No im good. Ive been trolling this forum for a while, so I know they tend to lock threads after 100 pages.
I think that Obama can pull through on tuesday. Maybe its just bias from talking to the people on my college but there seems to be a landslide of support for him around here.
Where are you at?
And man you turned out to know how we operate around here and all my hard work to redirect you to the right place was unnecessary in the end.
See? This is what I get for caring.
No good deed goes unpunished as it were.
Yes I meant lurking. Actually I meant trolling like Patrolling. Not like flaming trolls.
Edit: St. Cloud Minnesota is where im at. I got to St. Cloud State University.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
0
Options
deowolfis allowed to do that.Traffic.Registered Userregular
I wish I could go phone bank or somthing tommorow. But I work all day. Im dragging friends to the caucus at least. I am pumped, first time I have done a caucus.
JebusUD on
and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
but they're listening to every word I say
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
edited February 2008
If the Giants can beat the Patriots in their 'undefeated' season after everyone had counted them out, then YES WE CAN, really.
So who gets to make celebratory threads come Presidential victory in November? I reckon it'd be pretty easy to sort out McCain*/Clinton (clearly syndalis would get her+), but how can any one man split apart the Obama love on this forum and find the one true believer? Truly a job for no mortal man.
*:
can i has mccain
+:
or shinto would because his partner lost us NH and you all said woman should be allowed to vote shame on you
I've been writing this essay for about a week, and I plan on posting it on several forums, my facebook notes, and sending it to a few friends as well.
I was wondering if you guys wouldn't mind taking a look at it to provide commentary, and more importantly, criticism. I would like to begin posting it tomorrow afternoon. Consider yourself warned for length, I've at least tried to space it out a bit to provide a break for your eyes.
Yes we can. Yes, we can. YES. WE. CAN.
Why am I voting for Obama?
I appreciate his methods and his values. Even if his policies do not always mesh with my own positions, I recognize that he’s a religious candidate that will not lead a group of non-Christians with Christian principles, as he understands the plurality of our nation’s makeup and the importance of the separation between church and state. I know that his success will become a direct precedent for the politics of hope succeeding over the politics of cynicism. And I see that his desire for change applies to the administration, but it also applies to how the system traditionally has worked; in bringing the people into politics again, as his desire to have Americans regain an interest in politics meets Dean’s “50-state strategyâ€, his victory is just as valuable to the management of the country as it is to the national discourse on politics and leadership itself.
Now, within the Democratic primary, one of the more commonplace arguments against Obama’s candidacy is of his supposed lack of experience; his “thin record†as a politician. Many look dismissively at his established state Senate resume, ignoring the successes he had there, reaching across the aisle to get things done. It would likely surprise a lot of Democrats to hear that his record in elected office is actually longer than Clinton’s – the self-described “experienced’ politician in the running. He’s served as a civil rights attorney representing community organizers, discrimination claims and voting rights cases; he lectured on constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. While serving his state from within the Illinois state legislature, he worked to pass complex legislature on difficult topics, in particular leading the passage of bills reinforcing ethics reform and addressing police corruption and bias. In Washington, Obama has been able to collaborate with Republicans on issues of global warming and nuclear proliferation. Bill Clinton once said, “The truth is, you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience. Mine is rooted in the real lives of real people, and it will bring real results if we have the courage to change.†Such a sentiment is wholly appropriate to answer the question of Obama’s experience.
