Wsws 081020
Colin Powell appoggia Obama – Crescente consenso della classe dominante dietro il candidato democratico
Barry Grey
● In questa crisi finanziaria di proporzioni storiche ha pagato per Obama la sua sollecitudine per i gruppi finanziari e industriali (dichiarazioni di Powell, Chicago Tribune).
o Il Chicago Tribune: dall’osservazione della sua carriera politica, si può assicurare che Obama perseguiterà una linea politica conservatrice; governerà come centrista pragmatico.
– Significativo l’appoggio dato dal Colin Powell (capo di stato maggiore durante la guerra del Golfo del 1991, segretario di Stato nel primo mandato di George W. Bush), uno degli artefici della guerra contro l’Irak, al candidato democratico Obama: Obama sarebbe per Powell più capace del concorrente repubblicano, McCain, di «risolvere i nostri problemi economici», e grazie alla suo essere nero e relativamente giovane, sarebbe in grado di migliorare l’immagine degli USA nel mondo e tra gli stessi americani.
– Per Powell la crisi finanziaria è stata decisiva per trasferire il suo appoggio dai repubblicani al campo democratico; Obama ha appoggiato senza dubbi l’aiuto del governo alle banche.
– L’appoggio per Obama da parte di influenti quotidiani, che hanno decisamente appoggiato l’occupazione americana dell’Irak: tra questi il Washington Post, Los Angels Times, New York Daily News e Chicago Tribune (quest’ultimo aveva sempre sostenuto i repubblicani nei suoi 161 anni di storia),
o evidenzia l’ipocrisia della campagna di Obama, che per guadagnarsi la nomination democratica aveva attaccato la rivale, Hillary Clinton per aver votato a favore della guerra nel 2002.
– Evidente dimostrazione dell’appoggio di cui gode nei settori più influenti della classe dominante americana sono i sostanziosi fondi stanziati per Obama da gruppi economici:
o a settembre sono stati raggiunti i $150 mn., contro il predente record di $66mn. di agosto, per un totale oltre i $600 mn. superiore alla raccolta delle campagne di Bush nel 2000 e nel 2004, e molto superiore ai fondi raccolti da McCain.
o Dopo la nomination Obama ha assicurato la borghesia americana che se eletto avrebbe mantenuto una forza militare significativa in Irak, e sarebbe disposto a prorogare il calendario del ritiro delle truppe da combattimento.
● Al centro della sua campagna il rafforzamento della missione militare in Afghanistan e l’estensione delle operazioni al Pakistan.
– Da ricordare che Obama votò a favore delle misure di Stato di polizia di Bush come il Patriot Act, il Homeland Security Department, il Northern Command.
Donazione record con l’appoggio di Colin Powell ad Obama
JEFF ZELENY
– L’ex segretario di Stato Americano, il repubblicano Colin Powell, amico di vecchia data di McCain: Obama è un “elemento di trasformazione” “una nuova generazione che viene alla ribalta sulla scienza internazionale”. Powell è il repubblicano di maggior prestigio ad appoggiare Obama; l’anno scorso aveva versato per McCain $2300.
– A sua volta Obama su Powell: “grande soldato, grande statista, e grande americano”, “come noi sa che è il momento di unirsi assieme in una sola nazione – giovani e vecchi, ricchi e poveri, neri e bianchi, repubblicani e democratici”.
– Accusato di “socialismo”, Obama replica: «È un po’ difficile immaginarsi come facciano Warren Buffet e Colin Powell ad appoggiarmi, se pratico il socialismo».
– Il Financial Times si è dichiarato per Barack Obama, «il miglior candidato». Dato che gli obiettivi politici dei due candidati (Hillary Clinton e Barack Hussein Obama) si differenziano minimamente, quello che prevale e carattere, temperamento identità.
– Obama conduce una campagna brillante; quella della Clinton e caotica.
