What do you say when the revolution is televised? The world has seen the celebrations in Chicago, New York, Washington DC, and in pubs and gathering places around the country and across the globe. What can I add to that? Just this: I was surprised at the surprise.
For months I have been following the polls closely, to the point of knowing , thanks to fivethirtyeight.com, which polls have a Democratic lean (e.g. PPP) or a Republican lean (e.g. Mason-Dixon), why there wasn't going to be a Bradley effect, what kind of inside straight McCain would need to eke out a win, etc. So I was confident that Barack would win. And I, and most pundits, and the candidates themselves, downplayed the effect of race on the race. Race may have played a role earlier in the contest, but by now it was all supposed to be about the economy, Iraq, Palin's lack of competence, McCain's erratic behavior, Bush fatigue.
And then, when the election was called, many people reacted with disbelief. And they celebrated. The celebrations were partly about the change in parties and policy, but they were mostly about something which has hardly been talked about. And so I was surprised at how much of John McCain's gracious concession speech centered on race.
And I realized how important it was to me to see the color barrier broken, to see a dream realized. For one night, all thoughts of President Bush, war, and the economic crisis faded as we entered a new world. The impossible has happened. I should have been surprised.
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label opinion. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Surprise! President-Elect Obama
Caption: Colorado State University student, Mercedes Scott, looks in disbelief at the election results on her cell phone which shows Barack Obama the winner in the presidential race Tuesday night, Nov. 4, 2008, in the Black Student Services office on the CSU campus.
[photo and caption from the Coloradoan]
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Obama 30 Minute TV Message--It's About Us
Here is the 3o minute video the Obama campaign aired tonight on network television (minus three minutes of live feed from Florida shown at the end). The video weaves through the tapestry of his campaign by tracing the threads of people across the US.
Senator Obama's campaign has been different in many ways, but principally because it has been driven by ordinary citizens. We have contributed the money which has fueled it. We have provided the stories which inspired it. We have used our creativity, our ideas, and our heart to further it. We have created art, music, videos, and blogs. We have made calls and knocked on doors in neighboring states. We have held house parties and major concerts. And the campaign has welcomed our participation and involved us at nearly every level. A vote for Obama is a vote for us.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Obama and McCain Contrast on Economic Crisis
I think it is fair to say that a large part of this mess on Wall Street is due to deregulation, mostly championed by Republicans (Senator McCain has been a strong proponent of deregulation). I think it is also fair to say that the Bush administration, after years of not minding the current, took some bold steps this week to try to keep the economy from going down a waterfall.
Senator Obama has supported those efforts and called for bipartisanship.
Senator McCain has, on the other hand, staked out firm positions only to reverse himself the next day, and issued attacks on Senator Obama which, to be tactful, seem to be at odds with the facts. And as the video montage above from the Jed Report shows, Senator McCain has certainly not always been the voice of calm, steady, bipartisanship this week.
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page, known for its rightward tilt, wrote:
"In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution."
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Science Debate Answers!
As I introduced in one of my first posts, there has been a grassroots effort to get the presidential candidates to have a debate centered on concerns of science and technology. These concerns are intertwined with many foreign and domestic political issues. It is vital that the next President be aware of these concerns when constructing policy.
Well, we didn't get the candidates to hold a live debate, but we did get them to answer 14 important questions. Senator Obama responded on 30 August, and Senator McCain on 15 September (McCain thus had the advantage of seeing Obama's answers before committing to his own). Here are their complete answers, side by side. Below I offer a brief summary of their answer and my take on them. [under construction]
Innovation
Obama proposes doubling federal funding for basic research over the next decade. McCain would provide tax incentives for research. It is not clear whether he would increase funding for basic research, but he does say he will "Fund basic and applied research in new and emerging fields".
I am all for stimulating the market to engage in technological research, but basic research can take decades to pay off. Further, some basic research will end up enriching our culture but not providing direct economic benefit (e.g. the Hubble Space Telescope). So we cannot rely on the market alone.
Climate Change
Obama: "I will implement a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050."
McCain: "I will institute a new cap-and-trade system that over time will change the dynamic of our energy economy. By the year 2012, we will seek a return to 2005 levels of emissions, by 2020, a return to 1990 levels, and so on until we have achieved at least a reduction of sixty percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050."
