Obama & The Black-Eyed Peas

Parent Cafe
21

<p>I don’t discount the importance of inspirational rhetoric. It can lead to great things and it can lead to disaster. I agree with you that Reagan was a disaster. But he was able to be such a disaster because he was able to inspire so many Americans to embrace his vision. You and I were in the minority. </p>

<p>I have already said that I am convinced that Obama’s health plan is more realistic than Hillary’s; I was opposed to the Irag invasion from the beginning on the same grounds he was (and the CC archives ought to prove that). I have been impressed by his ability to get things done as a community organizer. I have as well been impressed by his call to reform Social Security. No, I do not believe he is an empty suit or a balloon full of hot air.
Now Hillary has great command of facts and policy, more than he does. And the policy differences between the two of them are not that great. But I think Bill has become a liability. The issue of co-presidency is a real one–and a Constitutional one. I also think that Hillary, for all her strengths, is not able to inspire others to the same degree Obama is; and she does inspire animosity among Republicans. It is undeserved, but it is a reality. It also would consume a lot of her time and energy to deal with, if she were president.</p>

22

<p>marite: Yes, I hear what you’re saying. I have also looked at the policies of both Clinton and Obama, and you are correct-- on many of them, they are not that far apart.</p>

<p>I really don’t like the media’s attempt to manipulate me, though. I also don’t want Oprah telling me who to vote for (or what books to read, for that matter). There’s a long time between now and the election. My own state’s primary isn’t until May. Just as Edwards’ lack of media coverage was a problem for him, I think Obama’s continuing (and seemingly selective) over-exposure could very well turn out to be equally destructive, over the long haul. He needs to somehow turn it down, in my opinion.</p>

23

<p>

</p>

<p>janieblue, simba,</p>

<p>I think you are misreading the situation, a lot. The media follows Obama so closely and with so much “enthusiasm” because he is drawing immense and unexpected public support (and in part because his improbable success and background make for a great story). Iowa’s caucus win in January, for example, was a huge surprise that “the media” had little to do with. Rather it was a combination of the campaign planting themselves in the state nearly a year in advance, plus Obama’s ability to organize the campaign (showing his experience and strength at community organizing from his past work in Chicago), plus the message he delivered over and over and over again. That is what won him Iowa; it was not the media attention he received. Then he gave one hell of a good speech on national TV and at THAT point, the media jumped on board for real.</p>

<p>Since then, there has been a great deal of attention paid to him and much of it is enthusiastic, but again, the media is responding to the people. Today for example, 14,000 people lined up in the cold in Idaho to attend his rally. Before 9 a.m.! </p>

<p>In Minneapolis, 20,000 came to see Obama this afternoon. I don’t know about you, but if I were a news director at any paper or TV station in the land, I would be reporting on a politician drawing 20,000 people to line up in February on a Saturday morning. The media are not getting the people to go there; the people are getting the media to cover it. Obama is something of a cultural phenomenon, and this is what it feels like to watch a movement grow. You may not like the man, think he’s worthy of the job of President or like his message. But you can’t blame the news media for getting caught up in telling the story of the public’s response to what they are seeing and hearing. </p>

<p>And, back to the music video, the media had nothing to do with it, short of airing Obama’s New Hampshire speech that served as Will.i.am’s inspiration for creating his song.</p>

24

<p>“At any rate, inspiring and being a good communicator are great attributes, but this next president is gonna need a whole lot more than that. I, for one, am sick to death of the media’s love affair with Obama. I’m sure he’s a fine person, but he hasn’t yet convinced me he can do the job. Sorry. There’s still plenty of time left, though.”</p>

<p>This is what I meant. And I apoligize; I see how what I said could be taken the wrong way. But I have a feeling if I’d said it about a Hillary song nobody would have been offended. It’s just that we need less singing and more talking…substantive talking.</p>

<p>Ditto Janieblue’s last post.</p>

<p>If you guys want to delete my previous comment, feel free. I understand.</p>

25

<p>Janieblue:</p>

<p>The Obama-Clinton debate is the first time I’ve watched TV in a very very long time. I have watched Oprah only once in my life–not my cup of tea. I don’t let endorsements sway me, though I consider them important (not for me but for what they tell me about the kind of support various candidates draw). I believe I am quite capable of making up my own mind: by going to the candidates’ websites, by looking at the list of people who are advising them and their campaigns, by reading their books, even when they’re ghost written (as Hillary’s and those of most political figures are), and of course, looking at their records. I think you are, too. If you feel that Clinton is the better prospective leader (which is different from being the better campaigner), that is fine. But revulsion against the media circus should not be a factor. To a large extent, it is due to the newness factor; but it is also because of the unexpectedly large and fervent crowds that Obama is attracting. It would be strange if the media failed to notice.</p>