+ Die Welt, 081018, "Post" e "Times" per Barack Obama
● Il WP, secondo più influente quotidiano liberale americano (dopo il NYT), ha appoggiato la candidatura del democratico Obama, completamente affidabile su “questione economica e la politica militare USA”.
o Motivazioni significative, dato il suo forte spostamento a destra dagli anni ’70, con il costante appoggio all’occupazione americana dell’Irak.
o WP: sull’economia, Obama sarebbe conservatore, «risponderebbe alla crisi economico con un salutare rispetto per i mercati», opponendosi alla sinistra del suo partito. Si è circondato di consiglieri economici con esperienza e centristi, tra i quali il miliardario Warren Buffet e l’ex presidente della Federal Reserve, Paul Volcker.
o WP: si compiace che Obama non abbia protestato contro gli aiuti fortemente anti-popolari, di migliaia di MD, a Wall Street, ha anzi invitato i democratici al Congresso ad appoggiare il piano finanziario di Bush.
o WP: Obama userà la crisi per giustificare i tagli al programma di welfare, come Medicare (sanità) e Social Security (previdenza sociale).
o WP: in politica estera cercherà di mantenere il predominio e l’impegno americano; per la maggior parte delle questioni (al-Qaeda, nucleare iraniano, e HIV) Obama si differenzia poco da Bush e McCain.
o Sull’Irak, nelle primarie, aveva fatto appello ad una opposizione di massa alla guerra, timori che cerchi di fissare una data per il ritiro delle truppe americane.
o Negli anni ’70, il WP ricevette ampio appoggio per aver rivelato il ruolo dell’amministrazione Nixon nello scandalo Watergate.
– Anche il principale editorialista conservatore del NYT, David Brooks, ha apprezzato Obama. «Sarà liberale, ma mai eccessivo. La sua famiglia è borghese. Il suo istinto e di fuggire dal gesto rivoluzionario per un piano graduale a sei punti».
– Appoggia Obama anche il conservatore britannico The Times: “il tempo di MacCain è passato»; Obama ha «carattere, intelligenza e capacità di giudizio». Irresponsabile la nomina della Palin a candidata alla vice-presidenza.
———————————–
Grande giornale conservatore si esprime per Obama
● Appoggia Obama il Chicago Tribune (CT), uno dei maggiori quotidiani conservatori americani che mai nei suoi 160 anni di storia ha sostenuto un democratico; nel 1860 ha contribuito in modo determinante all’elezione del primo presidente repubblicano, Abraham Lincoln, che ha eliminato la schiavitù, anch’egli proveniente dall’Ilinois.
o CT: Obama é un pragmatico, capace di raccogliere consenso. Ha collaborato con i repubblicani su una serie di temi importanti, riforma della giustizia, del welfare, regole etiche per la politica.
o CT: MacCain, che era sempre stato per uno Stato snello, in questa campagna ha presentato un piano per il salvataggio dei crediti immobiliari senza prevederne il finanziamento, ha proposto $4MD di facilitazioni fiscali, senza prevederne la copertura. Grosso errore la scelta di Sarah Palin.
Colin Powell endorses Obama – Growing ruling class consensus behind Democratic candidate
– Retired Gen. Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama on Sunday was the most politically significant of a series of recent statements by influential voices in the American ruling elite calling for the Democratic presidential candidate’s election on November 4.
Speaking on the NBC News program “Meet the Press,” Powell, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and secretary of state during the first term of George W. Bush, said he would vote for Obama because the Illinois senator was better able than his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain, to “fix our economic problems” and restore “a sense of purpose, a sense of confidence in the American people and, in the international community, in America.”
– Powell’s support for Obama over the candidate of his own party followed a series of endorsements by prominent newspapers, including the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Daily News and the Chicago Tribune. The Tribune’s endorsement was particularly significant. It marked the first time in its 161-year history that the conservative Republican newspaper endorsed a Democrat for president.
– These endorsements coincided with the Obama campaign’s announcement on Friday that it had raised the staggering sum of $150 million in September, shattering the previous record it set when it collected $66 million in August. This brings Obama’s total in campaign funds to more than $600 million, far surpassing the amounts raised by Bush in 2000 and 2004.