It is encouraging to see both candidates state that climate change is real and to set specific goals. McCain seems more likely, IMHO, to expand fossil fuel use in the short term (e.g. his position on offshore drilling) which is unlikely to move the market in the right direction. But this is one area where he does seem to differ markedly from the Bush administration. I do worry, however, about Gov. Palin, who seems to be skeptical that global warming is caused by humankind. To meet the goals that Obama or McCain have laid out will require a determined push from the White House. If Palin were to assume the presidency, I fear that she would return to the disastrous do-nothing policy of the Bush administration.
[more to come]
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Sarah Palin's thoughts on Iraq
Here are some thoughts from Republican VP pick Gov. Sarah Palin on Iraq. She makes George W. Bush sound coherent.
Further, her energy policy seems to consist mainly of further oil drilling. We cannot free ourselves from foreign oil by domestic drilling—there is not enough of it. And continuing to rely on oil will certainly do nothing to help global warming.
I also find it troubling that McCain met her only once or twice before picking her. Is that Putting America First? Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a qualified woman (like Hillary Clinton) elected to the US Presidency, but we can't just omit the "qualified" part.
Friday, August 29, 2008
McCain's Choice
Today, John McCain chose Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska to be his running mate. There is no question that it was a Hail Mary pass. It was designed to
• Obliterate coverage of Obama's historic acceptance speech.
• Appeal to anti-abortion activists
• Try to pick off disaffected Hillary voters
• Appeal to anti-abortion activists
• Try to pick off disaffected Hillary voters
But the pick carries with it great risks because Palin has so little experience (less than two years as governor of Alaska), and none on the national much less the international stage. The Republicans have already tried to compare her experience to Senator Obama's, but this is truly laughable. He has experience at the state, national, and international level, plus he has led an incredibly successful campaign organization with more twice the number of people in the state of Alaska. He has learned a lot in those two years of campaigning. She has 67 days.
But the thing I find most troubling is that they are making a naked grab for Hillary supporters. Palin and Hillary disagree on almost every issue. Yes, there are some supporters so childishly angry that Hillary lost that they will buy the ruse, but how can John McCain argue with a straight face that he puts the country first when his choice of running mate was based solely on cynical politics?
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Men for Clinton Supporters to Blame
In the hotly contested Democratic primary for US President, many supporters on both sides have focused on things they see as unfair. Inevitably, issues of race and gender arise. Some people have voted for Senator Obama because he is black and some for Senator Clinton because she is female. In both cases these voters hope their candidates will break through a glass ceiling and provide a role model for those to come. I think this is fine. Others vote against Obama because he is black or against Clinton because she is female. This is of course terribly wrong, and supporters of both candidates should decry both sins. But I think that the vast majority of people, such as myself, voted for who they thought was the best candidate, not for issues of race or gender. Obama has won a good fraction of the white vote and Clinton has won a good fraction of the male vote.
Some Clinton supporters have blamed her apparent loss on sexism. While I think it is true that some, particularly in the cable media, have made some misogynist comments, they are but a drop in the bucket of verbiage that has been spewed ad nauseam in this long contest. No, I think there are four main reasons that Barack Obama is now within reach of the nomination:
- Senator Obama is a thoughtful, talented candidate with a powerful message of change.
- The Obama campaign has excelled strategically at the large (50 state strategy) and the small (cool website).
- There are millions of voters who were waiting for a candidate like Barack. We existed before his campaign, he just energized us.
- Senator Clinton's campaign made two key strategic blunders.
It is the last point to which I devote the rest of the post.
Senator Clinton's campaign was run mostly by two men, Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson. Mark Penn has since stepped down from the top job. The two key mistakes they made were not campaigning in the caucus states on Super Tuesday, and not having a strategy for after Super Tuesday. They assumed that winning big states like NY, NJ, CA, as well as Clinton's home state of Arkansas, would seal the deal. But the Obama campaign cobbled together enough pledged delegates from IL and some smaller states to make the day nearly a tie. When the Clinton campaign did not achieve a blowout, they had no strategy to compete in the next set of states, and they lost a dozen in a row. These were fatal blows to the Clinton campaign.
I think this was a matter of hubris. Now maybe it is unfair, but hubris does tend to be associated with men. And the men that displayed that hubris, the men that destroyed Hillary Clinton's chances, were Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson. So Clinton supporters, please, if you want to blame men for Senator Clinton's impending loss, you need look no further than her own cocky campaign strategists.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Obama on Trade and Investing in Science
Senator Obama answers a question about trade. He makes clear that he is not opposed to trade, but he wants trade deals with much stricter labor, safety, and environmental standards. He also talks about the need to support innovation, such as by doubling the research and development budget. Let me say a few words about that.
