OPINION & EDITORIAL
Barack Obama: Presidential special interest whore
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Kyle Szarzynski:
- Legal system elitist, void of justice (April 30, 2008)
- 'War on drugs' cloaks oppression (April 23, 2008)
- Candidates betray King's radicalism (April 16, 2008)
- Media coverage favors U.S. interests (April 2, 2008)
- Irrational fears fuel crime focus (March 26, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Obama: Visionary, not fraudulent (September 19, 2007)
- Readers stop punching pillows, respond (September 21, 2007)
- Barack Obama: Political St. Nick (October 15, 2007)
- Dissecting Obama-mania (March 12, 2007)
- Barack Obama secret Muslim; good for you, Hillary (April 29, 2008)
Share This:
by Kyle Szarzynski
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Every decade or so, a liberal politician bursts onto the forefront of the American political landscape and achieves stardom among young, optimistic voters. This politician uses lofty rhetoric, promises major social change and instills confidence in the progressive potential of America. Bobby Kennedy was this politician in the 1960s. U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is this politician today.
The enthusiasm Mr. Obama has inspired among the collegiate is nothing short of astounding. The crowds he attracts on campuses are always big and loud, and his Facebook group now has almost 350,000 members. It seems the idealistic sons and daughters of the liberal middle class everywhere are jittery with excitement over their candidate.
UW is certainly no exception. Hundreds of students attended the Students for Obama kickoff meeting last Thursday. Ald. Eli Judge, District 8, former chair of Students for a Fair Wisconsin, was one of many who endorsed the Illinois senator at the meeting. He said, "Students are resoundingly in favor of Obama" and that he is "a really great advocate of students on a national level." Significantly, it was announced that the senator will make an appearance in Madison within the coming weeks.
Perhaps it's time to inject this annoying love fest with a dose of reality. Although Sen. Obama's oratory skills may be superior to his opponents', his record as a progressive is not. What's worse, many of his positions contradict the very ideals for which he claims to stand.
This was not always the case. After graduating from Columbia University in 1985, the young Mr. Obama settled in Chicago to begin work as a social justice advocate. Inspired by radical organizer Saul Alinsky, Mr. Obama became the head of the new Developing Communities Project, which operated on Chicago's Far South Side. His annual salary was $13,000. According to The Nation, he organized more than twenty church congregations in three years.
After his graduation from Harvard Law School in 1991, Mr. Obama returned to Chicago to practice law. Working for the civil rights firm Miner Barnhill & Galland, the lawyer Obama "represented community organizers, discrimination victims and [disenfranchised] black voters," according to the International Herald Tribune.
Mr. Obama became an inspiring figure. Through his tireless efforts, he became an effective spokesperson and fighter for the poor and oppressed. He engaged with radicals throughout the country, including famed Palestinian-American intellectual Edward Said.
Mr. Obama bears little resemblance to his former self. Once the champion of the dispossessed, he is now the champion of political opportunism. Let's briefly examine his not-so-progressive record.
Initially opposed to the invasion of Iraq, Mr. Obama has assured the warmongers that we must not "abandon" the troops. His voting record on Iraq is almost indistinguishable from his chief rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. He remains a strong supporter of the invasion of Afghanistan and the increasingly ridiculous farce of the war on terror.
Mr. Obama's commitment to equality apparently doesn't extend to poor Mexican immigrants. While publicly stating, "there isn't a stronger friend to the Latino community than me," his voting record says otherwise. In 2006, he voted for the Secure Fence Act, which authorizes the construction of a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border. He also opposes amnesty for undocumented workers.
With regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict, the senator's position can only be described as a flip-flop par excellence. Once a critic of U.S. policy in the region, he has since assured the Likud faithful of his support for Israel. Israel is "our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy," Mr. Obama said at a recent American Israel Public Affairs Committee convention. He also said the United States must continue to "fully fund military assistance" to Israel and defended the nation's blitzkrieg in Lebanon last year, stating that the Jewish state has a "legitimate right to defend itself." Regarding the occupation of the West Bank and dehumanization of millions of Palestinians, Mr. Obama had nothing to say.
On gay marriage, he is simply on the wrong side. He supports civil unions, but as he said, "My religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." The absurdity of the former chair of Students for a Fair Wisconsin endorsing this candidate speaks for itself. It should be noted that Mr. Obama's position on the issue is the same as that of Vice President Dick Cheney.
