I will begin by saying that the Obama phenomenon is defiant, miraculous and imaginary depending on one’s perceptions of things and the frame of analysis developed to make sense and meaning out of this myriad of mind bogging things. Who is Barack   Obama and where did he come from? This question has come up and gone away. Many will continue to search for the origins of this man just as many did when a little known politician from Illinois called Abraham  Lincoln showered up in national politics over one hundred and eighty years ago. There are many parallels between these two men who started from almost nowhere but a power tongue and the right choices of words combined to clear the thick forest of political difficulties to set them on the stage of presidential victory. Lincoln faced one of the most prominent politicians of his time Stephen   Douglas ; Barack   Obama defeated Senator Hillary   Clinton who was the most prominent challenger because she was a First Lady for eight years and is now one of the most known Senators on Capitol Hill.

The Obama’s phenomenon in the nomination process has raised some issues central to the 2008 presidential elections. The two major debates are the voter registration and polling on different sites around the country. It is not only in election sites but in places where caucuses had taken place. In both respect Obama has made history and demonstrated superior intelligence in organizing and effecting changes in American politics. Money talks, people say; Obama on the other hand speaks differently. Money talks only when he who pays the piper calls the tune. In American politics this has always meant the lobbyists and the custodians for big funds for election campaign are the masters of the dominant tunes. There are 30, 000 lobbyists and their tyranny puzzled and cowed many politicians into submission.  Barack   Obama is a new dog in this political field and his strategy of calling upon and relying almost totally on the grassroots has helped redefine the character and contents of politics. Henceforth, for Obama and his group, getting votes nationally is desirable, but in order to win one must rely on monies from below and not from that segment of society called lobbyists. These political terrorists are against vulnerable politicians are so harmful to the citizens whose capacity to influence their leaders is highjacked. Once they cast their nets and trapped the politicians the American voters discover to their dismay that their voting during elections are tampered with because the lobbyists place their group interests over and above the national interest. But Obama's victory has brought into effect a game change for the lobbyists and the lobbied.       

During the long process of the Democratic Party presidential nomination, Obama has set new styles of politicking. Not only did he change the game from relying on lobbyists but has introduced what no politician has ever done in American political history, his politics has a widening circle of players that make the average American citizen participatory and assertive. Outspent by the lobbyists and too distant from their politicians many active voters from the sidelines of the political process have always felt left out and marginalized. With the Obama campaign your dollar counts and in cooperation with others your collective work translates into victories after victories. This is what confronts all of us who are observing this election. Some have wondered why Hillary   Clinton with such a large body of supporters and power brokers failed miserably to raise funds and stayed away from the tentacles of the lobbyists. She tried and coined every word possible to damage Obama by linking him to inner city “slum landlords” and other funny senseless arguments, Obama reminded her politely of her association with Wal-Mart, the national chain that is against labor unions. This is why some writers contrasted the differential approaches between Obama and Hillary , Obama being the favorite of the Starbuck consumers, while Hillary is Walt mat patron.

The senator from Illinois has been accused over and over of being elite because of his support from the well educated, young and vibrant Americans who are not afraid to take a political risk/adventure with their youthful and dashing politician, Obama.

Compared to the New York Senator, Hillary who belongs to an older generation and is fiercely supported by older White Women (OWW) and by less educated Whites who are not only fearful of Barrack’s color but by his powerful education from both Columbia University and Harvard University.. When her campaign was showing serious sign of collapse, she tried to defeat Obama among the Whites who were showing favorable support for him by putting out words that many saw as racially motivated. To many her phrase about “hard working white people” simply disguised “poor white racists from West Virginia, Kentucky and elsewhere in the country” This fact was not missed by many and unfortunately for Hillary, she lost big time.

What really hurt Senator Clinton ’s campaign was that she fought with the 20th century political styles and Obama initiated the beginning of a 21st century style of political campaigning. This is true in the spread of the new feeling of doom among the lobbyists. If the Obama approach becomes common place and institutionalized, then we have a new day in American politics and the lobbyists might as well become political dinosaurs.

This said however, does not mean that Senator Obama ’s challenges are over. Just as he rightly said on the night he crossed the threshold to nomination, crossing one historical journal and beginning another. The first challenge to Brack   Obama is security; this traditional preoccupation of authorities mindful of national security and the safety of political leaders are even more pronounced this time. Since 9/11 and the negative consequences for the leaders and the led in this country, never in the history of America has external and national foes become so intertwined. The Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service have a common challenge and Obama in this national election becomes a national object of attention. Edward   Luttwak ’s piece in the New York which I responded raised this issue of his vulnerability.