Much of the world economy is based on science and technology. While there is a lot of appreciation for the latter--just look at the computer you read this on--the role of basic scientific research in creating that technology is often overlooked. Without research over the previous decades, current technology could not continue advancing at the same rate. Without basic research today, future technological innovation would be starved.
Sometimes the payoff is fairly quick. For example, something called giant magnetoresistance was discovered 20 years ago, and now it is used in most computer hard drives. (The 2007 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Albert Fert and Peter Grünberg for their discovery of giant magnetoresistance.)
Sometimes the payoff takes a long time. For example, the arcane theory of quantum mechanics was developed in the 1920's. Few would have predicted a theory needed only at the atomic scale would end up being important to the world economy. But most of our understanding of electronics, lasers, nuclear technology, and chemistry depends on an understanding of quantum mechanics. In fact, it has been estimated that 1/3 of the can be traced back to quantum mechanics.
The point is, we do not know which avenues of scientific research will lead to future technological breakthroughs. Currently, the US government spends about 0.3% of the US GNP on basic research. The report Rising Above the Gathering Storm calls for doubling that number--this is probably what motivated Senator Obama's comment. That report also calls for improving math and science education--which I think is crucial for our future success.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Obama Will Help Our Image Around the World
Ordinarily, I would say that the opinions of people around the world should not matter much in a US election. But after 8 years of George W. Bush's policies destroying our image, it is relevant that there is only one candidate who has a great chance to restore that image, Barack Obama. In recognition of that, here is a video endorsement of Obama from an Italian who is married to an American.
"I love the US very much... we live in a globalized world... when I am outside the US, I always want to defend it... It is time for America to restore its moral standing in the world... Barack Obama is the only one who can bring about that change"
Many people around the world had pictures of JFK on their walls. It would be wonderful to have another American president inspire that kind of global good will.
[Thanks to Miriam for that meme.]
Monday, March 31, 2008
The Cantwell Club
The blog 2008 Democratic Convention Watch has an excellent running post called the Superdelegate Endorsement List, which keeps track of which candidates each of the 793 superdelegates support. I have found it very useful for my Running List of Obama Endorsements. Currently, about 214 superdelegates have said they would support Obama, 246 would support Clinton, and 333 of them are undeclared. (It should be noted that Obama leads among superdelegates who are elected officials, as opposed to DNC members.)
Recently, the site has decided that a fourth category is needed, which they call the Pelosi Club, after Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. She has said,
"If the votes of the superdelegates overturn what happened in the elections, it would be harmful to the Democratic Party...The way the system works is that the [pledged] delegates choose the nominee."
Of course, Senator Obama is almost certain to end up with a majority of pledged delegates, so despite the fact that Speaker Pelosi has not endorsed either candidate explicitly, for purposes of tallying votes, she should be counted in the Obama column.
There are currently six other members of the Pelosi club, three like Pelosi who have not endorsed a candidate by name, two who have endorsed Obama (Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Former Sen. Tom Daschle), and one who has endorsed Clinton...Senator Maria Cantwell.
So Maria Cantwell, the Junior Senator from the state of Washington, is in a club by herself. She is the only superdelegate who endorses Clinton, but will vote for Obama (absent a total collapse of the Obama campaign). She has not renounced her endorsement of Senator Clinton, she has simply said that the will of the people is more important than her opinion:
"If we have a candidate who has the most delegates and the most states,” the Democratic party should come together around that candidate, Cantwell said. The pledged delegate count will be the most important factor, she said, because that is the basis of the nominating process.
With that one quote, she diminished Senator Clinton's lead in superdelegates by two (decreasing the number pledged to Hillary by one, and increasing the number who will vote for Barack by one).
I think Senator Cantwell should be rewarded for respecting democracy. If you concur, please send her a message of thanks, or contribute to her campaign. Just mention that you are doing it in honor of her starting the Cantwell Club.
I would like other superdelegates who have endorsed Senator Clinton to join the Cantwell Club. They need not renounce their endorsement of Hillary to join the club, they can simply say that democracy is more important than their personal opinion and so they will vote for the winner of the pledged delegates. An obvious candidate is the Senior Senator from the state of Washington, Patty Murray. If you want to send a positive message encouraging her to join the Cantwell Club, contact her here.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Response to Paul Krugman's "Lessons of 1992"
Paul Krugman wrote a piece in the New York Times called Lessons of 1992, in which he writes,
"First, those who don’t want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don’t want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s — a sizable group, at least in the punditocracy — are deluding themselves. Any Democrat who makes it to the White House can expect the same treatment: an unending procession of wild charges and fake scandals, dutifully given credence by major media organizations that somehow can’t bring themselves to declare the accusations unequivocally false (at least not on Page 1)."
