Reply #120: Thanks for the link - a quick reply... [View All]

[jonestonesusa]

I read through the links. I would definitely agree with you on the more conservative position Obama took on tort reform and energy bill votes. The article does mention that he's moved away from that position in recent statements, and I have heard elsewhere also that his position on subsidizing ethanol is changing due to concerns about the food prices. I think that is a genuine change in position, though I agree with you that it was a wrong vote on the whole bill.

On school vouchers - as a former public school teacher myself, I can understand the teacher's union position on vouchers, though I do not disagree with a position that says look at research as a basis for making the decision. It's a sacred cow for many of us in education to consider any approaches other than fully funding public schools as currently structured. I think that Obama's statement was the right amount of prudence, to suggest that strong teachers should be rewarded (I think they should be - they are to some extent in post-secondary educational settings) but that a systemic move toward vouchers should also not be done. I have not yet seen vouchers in action in Milwaukee - I live in Western Wisconsin - but it intrigues me that the black community in Milwaukee supports vouchers. So I probably lean a little closer to his sentiment on that issue.

Health care mandates versus optional system - I won't try to get into this now much, but I do support single payer. However, it seems like a question of system change vs. incrementalism, real vs. ideal politics. I'm usually about half convinced by Paul Krugman's analysis, so I don't know if I'd take his assessment at face value. I think for this issue we have to see what is actually proposed and how it is guided through Congress. Is it better to ask for the paradigm shift first or to ask for something that is likely to pass but only addresses some, not all, of the problems? Again, since I think that Obama is a better politician, I have more trust in his ability to get significant legislation passed as we move towards single payer.

Briefly, on the IWR - I do not agree that this is a hollow issue, and Obama's voting record on war funding, timetables, etc. is, at minimum, the equal of Clinton's. I think he's had a positive role in working for legislation on anti-nuclear smuggling legislation and restricting the use of torture. Actually, I thought hard about supporting Edwards this time because I appreciated his emphasis on pocketbook issues, but I do not want the supposedly anti-war party (the Democrats) to nominate two candidates in a row who voted for the war. We don't know of course what Obama's vote would have been on the IWR because it's a what if, but from hearing him speaking and looking at his Senate record so far, he clearly takes no relish in bellicose stances on an issue like this. I also think that the noise he is making on greater diplomatic initiatives with rogue states is a potential paradigm shift in foreign relations. And I also think you understate the political risk involved in speaking up in clear terms against the war in 2002, at a moment when a vast majority of the public was coming around to support the war. If Hillary Clinton had done that, the course of history would have been changed.

There's not much to say quickly about race-baiting, especially if it's in play to appeal in West Virginia to "hardworking voters, white voters" or to say Obama is lucky this election to be black. But if all that has been said from many Democratic quarters about this isn't convincing to you, I will not be either. I don't buy the Obama race-baiting as much in part because he has way more to lose by doing it than gain since his method is generally to appear as a race "transcendent" candidate, and also because I don't find it mysterious at all why Clinton has lost black support given a number of statements by herself and her surrogates. Actually, as much as I disagree with Shelby Steele about most political topics, his view of the difference between candidates like Sharpton and Jackson (calling them something like "demanders") and Barack Obama ("negotiator") is more insightful than average in this season that could really use some savvy analysis of race and political behavior.

I also like the site created by Melissa Harris-Lacewell at Princeton for her discussions of race and the Obama campaign (http://www.melissaharrislacewell.com/).

That's it - I do appreciate the time you spent to get the links and start the dialogue.