Month: October 2008

One of Ronald Reagan’s closest aides is voting for Barack Obama.

Former Reagan chief of staff Ken Duberstein told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria this week he intends to vote for Democrat Barack Obama on Tuesday.

Duberstein said he was influenced by another prominent Reagan official – Colin Powell – in his decision.

“Well let’s put it this way – I think Colin Powell’s decision is in fact the good housekeeping seal of approval on Barack Obama.”

Powell served as national security advisor to Reagan during Duberstein’s tenure as chief of staff.

Duberstein was also interviewed on the subject on MSNBC.

If a man who worked so closely for Reagan, the Moses of the Conservative Revolution, is choosing Obama …

The Civic-Minded Two, Woot!

This article has a video from the New America Foundation on how investing in infrastructure is not only desperately needed, but is the sort of economic stimulus we pretty badly need. It then follows with excerpts from an interview of Obama by Rachel Maddow.

MADDOW: There may be some policy fights ahead, particularly in responding to the economic crisis that will have both a practical and an ideological component. If we are looking at economic stimulus, is there a possibility that you could see in your first term, if you are elected, that we’d need an economic stimulus program that felt to Americans a little bit like a public works program, a little bit like an FDR-style infrastructure building program?

OBAMA: Well, I’ve actually talked about this. And I haven’t been hiding the ball on this. I think we have to rebuild our infrastructure. Look at what China’s doing right now. Their trains are faster than us, their ports are better than us. They are preparing for a very competitive 21st century economy and we’re not.

One of the most frustrating things over the last eight years has been the ability of George Bush to pile up debt and huge deficits and not have anything to show for it, right? So, if you’re going to run deficit spending, then it better be in rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our sewer lines, our water system, laying broadband lines.

One of, I think, the most important infrastructure projects that we need is a whole new electricity grid. Because if we’re going to be serious about renewable energy, I want to be able to get wind power from North Dakota to population centers, like Chicago. And we’re going to have to have a smart grid if we want to use plug-in hybrids then we want to be able to have ordinary consumers sell back the electricity that’s generated from those car batteries, back into the grid. That can create 5 million new jobs, just in new energy.

But, it’s huge projects that generally speaking, you’re not going to have private enterprise would want to take all those risks. And we’re going to have to be involved in that process.

That sounds like a better way to get some money into the economy than (a) sending out another round of stimulus checks to the populace (that will go to pay off debt, mostly), or (b) sending out another round of bailout checks to financial institutions (that will go, apparently, to golden parachutes and dividend payments).

Tim O’Reilly is a well-known tech blogger, and in this lengthy article he explains why he’s voting for Barack Obama.

Faced with these problems, we need a president who can harness the best and brightest our country has to offer, a president who is conversant with, and comfortable with, the power of technology to assist in solving these problems, a president who is good at listening, studying, and devising solutions based on the best insight available, rather than on narrow ideology. We need a president who can forge consensus, not just among the partisans in our own fractured democracy but around the world. We need a president who can inspire our citizens and our global partners to forgo narrow self interest and embrace the possibilities that we can achieve if we work together to build a better future.

I believe Barack Obama is that president. He is a man of intelligence, but also a man whose character and temperament seem suited to the problems of our age: unflappable, optimistic even in the face of adversity, willing to speak the truth about subjects that have long been taboo (I’m thinking of his speech on race, and his speech on fatherhood) and with unscripted reactions that show his fundamental decency (I’m thinking of his reaction to those who wanted to make a campaign issue of Sarah Palin’s daughter’s unplanned pregnancy.)

O’Reilly’s argument is based on the “tech” advantages of Obama’s call for connected and transparent government, his handling of financial matters, his stand on climate change, and his support of Net Neutrality. It’s a long article, but well worth reading.

(via BoingBoing)

The 3 Nov. issue of The American Conservative, beyond what Fukuyama writes, includes the following “ conservatives, libertarians, and independent thinkers” with endorsements of Obama:

John Patrick Diggins 

I prefer the professor to the warrior.

Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn 

Obama’s telling of his—and our—American story rang true to our struggles, ideals, and times, from his opening expression of “deep gratitude for the privilege of addressing this convention” to his closing prayer that out of trouble and cynicism “our country will reclaim its promise.” For living in these times has entailed a growing acquaintance with what Bob Dylan termed “the morals of despair.” From the “culture of greed,” as Kevin Phillips put it, and the obscene rich/poor gap to unilateralism and a deadly and costly war, family and community disintegration, immoral business and political practices, and economic collapse, sources of self-respect and respect in the world are hard to find. Obama echoes the call of some of our keenest social critics for a remoralization of politics and society. Wendell Berry, for one, has emphasized the need for an attitude of “stewardship” as an alternative to exploitation, manipulation, aggression, and selfishness. This message, not traceable to current notions of Republican and Democrat, recalls our commitments to the humbling, soul-leveling inspiration that is democracy, the dignity of hard work, individual and communal responsibility, and unity beyond race and other false boundaries.

Scott McConnell: 

For these reasons, I’m voting for Obama. While he doesn’t inspire me, he does impress. His two-year campaign has been disciplined and intelligent. He has surrounded himself with the mainstream liberal types who staffed the Clinton administration. Like countless social democratic leaders before him, he probably was more left-wing when he was younger. Circumstance and ambition have pushed him to the center. If elected, he will inherit an office burdened with massive financial and foreign-policy problems. Unlike John McCain, he won’t try to bomb his way out of the mess.

Robert A. Pape: 

I strongly support Barack Obama for president. In the past, I have supported both Republicans and Democrats, choosing the candidate with the leadership qualities and foreign-policy principles most likely to advance the national security of the United States. Of course, we have no crystal balls, but leaders with sound judgment on core policies and courage to look beyond political winds of the moment greatly improve the odds of long-term success. Obama scores uncommonly high on the “judgment-courage” index, qualities that will be needed as our next president seeks to repair the damage from the triple train wreck of our overstretched military, underperforming economy, and floundering international reputation that is now undermining our national security.

Of the 18 with articles, five are voting for Obama, three for McCain, four for a third party candidate, two for write-ins, and four are declining to vote at all.

Francis Fukuyama, conservative historian (The End of History) writes in The American Conservative why he’s voting for Barack Obama. (Emphasis mine)

I’m voting for Barack Obama this November for a very simple reason. It is hard to imagine a more disastrous presidency than that of George W. Bush. It was bad enough that he launched an unnecessary war and undermined the standing of the United States throughout the world in his first term. But in the waning days of his administration, he is presiding over a collapse of the American financial system and broader economy that will have consequences for years to come. As a general rule, democracies don’t work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure. While John McCain is trying desperately to pretend that he never had anything to do with the Republican Party, I think it would a travesty to reward the Republicans for failure on such a grand scale. 

McCain’s appeal was always that he could think for himself, but as the campaign has progressed, he has seemed simply erratic and hotheaded. His choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate was highly irresponsible; we have suffered under the current president who entered office without much knowledge of the world and was easily captured by the wrong advisers. McCain’s lurching from Reaganite free-marketer to populist tribune makes one wonder whether he has any underlying principles at all.

America has been living in a dream world for the past few years, losing its basic values of thrift and prudence and living far beyond its means, even as it has lectured the rest of the world to follow its model. At a time when the U.S. government has just nationalized a good part of the banking sector, we need to rethink a lot of the Reaganite verities of the past generation regarding taxes and regulation. Important as they were back in the 1980s and ’90s, they just won’t cut it for the period we are now entering. Obama is much better positioned to reinvent the American model and will certainly present a very different and more positive face of America to the rest of the world. 

(via DftCW and DOF)

DOF summarizes some of the ship-jumping going on amongst some high-profile Republicans, who are choosing to vote for Obama.

Something weird is going on. Conservative leaders like Colin Powell, Chris Buckley, and Ken Adelman are endorsing Obama. 

Conservative newspapers are going for the Senator from Illinois, too. The Chicago Tribune has endorsed their first Democrat in their entire 163-year history. The editor-in-chief of Dallas Magazine now calls himself A Conservative For Obama. The most important newspaper in Alaska is swimming madly for the Obama ship: Anchorage Daily News endorses Obama – McCain erratic, Palin not ready 

Hell, even our own Pantagraph has endorsed Obama. Twice they endorsed Ike over Stevenson, and Stevenson was from Bloomington. And owned half-interest in the newspaper! (In case you think there’s no such thing as editorial independence.)