Here is my response to him:
Dear Mr. Krugman:
I often agree with your columns, but not this time. I'm afraid your fundamental premise is false. To paraphrase that famous line,
Bill Clinton is no Barack Obama,
not even Bill Clinton at his most idealistic. I respect Bill and Hillary, but in the same way one respects a pit bull. It is nice to have them on your side. But since the beginning it has always been about them. Yes, the Republicans went gunning for them, but they invited some of the attacks by their modus operandi.
I know this sounds naive and idealistic, but every once in a great while, something idealistic is true. I think Barack Obama is sincere when he says that it is more about us than him, that he wants to forge a new politics that involves We the People. The Clintons never were that way, not even in pretense.
If somehow I am being duped, and Obama is the greatest actor the world has ever seen, then I say that the character he portrays would make a transcendent president. Most attacks on that kind of presidency would backfire, as the Clinton machine is finding out now in this campaign.
If you give people real hope, they won't trade it in easily for petty criticisms.
So, in summary, the year you were looking for was not 1992, it was 1960.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Huckabee Plans to Insert "God's Standards" into the US Constitution
I had been thinking that Huckabee was basically harmless, doling out religious pablum to his base. But this is quite scary. He says, "and that's what we need to do is to amend the constitution so it's in God's standards...". If this doesn't scare you, read on.The US Constitution is the legal bedrock of this stable yet heterogeneous society. It enshrines the separation of church and state and protects the rights of believers and nonbelievers of all types. Inclusion of "God's standards" would be antithetical to the whole document. Whose God? Whose interpretation of her standards? I think politicians use religion to further their own ends, usually in a divisive way. They play upon people's faith and drive wedges between us. When people are guided by unshakable beliefs, they can be convinced to commit unspeakable acts. So when a politician uses religious language, always ask yourself, "Am I being manipulated?". [on the other hand, Huckabee may not be in the race much longer]
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Yes We Can
Perhaps I am just a sucker for hope. And perhaps I was hasty to conclude Obama had the nomination in the bag. But I still think he can win.
Exit polls indicate that Hillary did much better with women in New Hampshire than Iowa. It has been conjectured that those voters did not want to give up on the dream of a female president. I understand that. I hope we elect a woman as President of the United States some time in the near future. I also look forward to the race barrier being broken.
But those things are not first in my mind at this juncture of history. I support Barack Obama because I think he is the best person for the job right now. I am not expecting him to be as politically savvy on day one as Hillary. What counts is the first 4 years. I think Barack will be able to affect more change in his presidency and do more to heal the nation and our image in the world than Hillary ever could.
Here is the text of his speech as released by Obama campaign:
Remarks of Senator Barack Obama - New Hampshire Primary
Tuesday, January 8th, 2008
Nashua, New Hampshire
I want to congratulate Senator Clinton on a hard-fought victory here in New Hampshire.
A few weeks ago, no one imagined that we'd have accomplished what we did here tonight. For most of this campaign, we were far behind, and we always knew our climb would be steep. But in record numbers, you came out and spoke up for change. And with your voices and your votes, you made it clear that at this moment – in this election – there is something happening in America.
There is something happening when men and women in Des Moines and Davenport; in Lebanon and Concord come out in the snows of January to wait in lines that stretch block after block because they believe in what this country can be.
There is something happening when Americans who are young in age and in spirit – who have never before participated in politics – turn out in numbers we've never seen because they know in their hearts that this time must be different.
There is something happening when people vote not just for the party they belong to but the hopes they hold in common – that whether we are rich or poor; black or white; Latino or Asian; whether we hail from Iowa or New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, we are ready to take this country in a fundamentally new direction. That is what's happening in America right now. Change is what's happening in America.
You can be the new majority who can lead this nation out of a long political darkness – Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington; who know that we can disagree without being disagreeable; who understand that if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence that's stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something better, there's no problem we can't solve – no destiny we cannot fulfill.
Our new American majority can end the outrage of unaffordable, unavailable health care in our time. We can bring doctors and patients; workers and businesses, Democrats and Republicans together; and we can tell the drug and insurance industry that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. Not this time. Not now. Our new majority can end the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.
