>
The media reaction to the recent ABC Presidential debate in Pennsylvania was virtually unanimous. Television moderators Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos had been widely ridiculed for not asking a single question on an issue of political substance for more than the first fifty minutes of the Presidential debate. Indeed, there was not a single question on wellness care, the war in Iraq, the economy, illegal immigration, social security, or any other of the essential challenges and issues facing America today.
Instead, for almost the first hour of the debate, the voters heard questions concerning Barrack Obama\'s recent dubious comments on tiny town America. In addition, the ABC moderators focused many questions on Obama\'s relationship with his pastor, the controversial Reverend Jeremiah Wright. One more debate question concerned no matter if Obama loves the American flag and why he does not wear flag pins on his suit lapel. Still one more question concerned Barack Obama\'s relationship with the former radical leader of the “Weathermen“, William Ayers.
Even though some of the criticism of the coverage of the Democrats Pennsylvania debate is certainly valid (specially troubling had been the continued camera shots of Former Initial daughter, Chelsea Clinton), the questions posed by the moderators in those very first fifty minutes were exactly the sorts of questions that the American voter now requirements answered in order to vote for or against Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama.
It is evident that the country is conscious that Barack Obama is to the left of the American political center on most of the major problems. It also appears from the public opinion polls that a lot of the American public would presently support an inexperienced, liberal, Democratic politician in the 2008 Presidential election. In truth, the polls indicate that if an election between John McCain and Barack Obama was held today, it would absolutely be especially close.
So a pertinent question in the mind of the American voter is genuinely just how far to the left of center are the politics of Barack Obama? The ultimate answer to that question will almost certainly determine the 2008 Presidential election. Thus, the questions in the 1st fifty two minutes of the ABC Presidential debate, while not about national problems, were certainly not frivolous and truly fairly critical.
Give consideration to that Barack Obama is running for the highest office in the land on a pretty short political record. He has been a United States Senator for just 3 years. Prior to that he was a State Senator in Illinois. His political record is short and his voting record appears carefully developed with a future campaign for a high office in mind.
In announcing the reason for his candidacy for the Presidency, Barack Obama said: \"What\'s stopped us is the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics, the ease with which we\'re distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions\". His oratory sounds terrific until 1 examines his actual record as an Illinois State Senator. That record indicates that he voted “present,” (efficiently sidestepping numerous critical problems) practically 130 times. It is a political voting record that gives little insight into today‘s presidential candidate. It is also a voting record that is in conflict with the words of the man.
As a result, in the minds of the voters, there are definitely two distinct Presidential candidates named Barack Obama. Which of the two is the actual candidate is the biggest question the voters must answer between now and election day. The reality is that the Barack Obama who can't win is the candidate who secretly agrees with the diatribes of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright. He also supports Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers, and other extreme activists of the American left. The Barack Obama who cannot win is the candidate that makes elitist comments about little town America and its guns and religion. The Barack Obama who can't win is the candidate that continues to backpedal and apologize for gaffes and communication errors.
Then again, the Barack Obama who can win the 2008 Presidential election is the candidate who uses his considerable communication abilities to unite the nation. Also, he should be a candidate who transcends partisan politics and wants real reform in Washington, D.C. He would learn quickly from his limited encounter and can't vote \"present\" on the key issues of the day. He could possibly not be an elitist, but really should be the candidate who has shown outstanding skill in the management of his heretofore successful Presidential campaign.
Is Barack Obama a exceptional, thoughtful politician who can transcend party politics and use his considerable oratory skill to lead the country and reform Washington DC.? Or is Barack Obama a far left of center, elitist candidate who secretly admires the dubious diatribes of his radical pastor, and who condones the actions of a violent underground leader of America\'s past?
Historically, American political reality concludes that the former Barack Obama can win the 2008 Presidential election, whilst the latter Barack Obama basically can not. It undoubtedly would be a lot less complicated for the voters during the next various months if the real Barack Obama finally stood up.
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar