The Audacity of ObamaWhile campaigning for president against George W. Bush, Al Gore told America, "I am my own man." He meant it. With Barack Obama, folks aren't so sure. Lately, people have questioned Obama's independence. Even supporters are concerned. Many feel let down by his support for the FISA bill President Bush just signed into law. This bill allows the president to continue to authorize unlawful searches and seizures under cover of national security and the global war on terror. It gives immunity from prosecution to private businesses, notably telecoms, that assist the government in this extraconstitutional judicial dodge. Through his "yes" vote, Obama gave the loyal Bushies the OK to keep up the good work of being bad stewards of the Constitution. As such, Obama no longer can get away with criticizing the president about national security. No longer part of the solution, Obama has become part of the problem. He may not have voted to authorize the war in Iraq, but he seems to have no problem with supporting policies that grew from this unnecessary war, including domestic spying on citizens without warrants or probable cause. You would guess that Obama, a Harvard-educated constitutional scholar, would know a thing or two about unlawful searches and seizures. You would think he is politic enough to realize it looks bad to have so little political space between him and John McSame on this important issue. Lately, Obama has changed direction so much that people are wondering who he is and what he stands for. A little late for that now, folks, but not too late. It's one thing to keep your opponents guessing, but even Obamaphiles are perplexed. Some question not only the candidate but also their own judgment. Others feel they've been conned and have focused too much on style over substance. Obama, not his rivals, is responsible for why concerns are being raised about his trustworthiness once elected.
It may surprise you to learn that some people actually do still care about the Constitution. After two terms of the Bush administration using the Constitution for Charmin, many voters would like to elect a president who, when he swears to uphold and defend the Constitution, actually means it. But now there are worries that Obama, while no loyal Bushie, may not be the one to change the course. Can he be trusted not to flinch under political pressure and rescue the Bill of Rights from Bush-Cheney apparatchiks who took pleasure knocking them down one right at a time? These are questions raised by supporters, mind you. There was a surreal moment last week when TV networks cut away from their coverage of Sens. Obama and Clinton campaigning together to show Dubya at the White House for the FISA bill signing. Bush thanked many supporters in the House and Senate by name. Not named was the Illinois senator whose vote was one of many but cast considerably more weight, as he is the presumptive Democratic nominee. Obama's vote put him in the company of conservative Republicans, such as Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, who supported the war in Iraq and the global war on terror since Day One. These are some of the same lawmakers who think all this talk about the Gonzales Eight is part of some vast left-wing conspiracy and some laws were meant to be broken. How did the Democratic bearer of change end up as the standard-bearer of Bush Republicanism in wartime? As he accepts the nomination, Obama must declare his independence. He also would do well to skip his storied biracial background and start talking about his core democratic beliefs. Rhonda Chriss Lokeman (RCLCreators@kc.rr.com) is a contributing editor to The Kansas City Star. To find out more about Rhonda Chriss Lokeman and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
