“In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity”

David Lindsay

Those who elected Obama also voted to reaffirm traditional marriage in Florida and in California. To end legal discrimination against working-class white men in Colorado. And not to liberalise gambling in Missouri or in Ohio.

They included almost everyone in the black church. They included the clear majority of Catholics.

In a word, they were moral and social conservatives.

They are Democrats for reasons of economic populism and foreign policy realism. Which are, of course, the right reasons.

Yes, lots of liberals voted for Obama, too. But lots of liberals voted for Gore. Lots of liberals voted for Kerry. And lots of liberals would have voted for Clinton.

Integral to all three of economic populism, moral and social conservatism, and foreign policy realism are that immigration must be strictly legal, that legal immigration must be strictly limited, and that English must remain the only language of the United States.

No one feels more strongly about these things than African-Americans, ninety-five per cent of whom voted for Obama.

By contrast, Hispanics, especially in the South West, voted for him less than had been expected, preferring John “Amnesty” McCain instead.

(Both groups voted for traditional marriage in California and Florida. Hence the picketing of the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City, attendees at which have no vote in states where they do not live, but are very rarely either black or Hispanic.)

Huge numbers of people are now registering as Democrats. Hard Leftists, ultra-liberals and peaceniks were already registered Democrats. Hardline capitalists, racist rednecks and neoconservative hawks would never join a party led by Obama.

So these must be the economically populist, morally and socially conservative foreign policy realists who have put Obama into the White House. And who could just as easily put him back out again.

Therefore, the nomination of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is a betrayal.

Clinton is a throwback to her husband’s era of NAFTA and GATT, and look how those have ended up. She is obviously anything but a moral and social conservative.

As a Senator, she voted for the Iraq War. As a candidate, she was beloved of AIPAC.

And she offered an American nuclear shield to “protect” against Iran (where there are more women than men at university) the feminist paradises of Saudi Arabia (whence came the 9/11 attacks), Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, all generous benefactors of her campaign.

The Democratic nominee is going to beat Sarah Palin anyway. But Obama has no automatic right to be that nominee.

He must earn that nomination by delivering on all three of economic populism, moral and social conservatism (at the very least, he must not make matters any worse), and foreign policy realism.

The nomination of Clinton augurs very ill indeed on all three fronts.

In 2012, one American election will really matter. That conducted in and as the Democratic primaries. Obama needs to face a very serious challenge indeed.

And he needs to know even now that he will be facing it.

Mike, Brighton

“In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity”
....In politics, a mistake

David

"But Obama has no automatic right to be that nominee"

No, but it would be unusual to see an incumbent facing a serious primary challenge.

steve

Well going by LBJ's dictum, looks like Obama has decided it is better to have Hillary Clinton in the tent p***ing out than outside the tent p***ing in

David Lindsay

And it's unusual for a President to behave like this. McCain might as well have won.

Obama has Marxist roots, like the neocons. And coups don't just stage themselves.

TrevorsDen

nice to see Obama shooting himself in the foot with his first round.

His second shot will destroy the US economy as he pursues the fools errand of lowering CO2. No comfort that a committee is proposing the same here.

Nor that the BBC ignorantly follow the same lead.

Jeremy

"In Peace, Goodwill."

Did I just win something?

Susan Hill

Will someone please explain to me because I genuinely do NOT understand ? If a considerable number of scientists (never mind the rest of us) have serious doubts about whether CO2 emissions have anything to do with Climate Change, and if the evidence is clear that Global Warming ceased 11 years ago, and if there is a considerable body of informed scientific voice which is saying quite loudly that many of the effects of CC have been exagerrated and if in fact all climate change is due to natural phenomenon anyway - IF all of this then WHY is Obama apparently wedded to the view that Global Waarming is caused by CO2 and that armageddon is round the corner ? and WHY are we still believing this in the UK ? and WHY do none of the counter-arguments and statistics from the scientists get attention ? WHY are both the US and the UK again and again trying to make their battered economies and their struggling industries pay for something which is unproven ? If the Global warming aka Climate Change story was 100% true and 100% proven and if it was all the fault of our carbon emissions it would be difficult enough for us to do much about it in the current economic climate. But as the scientific facts do not seem to be facts but opinions and the statistics and computer forecasts can be interpreted differently by different parties,why is there the total deafness to all disagreement with the PC view ? This is something I genuinely do not understand. Why is it so important to believe in man-made Climate Change ? Apart from anything else the idea that human beings on a tiny planet can actually influence something like the CLIMATE is the height of hubris. But I don`t think that is the whole answer.
Please will someone out there - TrevorsDen ? - tell me why ignorance prevails ? I mean, as if they didn`t have far more pressing, urgent and immediate matters to attend to - global terrorism, economic catastrophe, Britain turning into a Police State would seem to matter more than putative global warming. (ps. I just looked at our outdoor thermometer. It is minus 6)

Roger Thornhill

Get a room! And that goes for you, James, too.

Susan Hill

Why has everyone gone strangely quiet ?