Is it just petulance or political infighting? No, not apparently.

So I ask again, what the hell is going on? Just this: Obama is a better candidate, and there are still a lot of conservatives out there who will vote for the better candidate, regardless if they have an R or a D after their name. It’s called “thinking”. HuffPost contributor Eric Hirshberg set out to interview some of the thinking conservatives, and found it a moving experience; Conservatives voting for Obama, in their own words. Here’s a sample:

This is what democracy is supposed to be. These people actually listened, considered and were open to the possibility of change. They didn’t support a candidate. They actually chose one. And while I’m happy this year they are voting for “my team,” they also inspired me to be more open in my own political life.

I thought we were making an ad campaign about Obama. But I think we ended up making an ad campaign about the essential ingredient that makes democracy work: an open mind. We don’t belong to our political parties. Our political parties belong to us.

“They didn’t support a candidate. They actually chose one.” That’s kind of neat. And it points a way out of the party polarization that the US has gotten mired in.

Seventy-six (so far) Nobel Laureates in science have signed a letter endorsing Obama for President.

We have watched Senator Obama’s approach to these issues with admiration. We especially applaud his emphasis during the campaign on the power of science and technology to enhance our nation’s competitiveness. In particular, we support the measures he plans to take — through new initiatives in education and training, expanded research funding, an unbiased process for obtaining scientific advice, and an appropriate balance of basic and applied research — to meet the nation’s and the world’s most urgent needs.

There is more to the world than science, of course, and a scientist cannot speak any more authoritatively than you or me about the best presidential candidate regarding foreign policy, or economic plans, or non-scientific matters.

But by the same token I do think they carry some weight when it comes to evaluating the candidate’s position on science and research, the innovations and expansions of knowledge that will carry this country (and the world) forward through the 21st Century. I especially pay attention to the phrase, “an unbiased process for obtaining scientific advice,” which flies in the case of multiple instances where the current Administration has changed scientific conclusions to meet policy desires.

Another reason to vote for Obama.

(via ScienceBlogs) 

A very nice set of photos of Obama during the primary campaign by Callie Shell — waiting to go on stage, pressing the flesh, doing a stray pull-up, candid and in media res. Good stuff, and a nice glimpse at the man.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time and effort ragging on the GOP ticket this year. There’s been plenty to criticize about McCain, and Palin, and their advisors, and their supporters, and just the general goofiness from the Right.

But the fact is, I don’t think (unlike some other campaigns) that scaring folks is going to make much difference at this point. Fact is — most people who have made a decision aren’t going to be scared by it. They’ll filter out or discount anything negative said about their candidates. And the folks wavering between the candidates aren’t going (or shouldn’t) be scared into voting for the other guy.

So. Here on out, I’m not going to dwell on why I think McCain is a dishonored, opportunistic, angry, Bush-supporting tool of the Right, or why Palin is a bubble-headed incompetent ultra-conservative ideologue. While I may criticize stuff going on around the election, I’m not going to spend my time dissing the GOP ticket.

Instead, I’m going to try to focus more on making the case for Obama. For the folks not sure, for the folks a bit scared, for the folks who (sigh) still claim not to know “who Barack Obama is” — I’m going to try to dwell on the positive, on the question of why you should vote for Barack Obama.

I don’t know if it will make a difference (I mean, it’s not like this is a high-volume blog where everyone is hanging on my every word for guidance and inspiration). But it might change … one mind? I don’t know.

Maybe it will let someone who just cringes whenever I criticize McCain and Palin read something I’m writing about the election.

Maybe it will just inspire folks who are already Obama voters, making sure they get out and vote, and tell their friends. 

Or maybe it will just make me feel like I’m ending this campaign on an up note. Which is pretty worthwhile, come to think of it.

Note: The above doesn’t apply to my Google Shared items. There are far too many tales both positive and negative that are far too worthwhile passing along.