26

<p>

</p>

<p>epistrophy, you’re absolutely right. I have no idea why I typed Robert instead of John. I’ve known John since he was in high school! :)</p>

<p>Even though I am a strong supporter of Hillary, I can’t help but think about a Clinton/Obama ticket. The policy differences are so small, relatively speaking, and the two of them against anyone that the Republicans nominate would just be a pleasure to watch what they could accomplish.</p>

27

<p>I think we’ve had far, far too much substantive talking. If substantive talking meant anything, Dennis Kucinich would be the Democratic nominee.</p>

<p>Everyone already knows that both Obama and Hillary’s health care plans are giant giveaways to the health insurance companies and their lobbyists. Everyone knows that they aren’t going to make American companies - or Dubai companies (I’m thinking of Halliburton) - who left to explore Al Gore’s green pastures - come back. </p>

<p>There are no big secrets here. Why would we need more substantive talking?</p>

28

<p>Since this is a college web site, let us not forget that Obama,is a Harvard Law School Graduate, he is not just an “actor with good communication skills”.</p>

<p>The fact that tens of thousands of people are standing in lines around the country, just reflects the deep dissatisfaction with how things have been going in this country.
And, now the young people have found someone who appeals to them.</p>

<p>How could the media ignore this!</p>

<p>Update -Ethel Kennedy endorsed him today</p>

29

<p>^^and an alum of Columbia and Occidental. :)</p>

30

<p>Well, to be fair, Wellesley and Yale Law School are nothing to feel superior to! (even though I am a proud Harvard alum!).</p>

31

<p>ha ha… marite. We are lucky to have two extremely well-educated candidates from which to choose!</p>

32

<p>“I can’t help but think about a Clinton/Obama ticket”</p>

<p>Obama/HillBill ticket would be more interesting. Although I’m not sure Bill is well-suited to live on the grounds of the US Naval Observatory</p>

33

<p>Wow…!</p>

<p>“Even so, I think if Obama wins and steps into the White House, he’s ultimately going to prove a major disappointment to the American public, because the media and his supporters have elevated him to such a level at this point, that it’s all going to be downhill for him. He’s really being set up for a major fall.”</p>

<p>This has been my concern about the growing Obama cult—and yes, I do believe it is a sort of cult, because it is not based on reality or pragmatism. There is no way ANYONE can fulfill such a weighty and desperation filled hope. The man is a mere mortal, and a POLITICIAN to boot! He is not America’s messiah. There is no messiah on the horizon (not even Billary:rolleyes:)!</p>

<p>I believe the man basically has a good heart. He does want to do good. But I don’t think either he or his most fervent supporters fully realizes what he will be up against once installed in the White House, and the target of the most venomous partisan assault in US history. </p>

<p>And once the stars fall from the eyes of all the naive and idealistic young people (who believe Obama is some sort of talisman against the impending evils we are sure to be faced with in the coming years) come to realize that he has weaknesses, and faults, just like an ordinary human being, the backlash will be terrible indeed.:(</p>

34

<p>Well, what I want to know from both candidates is precisely what they will refuse to say. I want to know, in detail, how many Iraqis who have worked for the aggressive, hostile occupiers they will allow into the U.S. in the first year of the U.S. pullout. I want to know, in detail, what their plans are - including budgets for the next 10 years - for aiding the four million refugees the U.S. created, including the more than two million living in Syria, Jordan, and Iran who aren’t returning, and including the more than 600,000 ethnically cleansed since July by Warlord-in-Chief Betrayus.</p>

<p>I want to know all of this not just on humanitarian grounds, but because the refugees, especially those who left the country, were the most pro-Western, most educated sectors of Iraqi society, and if they permanently turn against the U.S., may represent a far greater long-term security threat than anything we have yet to face.</p>

<p>Some substantive talking would be nice…but I’m not holding my breath.</p>

35

<p>Poetsheart,
I disagree with you. First, I think that calling a mainstream candidate’s supporters a cult is offensive. </p>

<p>A cult is either this: “adherents of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices” or this: “organization that develops around an abusive guru, and which enforces the abuser’s authority, usually by means of an inner circle of lieutenants or close disciples.”</p>

<p>Clearly, this is mean-spirited hyperbole on your part and it seems really unlike you, from what I’ve read of your posts.</p>

<p>Second, just because people respond to Obama’s message and are inspired to rally, create music, defend him on college boards, etc… in no way means that their reasons are based on messianic dreams or “desperation filled hope.” You can have pragmatism with hope. You can be fully immersed in reality and still believe that Americans can unite to bring change from the grass-roots. Obama’s two books and his website are all about pragmatism. The guy is a wonk who can also speak and move people on a different level than the intellect.</p>

<p>And third, I especially think you do younger people a disservice by dismissing them as naive and idealistic and basically reducing them to moronic idiots who view a politician as a talisman. There are many incredibly smart and rational people, including young people, who have their feet firmly planted on the ground and who yet believe Obama represents our best chance to reenergize, unify and better this country. If your own kid supported Obama would you describe him or her in such demeaning terms?</p>

36

<p>So if you go to Obama’s website, he says he will pledge $2 billion - less than $1k per person - to support those ethnically cleansed. That’s laughable. Nothing about Iraqi refugees to the U.S. at all.</p>

<p>Hillary won’t commit ANY money - but wants to hold a “donor’s conference” - yeah, right - it has been a very effective strategy for Afghanistan, hasn’t it? Why would any donor want to support U.S. efforts to care for refugees in Syria and Iran? Nothing about Iraqi refugees to the U.S.</p>

<p>Neither of them considers this an issue of national security. If they ever find themselves in a “foreign adventure” again - what thinking individual would EVER aid Americans, well-meaning or not?</p>

<p>Just substantive talking. Doesn’t amount to a hill of beans in any case.</p>

37

<p>I apologize if I offended you, Momof2inca. That was not my intention. I said, “sort of cult”, because I believe the fervent adoration Obama engenders in SOME of his supporters seems to border on worship, and that worries me. Perhaps the analogy was hyperbolic, but I assure you, it wasn’t mean-spirited. Despite my fears for Obama, I am currently most inclined to vote for him, since I can no longer vote for Edwards.:)</p>

<p>“just because people respond to Obama’s message and are inspired to rally, create music, defend him on college boards, etc… in no way means that their reasons are based on messianic dreams or “desperation filled hope.” You can have pragmatism with hope. You can be fully immersed in reality and still believe that Americans can unite to bring change from the grass-roots.”</p>

<p>You’re absolutely right, and I’m sorry to have given you the impression that I believe ALL of Obama’s supporters view him in the way I outlined above. But I do believe that he does have a legion of KoolAid drinkers—at least as large as that of Hillary Clinton.</p>

<p>“And third, I especially think you do younger people a disservice by dismissing them as naive and idealistic and basically reducing them to moronic idiots who view a politician as a talisman. There are many incredibly smart and rational people, including young people, who have their feet firmly planted on the ground and who yet believe Obama represents our best chance to reenergize, unify and better this country. If your own kid supported Obama would you describe him or her in such demeaning terms?”</p>

<p>No doubt you are right about the majority of educated and intelligent young people who are excited by Obama’s candidacy. But I also believe that, to a degree, it is human nature to think in a binary fashion when one is so terribly invested in one’s candidate during such a critical and pivotal election. It’s so easy to be caught up in the type of fervor Obama engenders, which is virtually unprecedented in past years. Did even Kennedy inspire such widespread ardour? I believe that ultimately, the burden of what is, in some cases, a very desperate hope, is onerous and cannot be carried for long. </p>

<p>My DS does at this point support Obama, and plans to vote for him. But he hasn’t displayed anything near the type of excitement we often see on television from Obama’s most fervent supporters.</p>

<p>By the way, I too believe change can be inspired by exceptional leadership and grassroots commitment. But I also believe few who undertake the fight are prepared for the fierceness, the stamina, and the epic levels of deception those of the entrenched establishment are able to bring to the fight.</p>

38

<p>John Legend is one of my daughters favorites- it makes me smile to see him teamed up with my favorite :slight_smile: to write the soundtrack for a Howard Zinn miniseries
[The people speak](<a href=“http://seattlest.com/2007/12/15/eddie_vedder_ho.php”>http://seattlest.com/2007/12/15/eddie_vedder_ho.php&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

<p>[I was there](<a href=“http://seattlest.com/2007/12/12/obama_rocks_the.php”>http://seattlest.com/2007/12/12/obama_rocks_the.php&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

39

<p>Thanks for clarifying what you meant, poetsheart.</p>

40

<p>

</p>

<p>excerpted from Feb 3rd NYT Frank Rich column “Ask Not What J.F.K. Can Do for Obama”</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/03rich.html?hp[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/03rich.html?hp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>column goes on to compare Obama to Kennedy and America in 1960 to today.</p>