In a huge, significant moment for America, Barack Obama became the presumptive Democratic nominee Tuesday night. It has been a race that broke barriers and trod new territory. Eight candidates started out: among them, the first white woman, the first Hispanic, and the first Vegan and the most successful bid by an African American for the top office in the land. Scores of hotly-fought primaries and caucuses later, millions of voters have been lured into the process, and thousands of new activists have been trained.

The night after the final races – the candidates thanked their supporters and swore their unending allegiance to their constituents. Senator Clinton pledged specifically, when asked what she wanted: "I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted for me to be respected, to be heard, no longer to be invisible," It was a non-concession speech that let the air of contest – if not the contest itself live on.

So after all that talk of the new, and constituents and change and choice. It brings one up short to be reminded, so soon, that some traditions remain the same. After all that competitive racing, on the day after the final primary both Clinton and Obama headed to the same place, over to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee whose annual convention has long been Washington's top bi-partisan pledge fest. Between June 2-4, Sen. Clinton, Obama and McCain will speak, as will Congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Harry Reid, and Mitch McConnell. Races like candidates come and go, but some things never change.

Watch this commentary and a debate about migration law with Roberto Lovato and other on GRITtv. "GRITtv with Laura Flanders" plays on Free Speech TV directly following Democracy Now, and online, at GRITtv.org. Sign up for a video feed.

Comments (14)

1. Ms Flanders, get over it, huh?

   Obama walked into the lion's den and told them he liked Israel and wasn't a "closet Muslim" and tried to put their minds at ease.

   What do you expect him to do? Go in and tell them "Look, soon as I'm elected, you bums won't get the time of day and Israel will make peace with the Palestinians or face complete cut-off of aid. Now, where's the dessert cart?"

   Sorry, but even under Obama, "the Revolution" or whatever you guys are calling it these days...ain't coming, much less going to be televised.

   We'll get good, solid, INCREMENTAL changes with Obama as Prez...nothing more.

   And certainly we won't be sliding BACKWARDS, as we would with McCain.

   And that's it. Deal with it.

   Posted by Mask at 06/05/2008 @ 08:40am

2. Well, Mask, no-one forced Obama to walk into the lion's den. He could have declined the invitation. He could have just said: 'Sorry guys, but I'm focusing on America's national interests right now - Israel will have to wait.' I wonder what would happen if Obama - or any presidential candidate for that matter - came out with a consistent message of 'America first' with regard to Israel. Then again, I just finished reading that highly controversial classic-to-be 'The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy' by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, so I have a pretty good idea of what would happen...

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 06/05/2008 @ 09:25am

3. AIPAC conference falling on the day after the last primary was no coincidence, but a declaration, a threat, a manifestation of continued blackmail & extortion.

   As Charlie the Gent warned his coulda-been contender brother Terry Malloy: This is a very unhealthy relationship.

   Posted by sloper at 06/05/2008 @ 09:44am

4. Posted by Amsterdam69 at 06/5/2008

   What would happen?

   He'd hand McCain a good chunk of the Jewish vote and sent a signal that he would SEEM to be in the pocket of what Ari Berman of "The Nation" (to be pointed about it) called the "reflexively anti-Israel left".

   BTW, "America first" doesn't need to translate into "Screw Israel".

   Posted by Mask at 06/05/2008 @ 10:02am

5. Posted by Amsterdam69 at 06/5/2008

   As MASK and others can attest, I am no fan of AIPAC at all. Nonetheless, I have a practical streak and realize that "currently" 50% of the Democrat's campaign cash comes from AIPAC, and therefore winning these congressional and senate seats this November in addition to the White House requires their help.

   I think AIPAC is a right-wing Likud group pretending to be mainstream, and this DOES bother me. But the solution is to attack their power at its root by replacing their campaign cash with progressive money from Move-on, PDA, etc. so that congressional candidates can "choose" whether to take AIPAC money and still be viable candidates if they refuse AIPAC money.

   Once it is clear to AIPAC that alternative campaign financing is available for Democratic candidates, they will be forced to moderate their right-wing positions or be shown the door.

   Posted by Metteyya at 06/05/2008 @ 10:11am

6. Posted by Mask at 06/5/2008

   The Jewish vote... How many votes would that be, exactly? Are there enough Jews in the U.S. to make a real difference in a presidential election? I could never see New York vote Republican, no matter what. No, the real impact would be in the loss of campaign money from the Israel lobby.