– The flood of corporate money to Obama, substantially larger than the sums raised by McCain, is another unmistakable indication of his support among the most influential sections of the American ruling class.
– The endorsement of Obama by Powell, a key architect of the Iraq war, and by newspapers that have unswervingly supported the US occupation of the country, underscores the duplicity of the Obama campaign. These advocates of US imperialism and militarism have no problem endorsing a candidate who won his party’s nomination largely by appealing to popular antiwar sentiment and attacking his major rival, Senator Hillary Clinton, for voting to authorize the Iraq war in October of 2002.
– Since securing the Democratic nomination in June, Obama has concentrated his efforts on reassuring the ruling elite that, his antiwar rhetoric and campaign slogan of “change” notwithstanding, an Obama presidency will be a reliable defender of their class interests. This has entailed a swing to the right on both foreign and domestic policy, including assurances that he will retain a substantial US military force in Iraq after a drawdown of “combat” forces, and will be prepared to extend his timeline for withdrawing combat troops if requested by military commanders.
– At the same time, Obama has made a buildup of US forces in Afghanistan and the extension of military attacks into Pakistan a centerpiece of his campaign.
– Under conditions of a financial crisis of historic proportions which has further undermined US influence and prestige internationally and intensified popular discontent within the US, Obama’s solicitousness for the concerns of the financial-corporate elite has paid off.
– A common theme of Powell’s interview and the editorial statements endorsing Obama is the belief that Obama, in large part by virtue of his race and relative youthfulness, will improve the image of the United States around the world and as well as among the American people, while he can be relied on to pursue a conservative domestic agenda and continue the basic thrust of imperialist policy internationally.
The endorsements stressed the need, after the disastrous Bush years, for a president who could more intelligently and competently defend the basic interests of American imperialism.
In his interview, Powell gave a sober assessment of the crisis facing the United States. Like many of Obama’s establishment endorsers, he indicated that the eruption of the financial crisis over the past two months was a critical factor in swinging his support behind the Democrat.
– Powell echoed a widespread consensus within the ruling elite that Obama, by unambiguously supporting the government bailout of the banks, had acquitted himself more favorably than his opponent. “I have especially watched over the last six or seven weeks as both of them have really taken a final exam with respect to this economic crisis,” he said.
– The Chicago Tribune wrote in dire terms of the crisis facing American capitalism, speaking of “the greatest threat to the world economic system in 80 years” and the need for a president who could “lead us through a perilous time” and navigate “the grave domestic and foreign crises we face.”
– Declaring that its “editorial page has been a proponent of conservative principles,” the newspaper said it could “provide some assurance” that Obama, who made his start in Chicago Democratic politics, would pursue a conservative course. It wrote: “We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring US senator to the Democratic Party’s nominee for president.
“We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions…”
– The Tribune said it was confident that Obama would “govern as much more of a pragmatic centrist than many people expect,” and added for good measure that he has been called a “‘University of Chicago Democrat’—a reference to the famed free-market Chicago school of economics, which puts faith in markets.”
It is instructive to compare the measured judgments of these establishment spokesmen, who weigh their decision on the basis of a clear-eyed appreciation of their class interests, and the delusional claims of Obama’s supporters within the liberal intelligentsia and the liberal periphery of the Democratic Party.
– The current issue of the New York Review of Books features a series of essays on Obama by a group of contributors under the heading “A Fateful Election.”
– With the exception of author Joan Didion, who debunks the notion that the Obama campaign represents a progressive departure from conventional American bourgeois politics and notes the way in which race is employed to obscure “the real issue in American life, which is class,” the contributors portray an Obama victory as a historic milestone and the harbinger of a new age of social progress.
– Virtually all of the essays evince an obsession with race. Journalist Mark Danner declares, “The radicalism of Barack Obama lies not in his policies but in his face.” He refers to “the unspoken centrality of race, the ancient sinful fulcrum of American politics,” and concludes that the election of Obama would mark “a true revolution.”
