Iniatially, I was excited about John Edwards's campaign. He was, and remains, the only candidate really running on the idea that we have become enslaved to corporate interests, that the bulk of us are becoming poorer, and we haven't a hope in hell of ever reaching our parents level of wealth and comfort.
The question is, perhaps, at this increasingly late hour, whether he can go over the top in Iowa. Is his message resonating, or is he saddled as a loser? Is his message genuine?
Interesting stuff. The consensus seems to be that Edwards' positions, if not his rhetoric, are really about the same as Obama's and Clinton's--partly because they have co-opted his.
ReplyDeleteBTW, the Atlantic article on Obama, posted here a few weeks back, was the most original and compelling analysis of a dem candidate I've read yet. What do you think of this notion of the culture wars as a manifestation of the rift between pro and anti-Vietnam war boomers, and Obama's ability to bridge that divide?
Co-opted or no, I think it is valuable that we have the fucking conversation because poverty has long been such a dirtyword in America, because we have been sold that the only poor people in the land of plenty are the willfully ignorant, the stupid, the lazy and the criminal. I'll try to remember that as I play Federal Government and figure out a way to pay my student loans and heat this winter.
ReplyDeleteEdwards, even with his John boy super hair, may come along at the right time to be the messenger to a point, but I am still not sure he can go all the way. If you are asking whether I would vote for him, I'd say yes.
However, and despite my grave reservations about Obama's association with the queer saved Reverend (and who among us hasn't had questionable associations), I feel that Obama may, in fact, be the thing we need. Certainly the guy can be inspiring when he wants to, and I know a whole lot of people, disgruntled ex-Republicans among them, who certainly think that this kind of change is exactly what we need, after the wars of ideology in the last 40 years.
GenX, at its core, straddles the idealistic, but not necessarily ideological, and the pragmatic in that we see a better society is possible, and it will make us all safer, more prosperous, etc.
At any rate, the Boomers have rained hell down on us, because they are ideological, or ostensibly so. The Boomers, at their core, are a selfish lot, and the ideological is inherently selfish because it seeks to cleanse for its own edification.
I guess if you are asking me whether I would support Obama, I would say "yeah", because his new new left is actually the new old left-remember, the rational one.
At any rate, I think what we need is a New Deal for the American People.
Herr Docktor, are we ever going to get around and endorse a candidate.
I am a strong Obama supportter. I thought the following post was relevant to your reluctance to support him based on the Donnie McClurkin issue:
ReplyDelete"Yesterday, I went to see Barack Obama speak at North Carolina Central University, a "Historically Black College" in Durham, North Carolina. The vast majority of the crowd was black. In his riffing on what groups we cannot allow to be scapegoated in the next election, Barack built to and concluded with "homosexuals" ... to the conspicuous (and regrettable) silence of the crowd.
It wasn't the "right" thing to say politically, but it was the right thing to say. The national media certainly wouldn't have reported on it had he left homosexuality out of this particular speech. All he accomplished, by sticking to his principles, was run the risk of alienating people whose support he desperately needs."
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/11/obama-and-the-g.html