The Democratic Party's presidential nomination process has captured the attention of the country, leaving many of us, myself included, hungry for every tidbit of information that can be found. Not so long ago in 2004 a young and charismatic Illinois State Senator by the name of Barack Obama delivered an inspiring speech at the Democratic National Convention. With this speech, he burst onto the national scene and whispers of a potential presidential run started almost immediately. I for one was optimistic that he would run, and in February of 2007 my hope came true.
Did Hillary Clinton speak at the 2004 convention? I can't recall, and if she did it certainly wasn't memorable. And while it does take more than speeches to get anything accomplished, a leader must first capture the attention of those they are empowered to lead. Messages of inspiration, unification, and hope are necessary in this time of economic turmoil and war and only one major candidate is providing those for our nation.It is amazing that the Obama campaign has positioned itself where it is. Barack took on the establishment of the party and the most powerful couple in the party, the Clintons. Certainly their platforms are very similar and I don't agree with every political stance they have. The primary difference, though, is the message that each candidate is sending to the electorate. Obama is spreading inspiration, hope, and leadership in a campaign that seems aimed at putting our country back on track. Clinton is spreading misinformation, venom, and doubletalk in a campaign that seems aimed more at accomplishing Clinton's ambition to become the first female President than at doing good for the country.
I would have preferred a more libertarian candidate who would respect the Constitution and ensure civil liberties were protected. However, I believe given the times that Obama is the best candidate of those that can reasonably expect to win the presidency. He has promised to "discard Bush's unconstitutional executive orders"1 and statements like that have reassured me. More than that, however, I prefer a candidate who seems to respect the intelligence of the voters. Obama's willingness to cross party lines to get things accomplished (well established by his record in the Illinois State Senate and US Senate) combined with his message of hope, the intelligence with which he speaks, and the respect he gives to voters makes him the first Presidential candidate for whom I want to cast a vote for rather than voting against another.
That being said, the way in which the Clinton campaign has been run makes it impossible for me to ever cast a vote for her. It has been a campaign of hypocrisy, misinformation, religious intolerance, racism, and the same fear-mongering employed by the Bush administration. It started with Bill Clinton's attempt to cast Obama as "the black candidate" by comparing him to Jesse Jackson and has continued with Clinton's relative silence to Geraldine Ferraro's comments that Obama is only in the position that he is in because he's black. The anger that spewed forth at one of Obama's advisors calling Clinton a "monster" seems all the more hypocritical in light of one of Clinton's advisor's racist comments. The lack of action on removing Ferraro, a member of her campaign finance committee, from her campaign speaks loud and clear to her ambition to become president at all costs rather than to an ambition doing real good for our country.
Obama hasn't been perfect himself in this campaign, but he has certainly carried himself with more dignity than Clinton has. Our leaders should not resort to crying and hypocritical "shame on you" comments or claims of political experience that they really don't have (see her claims of international diplomacy forays,2 one of which ironically includes a speech).
As for the question of experience? It's certainly true Clinton has more experience living in Washington than does Obama, but then so does Bush and that hasn't made him a good president that last few years. Furthermore, if we're voting for experience that John McCain should be our choice, not Clinton. And what would Clinton say of the charismatic, inspiring young Democratic elected president in 1992? Someone by the name of Bill Clinton who had zero elected office experience in Washington prior to his Presidency. Which of the Senators did she support over her husband that year, Tom Harkin, Bob Kerrey, Eugene McCarthy, or Paul Tsongas?
Thus my support, my vote, and a modest contribution from me are going to Barack Obama. It will be my first vote for a Presidential candidate rather than against another. Admittedly, it is his inspirational messages of hope that drew me to his campaign, and I believe he deserves a chance to deliver on these promises. He might not succeed, but I think that's all he and his supporters are asking for: a chance to do something good for our country.
References:1. Newsvine
2. Seattle Times