Columbia University professor Andrew Delbanco acknowledges Obama to be “a chastened liberal whose domestic policy plans can seem vague,” but nonetheless declares, “The fact is that Obama, by virtue of being black, has already changed our culture, and changed it profoundly…”
– Nobel laureate economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman asserts that Republicans were previously able to win elections “by exploiting white racial resentment,” but concludes that this time it will be different and “the prospects for a new New Deal are looking bright again…”
– Historian Garry Wills argues that the ability of the next president to shape the Supreme Court makes the stakes in the election “staggering,” ignoring Obama’s own vote in support of Bush’s illegal domestic spying program and his support for police state measures as the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Department, the Northern Command, etc.
For the most part, these intellectuals and academics, in their desire to believe that something better is coming, engage in a willing suspension of disbelief. That having been said, they write not as the tribunes of popular opposition, but rather as representatives of layers of the establishment itself.
In the case of the Nation magazine, one is dealing more with professional dispensers of political illusions in the Democratic Party than with people who are disoriented by wishful thinking. The editorial in the current issue suggests that the Wall Street bailout signals a shift to the left within the political establishment. Citing McCain’s proposal for the government to buy up bad mortgages and Obama’s call for a 90-day moratorium on home foreclosures, the Nation writes that the crisis “has pushed the center firmly in a progressive direction.”
William Greider, in a piece on the bailout, writes: “Fortunately, Bush and Paulson are lame ducks. They will be replaced soon (we fervently hope) by Barack Obama, who is addressing the side of the crisis that Republicans always ignore—what’s happening to the people. Obama has revised and expanded his agenda, and he does not intend to wait until January.”
He then cites the token measures advanced by Obama, in the face of a social catastrophe that is engulfing the working class, and concludes breathlessly, “Economic turmoil has instilled a dynamic process in politics, driving everyone, including voters, to a new ground. We are likely to see even larger changes in the coming months. The treasury secretary seems out of breath. Obama appears to be getting his second wind.”
The Nation specializes in peddling the notion that objective events and the pressure of popular opinion will push an Obama White House to the left. This is despite the indisputable fact that since securing the nomination, Obama has responded not to the antiwar and increasingly anti-corporate sentiment within the population, but rather to the demands of his corporate sponsors and donors. Why this will suddenly shift after the election, the Nation does not explain.
In the increasingly likely event that Obama wins the election, it will not take long to discover what Colin Powell and the major organs of the bourgeois press already know—that beyond certain cosmetic changes, the reactionary thrust of the Bush administration will, in all essentials, continue.
– How will the self-deluded intellectuals of the New York Review of Books respond to a much wider war in Afghanistan, or its extension into Pakistan, or Iran, or even Russia?
As for the Nation, there is no reason to believe that such developments will alter its determination to serve as the “left” flank of the political establishment by opposing the development of an independent political and socialist movement of the working class.
Nyt 081020
October 20, 2008
Donation Record as Colin Powell Endorses Obama
WASHINGTON — Senator Barack Obama on Sunday captured a forceful endorsement from former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and announced he had shattered campaign finance records in September, gaining an immense financial edge that will allow him to overwhelm Senator John McCain’s efforts in every corner of the country.
The description of Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, as a “transformational figure” by Mr. Powell, a Republican who directed the first Iraq war, could lift Mr. Obama among some independents, moderates and Republicans and neutralize concerns about his experience. And his fund-raising — $150 million last month, more than double what he raised in August — could help him sell that message by allowing him to spend at full throttle, even investing in new battlegrounds like West Virginia without having to choose among states.
– Mr. Obama intends to devote most of his time over the next 15 days in states that President Bush won, aides said, going to Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia. Mr. McCain, the Republican nominee, has ruled out trying to expand his electoral map but is waging an aggressive effort defending those states, the largest of which still could fall either way.