Greater than any perceived lack of experience, no matter which flawed metric leads to that conclusion, Obama’s success story has never been in the number of years he’s sat in a U.S. Senate chair. It’s been in how he gets things done. While the Republican Party lies more or less in shambles after GWB’s presidency, he has recognized that now is not the time to adopt the traditional Democratic modus operandi of discarding Republican interests and sensibilities. Now is hardly the time to begin alienating people sitting on the other side of a metaphorical “line†dividing red and blue. And now is certainly not the time to continue dividing people into left and right. Obama recognizes these truths, and more, he’s recognized them since he was elected to the Illinois Senate. That’s why he’s been able to pass bill after bill with excellent support coming from those that would typically align themselves against his positions as well as those who mostly agree with him. As he writes in The Audacity of Hope, “not only did my encounters with voters confirm the fundamental decency of the American people, they also reminded me that at the core of the American experience are a set of ideals that continue to stir our collective conscience; a common set of values that bind us together despite our differences; a running thread of hope that makes our improbable experiment in democracy work.†In chapter two he elects to consider “those common values that might serve as the foundation for a new political consensus.â€
George Lakoff - describes one of the differences between Obama and Clinton as that of how either candidate defines bipartisanship. What Clinton means by the term is “moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes.†But Obama means something else entirely when considering bipartisanship. “For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves ‘conservatives’ or ‘independents,’ but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of ‘bipartisanship.’†http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/what-counts-as-an-issue_b_84177.html
One of Barack Obama’s key goals, spoken time and again and boldly repeated by his actions, has been to get people entered into the conversation of democracy and get them together to reach a consensus. From the smaller scale – Obama organized communities in Illinois and led a voter-registration effort in the capital that brought tens of thousands of people to the polls – to his larger successes in co-authoring bills in the U.S. Senate with Republicans that reached across any sort of divisive boundaries between the parties, Obama has time and again held fast to his desire to unite instead of divide. Since the Clinton era, the parties have been at each other’s throats, becoming ideological Hatfields and McCoys with a feud lasting a decade and half again, reaching a crest during Bush II’s administration. And make no mistake, the Democrats’ blood is up; there is a very real desire in many liberals to pass the most aggressively left-leaning legislature that can be crafted. And if this happens, the general public becomes scared off at the aggression and the extremism, and in the end it all winds up being for naught. For anyone planning to vote Democrat, then, my entreaty is this: we must first recognize that there is no better time to break this cycle, and second realize that no other candidate promises it, let alone has a good chance of succeeding, than Barack Obama. You cannot deny that Clinton’s verbiage has consistently been veered in the direction of “taking back†government from the Republicans, and that it’s the time for a change – but this change is predicated more upon what it isn’t (namely, the preceding conservative years) than upon what it is.
For the people not typically in agreement with the Democrats, it can be expected that you’re seeking a different set of reasons to vote for Obama. Indeed, his political stances may often be at odds with your own. But in my talks with Republicans who have nevertheless joined the Obama Express, I believe I’ve begun to nail down a few reasons that have transcended the parties and the platforms.
As I’d written above, Senator Obama’s history of voting, campaigning, and legislative action has proven him to be overwhelmingly in support of ethical politics. This last expression has no doubt already caused numerous people reading this to scoff, openly or inwardly. Truthfully, I believe that I’d have responded similarly, except for the fact that Obama actually sells it. It can be done! I swear it to you, it really can. And it is much more likely to be done if it has a proven successful precedent: namely, an honest and sincere candidate being elected to serve as President. Like it or not, presidential hopefuls will continue to take notes on the actions, and on the subsequent successes or failures, of previous candidates; thus, a vote for an honest candidate is a vote for honest candidates to follow.
And his promises of transparency and honesty in his administrative actions have no match in any other 2008 presidential candidates’ positions. In cooperation with Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn he introduced an act into the U.S. Senate that requires the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds. It also creates a publicly-accessible website cataloguing federal spending, allowing citizens to follow the path their tax dollars are taking. Obama is looking to sweep lobbyists’ feet out from under them, in order to allow the American people their warranted chance to be heard clearly.
Even while I myself was a self-declared Republican, I first began to admire Obama when I heard his ideas on the interplay between religion and politics. Though a Christian, I had nevertheless always felt that in a society of differing worldviews and beliefs, our laws needed to be based on the collective good (i.e. utilitarianism) and not on the unproven good that religious statutes attempt to supply. Particularly, and I believe most folks are willing to agree that, when it comes down to it, people ought not to be held to the laws of a religion to which they do not subscribe. So it is with religion and government! But I really should just let him do the talking: “Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.†(A Call to Renewal keynote)
"What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial—it’s central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West’s advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in.
Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can."
Beyond this, I’ve already noted his eagerness to bring people from both sides of the political spectrum into the discussion of issues and ideas. Regardless of disagreements over issues, the overarching goal is the realization that we are one people and our combined livelihood is what defines America. “There’s another ingredient in the American saga, a belief that we’re all connected as one people. If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. If there is a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and having to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandparent. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process that threatens my civil liberties.â€
So why did I choose those four words to title this piece, and not reference them at any point in the bulk of the message? I don’t feel I have had to. Optimism. Unity. Realism. Change. They’re the four corners of the soapbox from which Mr. Obama plans not to harangue the multitudes, but to inspire them. To deliver an old message in a new and authentic way. To transform “the audacity of hope†into “the standard of hopeâ€, and then hand it over to us that we might wave it proudly.
