Yes we can. - why I’m voting for Obama
Continuing our series - Here is why reader Anna is voting for Obama. Thanks Anna - your unedited essay follows. (this pic below is from a campaign event Anna attended).
These three words encompass all that I love about Barack Obama and his campaign. It is this affirmation of the power of ordinary people gathering to do great things that has driven me from Rochester to the streets of Chicago and the snow-swept fields of Iowa. It brought hundreds of volunteers together in a freezing office on Hudson Avenue on Saturday morning, and if we allow ourselves after having been beaten down for so long, to open ourselves up to hope, these three words promise to remake America.
I witnessed the reawakening of hope in the tiny town of Oelwein, Iowa, where I spent two months this summer and another two weeks over winter break (I’m a student at the University of Rochester). Few people realize the impact that Obama’s time as a community organizer on the south side of Chicago had on his political outlook, but we ran a campaign in Iowa that would have made Saul Alinsky proud (Obama was actually working for an organization that Alinsky founded). We were the first campaign ever to have an office in Oelwein, and we organized from the grassroots up. Oelwein’s story held echoes of Rochester and every other part of this country forgotten by Washington. Economically devastated by the closing of the railroad yards in the late ‘50s, Fayette County had one of the highest percentages of people on welfare in the country and a raging meth problem. It was a town of the elderly, where those working-age people unwilling to leave the soil their families had lived on for generations were woefully underemployed. Many of these people had simply given up hoping that anything would change. Then came Barack Obama.
He moved Geri Punteney, who I met in July when she came into our office out of curiosity and broke down sobbing when she told us about her brother who couldn’t get health insurance because he had been diagnosed with stage four cancer. He stoked a fire in the inimitable Jens Nielsen, who had been a staunch Republican all his life until his grandson, Seth, was killed in Iraq. And his call to action was heard by Justin Ledesma, age 19, preparing to leave for military boot camp, who had never participated in politics but threw himself into working for Senator Obama with more vigor than any practiced politico. Instead of the same empty promises that politicians had been making for years – vote for me and I’ll make things better – Obama asked something different – stand up with me and fight like hell to make things better – and they stood up. On caucus night I was so busy handing out voter registration cards to first time caucus-goers that I almost didn’t realize that we had swept my precinct 8 to 5 to 3. I will never forget the card that Lori Garceau, Jens’ daughter gave us the day after the caucuses. Tucked inside was a picture of her son Seth’s grave – over which stood a “Hope†yard sign.
This campaign is about electing a president who will correct the disgrace that the past eight years have been. But Senator Obama has taken this opportunity to do something more, and his campaign has also become about changing the way politics is conducted in this country. Political expediency has never played a role in Barack’s decision making, as was clear when he made a speech in 2002 opposing the war while in the midst of a brutal senatorial primary battle. Throughout this entire campaign, Senator Obama has not taken a penny from PACs, corporations or federally registered lobbyists. Barack has been committed to ethics reform in the in Senate, working with Senator Feingold of Wisconsin on legislation that mandated disclosure of bundling and restricting DeLay-style trips sponsored by lobbyists to, say, go golfing in Scotland But he also hasn’t waited for ethics laws to change, or for his convictions to become safe. Instead, he took a political risk, and made it work, raising more money than any other candidate in the second quarter, and keeping pace with Hillary Clinton throughout the rest of the year.
This is meaningful not only as a gesture. If we are trying to completely revolutionize the way the health care system works, it makes sense to choose someone who has not received millions of dollars from pharmaceutical companies and HMOs. If we want to get serious about alternative energy, it makes sense to choose someone who hasn’t taken a single contribution form an oil or coal company. And Senator Obama’s deep belief in the importance of unions – as a strong supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act, and a vocal opponent of the current union-busting NLRB – comes from convictions, not from PAC contributions.
The strength of Barack’s message should not be mistaken for a lack of substance. He has laid out an extensive plan for universal health care, under which every single person in this country will be able to afford coverage, and also a plan to focus on preventative care and public health. I direct you to the Blueprint for Change, because I think I’m already beginning to wear out RT’s welcome. Senator Obama also details a plan to have all combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months of taking office and, as a member of the Senate Veteran’s Affairs Committee, outlines a comprehensive strategy to give veterans the care they deserve when they return home, instituting a zero tolerance policy for homelessness among vets and fully funding the VA (good news for the Canandaigua hospital, among others).
Finally, and importantly to me, Senator Obama makes a call that has not been heard so strongly in a generation – he calls upon America’s young people to serve their country. While many campaigns consider youth organizing a waste of time, the Obama campaign has developed the most sophisticated student organization this country has ever seen. Through Students for Barack Obama and programs like Camp Obama, a five-day organizing training I was lucky enough to attend, they are building the next generation of activists, giving us the tools, and more importantly asking us to stand up and take ownership of our futures. I hope you’ll attend Rochester for Obama’s youth rally on Monday at 4 in Twelve Corners and witness the electricity for yourself.
For me, the choice on Tuesday is between two good Democrats. But the difference is important. It’s the difference between a good president and a truly great one, one who will inspire us and lift us up as a nation for generations. And to those who continue to doubt that change is possible, I speak with the same voice as millions of people across this country– young and old, black, white, latino and asian, when I say yes we can.





Great post.
In case anyone thinks that Anna’s experience is a fluke, here’s an interesting article about the grassroots strategy employed by the Obama campaign:
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_year_of_the_organizer
With all due respect Anna, I can appreciate your good efforts, and I realize and feel the passion you have for your candidate. Thank you for taking the time to write your thoughts and convictions as well.
