Obama Supports the $500 Billion Military Industrial Complex

In 2007, Clinton raised $97 million for the primaries and Obama raised $95.6 million (http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=332). Obama did get more small donations (as did Ron Paul), but he is NOT doing well in this race because of his message. In fact Clinton is getting more votes per dollar spent than Obama (probably because she has a major name recognition advantage).

Obama is doing well because he has an ok message and a hundred million dollars of money that comes from the rich (and the guillible non-rich).

By contrast John Edwards also had an excellent message with a strong appeal to the Democrats base, however he didn't appeal to the rich, didn't raise a hundred million, and did poorly.


Progressives and radicals who care about staying true to their values should stop supporting Obama, and start talking about positive alternatives.

If we were spending just a little less time on the Democrats, and more on Green Party (or building other alternatives like the Vermont Progressive Party) - we might realize that things like Cynthia McKinney's presidential candidacy could be the best thing to happen to US progressive politics since Jesse Jackson's 1984 and 1988 Rainbow Coalition campaigns. Of course it won't be important if the alternative press and activists ignore it. One example of a break in the wall was that recent San Franciso Bay Guardian's endorsement of Cynthia McKinney.

Cynthia might have a tough fight on her hands if Ralph Nader runs. Though if she manages to win the nomination against him, and the green party manages to stay united, she could help realign US politics by helping progressives break their unhealthy addiction to the war-mongering Democrats.

Obama denounces Liberation Theology

Rev. Jeremiah Wright is right about pretty much everything that he is being criticized for (except AIDs).

Both Clinton and Obama have consistently moved to the right.

It's possible that Obama's more liberal friends will mean that his administration would be more liberal. It's also possible that it means he'd run a more conservative campaign and administration - essentially he could act overzealous in his desire to get elected.

By constrast, Hillary Clinto moved to the right a longer time ago and she is now much more comfortable as the rightwing democratic party establishment canidate. Thus she might actually do a better job of getting across liberal policies and/or appointing slightly liberal people "under the radar". That is if she still cares about issues like healthcare or the Iraq War.

Checkout the Trinity United Church of Christ's mission:

The Pastor as well as the membership of Trinity United Church of Christ is committed to a 10-point Vision:
A congregation committed to ADORATION.
A congregation preaching SALVATION.
A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.

Obama wants to expand the Army and Marines

"Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines."


The Political Compass shows

The Political Compass shows how close Obama is to Clinton is to McCain - and how they are all rightwing.

The US political spectrum is weighed heavily to the right, by contrast most democracies have a party (labor, social democratic, socialist, or communist) with an ideology similar to that of Kucinich - getting around 30%-50% of the vote.

The US green party is in that ideological space (their positions are about as progressive as Kucinich) which would be a massive niche capable of supporting a major party in most countries, but it is currently struggling to get more than 10% in elections.