Vote for Barack Obama. This may be hard for the cynics to come to grips with, but America actually deserves it.
One comment, he registered tens of thousands of voters in Chicago, not the state capital. (Springfield)
And this won't be particularly helpful, but there's something off about the first actual paragraph. It doesn't flow well at all.
Yeah, too much leaping right into religion for some reason, not enough introduction. Back up a second. Talk about his general desire for change and inclusiveness in a broad sense, then start hitting his experience and history.
I don't think it's necessary to cite that image by Sullivan, although it is cool and I am going to print some out and post them.
You include no policy statements, and I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or bad thing. Everyone always complains "Durr he never talks about his policy positions, all he does is talk about change," and it might be best to preemptively strike against that particular talking point. YMMV.
One comment, he registered tens of thousands of voters in Chicago, not the state capital. (Springfield)
And this won't be particularly helpful, but there's something off about the first actual paragraph. It doesn't flow well at all.
I stopped reading after the first paragraph because of this. You need to create a unifying, interesting point in the first paragraph that you're going to carry through with the whole essay. I felt like you were presenting too many points too quickly without explaining why they were important.
Maybe start with something like "For the last few years our country has lived in a cynical divided nation. Barack Obama offers a rebuttal to the policy that we can not be active and proud of our country. His qualities are naturally suited for this. He is...."
Anyone have that link to that one blog page where it listed the laws that Obama was involved in in the senate? There are some trolls that I need to smash.
I move that Paul Krugman is a fuck. Do I have a second?
Yeah, pretty much (and I felt this way since before he decided that Obama must be destroyed for the slim chance that in some alternate universe Hillary Clinton passes universal health care not universal health insurance (and that is doubtful))
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I say our good List Manager for Obama should get to make such a thread. He's invested a lot more time into the campaign than any of us.
A bit ahead of ourselves here. We shall wait. Tuesday first.
Oh, I agree, and odds are no one will remember come November anyway. The question was just posed, so I weighed in.
D'awwwwwwwwwwww. for Jragghen
I'm actually up right now because the new list doesn't get sent out for me (and the rest of the local List Masters) to cut until the wee hours of the morning.
Also I definitely claim the celebration thread because I will not stop working for Obama until either he has been elected or defeated. Right now I'm feeling that the chances are pretty damn good that I'll be making that thread in November.
Also Jrag way to be on-message with everyone about how we need to keep fighting like we're ten points down. Done a better job than I (if only you coulda taken that WSJ interview for me.)
I'm excited guys. It's coming down to the wire and I have a good feeling. We can win this thing, but only if we keep working the hell out of it.
Also Harrier where are you in Texas? Please let it be Austin. I mean I'll consider shipping out somewhere else but Austin would be the nicest
It's not even like I don't like Obama. I just don't like catchphrases and rhetoric. The irony of it is that Obama has relatively solid credentials on some important issues, like government transparency, and even though his healthcare plan doesn't include universal coverage he's still all around solid--but the hope bit is just a little too saccharine for me to stand. If the yes we can thing catches on any harder, I may have to suck off a shotgun.
Wow. Illogic++
So basically you prefer Hillary because she is uninspiring? I mean you admit he's solid on policy and charismatic, but you don't like political candidates who can inspire people to achieve great things?
While you may find hope saccharine, the 295,000 people who voted for Obama (5,000 more than voted in the entire 2000 primary) in SC feel differently.
Maybe massive turnout and the largest grassroots campaign in history, with an unprecedented turnout of youth and first-time voters doesn't mean anything to you, but I think it means something for this country.
At the end of the day, it's pretty sad that our political and popular culture have destroyed your ability to believe sincerely in hope, but I suppose you're hardly the only casualty. It's sad that you can't imagine that a politician or his followers could be filled with genuine longing for change and genuine hope, but that's to be expected, I suppose.
I'm just glad that I spend my days working with those who defy expectations.
I say our good List Manager for Obama should get to make such a thread. He's invested a lot more time into the campaign than any of us.
A bit ahead of ourselves here. We shall wait. Tuesday first.
Oh, I agree, and odds are no one will remember come November anyway. The question was just posed, so I weighed in.
D'awwwwwwwwwwww. for Jragghen
I'm actually up right now because the new list doesn't get sent out for me (and the rest of the local List Masters) to cut until the wee hours of the morning.