We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their greatness. We can do this with our new majority.
We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our planet from a point of no return. And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan; we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes, because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.
All of the candidates in this race share these goals. All have good ideas. And all are patriots who serve this country honorably.
But the reason our campaign has always been different is because it's not just about what I will do as President, it's also about what you, the people who love this country, can do to change it.
That's why tonight belongs to you.
It belongs to the organizers and the volunteers and the staff who believed in our improbable journey and rallied so many others to join.
We know the battle ahead will be long, but always remember that no matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change. We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics who will only grow louder and more dissonant in the weeks to come.
We've been asked to pause for a reality check. We've been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope.
But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people.
Yes we can.
It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation.
Yes we can.
It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail toward freedom through the darkest of nights.
Yes we can.
It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.
Yes we can.
It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the ballot; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.
Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity. Yes we can heal this nation. Yes we can repair this world. Yes we can.
And so tomorrow, as we take this campaign South and West; as we learn that the struggles of the textile worker in Spartanburg are not so different than the plight of the dishwasher in Las Vegas; that the hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA; we will remember that there is something happening in America; that we are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people; we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter in America's story with three words that will ring from coast to coast; from sea to shining sea – Yes. We. Can.
Tuesday, January 8th, 2008
Nashua, New Hampshire
I want to congratulate Senator Clinton on a hard-fought victory here in New Hampshire.
A few weeks ago, no one imagined that we'd have accomplished what we did here tonight. For most of this campaign, we were far behind, and we always knew our climb would be steep. But in record numbers, you came out and spoke up for change. And with your voices and your votes, you made it clear that at this moment – in this election – there is something happening in America.
There is something happening when men and women in Des Moines and Davenport; in Lebanon and Concord come out in the snows of January to wait in lines that stretch block after block because they believe in what this country can be.
There is something happening when Americans who are young in age and in spirit – who have never before participated in politics – turn out in numbers we've never seen because they know in their hearts that this time must be different.
There is something happening when people vote not just for the party they belong to but the hopes they hold in common – that whether we are rich or poor; black or white; Latino or Asian; whether we hail from Iowa or New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, we are ready to take this country in a fundamentally new direction. That is what's happening in America right now. Change is what's happening in America.
You can be the new majority who can lead this nation out of a long political darkness – Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington; who know that we can disagree without being disagreeable; who understand that if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence that's stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something better, there's no problem we can't solve – no destiny we cannot fulfill.
Our new American majority can end the outrage of unaffordable, unavailable health care in our time. We can bring doctors and patients; workers and businesses, Democrats and Republicans together; and we can tell the drug and insurance industry that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. Not this time. Not now. Our new majority can end the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.
We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their greatness. We can do this with our new majority.
We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our planet from a point of no return. And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan; we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes, because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.
All of the candidates in this race share these goals. All have good ideas. And all are patriots who serve this country honorably.
But the reason our campaign has always been different is because it's not just about what I will do as President, it's also about what you, the people who love this country, can do to change it.
That's why tonight belongs to you.
It belongs to the organizers and the volunteers and the staff who believed in our improbable journey and rallied so many others to join.
We know the battle ahead will be long, but always remember that no matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can withstand the power of millions of voices calling for change. We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics who will only grow louder and more dissonant in the weeks to come.
We've been asked to pause for a reality check. We've been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope.
But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people.
Yes we can.
It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation.
Yes we can.
It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail toward freedom through the darkest of nights.
Yes we can.
It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.
Yes we can.
It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the ballot; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.
Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity. Yes we can heal this nation. Yes we can repair this world. Yes we can.
And so tomorrow, as we take this campaign South and West; as we learn that the struggles of the textile worker in Spartanburg are not so different than the plight of the dishwasher in Las Vegas; that the hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA; we will remember that there is something happening in America; that we are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people; we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter in America's story with three words that will ring from coast to coast; from sea to shining sea – Yes. We. Can.
[text obtained here]
Friday, January 4, 2008
Iowa Caucus Speeches
Here are speeches by 7 of the candidates following last night's Iowa Caucuses.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Obama Wins Iowa
Iowa, thanks for following up on my endorse-ment :).
Whichever candidate you were for, I hope you can revel in the fact that Iowa, one of the whitest states in the country (91%), just voted for an African-American. An agricultural state voted for an intellectual. And many young people were brought into the process.
