It's official !! Obama is the nominee!

[sekhmet]

The problem with you potters is that you're always watching like hawks for wobble and you forget the sensual sleekness of the ummm column of clay. Of course the wobble will set the hole thing spinning into the corner but ...

I guess that having all those years of senate experience means pretty much nothing if you are afraid that Obama is actually going to change things, and that the millions of people who come out to hear him and vote for him actually want him to change things.

It's the real issue. Arguing that the man is inexperienced and hiding his policies on the internet is masking the real problem. The country wants change and it's going to get change if Obama becomes President.

[epaul]

Damn.

I get three strikes. That's just one.

Couldn't you have quoted Goodwin?

[Supertramp78]

"He might keep Minnesota from splitting off and joining Canada."

Wait a minute. Who wants to keep Minnesota from doing that?

[AlanC]

Jun 5, 2008 11:29:00 GMT -5 sekhmet said:

The country wants change and it's going to get change if Obama becomes President.

Kate, I can't speak for "The Country" but my opinion is that a great many may say they want "change" but when the specific details of the aforesaid "change" appears to require some sort of sacrifice or inconvenience...well, now, I dunno if they will want it so much. To fix our deficits and oil dependence and our collective ADD would take a greater amount of thought, reasonableness, commitment, education, and selflessness than we (at least the bunch I live around) are willing to give. And I am fairly certain that the entrenched power structure of industry/lobbiests/congress ain't gonna want anything that diverts the money flow from the spouts wherein it now flows. But that's just me and I'm a cynic.

[Supertramp78]

'And I am fairly certain that the entrenched power structure of industry/lobbiests/congress ain't gonna want anything that diverts the money flow from the spouts wherein it now flows."

Peter? Want to comment?

[sekhmet]

Alan, of course that is the precise problem.

I think the people that want change the most are those who are not doing so well the way things are - factory workers who have no pension after paying for one for years, people who work in industries that have been mostly outsourced to China; kids who are working three jobs to pay mama's medical bills; poor folks who watch their parents die for lack of coverage for chemotherapy while watching the rich folks on the other side of town get all the care they need; people who are appalled at how profitable it seems to be Haliburton and Blackwater with their ties to government and their industry waging war; people who want to be America the Beautiful again and be proud of their country's foreign policy; people who are ashamed that their Commander in Chief either deliberately lied the country into a preemptive strike on Iraq or was too stupid to know the truth; people who want the rhetoric about the greatest country on the planet to be true, or even half true.

Hell, I want the American dream to be true.

The problem is that change is difficult. But it is possible.

In the 80s Canada found itself in very bad financial circumstances. The GDP did not pay for the government services. The government ran a very expensive but very effective advertising campaign explaining basic financial management. Pie charts, projections .. what would happen if we didn't balance the budget and what would happen if we did. The people swallowed a really hard fiscal pill. Medical services were curtailed, all sorts of difficult cuts were made in government. More than half the civil service was let go. The budget was balanced, then the surpluses started rolling in, and things got better. At this point the country is in terrific shape financially.

I mention all that because I have seen difficult change start at the top in my own country.

The vision that Obama proposes is a real paradigm shift in the US. I will be interested to see just how much of it the people will go along with. He proposes to shift wealth back to the middle class. It's going to be a difficult job. I don't envy him.

[Cornflake]

I'm not a cynic, but I share Alan's doubts about the extent to which people are ready to pay the price to solve some of our bigger problems. That's why, if Obama is elected, his aspirations are going to collide with some hard realities. The President alone can't do much. He'll have to get legislation passed by members of Congress who are worried about getting reelected and who won't want to piss off voters. Those members of Congress will also be concerned with getting contributions from big contributors so that they can get reelected. They'll accordingly be susceptible to pressure. I suspect that a lot of Obama supporters have unrealistic expectations about what he could achieve.

All the same, anything he can do would be a plus. And maybe he could sell the electorate on taking some bitter pills.

[AlanC]

Jun 5, 2008 11:48:34 GMT -5 Supertramp78 said:

'And I am fairly certain that the entrenched power structure of industry/lobbiests/congress ain't gonna want anything that diverts the money flow from the spouts wherein it now flows."

Peter? Want to comment?

Just remember that I own an "S-Corp" so I ain't no anarchist or communist....just a cynic.

[Supertramp78]

Flake, I'll take aspirations I believe in that may or may not happen over aspirations I don't believe in that may or may not happen any day of the week.

[Cornflake]

Oh, I agree, Tramp. I just don't think unrealistic expectations will help.

[millring]

Jun 5, 2008 11:30:00 GMT -5 epaul said:

Damn.

I get three strikes. That's just one.

There's a farmer's union in MN?

Oh well.

I just hate this bickering. In lieu of a kiss on the lips, I went to the International Star Registry and had a star named for you. Expect delivery soon. They assured me that it's a small star -- nothing too gaudy or ostentatious. I know how you Minnesotans hate a display.

[dradtke]

Yes, Virginia, there is a Farmers' Union in Minnesota. I try to pick up one of their yardsticks at the state fair every year. They're not far from the deep-fried Twinkie booth.

[theevan]

Creative campaign slogans, Part I
(I kind of like it)

[Deleted]

It's interesting to contemplate the relative work of a president in 1860, compard to 2008. Yeah, the government has grown, as has the population at an enormous rate. kind of like everything else. But, so have the tools and staff of the president. I beleive Lincoln's staff sonsisted of ONE personal secretary. And, never saw a picture of Abe or this secretary with a laptop. We've tended to make the types of adjustments and create the tools that allow us to keep pace. I don't really think we have developed into a race of supermen, or anything. Just acquired different and better tools.