If I had more room I could detail his support for Clintonian neoliberalism, hawkish position on Iran and support for limits on the right to sue corporations. Mr. Obama, once a friend of Edward Said and admirer of Saul Alinsky, is now an AIPAC whore and wannabe Bill Clinton.
Many blame Mr. Obama's degeneration on the U.S. political machine. Does it matter? Either way, the notion that he is the candidate of progress must be buried once and for all.
Kyle Szarzynski (kszarzynski@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring history and Spanish.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 2:11am):
This will be one big fun troll fest.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:30am):
You can't talk about Palestine at an AIPAC event, but Obama has said that no one sufferes more than the Palestinian people.
As unfortunate as it is, it's nearly impossible for a Democrat to win without support from organizations like AIPAC.
Hopefully if Obama gets in office he'll return to his original and true feelings on the conflict.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:53am):
Well put Kyle. We all know that Students for Fair Wisconsin was just a Democratic Party front group, so no shocker there. The reality is that, with the exception of Kucinich and maybe Edwards (except his shilling for zionists "I repeat nothing is off the table in regards to Iran") none of the candidates believe in real structural change.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:55am):
This is an offensive article. How can you make a comment about who is best for gay rights when gay activists believe in Obama?
"Democratic National Committee GLBT Caucus Chair Rick Stafford and other politicos said Edwards and Obama have quickly outshined a crowded field of other White House hopefuls because they're prepared to sincerely discuss gay issues.
Stafford said such genuineness is a key quality that many other candidates -- including top Democratic contender Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) -- have yet to demonstrate.
"When Obama and Edwards talk about our issues," he said, "I think there's a sense that they speak from their hearts and they're willing to show that they're not there yet, where I'm not sure that kind of speaking from the heart comes from Hillary."
Edwards and Obama oppose same-sex marriage, but have said they want to expand gay civil rights."
http://www.washblade.com/2007/2-2/news/national/9935.cfm
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 4:27am):
Someone say "troll"?
- Germain Q. Stemme
Blue Diamond (September 18, 2007 @ 6:59am):
Actually, there will be no troll comments coming from me , a serious Obama supporter. I don't give a rats hoot about this attack against Obama. It's OBVIOUS what's fueling it. I am not a Wisconsin native , but I have lived in THIS state for over three years now and I have been paying VERY close attention to Wisconsin Politics, moreso than the natives themselves and looking at this "critique" of Barack Obama from my "Native Californian" viewpoint , I'd say it's pretty clear why the author feels the need to attempt to discourage support for this "particular" candidate. But guess what ? It won't work and we all know it. Get used to saying "President Obama". It will make it so much easier. Have a nice day and keep up the overall good work. One thing I will say about Madison Wisconsin. It may not be as "progressive" as California, but hey, it's the best thing Wisconsin has to offer . That's for darn sure and I'd take ya'll over the SOUTH any day.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 7:35am):
Could someone inform Mr. Szarzynski that 100% of the presidential candidates are a similar brand of whore?
Yes, in America, we have a choice between two "different" parties who manage to never change a thing.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 7:59am):
Kyle,
Aren't they all?
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 8:56am):
Spot-on. Go Edwards! Or Kucinich!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 9:10am):
Kyle, maybe it's because you are just so hard to please. Politicians oppose gay marriage because it is political suicide. Name one politician, besides Tammy Baldwin, who has won an election due to their support for gay marriage.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 9:52am):
Is no one else concerned that he called a U.S. Senator a whore?
I mean, I'm all for freedom of expression but it's hard to take someone seriously who shows that much disrespect for others.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 10:07am):
Go Edwards! Finally publicize that there really are two Americas! Then pick your America, the one that has 5 million dollar mansions with their own basketball courts and helicopter pads! Basketball court-helipad mansions for all! That is the future of Edwardsian communism!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 10:23am):
The point of democracy(all though hampered in a two party system) is to keep politics towards a center point. Although the pendulum swings a little this way and a little that way it never goes far from the center. Thus why Bush and Reagan are to the extreme right of those who have been presidents and Carter to the far left. None of them is that far off of center politically. If you find the center point is not one you can live with pack up and move to a country that does. Trying seeing how you like the quality of life in Cuba or North Korea. I'm sure you'll see your much more adjusted to the American way of life then you like to admit. Basically, as Avril Lavigne is to punk rock, Kyle is to communist revolutionaries.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 11:03am):
Your ability to distill a nuanced argument into black and white for all us commoners is "par excellence." It will certainly serve you well in your journalistic endeavors. I, too, am upset you ran out of room. Do continue next week, for I pronounce you Kyle Szarzynski: Purveyor of Progressive Values for America!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 11:26am):
can this kid write one article without bashing Israel?