There have been many complaints about Iowa being too provincial and homogenous, but that did not hold sway tonight.
Although it would be nicer to have a more representative slice of the electorate serve the role of Iowa and New Hampshire, I think it is important to have some small group of people who get to see the candidates up close and not just through a TV screen.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Barack Obama for US President
I debated whether I should endorse a presidential candidate in this blog. Much of the time, I hope to present information and let you form your own opinion. I think all of the candidates for US president have their plusses and minuses, and I could understand someone sensible supporting almost any of them, for one reason or another. I could also understand someone being opposed to any of them. But one has to decide. I am for Barack Obama.
I considered putting the endorsement behind the 'read more' link. But in the end, I decided to give you my opinion. If you want to know the reasons for my endorsement (including Barack's position on research), please read on.
Given his background and his rhetoric, I believe Barack Obama has the best chance to heal the wounds caused over the last seven years. He has an amazingly heterogeneous background, and he brings a thoughtful, hopeful, peaceful message. He has progressive positions on healthcare, workers' rights, and the environment (though so do many of the other Democrats), and seems able to achieve advances through pragmatic compromise. He also supports increasing the research and education budgets -- what the US needs in this information society.
“Let us be the generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age. Let's set high standards for our schools and give them the resources they need to succeed. Let's recruit a new army of teachers, and give them better pay and more support in exchange for more accountability. Let's make college more affordable, and let's invest in scientific research, and let's lay down broadband lines through the heart of inner cities and rural towns all across America.”
— Barack Obama Presidential Announcement Speech in Springfield, IL 02/10/07
I also think Barack has a good shot at winning in the general election. (I think it is crucial that the next US President be a Democrat, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that the Republican candidates have not repudiated the policies of the current administration. A vote for them is to some extent a vote in support of the last seven years.)
I was worried at the beginning of the campaign that Barack was not experienced enough to run a national campaign, but the campaign has stretched on so long that he has had time to learn. His positive pragmatic message appeals to independents. Finally, he does very well in head-to-head match-ups with his possible Republican opponents.
It should be noted that I am posting this the night before the Iowa Caucuses. I hope my endorsement stays relevant, at least through super Tuesday!
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Merry Christmas!
In the last few years, the title of this post has become contro- versial in the US. Perhaps out of a fear of not offending anyone, there has, for a number of years, been a trend toward removing the word "Christmas" from "Merry", "Tree", and most sacred of all, "Sale" ;). I understand and agree with the impulse of not wanting to offend people, but I also recognize in a religiously and politically diverse world, one has to try to be tolerant in receiving words as well as saying them.
On the other hand, I don't think you should say "Merry Christmas" to someone you know it will offend. What for, to prove a point? Is that in the spirit of the season? [also discussed: divinity of Jesus.]
In fact, I almost always either say "Happy Holidays" or "Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays" unless I think the person would prefer I say "Merry Christmas" or refer to another specific holiday, e.g. "Happy Hanukkah". The point is, intent matters and so does context.
For example, the title of this post is not a greeting to a specific person, nor any statement about the relative worth of one holiday over another. It is not a statement suggesting that you, dear reader, must be merry about Christmas. It is expressing my feelings about the season. Nor is it an expression of any religious beliefs (in my case at least). It is just my expression of joy at this time that I have always loved.
I love Christmas because it is a rare time for my family to come together. It is a time to sing carols and eat, drink, and be merry. It is a time to celebrate life. (I should say that I have found the Winter Solstice also to be a good day for these, which is fitting since the date of Christmas likely traces its origins to the Solstice-timed holidays of Saturnalia or to Sol Invictus.)
Christmas is not a religious holiday for me personally, because I don't believe that Jesus was divine. But I have come to think that Jesus was an amazing person. He was one of the first to preach nonviolence, and love thy neighbor. There have been others. For example, Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. are worthy of our reverence too.
It's too bad that much of Christianity bears so little resemblance to what Jesus seems to have been striving for. In fact, given that Jesus never wrote a word, it is amazing that any of his message managed to survive all the people who have been involved in constructing and making use of a religion about him (like the Roman Emperor Constantine, whose Council of Nicaea decided many things including whether Jesus was a deity or not).
Anyway, think of the message, love thy neighbor. And of course, eat, drink, and be merry. Happy Holidays, Happy Hanukkah, Happy Kwanzaa, Happy Solstice, and Merry Christmas!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