Also I definitely claim the celebration thread because I will not stop working for Obama until either he has been elected or defeated. Right now I'm feeling that the chances are pretty damn good that I'll be making that thread in November.
Also Jrag way to be on-message with everyone about how we need to keep fighting like we're ten points down. Done a better job than I (if only you coulda taken that WSJ interview for me.)
I'm excited guys. It's coming down to the wire and I have a good feeling. We can win this thing, but only if we keep working the hell out of it.
Also Harrier where are you in Texas? Please let it be Austin. I mean I'll consider shipping out somewhere else but Austin would be the nicest
Austin is the only place which really matters for the Democratic primary in Texas anyway, yeah? Every other place will be voting Red.
Mr^2 honestly just struck me as the type to distrust charisma regardless of the source since you can have charismatic figures lead people to do Bad Things.
On the other hand, like you said, you need charisma to get people motivated.
Mr^2 honestly just struck me as the type to distrust charisma regardless of the source since you can have charismatic figures lead people to do Bad Things.
On the other hand, like you said, you need charisma to get people motivated.
Well if the dude is solid on policy you don't really have to worry about the leading-people-to-do-bad-things part anyway.
Excuse him for being a tad bit cynical. That's really all it is. The past 7 or 8 years have sucked and some people aren't going to easily forget the myriad of promises broken that paved the way for that misery.
This is why hope is audacious. We fear being led astray again. We now fear the words that would seek to unite us because we are faced with the demons of the past ("I'm a uniter, not a divider" ...)
This is why we must dig down deep within ourselves and find the audacity to hope. The audacity to hope in the face of so much doubt and fear of betrayal. Cast caution to the wind and dare to help be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Break through our jadedness and cynicism to help change the world...
Excuse him for being a tad bit cynical. That's really all it is. The past 7 or 8 years have sucked and some people aren't going to easily forget the myriad of promises broken that paved the way for that misery.
This is why hope is audacious. We fear being led astray again. We now fear the words that would seek to unite us because we are faced with the demons of the past ("I'm a uniter, not a divider" ...)
This is why we must dig down deep within ourselves and find the audacity to hope. The audacity to hope in the face of so much doubt and fear of betrayal. Cast caution to the wind and dare to help be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Break through our jadedness and cynicism to help change the world...
yeah... that felt cheesy. Oh well.
Oh well indeed.
I couldn't give less of a shit these days about sounding naive or cheesy or cliche -- I care about saying what I really think and feel and frankly fuck you if you look down on me for it.
I've been sick of irony and jaded superiority for a long time now. It's so amazing to see people really doing what's harder and putting themselves out there, putting their hearts on the line.
I guess some people just aren't ready to make that leap.
I'm slowly turning my slightly conservative friend onto Obama. The One Voice and Yes We Can videos are absolute gold in catching people attention. They hit all the right notes. His MLK speech is one of the finest I've heard in a long time.
That said, I'm pretty disappointed in the Superbowl ad. I wish they'd have used the last 30 seconds of One Voice because it's so good.
Excuse him for being a tad bit cynical. That's really all it is. The past 7 or 8 years have sucked and some people aren't going to easily forget the myriad of promises broken that paved the way for that misery.
To be fair, it's more than just the past 7 or 8 years.
I was born around the time of Watergate, and since I've been aware of national politics the high-water mark for a federal government that was inspiring and competent was the disappointing, triangulating mess that was the Clinton administration. Seeing Dean get crushed in 2004 didn't help, either.
So yeah, I was slow to warm to Obama since it's hard to overcome that many decades of disappointment, but I've realized that the whole "Distrust the government! Government is evil!" worldview only makes it easier for the GOP to further dismantle the New Deal and enact fucked up legislation I disagree with, using "Hey, the government's incompetent and corrupt, so why bother regulating pollution" as a reason.
So I'm trying to swallow my instinctive Gen-X cynicism and stay on the Hope & Change bandwagon.
Posts
No good deed goes unpunished as it were.
Yes I meant lurking. Actually I meant trolling like Patrolling. Not like flaming trolls.
Edit: St. Cloud Minnesota is where im at. I got to St. Cloud State University.
but they're listening to every word I say
Funny, plenty of the Mormons I know aren't voting for Mitt. But they're military Mormons, so, I dunno - automatic McCain vote?
I was like "no."
but they're listening to every word I say
Oh and I appoint myself Georgia representative. Dibsies.