But the events Sunday, taken together, dealt another dispiriting setback to Republicans, particularly since Mr. Powell is a longtime friend of Mr. McCain’s and even donated to his campaign. “Powell is a glass of warm milk and a cookie for those who can’t sleep worrying about the lack of experience of a President Obama,” said Alex Castellanos, a Republican strategist.
– Mr. Powell, who made his announcement on “Meet the Press” on NBC, called Mr. Obama “a transformational figure.”
– “He is a new generation coming into the world, onto the world stage,” he continued.
The words were quickly seized upon by Mr. Obama.
– “A great soldier, a great statesman and a great American has endorsed our campaign to change America,” Mr. Obama said on Sunday in North Carolina, which has not backed a Democrat for president since 1976. “He knows, as we do, that this is a moment where we all need to come together as one nation — young and old, rich and poor, black and white, Republican and Democrat.”
With just two weeks to go in the race, Mr. McCain finds himself in a daunting position, as polls in critical swing states give him fewer avenues to victory on Nov. 4. But having been written off before, he has embraced his underdog status, firing away at Mr. Obama on economic issues and assailing his robust fund-raising while he reminding voters that Mr. Obama had broken a pledge to accept public financing in the general election.
– Because Mr. Obama has raised more than $600 million, Mr. McCain said, the “dam has broken” for future presidential campaigns. Mr. McCain, who accepted public financing and received an $84 million allotment from the treasury, suggested he may well be the last presidential candidate to run under the current rules established at the end of the Watergate era.
“It’s laying a predicate for the future that can be very dangerous,” Mr. McCain said on “Fox News Sunday.” “History shows us where unlimited amounts of money are in political campaigns, it leads to scandal.”
Reacting to the Powell endorsement, Mr. McCain did not criticize the former secretary of state, saying, “I respect and continue to respect and admire Secretary Powell.” He did not mention the endorsement at a pair of rallies in Ohio.
“We’re going to win Ohio, and we’re going to show the pundits again that they were wrong,” Mr. McCain said to cheers in Toledo. He focused on his economic argument, warning that Mr. Obama would try to “redistribute the wealth” through his tax proposals.
– Mr. Powell, a retired Army general who was a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President George Bush and President Bill Clinton, seemed intent on making the most out of his endorsement by saving it until the end of the race and by not informing either candidate before disclosing it on “Meet the Press.”
– Mr. Powell said he was dismayed by the tenor of the campaign, declared that Mr. McCain’s running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, was not fit to be vice president, expressed displeasure with the direction of the Republican Party and called Mr. McCain scattered on his approach to the economy. “Every day there was a different approach,” he said.
“As gifted as he is,” Mr. Powell said of Mr. McCain, a friend for 25 years, “he is essentially going to execute the Republican agenda, the orthodoxy of the Republican agenda, with a new face and a maverick approach to it, and he’d be quite good at it. But I think we need a generational change.”
While several Republicans brushed aside the significance of the endorsement, saying they believed it had been in the works for weeks, others said they were more concerned by Mr. Obama’s ability to dwarf Mr. McCain in spending during the final weeks of the campaign. As strategists for Mr. Obama eyed intensifying their efforts in Georgia, North Dakota and West Virginia, Republican advisers were trimming their efforts back to states won by Mr. Bush in 2004 and hoping for the best elsewhere.
The endorsement and the new fund-raising figures came on a weekend filled with signs of fresh momentum for Mr. Obama.
– He broke his record for crowd sizes, drawing an estimated 100,000 people to an outdoor rally in St. Louis. But the campaigns appear to be locked in a bitter duel in Missouri and a few other states that supported Republicans in recent presidential contests.
“The numbers we’re seeing at rallies are good portents,” said Mr. Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod, who like other aides reflected a sweaty and nervous optimism. “These become good barometers of enthusiasm.”
