Lambasted for Not Drinking the Obama Kool-Aid

[KennedyGuy]

http://www.michaelfauntroy.com/

"It’s hard out here for Black pundits/analysts/commentators who haven’t come around to drinking the Barack-Obama-is-the-best-thing-since-sliced-bread-how-
did-we-ever-exist-as-a-nation-without-him-this-is-our-last-best-
chance-to-elect-a-Black-president-so-we-better-support-him-see-I-told-you-
racism-is-dead Kool-Aid. I have learned an unfortunate lesson in observing the Democratic presidential nomination fight: In too many segments of the country – Black and White – to express any skepticism about Barack Obama is considered political heresy. I’m blown away by this discovery, because it suggests a dangerous group think: Obama is the only agent of change and to not praise him at every opportunity is to support the status quo (And, oh, by the way, Hilary is the devil!)".
snip

"Can anyone say for sure that he would not have voted to authorize Bush’s foolishness in Iraq if he were a member of the Senate in 2002? I’m willing to bet that Obama would have done as all the Senate Democrats who wanted to be president did: vote to support Bush so that their Republican general election opponent couldn’t say they were soft on terrorism.

All I’ve tried to do is add some reason and caution to the over-the-top response that many voters have for Obama. And I’ll keep doing it. I have thick skin, so it’s no big deal to me".

[ellacott]

1. Are you African American?

[KennedyGuy]

3. do I have to be to comment on Obama?

what a racist question

[ellacott]

7. Oh stop, It wasn't a racist question

The fact that you came to all the wrong conclusions is really funny. I didn't say you had to be African American to comment. That's kinda stupid.

[paulk]

28. well, asking someone what their race is

is kind of the definition of a racist question.

[midnight]

29. There are more clever ways. The one I always receive is..........

What nationality is your mother. That covers all the bases. You know just incase I didn't have a father.

[SteppingRazor]

4. The person whose website this is from is. Of course, he was also a Clinton appointee...

back in the 1990s, which is probably more relevant when discussing someone's opinion of Hillary v. Obama.

[goldcanyonaz]

6. No, I'm not. I'm a person who happens to be black.. I always hated the African American label.

[ellacott]

8. Huh, I was asking the OP

[KennedyGuy]

11. why?

[ellacott]

24. I'm wondering why you keep trying to bring up blacks who you feel don't support Obama

What does it matter? Do you think that all blacks are supposed to support him and if they don't that makes it even worse for Obama?

[goldcanyonaz]

12. I know, I just felt like answering. Thanks.

I haven't drank the kool-aid yet, and have been checking for pods growing outside my bedroom each and every night.

[ellacott]

22. Good for you

You're special

[killbotfactory]

2. Yes, we can say for certain he would not have voted for the IWR

He was running for an election when he opposed this stupid war to begin with.

[Bluerthanblue]

14. indeed we can- here are his words:

......... I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.… The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and to-lerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago) is a candidate for the U.S. Senate. He delivered the above remarks at an antiwar rally on October 26, 2002, in Chicago.

By Barack Obama ...........

http://www.tnj.com/archives/2004/september2004/final_word.php

[maximusveritas]

15. Yes, this guy is badly misinformed

He also says Obama hasn't voted against funding, which is also not true.

He may not be a Clinton supporter, but he's certainly swallowed their BS.

[Apollo11]

5. We should look closely at all the candidates and their records.

Obama has a special talent for delivering a speech that sound like JFK meets MLK, for the MTV generation. Back in 2004 he admitted that he did not know how he would have voted if he had already been in the US Senate back in 2002 when the Iraq War Resolution came up.

If you look at their records in the US Senate - none of the top tier candidates is perfect. So we kind of have to go with a hunch and make a leap of faith based on who do we believe.

I like a lot of what Edwards has been saying but I'm not sure if I can believe that he will actually be able to deliver even half of what he is promising.

Come November 4th, voters will be looking for a candidate who can re-unite the country after 8 years of Bush-Cheney. I think Obama understands this context.

[NYCGirl]

10. Here's Obama himself explaining his 2004 Iraq statement:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=lN30M6StFfk

[Apollo11]

21. Hey NYCGirl

Two years ago, Al Gore warned us about Democrats in Congress who "go along to get along".