Again, the pressure for the Democratic Presumptive Nominee to choose a running mate is simply over bearing. Obama finds himself in the same position as his admired source of inspiration, President John   F.   Kennedy . Here  again, his hero becomes the equal source of inspiration for him and his most vicious belligerent Bill Clinton fighting on the side of his wife Hillary. Although Clinton used the Kennedy name to pull on that formidable pillar of support in American politics, in this campaign, the Clintons now do not see the parallels between Obama and Kennedy . The young candidate from Illinois today is more like Kennedy than Bill   Clinton in 1992. Yes, Bill   Clinton is as white as John   Kennedy , but he is no John   Kennedy in terms of parallels. He was clearly not the first white southerner seeking the presidency after the agonies of a long fought Civil War. Obama on the other hand is like Kennedy in this campaign. Kennedy was the first Catholic seeking the presidency at a time when residual Protestant hostility against Catholics is known and well recognized. Hillary   Clinton ’s metaphor of the” hard working white people” is an ugly reminder of this state of affairs. Until the American voters elect Obama, this lingering effect of residual prejudice haunts us all in America and beyond.

The big question for Barack   Obama is whether to select Hillary or not. Choosing Hillary is not an easy task; it has grave consequences for him. As with John   Kennedy , Obama must decide whether to engage her as Vice President. But must first ask himself if he wants someone whose membership in his presidential team would potentially be detrimental to his candidacy, and even if successful undesirable in terms of happy relationship? Much is being said about this. In my view, two things must be addressed if Obama expect safe landing and a good administration from 2009 onwards. A Hillary role parallels that of Lyndon   Johnson in the Kennedy administration. Historians have reminded us about the circumstances that led to that selection and the exchanges of words between John   Kennedy and his advisers about choosing Johnson . Apparently, John   Kennedy was eager to win and his personal ambition drove him to that decision. He wanted to win Texas and Johnson , a senior and prominent Senator was the man for that victory. Even though he did not get along with Johnson , Kennedy was willing to take the risk. As history now tells the story, the rest is now history. He died from an assassin’s bullet in Texas , one of his sources of victory. Obama has to ask himself whether Hillary is as political formidable as Johnson and whether he can also put up with Bill   Clinton . Some have described such an arrangement as a troika. This was an old Soviet political term to describe a ruling group of leaders among the communists in Moscow during the Cold War. Others are very apprehensive about Bill   Clinton in the entourage. He will not only pollute the air, but his presence could be the proverbial “pain in the neck.”

Barack Obama has made history; Jesse Jackson and others before him tried and failed; Obama has proven that the residual racism that denied them victory could be overcome. Like   Martin   Luther   King he too is singing “We Shall Overcome.” Again, Obama’s victory is inspiring but inconclusive until he makes the inauguration in January 2009 and set his foot at the White House. His political enemies are not happy with his present success, but their bad feelings cloud their minds from seeing him at the White House. Man proposes and God decides beyond our wildest dreams. Let us wait and see what history has for us in November and see whether history will once again be rewritten in America .

Robot  Villager

# 1 I will begin by saying that the Obama phenomenon is defiant, miraculous and imaginary depending...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 16.06.2008 11:00

Abujaboy  Villager

# 2 Man, as an American living in Nigeria, I cannot STAND this author's *****ic writing. Juvenile/trite/boring/inaccurate ideas expressed by poor prose. Her mere passing familiarity with America, its history, its politics, its culture, its language, its people, its values -- totally disqualify her from writing. Where to begin? "Defiant, miraculous, and imaginary"? Take a deep breath, honey. 40 years ago, maybe. Someone who has gone to the best schools, has great political connections, strong charisma, ran for the Senate at just the right time, is not a "defiant, imaginary, mind bogging miracle" just because he's black. "Who is he and where did he come from? Many will continue to search for his origins?" WHAT? She speaks of him as if he's some mysterious force, or Jesus. Any number of newspaper articles, AND HIS OWN BOOK, for goodness' sake, will tell you this. AND COMPARING HIM TO LINCOLN? Is she out of her mind? "Obama has set new styles of politicking... he has introduced what no politician has ever done in American political history, his politics has a widening circle of players that make the average American citizen participatory and assertive..." Pure poppycock. "The big question for Barack Obama is whether to select Hillary or not." Ridiculous. There's no way in the world he would choose her, and no way she would accept. "Barack Obama has made history." True. "Jesse Jackson and others before him tried and failed; Obama has proven that the residual racism that denied them victory could be overcome." Absolutely, undeniably false. Jesse Jackson wasn't nominated because he's an *****, a demogogue, an anti-semite, a total novice -- need I go on? Racism had nothing to do with it. Nigeria Village Square, PLEASE stop printing this tripe!!!! It lowers the level of dialogue of the whole website. Posted by Abujaboy| 17.06.2008 07:24

Abujaboy  Villager

# 3 Just for the record, the word that was blotted out twice was I D I O T, not profanity. Posted by Abujaboy| 17.06.2008 10:04