Time to Get on the Obama Bandwagon
I recently read that the "smart money" (Stephen Spielberg) was supporting Hillary Clinton. I also read the polls that said that Hillary's negatives are such that 50% of the country will not vote for her (period). But the same is not true of Barack Obama. He may not have the support of Spielberg or Antonio Villaraigosa but more than 150,000 people gave money to the campaign this past quarter, which gave him $32.5 million -- that's $10 million more than Hillary took in and $23 million more than John Edwards. This near record haul, just short of GW's $35 million record in 2003 (2nd quarter) -- remember GW was running unopposed for the GOP crown, so he didn't have to share. For more on the story -- all the papers are covering it -- click here for the LA Times story.
Money isn't everything -- in fact it can be a corrupting influence, but with that said Obama's take needs to be taken very seriously -- both in the amount received and the breadth of support (I gave my pittance and will give more in time). This grassroots effort should begin to speak to the Democratic Party folks -- if you want to win -- and if recent Supreme Court decisions are any indication winning in 08 is imperative -- Hillary is not the person to support.
Barack Obama has demonstrated a keen insight into the issues, a vision for the future, a willingness to listen and grow in office. He has much to learn, of course, but there is time and he seems to have the kind of wisdom we need at this time in history. That he is able and willing to articulate how his faith influences his politics isn't essential, of course, but it does give us insight into a person who understands the call to compassion and service that is central to the message of Jesus. So, let us say no to cronyism and dynasties and support Barack Obama in 2008.
***Note -- I speak only for myself and not my church or denomination!
Comments
Political issues are fair game in being discussed from the pulpit. Endorsements for a party or person are not. Is a personal blog enough different?
Since I am not on a church staff right now, I have somewhat more freedom, but I have not endorsed a candidate, just pointed out the pros and cons of the top 3 Dems. Edwards still has the most coherent and detailed progressive policies, but not the charisma and vision of Obama. Clinton is still too cautious on the war and it was Clintonian policies on the economy (especially trade) that Bush was able to exploit to harm Americans as much as he has.
I understand your discomfort. I come from a politically active background (GOP in fact), but I've tried to stay out of the fray, for the most part in past years. I believe, however, that this is one of those moments in history where silence is as problematic. I did, however, delink this blog from our church web site. Yes, you can still find it if you go through it to my own web page which links here, but it takes a bit of doing.
I put the disclaimer in as an after thought, since I'd already put it on the sidebar, but your words serve as a reminder that I need to be regular about that.
Personally I am standing behind Obama for many of the reasons Bob listed. He is not my perfect candidate but I think he could win and he would bring much to the office. I'm not crazy about Hillary - she would be close to the bottom for me in the Democratic field - and I'm not sure that she could win. If she gets the nomination, I will vote for her but I hope she doesn't.