Using Mr. Obama as a magnet, the large rallies are specifically intended to stir interest in early voting and to serve as practice exercises for local campaign organizers to get out the vote on Election Day. By focusing on several Republican-leaning states, like Missouri, North Carolina and Virginia, advisers said they were striving to pave several distinct routes to an Electoral College victory instead of relying on a set number of states as Democrats have in the past.
– While Mr. Powell said he had no plans to campaign for Mr. Obama, he became the highest-profile Republican to add his support to the Democratic ticket. He dismissed the notion that he was supporting Mr. Obama because they are both black.
– He contributed $2,300 to Mr. McCain last year and said he had studied both candidates for nearly two years, but in recent weeks Mr. Obama had impressed him.
“He displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems,” Mr. Powell said, adding: “Not jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor. I think that he has a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well.”
Advisers to Mr. Obama said they had no immediate plans of using Mr. Powell in campaign advertisements, but that could change over the next two weeks. Mr. Obama, who has used his large campaign treasury to buy 30-minute spots on the television networks in the final week of the race, could highlight the endorsement at that point, but aides also said they expected Mr. Powell’s words to receive plenty of attention on their own.
Mr. Powell seemed to offer a twinge of regret, saying, “It isn’t easy for me to disappoint Senator McCain in the way that I have this morning.” But he said he disagreed with the McCain campaign’s decision to raise doubts about Mr. Obama by linking him to William Ayers, an antigovernment radical from the 1960s.
“Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed-out terrorist,” Mr. Powell said. “Well, then, why do we keep talking about him?”
– Still, the Republican ticket intensified its new line of attack, likening Mr. Obama’s policies to socialism. Ms. Palin, campaigning on Sunday in New Mexico, did not mention the Powell endorsement, instead deriding Mr. Obama for a comment he made last week about wanting to “spread the wealth.” She declared, “Now is no time to experiment with socialism.”
Mr. Obama, invoking Mr. Powell, offered a retort as he met with voters in North Carolina.
– “Socialism?” Mr. Obama said. “It’s kind of hard to figure out how Warren Buffet endorsed me and Colin Powell endorsed me, and I’m practicing socialism. John McCain thinks that giving these Americans a break is socialism. Well, I call it opportunity.”
Mr. McCain, who mentioned Mr. Powell on Sunday only when asked about him during a television interview, noted that he had collected endorsements from four former secretaries of state and more than 200 retired Army general and admirals.
Michael Powell contributed reporting from Fayetteville, N.C., and Michael Cooper from Columbus, Ohio.
————————–
21. April 2008, 07:30 Uhr
Der schwarze Senator aus Illinois sei nicht nur ein "mitreißender Redner" und habe die meisten Delegiertenstimmen hinter sich, sondern sei einfach "der bessere Kandidat", schreibt die britische Zeitung in einem Kommentar. Dafür bekam Hillary Clinton überraschend Unterstützung von einem ihrer schärfsten Kritiker.
Sie umschleichen sich wie Raubkatzen, jeden Moment zum Angriff bereit: Hillary Clinton und Barack Obama in einer TV-Debatte.
– Angesichts des zunehmend schärfer werdenden Wettkampfs um die Präsidentschaftskandidatur der US-Demokraten hat sich die „Financial Times“ klar hinter Barack Obama gestellt. Der schwarze Senator aus Illinois sei nicht nur ein „mitreißender Redner“ und habe die meisten Delegiertenstimmen hinter sich, sondern sei einfach „der bessere Kandidat“, schrieb die britische Zeitung in ihrem Kommentar. Dafür bekam Hillary Clinton überraschend Unterstützung von einem ihrer schärfsten Kritiker.
– Da sich die politischen Ziele der beiden Bewerber nur minimal unterschieden, gehe es in dem Wettstreit „um Charakter, Temperament und Identität“, schreibt die „Financial Times“. Mit seiner „brillanten Kampagne“ aber habe Obama bewiesen, dass er „sympathischer, ehrlicher und vertrauenswürdiger“ sei, sich ernsthaft um Konsens bemühe und über die Parteigrenze hinweg Anziehungskraft besitze. Clintons Kampagne dagegen sei das reine „Chaos“. „Diejenigen, die sie nicht leiden können, tun es mit Leidenschaft“.
Die USA, heißt es in dem Kommentar weiter, hätten das Bedürfnis nach Inspiration. Die Wahl der ersten Präsidentin hätte in der Tat „sehr inspirierend“ sein können. „Doch nicht, wenn diese Frau – mit ihrem dynastischen Gepäck und der Gabe zu spalten – gegen diesen Mann antritt.“ Die Demokraten hätten „furchtbar lange“ auf einen Politiker wie Barack Obama gewartet. „Schon zu lange“.
– Die Zeitung „Pittsburgh Tribune-Review“ sprach sich dagegen offen für die frühere First Lady als Präsidentschaftskandidatin der Demokratischen Partei aus. Der Herausgeber des Blattes, Richard Mellon Scaife, hatte in den 90er Jahren etliche kritisch-konservative Recherchen gegen Hillary Clinton und ihren Mann, den damaligen Präsidenten Bill Clinton, angestoßen. Nun verwies die Zeitung nicht nur auf die politische Erfahrung der New Yorker Senatorin, sondern auch darauf, dass sie den Mut gehabt habe, sich trotz der langjährigen Kritik an ihrer Person mit der „Tribune“-Redaktion zusammenzusetzen. „Politische Courage ist für einen Präsidenten unentbehrlich. Clinton hat das gezeigt, Obama nicht“, hieß es mit Blick auf Clintons parteiinternen Konkurrenten Barack Obama, dem farbigen Senator aus Illinois.
In Pennsylvania stimmen die Wähler am Dienstag ab. In Umfragen liegt Clinton in dem Ostküstenstaat zwar vor Obama, ihr Vorsprung ist zuletzt jedoch zusammengeschmolzen. Sie muss nun Beobachtern zufolge sehr deutlich gewinnen, um einen weiteren Kampf um die Nominierung begründen zu können. Bei den Delegiertenstimmen der bisherigen Abstimmungen liegt Obama vorn. – AP/AFP/sa
Wsws 081018
The Washington Post endorses Obama
– The Washington Post endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama yesterday. Such an endorsement—by the second-most influential liberal paper after the New York Times, headquartered in the nation’s capital, and which obtained widespread support in the 1970s for uncovering the Nixon administration’s role in the Watergate affair—carries immense weight in the US political establishment.
– The Post editorial explained that on two fundamental class questions—US economic and military policy—Obama could be safely trusted with the presidency. The reasons it gave are especially significant as the Post, in line with the general drift of American politics since the 1970s, has moved far to the right, notably with its unrelenting support to the US occupation of Iraq.
– On the economy, the Post saw Obama as a conservative candidate, who would “respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets” and oppose more left-leaning elements in his own party.
The Post noted the fact that Obama “has surrounded himself with top-notch, experienced, centrist economic advisers [is] perhaps the best guarantee that…Mr. Obama will not ride into town determined to reinvent every policy wheel.” According to Obama’s comments at the October 15 presidential debate, these advisers include multibillionaire investor Warren Buffett and ex-Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker.
– The paper was pleased that Obama raised no protest over the Bush administration’s bitterly unpopular, multitrillion-dollar bailouts of Wall Street. It wrote, “the country will want in its president a combination of nimbleness and steadfastness—precisely the qualities Mr. Obama has displayed during the past few weeks. When he might have been scoring political points against the incumbent, he instead responsibly urged fellow Democrats in Congress to back Mr. Bush’s financial rescue plan.”
– The Post added, “A silver lining of the financial crisis may be the flexibility it gives Mr. Obama to override some…in his own party who oppose open trade, as well as to pursue the entitlement reform that he surely understands is needed.” In other words, the Post calculates that Obama would use the crisis to justify cuts in social programs like Medicare and Social Security.
