lackeys, showing once more who their paymasters are, apparently can't wait to give it to them.

    This is the same hack-dog Congress that couldn't pass immigration reform or an energy  bill -- of any kind -- for over two years.  Suddenly the dysfunctional Congress springs into action, promising action within a week.

    This is totally outrageous.  THIS ACTION IS THE PROOF IN THE PUDDING THAT CONGRESS IS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY THE WALL STREET/INTERNATIONAL MONEY INTERESTS! 

    This is the final chapter of the Bush Presidency's Ripoff Ride to Nowhere, sponsored by the high-powered money interests.  

    And once again Congressional 'watchdogs' can't wait to roll over and sell their constituents out, dancing to the tune of the Wall Street masters of the game!    

    And once more the average American taxpayer is being fleeced -- by a government that claims to be fighting for him.

    The lessons of our own history should have taught us by now that big isn't better, that centralized power won't help the most but the few.  

    And yet we here go again, for a fast ride on the Train to Nowhere, your excursion courtesy of George W. Bush.       

     Whoever wins the presidency this fall, one thing is for sure:  the road to the White House in 2008 apparently will be strewn with the battlefield corpses of blown-up Wall Street firms.

     While American intervention in Iraq resulted in an onslaught of terrorist attacks and bombings, Americans themselves now seem to be experiencing a form of economic terrorism at home, as daily reports file in about the carnage on Wall Street. 

     Change may be the mantra in this race, but it's becoming not exactly the type of change anyone predicted.  The change in the landscape rather reflects a growing economic uncertainty -- and that change becomes further reflected in a shifting, and unpredictable, political arena.

     Recent reports indicate perhaps as many as ten battleground states -- many in the midwest -- now up for grabs. 

     Given the new economic and political uncertainty, it could well be the candidate who can inspire the most confidence in a shaken electorate will be the one who takes the oath of office in Washington D.C. in January.       

     Part of the Barack Obama story is of course how after graduating from Harvard Law School, he turned down a lucrative Wall Street job so he could return to Chicago to make sure everyone was properly signed up for food stamps.  Now there's nothing wrong with helping our less fortunate neighbors in downtrodden neighborhoods get all the assistance they can.    

     And granted this is only part of the Barry Obama saga, but does all this neat stuff really resonate with a large portion of America?

     The answer, perhaps a sad one for Democrats, is a resounding 'no.'  As in 'no thanks, we respect you and all, but that's ok.'

     The reality of a presidential race is that it is also in large part a popularity contest.  Most of us don't know for sure who will actually be the best president.  Or, for that matter, what type of president a man (or woman) will be.  No one foresaw the Bush administration's eagerness to go to war in Iraq (no one that I know).

      But what we do know is whom we like, or whom we wish to put our trust in.  That's much easier.  Ok, so Barack Obama was a community organizer, then a state senator.  That's really pretty BOOGEDY-hum stuff.  John McCain IS a war hero, and also a bomber pilot, prisoner of war, and U.S. senator for some three(?) terms.

      Sarah Palin is an attractive and likeable woman.  Joe Biden is an East Coast liberal whose popularity amongst voters in his 2008 presidential run was so imperceptible he withdrew after the initial Iowa primary.

      Personal popularity, while part and parcel of politics, also stands alone outside that realm.   

      The popularity/likeability index is one neither party can ignore.