Obama and His Ethical Dilemmas

In the New York Times, on Sunday, August 9, 09, Frank Rich raises some provocative issues about Obama's broken promises and whether or not he is capitulating to the corporate establishment. You can read the article here.

Obama, and any reformer who has political power, faces a difficult moral and ethical quandary: in politics, money always talks. In Western law, corporations are legally considered to be single individuals, and as such retain the rights of individuals to free speech and access to lawmakers so they can influence their opinions and laws in their favor. In the United States, campaign financing has been the accepted form of legal bribery. This is why the efforts of various citizens groups, such as Common Cause, to control and eliminate corporate campaign contributions have always stalled.

Back to Obama's quandary: how will he make fundamental changes when the corporations control the elected officials who ultimately decide on the changes? Obviously, he has to find ways to work with the corporations. The questions are: how many goals do you sacrifice in order to obtain your highest goals? How many concessions to big business do you make before you simply arrive at the status quo that Business prefers?

As Frank Rich points out, in the battle to reform health insurance, almost every Representative and Senator in both parties have accepted large bribes, er, “campaign contributions” from the health insurance industry. Obama, himself, appointed many of the good ol' boys from the financial industry–men who were at least complicit in the financial collapse–in the reconstruction efforts we know as the bail-out and stimulus packages.

Obama is a brilliant men, so he certainly was or is aware of the roles his appointees played in the collapse. Does this make him (Obama) a part of the solution or part of the problem? I believe he is a highly ethical person as well as being a shrewd politician, so I imagine that these thoughts are not new to him. He is also very aware that Jimmy Carter tried to clean up government but without engaging the Establishment, so he had only one term, and the effects of his efforts evaporated almost as soon as he left office.

Bill Clinton found himself in similar positions on a number of issues, however he faced a hostile Republican Congress. The results of his quid-pro-quo were that the country had the largest and longest period of economic growth in recent history, and two major mistakes: NAFTA and the “reform” of welfare that, in fact, broke a well-run system. The middle-class continues to pay the price for both of these mistakes, particularly NAFTA.

Many of us are working hard to support Obama's efforts at health insurance reform. Whatever passes into law will be a major advance. Let's just hope that he does not give the farm away to the corporations in the process.

Clinton Gas Plan Bad For Michigan: Granholm Please Note

Jennifer Granholm who has been doing a fairly good job of working hard to stimulate job growth and diversification of Michigan's economy might have to rethink her support of Hillary Clinton as result of her new proposal on gas prices.

Clinton is proposing a tax cut that makes her sound like a Republican. But even worse, cutting the federal gasoline tax would also cut billions of dollars out of road construction projects at a time when Gov. Granholm has been accelerating road projects to create more Michigan jobs.

Apparently, Clinton needs a few more votes and she will do anything to get them including helping to destroy Michigan jobs.

Obama is right on about this one. We need a real national energy program, not another quick fix. At a time when GM is announcing thousands of more Michigan layoffs, the last thing we need is a Republican style proposal from a Democrat.

Come on guys, lighten up!

I know this blog is leaning heavily toward Obama, but I have worked too long for the rights of women to put up with idea that he is the answer to all our problems. Give me a person who can multi-task!

Think about checking this article written by Connie Schultz in the Cleveland Plain Dealer entitled, "Men, it's not your place to tell Clinton to quit the race," in April 6, 2008 issue.

I cannot believe the level of misogyny present among the pundits in this race against Clinton. I have wondered just what woman could run and not raise the hackles of these same men. When did you hear the clothing, voice, haircuts among other things criticized in male candidates? One pundit suggested the other day she only became senator in NY because of her association with Bill. There are a number of women in the Senate now who were elected on their own, including her.

Now mind you I am sure that they will be after Obama on another whole list of things if he is candidate.

GeneG.

Bill Clinton and Truman– what a pair

Yesterday (5 July), I spent a memorable afternoon sitting about 30 feet from Bill Clinton as he addressed 5000 people. It was a hot day in Independence, MO, and we had gathered to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Truman Library and Museum.

After broiling in the afternoon sun, we were finally admitted into the cool air of the physical center of the Reformed Latter Day Saints, the Community of Christ auditorium. Harry Truman’s grandson, Clifton Truman Daniel, and the governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius were sitting near us, as were other political luminaries.

My point in this entry is not to burden you with a “what I did on my summer vacation” sort of diary, but to remind you, as I was reminded yesterday, that our greatest presidents have been visionaries and men of good will.

Unlike the current inhabitant of the Oval Office, these men actually meant what they said. Bill Clinton reminded us that Harry Truman sought out our nation’s enemies so he could talk with them and reach political solutions. Truman devised the perfect, non-military alternative to counter Russian imperialism: the Marshall Plan.

He respected minorities, was concerned about the welfare of the entire nation, acknowledged his mistakes, and led this country brilliantly through some of the most dangerous periods of our history: the reconstruction following WWII and the beginning of the Cold War. In short, he was the complete antithesis of our current president who has engaged in double-speak for so long that he has lost his moorings politically, ethically, and morally. He is adrift on a sea of deception, with he himself, perhaps, being the most deceived.

Clinton, who is perhaps one of the most thwarted presidents we’ve ever had, talked about how Truman was thwarted by powerful political forces who would not abide racial integration, universal health care, or a myriad of other programs that could have bettered our society. Like Truman, Clinton could have done so much more had he been able to focus on the job rather than fighting off his enemies who would do anything, including shutting down the federal government, to make his life miserable. Parenthetically, does this sound like what a certain Michigan governor is going through?

Yesterday, all of us who heard Clinton speak were reminded that once we had great presidents who cared about all of us. I look forward to the possibility that this will someday once again be true.