– In foreign policy, the Post concluded “the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain US leadership and engagement.” It wrote that on “most policies, such as the need to go after al-Qaeda, check Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and fight HIV/AIDS, [Obama] differs little from Mr. Bush or Mr. McCain.”
– Its treatment of Obama’s Iraq policy is particularly significant, as Obama based his primary campaign on appeals to mass opposition to the Iraq war and criticism of the support given to it by other Democrats, such as Hillary Clinton. The Post writes,
– “Mr. Obama’s greatest deviation from current policy is also our biggest worry: his insistence on withdrawing US combat troops from Iraq on a fixed timeline. Thanks to the surge Mr. Obama opposed, it may be feasible to withdraw many troops during his first two years in office.”
The Post was clearly not overly worried, however: “if it isn’t [possible to withdraw US troops]—and US generals have warned that the hard-won gains of the past 18 months could be lost by a precipitous withdrawal,” the Post said, it could “assume that Mr. Obama would recognize the strategic importance of success in Iraq and adjust his plans.”
– Coincidentally, on the very same day the leading conservative columnist for the New York Times, David Brooks, issued his own appraisal of Obama. In his column “Thinking about Obama,” Brooks praised Obama for being “reassuring and self-composed,” writing, “He may be liberal, but he is never wild. His family is bourgeois. His instinct is to flee the revolutionary gesture in favor of the six-point plan.”
Such judgments pour cold water over the panegyrics to Obama written in left-liberal circles, where the Nation and various left intellectuals present Obama as holding out the prospect of fundamental change. Which are more realistic: their hopes, or the assessments of Brooks, Buffett, and the Washington Post?
"Post" und "Times" für Barack Obama
18. Oktober 2008, 03:02 Uhr
* Die führende US-Zeitung "Washington Post" hat sich hinter den Demokraten Barack Obama gestellt. Unter der Überschrift "Barack Obama for President" wies die Redaktion in einem Leitartikel darauf hin, dass der Republikaner John McCain durch die "verantwortungslose" Ernennung von Sarah Palin als seine Vizekandidatin enttäuscht habe.
– Auch die konservative britische Zeitung "The Times" empfahl Obama. "Senator John McCain ist ein wirklicher Held und ein mutiger Politiker … Doch seine Zeit ist vorbei." Obama habe "Charakter, Intelligenz und Urteilskraft" gezeigt. McCain sei "gescheitert", "und seine sonderliche Wahl der Vizepräsidentenkandidatin war unverantwortlich".
——————————-
Die Welt 081025
Große konservative Zeitung stellt sich hinter Obama
– Die "Chicago Tribune", eine der führenden konservativen Zeitungen der USA, hat sich in ihrer 160-jährigen Geschichte nie hinter einen Präsidentschaftskandidaten der Demokratischen Partei gestellt – bis sie sich jetzt für Barack Obama entschied. Clemens Wergin sprach mit Meinungschef Bruce Dold.
Wie kam es zur für die "Chicago Tribune" revolutionären Positionierung?
– Wir haben uns gefragt, wie viel wir über Obamas Charakter wissen, seine Integrität und seine Entscheidungsfindungen. Wir haben ihn seit seinen ersten Schritten in der Politik beobachtet bis zu seiner gegenwärtigen Rolle als US-Senator. Seine politische Philosophie weicht von der der "Chicago Tribune" ab. Aber er war immer pragmatisch und einer, dem daran gelegen war, einen Konsens herzustellen. So hat er mit Republikanern bei einer Reihe von Themen zusammengearbeitet, die uns wichtig waren. Etwa bei der Reform der Strafjustiz, des Sozialstaates oder bei Ethik-Regeln für die Politik. Dann haben wir uns John McCain angesehen, dessen Kandidatur wir in den meisten Jahren gerne unterstützt hätten. Wir hatten aber den Eindruck, dass er sich von seinen philosophischen Wurzeln entfernt hat.
Er gilt ja ebenfalls als moderat.
Ja, nur zwei Dinge sind im Moment problematisch: McCain war immer ein Vertreter des schlanken Staates