Obama Endorses White Conservative over Black Liberal?

by Deb Cupples |   The Savannah Morning News reports:

"In an unusual move, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is backing U.S. Rep. John Barrow [of Georgia] in a contested primary election.

"On July 15, Barrow, who is white, faces state Sen. Regina Thomas, who is black, in a Democratic primary likely to attract overwhelmingly black turnout.

"The Savannah congressman supports policies such as the war in Iraq and President Bush's tax cuts, which Obama and Thomas oppose."

It gets better: Rep. Barrow fought hard to promote the Bush Administration's domestic spying programs and Telecom Amnesty (i.e., retroactive immunity for telecom companies that broke the law when helping the Bush Administration spy on Americans).

In short, Sen. Obama has chosen to publicly support a congressman who stands for three major policies that are egregiously offensive to progressives who are counting Obama to bring about "Change."

Hmmm.

This is not the first time that Sen. Obama has endorsed a Republican in Democrats' clothing.  In 2006, Obama endorsed Joe Lieberman against war opponent Ned Lamont.

Maybe Sen. Obama has a sound, strategic reason for making himself look less and less progressive and more and more like John McCain.

A few days ago, for example, Sen. Obama admitted that his tough talk against NAFTA during the primaries was just talk: he doesn't really plan to threaten to opt out of NAFTA as a means of re-negotiating for American workers' benefit.

Then there's the economy.  Just days after he won the Democratic primaries, Sen. Obama professed love for the so-called "free market."  This is great for large corporate players but not so great for us ordinary Americans.  Other politicians who loved the so-called "free market" include George Bush and Ronald Reagan, and we see where that got us.

Then, there's FISA.  Congressional Democrats hammered out a deal that they call a "compromise" but is actually a capitulation to the White House and congressional Republicans.  It includes Telecom Amnesty and broader powers to spy on Americans.

Obama hasn't publicly come out in favor of Telecom Amnesty.  On the other hand, as Glenn Greenwald pointed out yesterday, Sen. Obama was conspicuously silent on the issue when news of the "compromise" hit the press -- instead of publicly leading the opposition.

Obama's silence is no surprise to me, because 1) Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a key supporter of Telecom Amnesty, endorsed Obama during the primaries; and 2) Obama's national security adviser John Brennan is a big fan of Telecom Amnesty. 

I know. You can't always judge people by the company they keep, but it's interesting to note that Obama's current (i.e., progressive-unfriendly) position on NAFTA mirrors that of his economic adviser Austan Goolsbee (the one who told Canadian officials in February not to worry about Obama's tough rhetoric against NAFTA).

Since Hillary Clinton endorsed him a couple weeks ago, Sen. Obama has been looking more and more different from the person he'd represented himself to be during the first five months of 2008.

Progressives far and wide (at least the ones who aren't ignoring such inconsistencies) will likely be disappointed and disillusioned.

Memeorandum has commentary.