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 12:28pm):
As progressive as I am, I am no fan of Obama.
Mike Gravel '08, I say.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 12:41pm):
A nearly identical article could be written on literally any candidate, Democrat or Republican, without much effort.
An unfortunate commentary on our current political system aside, the fact that you attach a blantantly sensationalist headline to the piece and try to pass it off as some sort of elucidating point of view only seems to show a desire to create controversy for the sake of controversy.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to rename it "Kyle Szarzynski: Badger Herald Attention Whore."
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 12:50pm):
"This is an offensive article. How can you make a comment about who is best for gay rights when gay activists believe in Obama?"
not for nothing, but Tammy Baldwin endorsed Hillary Clinton.
Ryan Stibbe (September 18, 2007 @ 12:55pm):
Preach it, brother!
It's about time someone said something about the whole Obamania thing. And just about our screwed up political system in general.
I just wish that candidates would stop spewing out what the group in front of them wants to hear and start talking about what truely matters to them. Then, and only then, will America actually know who it is that they are electing.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 1:05pm):
not for nothing, but Tammy Baldwin endorsed Hillary Clinton.
And Hillary Clinton has continued to be inconsistent on gay issues, ranging from DOMA to her "evolution" on civil unions.
Obama has been 100% consistent in his stance on gay rights.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 1:35pm):
Hey look, a socialist anti-Semite dissatisfied with the current crop of Dem candidates. Shocker!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:10pm):
I should have known that only a fellow Wisconsinite could come up with such an outragious headline! It's time for the American People to take back what belongs to them, their Government and I don't see that happening with any other canidate, do you? We have a right to hope again, dream again and look at politics optimistically again. We can't cave again to the assumption that nothing will ever change, because it won't unless we stand together for change. Go Obama!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:20pm):
Hey look, another person quick to call anyone who criticizes Israel an anti-Semite. Shocker!
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 3:36pm):
kyle hates obama because of the jewish thing.
relax libs...you guys can get along yet!
too bad kyle hasn't actually researched obama's moral equivocating comments about the poor 'palestinians.' maybe he thinks someone else should do all the research so he can ride those coattails...a position that is paramount in his logic and only matched by his jew hatred.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 4:04pm):
Two words...
RON PAUL
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 4:09pm):
3:20, it's one thing to criticize Israel under reasonable terms. For example, you can easily be critical of the invasion of Lebanon and say that at times Israel is too aggressive with the Palestinians. It's another to use the language Szarzinsky does, trying to paint Hamas and others in Palestine as "freedom fighters" and the Israelis as expansionist terrorists. This portrays a world view that the Jews do not deserve their own state. Which, in my opinion, is an anti-semitic view.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 4:53pm):
Thank you for an insightful article! I could only ask for more details on Obama's voting record to demonstrate that, like most all the other candidates, he is the mouthpiece for the Council on Foreign Relations and AIPAC (2nd largest lobbying group in DC behind the NRA). Thank God that Ron Paul is running and I can vote for someone who has consistently voted against the Iraq war, the "Patriot Act" and the slew of other unconstitutional acts of congress.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 5:21pm):
I like how one paragraph is about Israel and this has become the focus of the discussion. This reflects not on the writer but on the posters of this board. It may make some of you insecure, but Israel is a bastion for human rights abuses and any candidate who defends it deserves to be criticized.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 5:38pm):
I blame Austin King/Matt Berg/Ashok Kumar for this awful article.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 6:05pm):
I would just like to say that as a Jew and an Obama supporter, Kyle does not have his facts right! maybe kyle should do some more research on each candidate and their voting records before making false claims about the candidates.
also it is appalling to me that the badger herald continues to publish kyle's columns that are repeatedly bashing Israel, no matter how the issue relates to the state of Israel.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 6:09pm):
I knew whores, and you sir are no whore.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 8:55pm):
Do either Kyle or Kyle's editors care at all about making this newspaper readable and serious? Opinion columnists need to hit the reader with the point near or at the beginning of the column. Kyle's first 3 paragaphs are meandering and interminable, and he doesn't get to the point until the beginning of paragraph 4, by which time I had stopped reading. Furthermore, what kind of editor allows the word "whore" to appear in the title? I know the Badger Herald is only a student paper, but they should aspire to at least a minimal level of profesionalism. This isn't cutting it.