Allow me as a co-author and equally passioned grassroots participant in helping to promote and create change to take issue with some of the points you have made. I could not, in all fairness, not comment on your points as it is some of the exact points you make that convince me that Hillary Clinton is better equipped to serve as President.
Your first paragraph is my biggest argument. I don’t want to remake America. I want someone who can heal the enormous problems this country currently is facing. It’s going to take alot more than “Yes we can” to accomplish that goal. This country needs more than a cliche. This country needs experience.
Others more qualified than probably either of us have evaluated Barack Obama’s proposed health care and have come to this conclusion, an opinion shared by many:
“I recently castigated Mr. Obama for adopting right-wing talking points about a Social Security ‘crisis.’ Now he’s echoing right-wing talking points on health care…
What seems to have happened is that Mr. Obama’s caution, his reluctance to stake out a clearly partisan position, led him to propose a relatively weak, incomplete health care plan…
Now, in the effort to defend his plan’s weakness, he’s attacking his Democratic opponents from the right  and in so doing giving aid and comfort to the enemies of reform. “
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/opinion/30krugman.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
A deeper look at Obama’s actions while in the Senate would take argument with this statement:
When residents in Illinois voiced outrage two years ago upon learning that the Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants, the state’s freshman senator, Barack Obama, took up their cause.
Mr. Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was “the only nuclear legislation that I’ve passed.â€ÂÂ
“I just did that last year,†he said, to murmurs of approval.
A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.
Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.
“Senator Obama’s staff was sending us copies of the bill to review, and we could see it weakening with each successive draft,†said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will County, Ill., where low-level radioactive runoff had turned up in groundwater. “The teeth were just taken out of it.â€ÂÂ
The history of the bill shows Mr. Obama navigating a home-state controversy that pitted two important constituencies against each other and tested his skills as a legislative infighter. On one side were neighbors of several nuclear plants upset that low-level radioactive leaks had gone unreported for years; on the other was Exelon, the country’s largest nuclear plant operator and one of Mr. Obama’s largest sources of campaign money.
Since 2003, executives and employees of Exelon, which is based in Illinois, have contributed at least $227,000 to Mr. Obama’s campaigns for the United States Senate and for president. Two top Exelon officials, Frank M. Clark, executive vice president, and John W. Rogers Jr., a director, are among his largest fund-raisers.
Another Obama donor, John W. Rowe, chairman of Exelon, is also chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry’s lobbying group, based in Washington. Exelon’s support for Mr. Obama far exceeds its support for any other presidential candidate.
In addition, Mr. Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, has worked as a consultant to Exelon. A spokeswoman for Exelon said Mr. Axelrod’s company had helped an Exelon subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison, with communications strategy periodically since 2002, but had no involvement in the leak controversy or other nuclear issues. . . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?hp
On Healthcare Reform (one of the issues I consider extremely important in dissecting:
“I recently castigated Mr. Obama for adopting right-wing talking points about a Social Security ‘crisis.’ Now he’s echoing right-wing talking points on health care…
What seems to have happened is that Mr. Obama’s caution, his reluctance to stake out a clearly partisan position, led him to propose a relatively weak, incomplete health care plan…
Now, in the effort to defend his plan’s weakness, he’s attacking his Democratic opponents from the right  and in so doing giving aid and comfort to the enemies of reform. “
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/opinion/30krugman.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Obama is by no means “new” in the concept of enacting and enabling youth to act upon their constitutional right to vote and assemble in this country. In the 1960’s, young people helped shape this country and change dramatically the direction our government had taken with regards to the Viet Nam War - a war where a draft gave NO option as to whether or not a young person served or did not - when LEAVING your country was the only option available and many of those same young people now 40 years later make up the largest group of voters in this country. Adding age differentiation at this critical point in our nations history, and our country’s future is, in my opinion, is not truly saliable:
Goodbye to the ageism . . .
How dare anyone unilaterally decide when to turn the page on history, papering over real inequities and suffering constituencies in the promise of a feel-good campaign? How dare anyone claim to unify while dividing, or think that to rouse U.S. youth from torpor it’s useful to triage the single largest demographic in this country’s history: the boomer generationâ€â€Âthe majority of which is female?
Old woman are the one group that doesn’t grow more conservative with ageâ€â€Âand we are the generation of radicals who said “Well-behaved women seldom make history.†Goodbye to going gently into any goodnight any man prescribes for us. We are the women who changed the reality of the United States. And though we never went away, brace yourselves: we’re back!
We are the women who brought this country equal credit, better pay, affirmative action, the concept of a family-focused workplace; the women who established rape-crisis centers and battery shelters, marital-rape and date-rape laws; the women who defended lesbian custody rights, who fought for prison reform, founded the peace and environmental movements; who insisted that medical research include female anatomy; who inspired men to become more nurturing parents; who created women’s studies and Title IX so we all could cheer the WNBA stars and Mia Hamm. We are the women who reclaimed sexuality from violent pornography, who put childcare on the national agenda, who transformed demographics, artistic expression, language itself. We are the women who forged a worldwide movement. We are the proud successors of women who, though it took more than 50 years, won us the vote.
We are the women who now comprise the majority of U.S. voters.
http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/020108.html
And finally (and I do apologoize for the length of this post)…
I couldn’t agree with you more. May the best candidate win!
Ha Ha Ha
Anna - Thank you for this solid well written piece.
Great detailed research, jiminy.