« Hey Barack, quit posing for Mount Rushmore and do the right thing | Main | The Gap fire, a couple of miles from the line »
05 July 2008
Obama the Octopus? Superdelegates take note!
The "other shoe" keeps dropping.
Just how many legs and feet does Obama have, and thus how many more shoes are there to drop? As I wrote to a friend, an Obama supporter, "What's next? Asking Joe Lieberman to be his running mate?"
Put another way, a question I put forward in a much earlier post: Just how many progressive principles is Obama willing to sacrifice in order to achieve "post-partisanship"? We are beginning to get the answer.
Consider his recent stance on FISA; the pandering to the right with his proposed augmentation of Bush's "faith-based initiative;" the obfuscations of his position on ending the war in Iraq; and his, uh, restatement of just what it means for a woman to have a "right to choose."
To my fellow-progressives, my fellow-liberals, those of you who giddily parroted Obama's "change" mantra, projected your own "hope" onto a blank screen, confused style with substance -- how are you feeling today about your candidate?
I know that the FISA business has caused a great stir on the listserves and in the comment area of Obama's website. But that may not be enough.
It may be time for serious re-thinking. It's not too late for superdelegates to change their minds. All it would take is a caucus, and a vote for Hillary, and the nomination could be hers after all.
That's what superdelegates are all about...being the grown-ups who keep the Democratic Party from being hijacked. And make no mistake, it is being hijacked, by a charismatic orator whose only ambition is for himself and who has now proven that he will say anything and do anything, including sacrificing family, friends, surrogates, supporters -- and the bedrock principles of the Democratic Party -- if they get in his way.
Posted by EDN on July 5, 2008 at 10:56 AM in Election '08, Kvetch & Retch, Moral Values, The Politics of Sex | Permalink
Comments
That would be an interesting development, to be sure. While I wouldn't mind seeing a superdelegate revolt threatened or even carried out on the convention floor ... well, all hell would break loose. Most of the party regulars have already buried Hillary and moved on to expected victory with Obama. As for the Obamaniacs -- fuhgeddaboudit. They would break the party for good and all. It would be awfully difficult to hijack the Party from the hijacker.
But you do bring up the method most likely to succeed in pushing Obama to honor his campaign promises.
He's already blown off the little people, as evidenced by his "Oh well, too bad. See ya!" response to the anti-FISA community group on his website.
But as you point out, the nomination isn't actually his yet.
All of us little people, so useful for photo ops but a real drag when it's time to get serious, would do far better to apply pressure to the right superdelegates -- the ones who would have gone for Hillary if Obama hadn't seemed like a done deal. It would help to have one or two of the big-name superdelegates loudly threaten to switch.
If it didn't secure the nomination for Hillary, it could be enough of a threat to make Obama think long and hard about screwing over them that brung him. He's got to be shown that there are still ways to hold his feet to the fire, that there are some issues that are non-negotiable.
Posted by: Chiaroscuro | Jul 5, 2008 1:14:52 PM
I think Obama compromises for too little gain and of course I'm disappointed about FISA, but what makes you think Hillary is more progressive than Obama? Do you not remember pro-war Hillary's support of the credit card industry-written bankruptcy bill? And during Bill's presidency she supported the disastrous trade, welfare, and deregulation policies.
The only thing a true progressive can say about either Hillary or Barack is that they are better than the Republicans. Kucinich was the only true progressive in this race.
Posted by: Anon | Jul 30, 2008 4:30:13 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
