Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Convention Commentary

The WSWS takes the Nation magazine to task for coming out and supporting Obama, despite the fact his stands, where they can be ascertained, have little in common with the magazine's beliefs:

The article, by Robert L. Borosage and Katrina vanden Heuvel, has two essential aims. The first is to quell growing disillusionment with Obama among many initial supporters of his campaign, including readers of the Nation, and secure his victory in the November election. The second is to define in advance the legitimate parameters of social opposition and protest that will emerge under an Obama administration.

The authors all but acknowledge that in his campaign, Obama has not advanced an agenda that departs in any significant way from previous administrations—Republican and Democratic—which, they say, were guided by “conservative ideas that have dominated our politics for three decades.”


Either I can't see worth a damn or else the article is only in the hard copy edition of the magazine.

The WSWS notes a sense of foreboding in the party. There is a sense of deep divisions within it, and what's worse is Obama has lost traction in the months since he stole the nomination away from Democratic primary and caucus voters. The WSWS attributes this loss of traction to his supporters becoming frustrated with his sharp turn to the right.

That may be part of it, but the rift between the Clinton supporters and the rest of the party can't be denied.

No comments: