page 7
Barack Obama: A Transformational Choice
By JOHN TEBES Staff Writer Every few generations, a unique political leader arrives on the scene at the perfect time in history. Today, we are faced with two wars halfway around the world, a terrorist enemy, a climate crisis, economic recession, high health care costs, and entrenched partisanship in Washington that prevents us from working together. The next president must bridge the divides that separate Americans from one another and from the world at large to solve these problems. Barack Obama is that president. Obama’s stances on the major political issues are consistent with what the majority of Americans believe. On Iraq, he wants us to withdraw, but to do so deliberately and carefully over a period of 16 months. Unlike Clinton, he opposed the war from the start when he was a candidate for the U.S. Senate even though it was an unpopular stance at the time. He also believes that we should give tax cuts to the middle class, and not to the richest Americans or to oil, pharmaceutical, and health insurance companies. He also supports universal health care for children and, eventually, for all Americans. And finally, Obama strongly supports action to protect the environment and address global warming. Obama’s positions differ greatly from John McCain’s, the Republican nominee for president, but are very similar to Hillary Clinton’s. He differs from Clinton, however, because at 46 years old, he is the first of the post-baby boom generation to be a serious candidate for president. He is not bound to the old Washington approach to politics that was shaped during Watergate, Vietnam, and the Reagan years. Clinton represents the old politics, and her generational difference from Obama binds her to her party’s old solutions, especially her strong distrust of all things Republican. As Andrew Sullivan says when speaking about Clinton in a December 2007 argument in support of Obama in TheAtlantic. com: “She has internalized what most Democrats of her generation have internalized: They suspect that the majority is not with them, and so some quotient of President would also have great cultural meaning for America and the world. By now, everyone knows Obama’s life story. Born to a white mother from Kansas and a Kenyan father who left the family when Obama was two years old, his mother moved to Hawaii when he was young where he was also raised, in part, by his white maternal grandparents. After living in Indonesia for several years as a child, he returned to Hawaii for high school, and eventually graduated from Columbia University. After college he worked for a few years as a community organizer in Chicago, and later attended Harvard Law School. After graduation, he turned down a lucrative job on Wall Street to return to Chicago to continue his community organizing with the poor and working class, but now with the power of the law behind him. He served several terms as an Illinois state senator before being elected a U.S. Senator from Illinois in 2006. Later, even though he did not grow up religious, Obama became a Christian as an adult while attending a Congregationalist church on the south side of Chicago. Obama’s story truly symbolizes what is good about America – a child raised mostly by a single mother of limited means who takes advantage of what his family and his country had to offer to become the frontrunner for the democratic nomination for President. He embodies many dualities in America – black and white, immigrant and native, religious agnostic and devout believer. When Americans look at Obama they see what our country can become; when the world sees Obama they see what our country truly is. Like no other candidate, he provides us with an opportunity to overcome divides that separate us from each other and from the world. He is a new voice, a potentially transformational leader whose life experiences, competence, and charisma make him the right person at this time in our history. No one else even comes close.
discretion, fear, or plain deception is required if they are to advance their objectives.” Obama, having been born to a mother just five years older than Clinton, is not bound to the political divisions brought on by the Reagan era, but can profess his own beliefs on issues, rather than echo what his party believes. Obama’s election as our next
Hillary Clinton: An Historic Candidacy, A Real Leader
By REBECCA KAGAN Staff Writer
On January 8, 2008, Hillary Clinton made history by being the first woman ever to win a presidential primary in America. You may have missed that day. The press certainly did. They were too busy extolling the endless virtues of Barack Obama, politician extraordinaire, his revolutionary vision, and his potential for change, to see change when it actually occurred. The democratic primary race has certainly been unusual. With the delegate count changing daily, it can be difficult to gain an accurate idea of where the race currently stands. However,
most accounts agree that Senator Obama is ahead by slightly more than 100 delegates out of the 2025 needed for the nomination. As each primary unfolds it seems increasingly unlikely that a final decision will be reached before the Democratic National Convention. And yet, despite the tight race and serious competition, and even after her recent win in the Pennsylvania primary, the media has repeatedly urged Clinton to abandon her campaign. They often predict her concession, and question whether she is harming the party by remaining in the race. Yet historically the nomination has remained in contention well into the summer. Criticism of Clinton rarely attacks her politics but instead
falls to her gender, age, or appearance. Radio host and political commentator Rush Limbaugh asked, “Will this country want to actually watch
a woman get older before their eyes on a daily basis?” This sentiment is appallingly sexist. John McCain, age 71, is eleven years older than Clinton, and would be the oldest candidate ever
elected to a first term in the White House. But nobody is worried about looking at an old man. The media has raised the question of whether a female president would be able to negotiate in the Middle East, where women’s rights are significantly diminished. What a ridiculous idea. In Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto was Prime Minister for five years. India, Nicaragua, and Indonesia, Germany, Ireland, and the United Kingdom have had female leaders, and the list doesn’t stop there. But America, supposed leader of the democratic world, cannot even respect the candidacy of a woman. Clinton’s success has been chalked up to a variety of unique factors, such as her husband’s celebrity-like status and her support from women. Even
the fact that she once seemed on the verge of tears allegedly earned her a huge number of “sympathy votes.” Reporters scramble to explain each of her victories as if they were a fluke or an embarrassment. Somehow, Clinton’s very real leadership potential in her own right has been nearly forgotten. It has been said that behind every great man stands a woman. During this election, the media has attempted to shove Hillary Clinton behind various men – first her husband, Bill Clinton, and then her opponent, Senator Obama. Whether she wins or not, Senator Clinton has more than proved that she can stand on her own two feet. Perhaps it is time for the country to accept that she has stepped out of that shadow.
Answers to Celebrity Matching Quiz
a. Ellen Degeneres (Clinton) g. Jack Nicholson (Clinton) b. Curt Schilling (McCain) c. Sylvester Stallone (McCain) h. George Clooney (Obama) i.Chris Rock (Obama) d. Scarlett Johansson (Obama) j. Barbara Streisand (Clinton) e. Fred Thompson (McCain) k. Robert DeNiro (Obama) f. Elton John (Clinton) l. Heidi Montag (McCain)