Why is this piece from Antony Green (discussing U.S politics) listed under 'Indigenous affairs' pray tell?

"Now comes the hard part
People all over the world are trying to take the measure of Barack Obama.
Indigenous Affairs - Antony Green - posted 7/7/2008"

Great article. Thank you. I'm one of the progressives disappointed (understatement) by Barack Obama's recent positions on the death penalty and FISA. He has inspired millions who believe his message of change, unity and inclusion and it would be truely tragic for him to take a caretaker position when he is in the White House.

However, I'm confused - this piece is by Antony Green, and yet it is available on several other sites with the author David Michael Green (http://www.opednews.com/articles/Now-Comes-The-Hard-Part-by-David-Michael-Gree-080626-177.html and http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Previous_Articles.html).

From their photos and bios I don't think Antony and David are the same person. Will the true author please stand up?

Sorry folks! Mea culpa. All now fixed.
Susan P editor

What an incredibly shallow and superficial look at Obama and Democratic politics. This analysis is lengthy, yet surprisingly short on substance.

The article is a simplistic and indeed fallacious analysis even with the stated bias towards the loony-left ( progressive is not even remotely appropriate description ) of the author . It is typical of the rubbish you see on soft-left websites with a preaching to the choir tone that suggests no alternative views exist, whilst concurrently patting the author on the back.

As a polemic it has little value. As an oped piece for die hard lefties it leaves a lot to be desired.

Obama is a complete unknown which is the major problem many people have with him. He's a first term senator with a commensurately short voting record. Politically he is following a well worn democratic path; moving away from the far left policies that so excite the presidential primary voters and towards a centrist position which will allow him to capture the middle ground of the political landscape. There’s nothing new in this approach which I imagine is partly what is causing the soft-left so much pain.

Figuring out just where it is Obama himself stands is not a simple business.It has always been the middle ground which has provided electoral victory for the Presidential hopefuls. And whilst that middle ground is not immutable, it does move left or right during times of change or upheaval, currently it is significantly further to the right than Obama’s primary campaign cheer squad.

Early signs during the campaign showed that Obama was prepared to say whatever he needed to, to get elected. Clearly David Green is happy for him to hide his true beliefs to hoodwink the electorate, if it means the democrats win the coming Presidential election.

TBC

Cont,

I suppose it should not surprise me that a self avowed leftist would have such a cavalier attitude towards democracy and the will of the people. There has always been a disregard of the average person at the heart of leftist politics (People just can't be trusted to know what’s good for them).

Obama is a populist and a bit of a buffoon and has had a fairly easy ride on the back of the "groundbreaking" nature of his bid. . Normally the presidential campaign serves a test of character, strength, willpower and decision making under pressure. He hasn't been tested and is unlikely to be tested until he gets into office. That’s a hell of a risk for a country to take, especially one fighting war on two fronts, reeling from a recession and facing the growing proliferation of WMD’s.

Pandering to the pollyannas by removing US troops from Iraq on a strict timeline, completely unrelated to improvements in security, will likely squander all of the gains made in that country which are now considerable. Thankfully he is moderating his simplistic approach, at least for the benefit of swing voters. What he actually intends doing only time will tell, but a more thoughtful and pragmatic approach is not "caretaker" mode, as Green would have you believe. It is the approach of a considered and thoughtful presidency. Dogmatic solutions to complex problems invariably bring unexpected and often catastrophic outcomes. Simply bugging out is not a valid option.

Louise,

Obama may have inspired millions but he also alienated millions as well. In a complex political landscape a significant shift to the left by a politician must be preceded by a similar shift in the publics political outlook. That has not occurred. Mcain will suffer from a desire among a significant portotion of the voting public to punish G.W.Bush but don't confuse that with a shift to the left in political orientation. Obama is aware of this and is making sure he takes advantage.

This election is an election between Hate and Reason. Whether Americans will elect a populist arch political opportunist and a wannabe to boot to the presidency as a result of the hate toward Bush and the Republicans or whether reason will obstruct this chameleon from entering the White House due to his unfathomable inexperience and his virtuosity to pull stunts. Already he is changing all his major pre-nomination stands on NAFTA, on FISA, on surveillance, and the pull-out of American troops from Iraq under his major slogan of CHANGING America. This is political fraud par excellence, similar to the one Kevin Rudd pulled on the Australian electorate.

In our dangerous times we need statesmen of Churchillian status, and not populist politicians with no substance.

http://www.con.observationdeck.org