On the black screen
*:
A bit ahead of ourselves here. We shall wait. Tuesday first.
http://obeygiant.com/images/barack_poster_bw-85x11.pdf
Oh, I agree, and odds are no one will remember come November anyway. The question was just posed, so I weighed in.
Since I asked.
I was wondering if you guys wouldn't mind taking a look at it to provide commentary, and more importantly, criticism. I would like to begin posting it tomorrow afternoon. Consider yourself warned for length, I've at least tried to space it out a bit to provide a break for your eyes.
Why am I voting for Obama?
I appreciate his methods and his values. Even if his policies do not always mesh with my own positions, I recognize that he’s a religious candidate that will not lead a group of non-Christians with Christian principles, as he understands the plurality of our nation’s makeup and the importance of the separation between church and state. I know that his success will become a direct precedent for the politics of hope succeeding over the politics of cynicism. And I see that his desire for change applies to the administration, but it also applies to how the system traditionally has worked; in bringing the people into politics again, as his desire to have Americans regain an interest in politics meets Dean’s “50-state strategyâ€, his victory is just as valuable to the management of the country as it is to the national discourse on politics and leadership itself.
Now, within the Democratic primary, one of the more commonplace arguments against Obama’s candidacy is of his supposed lack of experience; his “thin record†as a politician. Many look dismissively at his established state Senate resume, ignoring the successes he had there, reaching across the aisle to get things done. It would likely surprise a lot of Democrats to hear that his record in elected office is actually longer than Clinton’s – the self-described “experienced’ politician in the running. He’s served as a civil rights attorney representing community organizers, discrimination claims and voting rights cases; he lectured on constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. While serving his state from within the Illinois state legislature, he worked to pass complex legislature on difficult topics, in particular leading the passage of bills reinforcing ethics reform and addressing police corruption and bias. In Washington, Obama has been able to collaborate with Republicans on issues of global warming and nuclear proliferation. Bill Clinton once said, “The truth is, you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience. Mine is rooted in the real lives of real people, and it will bring real results if we have the courage to change.†Such a sentiment is wholly appropriate to answer the question of Obama’s experience.
Greater than any perceived lack of experience, no matter which flawed metric leads to that conclusion, Obama’s success story has never been in the number of years he’s sat in a U.S. Senate chair. It’s been in how he gets things done. While the Republican Party lies more or less in shambles after GWB’s presidency, he has recognized that now is not the time to adopt the traditional Democratic modus operandi of discarding Republican interests and sensibilities. Now is hardly the time to begin alienating people sitting on the other side of a metaphorical “line†dividing red and blue. And now is certainly not the time to continue dividing people into left and right. Obama recognizes these truths, and more, he’s recognized them since he was elected to the Illinois Senate. That’s why he’s been able to pass bill after bill with excellent support coming from those that would typically align themselves against his positions as well as those who mostly agree with him. As he writes in The Audacity of Hope, “not only did my encounters with voters confirm the fundamental decency of the American people, they also reminded me that at the core of the American experience are a set of ideals that continue to stir our collective conscience; a common set of values that bind us together despite our differences; a running thread of hope that makes our improbable experiment in democracy work.†In chapter two he elects to consider “those common values that might serve as the foundation for a new political consensus.â€
George Lakoff - describes one of the differences between Obama and Clinton as that of how either candidate defines bipartisanship. What Clinton means by the term is “moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes.†But Obama means something else entirely when considering bipartisanship. “For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves ‘conservatives’ or ‘independents,’ but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of ‘bipartisanship.’â€
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/what-counts-as-an-issue_b_84177.html
One of Barack Obama’s key goals, spoken time and again and boldly repeated by his actions, has been to get people entered into the conversation of democracy and get them together to reach a consensus. From the smaller scale – Obama organized communities in Illinois and led a voter-registration effort in the capital that brought tens of thousands of people to the polls – to his larger successes in co-authoring bills in the U.S. Senate with Republicans that reached across any sort of divisive boundaries between the parties, Obama has time and again held fast to his desire to unite instead of divide. Since the Clinton era, the parties have been at each other’s throats, becoming ideological Hatfields and McCoys with a feud lasting a decade and half again, reaching a crest during Bush II’s administration. And make no mistake, the Democrats’ blood is up; there is a very real desire in many liberals to pass the most aggressively left-leaning legislature that can be crafted. And if this happens, the general public becomes scared off at the aggression and the extremism, and in the end it all winds up being for naught. For anyone planning to vote Democrat, then, my entreaty is this: we must first recognize that there is no better time to break this cycle, and second realize that no other candidate promises it, let alone has a good chance of succeeding, than Barack Obama. You cannot deny that Clinton’s verbiage has consistently been veered in the direction of “taking back†government from the Republicans, and that it’s the time for a change – but this change is predicated more upon what it isn’t (namely, the preceding conservative years) than upon what it is.
For the people not typically in agreement with the Democrats, it can be expected that you’re seeking a different set of reasons to vote for Obama. Indeed, his political stances may often be at odds with your own. But in my talks with Republicans who have nevertheless joined the Obama Express, I believe I’ve begun to nail down a few reasons that have transcended the parties and the platforms.
As I’d written above, Senator Obama’s history of voting, campaigning, and legislative action has proven him to be overwhelmingly in support of ethical politics. This last expression has no doubt already caused numerous people reading this to scoff, openly or inwardly. Truthfully, I believe that I’d have responded similarly, except for the fact that Obama actually sells it. It can be done! I swear it to you, it really can. And it is much more likely to be done if it has a proven successful precedent: namely, an honest and sincere candidate being elected to serve as President. Like it or not, presidential hopefuls will continue to take notes on the actions, and on the subsequent successes or failures, of previous candidates; thus, a vote for an honest candidate is a vote for honest candidates to follow.
And his promises of transparency and honesty in his administrative actions have no match in any other 2008 presidential candidates’ positions. In cooperation with Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn he introduced an act into the U.S. Senate that requires the full disclosure of all entities or organizations receiving federal funds. It also creates a publicly-accessible website cataloguing federal spending, allowing citizens to follow the path their tax dollars are taking. Obama is looking to sweep lobbyists’ feet out from under them, in order to allow the American people their warranted chance to be heard clearly.
Even while I myself was a self-declared Republican, I first began to admire Obama when I heard his ideas on the interplay between religion and politics. Though a Christian, I had nevertheless always felt that in a society of differing worldviews and beliefs, our laws needed to be based on the collective good (i.e. utilitarianism) and not on the unproven good that religious statutes attempt to supply. Particularly, and I believe most folks are willing to agree that, when it comes down to it, people ought not to be held to the laws of a religion to which they do not subscribe. So it is with religion and government! But I really should just let him do the talking: “Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.†(A Call to Renewal keynote)
Perhaps most interestingly of his unifying attributes is this picture drawn by Andrew Sullivan: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/obama
"What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial—it’s central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West’s advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in.
Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can."
Beyond this, I’ve already noted his eagerness to bring people from both sides of the political spectrum into the discussion of issues and ideas. Regardless of disagreements over issues, the overarching goal is the realization that we are one people and our combined livelihood is what defines America. “There’s another ingredient in the American saga, a belief that we’re all connected as one people. If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. If there is a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and having to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandparent. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process that threatens my civil liberties.â€
So why did I choose those four words to title this piece, and not reference them at any point in the bulk of the message? I don’t feel I have had to. Optimism. Unity. Realism. Change. They’re the four corners of the soapbox from which Mr. Obama plans not to harangue the multitudes, but to inspire them. To deliver an old message in a new and authentic way. To transform “the audacity of hope†into “the standard of hopeâ€, and then hand it over to us that we might wave it proudly.
Vote for Barack Obama. This may be hard for the cynics to come to grips with, but America actually deserves it.
And this won't be particularly helpful, but there's something off about the first actual paragraph. It doesn't flow well at all.
Yeah, too much leaping right into religion for some reason, not enough introduction. Back up a second. Talk about his general desire for change and inclusiveness in a broad sense, then start hitting his experience and history.
I don't think it's necessary to cite that image by Sullivan, although it is cool and I am going to print some out and post them.
You include no policy statements, and I'm not sure whether that's a good thing or bad thing. Everyone always complains "Durr he never talks about his policy positions, all he does is talk about change," and it might be best to preemptively strike against that particular talking point. YMMV.
I stopped reading after the first paragraph because of this. You need to create a unifying, interesting point in the first paragraph that you're going to carry through with the whole essay. I felt like you were presenting too many points too quickly without explaining why they were important.
Maybe start with something like "For the last few years our country has lived in a cynical divided nation. Barack Obama offers a rebuttal to the policy that we can not be active and proud of our country. His qualities are naturally suited for this. He is...."
