Trust me Eck-- this is no rah-rah, U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A! (a la 1980 Olympic Hockey victory) jingoistic BS.<br><br>This is a lot of Americans experiencing for the first time in their political lives-- a vision that things can be right. At the age of 40, my first memories were that of Carter. Though history has been kind to him-- I can't say that anyone was too jazzed about his administration at the time (and here, I'm being kind). Ford = ( ). Reagan, hero to many was deep down, just another wealthy man with utter contempt for the poor and at a gut level everyone knows it. Bush Sr. = more of the same. Bill Clinton, though at the helm during one of the most prosperous times in modern history was a good president, but in the back of my mind I always felt that he could have been equally comfortable hosting a game show like Family Feud (and this was before the Lewinski scandal).<br><br>Obama is different.<br><br>I'm not crazy about the video. I'd just as soon hear Obama speak minus the editorial licenses taken to force his words to fit in with with the other elements in the video. But maybe that's just me.<br><br>
I am not saying that he's more likely to stumble than anyone else - merely noting that a stumble is inevitable and a good litmus test of true ability is the manner in which you recover from your stumbles - gracefully, efficiently, or otherwise.<br><br>Agreed with your assessment about the VP thing. Neither one would want it.<br><br>[color:red]_________________________</font color=red><br>[color:white]Max </font color=white><br>
Obama has as many specifics on his policies as anyone else running for this position. visit his website and then Hillary's and then McCain's, etc. the position papers are available to read. but this stuff doesn't translate to the sound-bytes that Americans tend to react to.<br><br>None of the candidates speak in specifics on the campaign trail. Obama just happens to be overwhelmingly more inspirational in not giving specifics than the other candidates. he can speak in generalities and provide motivation to support his movement that the other candidates can't tap into. will it translate to actual movement and change if he wins the election? time will tell. i am not sure what people expect other than a guy who is promising to listen to the other side rather than just trying to ram things through like Bush has done. Obama has a history of working with the other side in the Illinois legislature so his background seems to indicate that he's serious about trying to be less divisive than most candidates. we'll see . . . hopefully. but he's also about opening up government and not having back room deals. he wants to get more government stuff on the C-Span networks and let the public see government happening more so that we can have a voice in our government. that resonates with me, particularly after Hillary's back-room deals previously in Healthcare in the 90s and the overwhelming back-room energy deals by Cheney and other secret meetings by the Bush admin. i believe that Obama will do this. is this wishful thinking by me? perhaps, but i believe this promise. <br><br>
[color:blue]Obama won't be a VP. not. a. chance.</font color=blue><br><br>I have actively followed presidential elections since 1964 and know that tradition would support your view, but this isn't a traditional situation, because both are "minority" candidates and cover very different constituencies.<br>Traditionally, a nominee would select a running mate, to complement his own position, be that geographic of ideological.<br>This time, I get the feeling that tradition may not cover all eventualities.<br><br>I honestly believe that dividing the current ticket would be too hard to take for a large portion of the electorate and could result in reduced Democratic votes. (Heck, when even Craig already says it doesn't make him want to vote, we may have a problem.)<br><br>I don't believe it would harm Obama, to put in a few years (perhaps just the first term) in the Clinton Court and then prepare for the main event. <br><br>But of course, even I could be wrong ;)<br><br><br><br><br>
"Humor ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht" (Humour means laughing despite of it)
The US doesn't have a head of state separate from head of government, so here the president needs to do both, manage the govt. and also provide an identity (or soul). It's very very rare that one can get both in a single package. Sometimes we get someone who is good at one of them, and sometimes someone who is good at another of them, but usually we get mediocrities at both and when we're really really lucky we get someone who is terrible at both (don't look now, but if you knock on the front door at 1600 PA Ave. today, you'll get to meet one of those). IMHO, the most "successful," by which I really mean "popular" presidents of the last 50 years have been in the charisma, soul-providing category—Kennedy and Reagan. Neither one of those guys was a particularly good administrator, I think, but they both presented an image of American/Americans that captured the imagination of the people. So that's what many of us see as being the definition of a good president (and in many ways, though they were of different political parties and political persuasions, IMHO the images they presented were astonishingly similar). It'd be nice if we could get a Wunderkind president who combines both characteristics, but I'm not holding my breath.<br><br>[color:red]</font color=red> [color:orange]</font color=orange> [color:yellow]</font color=yellow> [color:green]</font color=green> [color:blue]</font color=blue> [color:purple]</font color=purple>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
<br>I know, I know ...... but this kind of euphoria seems as far removed from reality as the flag-waving jinguism.<br>Hopefully, this isn't just a brush-fire (pun intended) and hopefully, there is substance behind the man's media-and sex appeal.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
"Humor ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht" (Humour means laughing despite of it)
i think it's hard to define the "euphoria" as being removed from reality. the reality is that Obama is still behind Hillary in the polls. he's gaining rapidly, but he's still facing an uphill climb.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>his kind of euphoria seems as far removed from reality...<p><hr></blockquote><p>Let's just suppose that Obama wont make a good president (and here I'm giving a huge benefit of doubt). That said, he still would have politicized a whole lot of people that perhaps otherwise would not have given a sh!t. Barrack Obama has been a shot in the arm of democracy. It feels good.<br><br>And as far as competence goes... I think that he is the type of person that can overcome better than most, the congressional gridlock that has been the norm since before I can remember. The man can, and will, lead.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>This poster-child euphoria won't last until November. <p><hr></blockquote><p>That is not all that Obama is about. Two days before super Tuesday of course the rah rah is going full tilt but the man has substance behind him that will last the nine months and hopefully eight years.<br><br>Here is a test. Go to the main McCain website and parse the economy plan. There is none. Zero, nada. It does not add up. He has no plan except promise to cut taxes and prime the pump and stuff that is not going to work in 2009-2012. Then do the same for Obama's web site. Dig down. He makes no promises. In fact in speeches recently he has said taxes are going to have to be raised. His economic, education plans are where I get all euphoric because he is not over reaching. Of course he does the "middle class will see some more bucks and I am taking from the rich" because he has to get elected. His swap actually has some credibility to it. It could pass.<br><br>Two examples: he actually comes out and says basic research in the USA is at 50% funding in real dollars as compared to 1970. Any scientist knows that but to hear a politician say it is refreshing. <br><br>Do a search on the word "science" on the McCain site and on the Obama site. Two times for McCain, 13 for Obama. And the two times McCain says it the sentence reads "keep science innovations that we have already made ready to use in hospitals". This is lab bench to bedside jingoism that belies where real innovation comes from. Basic research. Obama wants more scientists minted, more funding for basic research. That is the economic engine of the 21st century. Everyone else just wants to build a cool embassy in Baghdad. <br><br>Bush jingoism four years ago was just that. Hot air mixed with fear mongering. Obama is a man with a plan and it is actually a realistic plan. America will have no wiggle room for funding anything but the debt and social security unless we make a quantum shift in our thinking. All we need is a an 8% turn to continue being the economic giant that we are (sorry europe). A messiah telling us we need to raise taxes because we have a new and better path to follow is what we need. Because a straight politician can't say that. At least out loud.<br><br>That 8% course correction will be done by a lot of persuasion. A lot of thinking about our kids and not the newest HDTV for the family room. To do that a messiah mixed in with euphoria is our last chance. It's a pretty good one too.<br><br>Aside: this is absolutely the first election that I might be voting for my favorite in the final election. No compromises. That would be amazing.<br><br><br><br>
Eck,<br><br>First off, this video was not produced by anyone associated with the Obama campaign. The musicians involved wrote and produced this on their own because they were inspired by the message of hope in Obama's NH speech.<br><br>The message of hope is that there can and will be a better America, so the song and video set to Obama's words strike a chord that many others are feeling. No, we're not electing a messiah, we're electing a skilled politician who connects with the mindset and aspirations of a country beaten down and left to distrust those who were elected to govern us.<br><br><br><br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.