I think we'd be flattering ourselves a little to think that we could step into medicine in 1860. But, I don't know, maybe Shannon would have some thoughts. In my business, the tools permit lawyers to produce much more work, much faster. Hence, the 25-hour billable day, I guess. There's a lot more law to know, but the tools allow us to access it much faster. It's not like any modern lawyer knows more about the law than Abe, but we can sure find what we don't know faster than riding a horse 20 miles to an inadequate library.

I was trying to think about pottery, Millring. But, I've never even had the into course, or anything. Like acoustic guitars, it may be one of those fields where technology just hasn't shaken things up as much as other fields? On the other hand, working with some wood-fire kiln may be challenging.

[sidheguitarmichael]

Jun 5, 2008 12:19:18 GMT -5 sekhmet said:

I think the people that want change the most are those who are not doing so well the way things are - factory workers who have no pension after paying for one for years, people who work in industries that have been mostly outsourced to China; kids who are working three jobs to pay mama's medical bills; poor folks who watch their parents die for lack of coverage for chemotherapy while watching the rich folks on the other side of town get all the care they need; people who are appalled at how profitable it seems to be Haliburton and Blackwater with their ties to government and their industry waging war; people who want to be America the Beautiful again and be proud of their country's foreign policy; people who are ashamed that their Commander in Chief either deliberately lied the country into a preemptive strike on Iraq or was too stupid to know the truth; people who want the rhetoric about the greatest country on the planet to be true, or even half true.

A fair summary of Obama's appeal, IMHO, and a reasonable explanation of his phenomenal grass-roots financial support.


The definition of conservative is someone who actually has something to conserve.

With more and more people getting shut out of health care, decisions about who we bomb, access to education and other aspects of the American dream, the conservative movement is slowly eating itself by the tail as it begins to disappoint more of the general population and thin AmDream shareholders from its own ranks.

Obama might well fail too, but he's a different approach, and with the current power elite having proved themselves untrustworthy with matches and sharp objects, let alone policy, it makes sense to a lot of folks to give the new guy a shot at it (as always, IMHO).
-MM

[sekhmet]

And, Michael, that being true, that people are ready to vote against as much as for in this election, it seems that the less history in Washington as it is, the better.

[sidheguitarmichael]

It's an anti-incumbent mood from where I sit and stand. That was probably Hilary's downfall as well, if one boils it down to dust. Frankly, she should have easily taken the nomination by marquis of queensberry rules...

[Supertramp78]

I think there is a lot to that. Obama ran on a "Change" platform. Hillary ran on the "experience" platform. Problem is, when people want change, they just don't think they are going to get it from somone who has been in government for 16 years making it the way it is now. this is an election where experience counts against you.

It is funny to me that the Republicans (and Hillary) are focusing on the experience issue. Eight years ago you never heard anyone argue experience when Bush was running against Gore. It was a carryover from the primary when Bush ran against McCain and couldn't claim more experience then either. So he ran on the ""Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" platform. The Republicans never claimed experience with Alan Keyes or Steve Forbes or Gary you have to be kidding me Bauer. If experience was such a big predictor or future Presidential success, you would think the GOP would have flocked to McCain over Bush. Nope. They picked Bush.

And when Bush ran against Gore, you never heard Bush expound on his 'experience'. Probably because compared to a guy who had spent 8 years as VP, 8 years in the Senate and 8 years in the House, he would look like an idiot to even utter the word 'experience'. So he ran on a platform of leadership and change. He was the uniter. He said, "It's time to get a leader in Washington who brings Republicans and Democrats together to get the people's business done" and folks just ate it up. He never said how he was going to do it either. Good thing since he never even tried.

I remember him telling people he was going to bring honor and respect back to the White House. Bring the parties together to work toward the common good. Try to fix what was broken in Washington. You know, all the stuff Obama is saying he will do. But eight years ago the GOP just ate it up like mother's milk and never once mentioned Bush's complete lack of experience when compared to his opponent.

So why is experience so important now? Because for the first time in a long time, their candidate has more National experience. It is the one thing he can claim an advantage on so of course it is NOW the most important qualification you could have.

I still remember a stump speech in November of 2000 when Bush said, "The role of a leader is to anticipate. The role of a leader is to look down the road. The role of a leader is to see warning signs and do something about it."

And he ran on a leadership platform in 2004.

[Tim Alexander (fmrly. Camalex)]

"I'm not a cynic, but I share Alan's doubts about the extent to which people are ready to pay the price to solve some of our bigger problems."

If our country and our people aren't now willing to pay the price to solve our bigger problems, I suppose we ought to simply put the "closed" sign up - because this wouldn't be the America I want to be a part of and it wouldn't the America my parents and grandparents built. It someone else's country and I suppose I'd start thinking a lot more like Doug Heard.

We need to solve bigger problems and get our noses out of the asses of every major multi-national corporation that pays the winning party to keep the status quo. Obama could be the smoorthest liar in the world -- slicker than slick Willy but I have a hunch he's the real deal and I pray he can be successful and thughtful as he guides this nation through and out of the quagmire President Dickhead has left for him. McCain doesn't have the courage, the energy or the inclination to work against the interests of major corporations -- Obama might the huckleberry we have all needed for a very long time. Just my opinion.

[sekhmet]

Tim! You Go Man!