The one overtly positive thing I can say for Obama... He's not the Washington Insider, the status quo.
I keep hearing this, but there is overwhelming evidence to suggest otherwise.
1. He is definitely an insider of the Illinois Democratic machine, one of the most draconian and established political machines remaining in America. He is known to have Washington insider Dick Durbin as his mentor. His votes have largely paralleled Durbin's and have supported Illinois pork barrel issues -- at least the ones he didn't simply vote "present" on to reduce his exposure to having a more solid record during his term as senator/candidate. It's a point of fact, that you do not get the support of the Illinois Democratic machine by being an "outsider" or "a force for change." Really, a laughable idea.
2. As above, you do not get the support of the national Democratic Party by being an outsider, anymore than you do with the Republicans. Some Democrats are more liberal than others, some have an assortment of different favored positions. But, Obama is a mainstream candidate and you are not part of the mainstream if you express an unwillingness to play ball or show any great degree of independence. His support from Ted Kennedy, a consummate party insider, should make this obvious.
3. He has already managed to establish an "insider" base of lobbyist support in Washington to rival any other politician.
Yet it is also startling to see how quickly Obama’s senatorship has been woven into the web of institutionalized influence-trading that afflicts official Washington. He quickly established a political machine funded and run by a standard Beltway group of lobbyists, P.R. consultants, and hangers-on. For the staff post of policy director he hired Karen Kornbluh, a senior aide to Robert Rubin when the latter, as head of the Treasury Department under Bill Clinton, was a chief advocate for NAFTA and other free-trade policies that decimated the nation’s manufacturing sector (and the organized labor wing of the Democratic Party). Obama’s top contributors are corporate law and lobbying firms (Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden, Arps, where four attorneys are fund-raisers for Obama as well as donors), Wall Street financial houses (Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase), and big Chicago interests (Henry Crown and Company, an investment firm that has stakes in industries ranging from telecommunications to defense). Obama immediately established a “leadership PAC,” a vehicle through which a member of Congress can contribute to other politicians’ campaigns—and one that political reform groups generally view as a slush fund through which congressional leaders can evade campaign-finance rules while raising their own political profiles.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275
4. Similarly, his claims of not accepting money from lobbyists are a bit thin in actual practice:
But behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.
In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/09/pacs_and_lobbyists_aided_obamas_rise/
5. He has also already managed to become involved in the whole "shady deals" thing for personal gain that is so common (and bipartisan, actually) in Illinois politics. Such as the
Tony Rezko shady real estate deal.
Obama talks a good game. He is attractive and articulate and has a good speech writer to take advantage of those skills. However, as an "agent of change" you likely have to look no further than Dick Durbin or Ted Kennedy for insight as to what change means. He will likely push a very progressive, but mainstream Democratic agenda. He will certainly work with the people he needs to to achieve this agenda and support his next election bid.
The only true outsiders, true agents for change, in this election are/were Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. You can tell the difference between insiders and outsiders by how they were supported by their own parties compared to the mainstream candidates.
Charon