   True, 'America first' is not the same as 'screw Israel'. But a consistent policy of 'America first' would at least allow for an honest assessment of what Israel means to the United States. Israel is not a strategic asset to the US, it's a strategic liability. You could at least demand that Israel be treated the same as all other countries which receive financial and military support from the US. You might also ask why a country as prosperous as Israel should receive any US aid at all.

   Posted by Metteyya at 06/5/2008

   I see your point, and I appreciate your practical streak. But I think it's such a shame that all this corruption should be required to restore the Democrats to power. The United States is the greatest democracy in the world in some ways. The level of public involvement with political campaigns is enormous compared with Europe. But at the same time, America's democracy is so incredibly corrupt compared with other Western democracies. The idea that elections can never be won without first having been bought, is almost universally accepted in the United States. That's too bad.

   Posted by Amsterdam69 at 06/05/2008 @ 11:01am

7. ...you bums won't get the time of day and Israel will make peace with the Palestinians or face complete cut-off of aid. Now, where's the dessert cart?"

   Mask,

   Now that was damned funny. I could just imagine how that would go over.

   The sad thing about all of this is a handful of people with wealth have a disproportionate amount of power alloted to them via their lobby groups. What is there to stop other foreign countries from doing the same.

   For example, a lot of ex-Russians I know are very loyal to the mother land. Maybe in 20 more years there will be a group similar to AIPAC that only cares about Russia's interest and the same for Chinese immigrants.

   After a while, the U.S. government, powered by foreign lobby groups, will be looking out for the welfare of other countries over it's own welfare. At present, Israel is the only country besides maybe Britain where there is any evidence of this.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 06/05/2008 @ 12:14pm

8. Speaking of "Some things never change", did y'all notice that they are marching out the 5 9/11 masterminds for trial now. NOW, after holding them for 5 years, they are going to hold the trial during the election cycle. How pathetic and transparent is that? Maybe the Neocons will televise the execution too to appease the murderous far-right nut jobs.

   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24980555/

   Posted by leftofcenter at 06/05/2008 @ 12:32pm

9. Posted by leftofcenter at 06/5/2008

   Bush reminds me of the mayor off the movie Jaws. The only difference is that Bush doesn't have the used blue used car salesman suit.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 06/05/2008 @ 12:42pm

10. Wolfgang....

    http://home.avenuebroadband.com/~dvaughn58/bush_blues.html

    Posted by leftofcenter at 06/05/2008 @ 1:24pm

11. METTEY, you're a bit more than just a "non-fan of AIPAC" on occasion.

    Dare we remember----

    "Israel's position is simply ridiculous, and it is truly amazing that the mainstream press continues to pretend that Israel is justified in its actions. I'm not a big Farrahkan fan, but his statement about the Jews controlling the mainstream press appears to be accurate.

    When the funniest guy in America, Arsenio Hall, can no longer get a job after inviting Farrahkan on as a guest on his talk show, then we know Jewish power over the media is way out of control."----Posted by METTEYYA 06/06/2007 @ 2:38pm

    BLOG | Posted 06/05/2007 @ 4:25pm Comments for "Opposing Occupation" by Peter Rothberg

    Posted by Mask at 06/05/2008 @ 1:53pm

12. Sorry, but even under Obama, "the Revolution" or whatever you guys are calling it these days...ain't coming, much less going to be televised.

    Posted by Mask

    of course not.

    <i>the wheels on the bus go 'round and 'round</i>

    gil scott-heron:

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=uTCQSk2l8bc

    you will not be able to stay home, brother.......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/05/2008 @ 3:55pm

13. The Jewish vote... How many votes would that be, exactly? Are there enough Jews in the U.S. to make a real difference in a presidential election?

    Posted by Amsterdam69

    well, if they lived in north dakota or guam....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/05/2008 @ 3:56pm

14. SANTA ANA/LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Broadcom Corp's former CEO took cocaine and spiked customers' drinks with ecstasy while also directing a criminal stock-options backdating conspiracy that cost the microchip company $2.2 billion, federal indictments released on Thursday charged.

    now that's MY kind of CEO, you rock, baby

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/06/2008 @ 09:46am