As it stands now I'm just reading a list.
I voted yes, because I'm a gambling addict.
Actually because we need the money. And because fuck Nevada.
Impact, if any?
+1.
I don't like the idea of more taxation on gambling, but this also expands it so it's give and take.
I figure expand gambling first and try to roll back the taxes later.
And yes despite the fact CA has an income tax, property taxes, VAT, and tons of user fees we somehow are still running a deficit.
Now what if America read that post?
How do you think America would feel?
Government efficiency is a myth
Yeah, pretty much (and I felt this way since before he decided that Obama must be destroyed for the slim chance that in some alternate universe Hillary Clinton passes universal health care not universal health insurance (and that is doubtful))
D'awwwwwwwwwwww.
I'm actually up right now because the new list doesn't get sent out for me (and the rest of the local List Masters) to cut until the wee hours of the morning.
Also I definitely claim the celebration thread because I will not stop working for Obama until either he has been elected or defeated. Right now I'm feeling that the chances are pretty damn good that I'll be making that thread in November.
Also Jrag way to be on-message with everyone about how we need to keep fighting like we're ten points down. Done a better job than I (if only you coulda taken that WSJ interview for me.)
I'm excited guys. It's coming down to the wire and I have a good feeling. We can win this thing, but only if we keep working the hell out of it.
Also Harrier where are you in Texas? Please let it be Austin. I mean I'll consider shipping out somewhere else but Austin would be the nicest
Wow. Illogic++
So basically you prefer Hillary because she is uninspiring? I mean you admit he's solid on policy and charismatic, but you don't like political candidates who can inspire people to achieve great things?
While you may find hope saccharine, the 295,000 people who voted for Obama (5,000 more than voted in the entire 2000 primary) in SC feel differently.
Maybe massive turnout and the largest grassroots campaign in history, with an unprecedented turnout of youth and first-time voters doesn't mean anything to you, but I think it means something for this country.
At the end of the day, it's pretty sad that our political and popular culture have destroyed your ability to believe sincerely in hope, but I suppose you're hardly the only casualty. It's sad that you can't imagine that a politician or his followers could be filled with genuine longing for change and genuine hope, but that's to be expected, I suppose.
I'm just glad that I spend my days working with those who defy expectations.
Austin is the only place which really matters for the Democratic primary in Texas anyway, yeah? Every other place will be voting Red.
On the other hand, like you said, you need charisma to get people motivated.
On the black screen
He's become a baby boomer, lynch him!!!
Well if the dude is solid on policy you don't really have to worry about the leading-people-to-do-bad-things part anyway.
But that's nothing like what he said anyway:
That's good ol' fashioned cynicism
This is why hope is audacious. We fear being led astray again. We now fear the words that would seek to unite us because we are faced with the demons of the past ("I'm a uniter, not a divider" ...)
This is why we must dig down deep within ourselves and find the audacity to hope. The audacity to hope in the face of so much doubt and fear of betrayal. Cast caution to the wind and dare to help be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Break through our jadedness and cynicism to help change the world...
yeah... that felt cheesy. Oh well.
Oh well indeed.
I couldn't give less of a shit these days about sounding naive or cheesy or cliche -- I care about saying what I really think and feel and frankly fuck you if you look down on me for it.
I've been sick of irony and jaded superiority for a long time now. It's so amazing to see people really doing what's harder and putting themselves out there, putting their hearts on the line.
I guess some people just aren't ready to make that leap.
NNID: Hakkekage
That said, I'm pretty disappointed in the Superbowl ad. I wish they'd have used the last 30 seconds of One Voice because it's so good.
To be fair, it's more than just the past 7 or 8 years.
I was born around the time of Watergate, and since I've been aware of national politics the high-water mark for a federal government that was inspiring and competent was the disappointing, triangulating mess that was the Clinton administration. Seeing Dean get crushed in 2004 didn't help, either.
So yeah, I was slow to warm to Obama since it's hard to overcome that many decades of disappointment, but I've realized that the whole "Distrust the government! Government is evil!" worldview only makes it easier for the GOP to further dismantle the New Deal and enact fucked up legislation I disagree with, using "Hey, the government's incompetent and corrupt, so why bother regulating pollution" as a reason.
So I'm trying to swallow my instinctive Gen-X cynicism and stay on the Hope & Change bandwagon.