I guess we will never know for certain how Obama would have voted had he been in the US Senate back in the fall of 2002. But back then it was seen as politically dangerous for Senators to speak out against Bush's "War on Terror".

Of course in 2007 being anti-war became the more popular position. Even Hillary's campaign have started printing signs for their events that have "STOP THE WAR" on them.

This particular issue has come up here on DU a couple of times in the past few months. One of Hillary's supporters made the case that Obama admitted to CNN that he lied in 2004. Effectively he made a false statement about his own position, to make it look like he did not disagree with Kerry and Edwards. Now Obama is saying that he is free to tell us the truth.

On the plus side, Obama is the only serious candidate who is able say that the invasion and occupation of Iraq is "a war that should never have been authorized". It's a line he uses in most of his speeches and it has won him a lot of supporters.

[Bluerthanblue]

26. You can read Obama's thoughts of Oct. 2002

in my reply above-
there is a link to his speech about the IWRR. He could have doomed his political future with this speech.

[Mythsaje]

The only thing Edwards is promising is a fight.

He knows its an uphill battle, but a battle that must be fought if we have any chance of getting out of this trap the Repugs and their enablers have lured us into.

[robbedvoter]

31. The only thing Edwards is doing is promising. "This time, every vote will be counted"

Whatever happened to that one - now that he wants our vote again?

[Mythsaje]

33. Abandoning THAT fight wasn't his decision to make, now was it?

[robbedvoter]

36. Why not? I voted for him too - couldn't he at least let everyone know we won?

A whole country thinks we lost - he kept the secret - for whatever reason. So, the fighter couldn't even fight Kerry? For our votes?

[ButterflyBlood]

9. Obama said flat out he'd vote against the IWR

More than I can say for Hillary. If you're going to attack him on something, try something he hasn't said the exact opposite of.

[rodeodance]

17. He is in a great spot on this one--A monday morning quarterback commentary.

[maximusveritas]

19. Uh, no it's not Monday morning

It's Saturday and Sunday morning because he said it before the resolution was voted on.

[rodeodance]

25. could be Friday

[Bluerthanblue]

27. no- it was october of 2002- how is that Monday am quaterbacking???

please don't spread gossip and rumors.

You can find his actual words about this issue in my post above.

[goldcanyonaz]

32. He wasn't even a U.S. Senator at the time. More than likely he would have just voted Present!

[Bluerthanblue]

34. please read

his words delivered publicly in Oct- 2002-

He put his future on the line at a time when many people I respect didn't.

My choice for 2004- John Kerry didn't risk voting against the IRWR.

here- I'll post the thing for you again here: Please READ IT if you are going to make such foolish statements.

I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.… The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and to-lerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago) is a candidate for the U.S. Senate. He delivered the above remarks at an antiwar rally on October 26, 2002, in Chicago.

http://www.tnj.com/archives/2004/september2004/final_word.php

[Triana]

13. Last time this happened: With bu$h in 2000 - scary indeed (n/t)

[rodeodance]

18. Molly Ivans was onto him but few listened to a real journalist.

[robbedvoter]

37. last time that happened - DU or EU pre-Iowa. Every single day.

Every variance from All hail Edwards was stifled.

[rodeodance]

16. The so-called NH 'independents' are sure jumping on the Iowa bandwagon

[goldcanyonaz]

20. In Arizona you have to be registered as either a Repug or a Democrat.

Today is the deadline to register or switch sides. You can't show up as an Independent.

[mathewsleep]

23. drink it

drink the obama kool-aid!

[robbedvoter]

30. Oh, no! The outside world is the opposite of DU (oops EU!) - through the looking glass!

It's a parallel universe populated by haters!

I know exactly how you feel - only it was Edwards supporters here who used to tell others to...run along now. As for the answer to that question:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4x_KnWEDjs
and combined with

MATTHEWS: OK. I just want to get one thing straight so that we know how
you would have been different in president if you had been in office
the last four years as president. Would you have gone to Afghanistan?

EDWARDS: I would.

MATTHEWS: Would you have gone to Iraq?

EDWARDS: I would have gone to Iraq.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3131295 /

[Nailzberg]

35. I don't take seriously any author using a 44 word hyphenate.

I draw the line at forty, folks.