Anonymous (September 18, 2007 @ 9:18pm):
your right, obama is just like clinton, except she is a lot more intellligent, so vote for her
Anonymous (September 19, 2007 @ 3:42am):
What do you think of Obadiah Shoher's extensive reply to Ed Said at http://samsonblinded.org/titles/edward_said_end_peace_process.htm ?
Anonymous (September 19, 2007 @ 2:28pm):
"Kyle Szarzynski: Badger Herald Attention Whore."
That's a ridiculous to say! What Kyle's pointing out, here is that idealistic liberals are simply jumping on the Obama bandwagon without really knowing the facts. Those of you, particularly the latter comments who are placing blame on Kyle and the editors of this paper for not doing adequate research aren't providing any evidence to the contrary. In turn, plenty of authors and journalists, will, of course, use language to their attention-getting advantage, hence the word 'whore' is well placed.
Those of you with your feeling hurts over any anti-semitic sentiments that you're picking up on, are simply looking to play the role of victim... just because someone is pro-Palestine (as Kyle might be) doesn't make them anti-jew. Get over it.
I think this article is well done and insightful... it encourages people to stop getting on the trendy bus, think outside the box and to base our judgements on facts rather than popularity.
Anonymous (September 27, 2007 @ 10:46am):
Very sketchy use of adjectives, Mr. Szarzynski. It is interesting how you choose to say that Senator Obama's voting record on the war is virtually indistinguishable from Senator Clinton's, while totally overlooking the very important fact, that when the issue was first raised, Ms. Clinton jumped on the invade iraq bandwagon, where all the support was at the time, while Mr. Obama has been stauchly against it from the beginning. Now really, which candidate is really the one who has had the best interests of Americans at heart? Clearly not Ms. Clinton, who solely tries to ride the support of whatever position is popular at a given period of time. Also, your article cites very few interest groups to which Mr. Obama is affiliated, let alone a "whore" to. As anybody who has taken political science 101 knows, interest groups are an important aspect of any democracy; they only become problematic when they achieve so much power that the government is unable to make decisions on behalf of the best interests of the population, and all that your brash and foolhardy article seems to do is attack Mr. Obama on issues where you disagree with him and put an interest group assosiated with that issue next to his name. I encourage you to find some real facts before you call somebody a "whore" next time, because it seems as if anybody, that you, trying to get people to read your standardless "journalism" by putting hateful false accusations in your title, are the real whore.
Thomas Mann (January 28, 2008 @ 3:52pm):
What about a comment from you or your organization either signed or anonymous that really, honesly,unabiasedly, tells what Obama's voting record on Israeli-"Palestinian issue" is!? Then, we can really tell more for whom to cast a vote. Biased drivel DOES NOT say anything...It's merely weritten to gain YOU readership, not tell the TRUTH!!!
Anonymous (March 22, 2008 @ 1:09am):
And your Mr.McCain is better in what way? That's what I thought.
The fact is in order to be playing at the level these candidates are playing at, one has to sell out parts of his/her soul, you have to say things that get votes, plain and simple. At least you can tell Obama still has some of his soul left and not just another Republican PUPPET!
Anonymous (April 29, 2008 @ 12:16pm):
just wait til he is president. everything leading up to president (who knows how long he has had being president in mind) is calculated for votes. it's only when he starts to get the intelligence briefings and can meet his cabinet etc. that he will know what he's gotten himself into and then will he show his true colors
Anonymous (July 4, 2008 @ 12:07am):
Obama has proven Rev. Wright to be, well... right. Obama will do and say anything to get elected. He is quickly losing his base. What a phoney AIPAC loving, FISA sucking whore he is.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
