It was not a perfect inauguration. Barack Obama and John Roberts mutually stumbled over the Oath of Office. Obama's speech was powerful, moving in places, but somber, serious, and not entirely elegant. There was a nervous air to some of the proceedings, particularly Rick Warren's invocation. The crowd -- well more than a million people -- was respectful of one another, and reverential of the ceremony. But Washington has been essentially impossible to navigate for the past 12 hours or so, a disorienting labyrinth of road and subway closures, crowds and frigid temperatures; I literally got lost in the crowd.
In spite of all of that, I found myself almost overcome with pride, and read the same emotion on the faces of nearly everyone that I passed in the crowd. For as much as some parts of the world have developed a habit of looking down on America, it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader. Here's hoping that Obama will prove to be a president worthy of our great nation.
1.20.2009
A Proud Moment for America
@ 1:38 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
229 comments
This is not a proud moment in America. It's a dark day. Easily the darkest day since September 11th, 2001.
A terrorist regime has taken over the White House. May God deliver us now!
Simpleton, way to live up to your name.
Arresting, perfect speech. (And yeah on the opening and Rick Warren's invocation.)
This is going to be great. Thanks for sharing what's on with you from Washington.
gawd bless america - all of us
fitting that there would be a late start & a few stumbles today after 8 years of Bush/Cheney
visual of Cheney in the wheelchair & Bush leaving in the copter to audible razzing from the crowds sums up the entire Inauguration
hopefully better days to come
Here's hoping that Obama will prove to be a president worthy of our great nation.
Hope is a noble thing but not tangible. Unfortunately, I think too much of what this man is made of is simply intangible rhetoric based on "hope."
We were once a great nation. With the election of Obama, I truly believe we are headed for a disaster. I think our days as a hyperpower or superpower are numbered. We will be no more consequential than Trinidad and Tobago by the end of Obama's first term.
It's incredibly sad how this country is failed and the doom that lies ahead.
We were once a great nation. With the election of Obama, I truly believe we are headed for a disaster. I think our days as a hyperpower or superpower are numbered. We will be no more consequential than Trinidad and Tobago by the end of Obama's first term.
It's incredibly sad how this country is failed and the doom that lies ahead.
Obvious Troll is Obvious.
Thank you Nate. An appropriate post for a hopeful and somber time. And here's hoping that simpleton chose his name to point to the absurdity of his post.
Here at the other end of streaming video (projected on a wall at the school where I work) the organizational chaos, brutal weather, and awkward missteps were not a big deal. The speech was moving and the crystalline significance of the moment came through.
A terrorist regime has taken over the White House.
Didn't you see it, Simple? They were escorted out the east side of the Capitol.
Were there any last minute pardons? Would we even know yet if there were?
Could we see some new executive orders this afternoon?
Time to Rebuild the Country.
"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations."
Damn straight. The US was a much more dangerous place when we established these rights, why do we need to sacrifice them now?
The First Obama Inaugural: Most Definitely Not a Family Affair
Today many here celebrate Obama's political victory and you are entitled to it.
As with everything Obama, the inauguration has left me empty and unsatisfied. His speech was yet another dark harangue that might have been given by Bush or Reagan, empty rhetoric delivered with his signature tinge of anger. Curiously, there was little red meat for the Libs. Obama seems to want to be his own man. The question is: What man is that?
Perhaps at such moments Obama thinks of his father, of his lack of connection to his blood family. Oh sure, the half-sister was there and somewhere in the crowd I am told was the step-grandmother brought over by the Kenyan delegation as a perverse kind of bait, but there seems little in terms of human flesh to root Obama to this earth.
I awoke this morning thinking of Obama's Aunt, Zeituni Onyango. She who Obama so affectionately described in his best-selling memoir Dreams from My Father, an illegal immigrant who has lived for years in a disabled-access apartment in a rundown public housing project in South Boston.
For all of Obama's high-minded words about our inter-connectedness and implicit duty to each other where was Aunt Zeituni today?
And what of his half brother?
George is his name. Again in one of Obama's books he says that on his trip to Africa he met George, describing him as a "beautiful boy". Apparently, that beauty did not affect him to any great degree. This man now perhaps in his 30s has told the world press how he lives on one dollar a day and how he has been forced to live by his fists, which he proudly proclaims he is good at. How sad to live in squalor and poverty when you have a multi-millionaire half brother. Contrast this with the McCain’s who plucked an orphan out of the arms of Mother Teresa to raise as their own daughter.
Contrast, too, Obama’s family values against those of Sarah Palin who seemed to juggle an awful lot during the campaign and still retain her motherhood and essential humanity.
And so I remembered Aunt Zeituni and brother George today, using them as talismans against Obama’s charm and rhetorical skill and his finely-honed sense of moment. Oh, the pageantry of it all! So Reaganesque! I will not be easily seduced by all of that.
Let me know instead what he has done for his kin. Did he ever stop for a moment and extend a hand to Aunt or Brother, if only so as to create a single point of light?
Beautiful words, Nate! Worthy of this great day.
Well, here's hoping the Obama will be the guy I voted for, and not the guy that chose Rick Warren to pray for him.
Thanks a lot, Nate. We look forward to more reaction comments and reaction shots -- and to more of 538 in the months and years to come.
Why can't the woonie-burgers go somewhere else and commiserate?
For the rest of us -- which is almost all of us -- what a great day!
PeteKent is back! LOL
I thought the speech was just right for the occasion. Times are very hard, and Obama needed to state that plainly and say that it will take time and very hard work to get through them and out the other side. He also needed to say that we need to maintain hope and continue to work hard and sacrifice, and honor the dignity of honest, hard work.
As a boy, I lived in a Malay village for 2 years as part of the community, so his shoutout to Muslims in America (I also was gratified that he mentioned non-believers) and the part of the speech directed at the Muslim World particularly pleased me. Obama is a man who understands Islam and the Muslim world from personal experience. I predict that he will visit Indonesia in the first year if not the first 6 months of his Administration, and I think it will be a very important trip.
I also loved his remarks about science.
Do you laugh so easily at human misery ignored, Charlie? Remember: he who laughs last, laughs best.
Normally I love you Nate, but I'm wondering about the comment about the European nations.
If by 'a man like Barack Obama' you mean a black man, then remember that most European countries have very much smaller black populations than the US, so yes, it's more unlikely (though certainly not impossible).
Remember that countries like the UK have no history of institutionalised racism. We elected a Jewish prime minister about a hundred and fifty years ago and our first female prime minister nearly thirty years ago - I'm still waiting for either of those things to happen here.
The idea being promulgated by all the media here that such things can happen 'only in America' is ridiculous and not a little bit offensive.
I was heartily embarrassed by Rick Warren's stumbling, bumbling, and hardly humbling invocation. Perhaps Biden should have brought his parish priest.
The President's speech hit the right note--serious, deadly serious, yet hopeful and inspiring.
Amen Nate. Today is a day to celebrate - tomorrow we, all of us, need to get back to work keeping America the greatest nation in the world.
Despite the joy of this national day, the hate and fear mongering from simple minded reactionaries and Republicans is still thick in the air.
It's why they've been swept into the dustbin of history.
Deservedly so.
About Rick Warren's invocation:
It's being overwhelmingly panned on DailyKos. Let me make clear that I am a strong supporter of gay rights, including marriage equality. I strongly and totally support and advocate the right of civil marriage for both gay and straight couples. I would not have chosen to select Warren to give an invocation. But I'm not Obama and understand why Obama did select him. And that said, and considering that Warren is an Evangelical, I actually thought his invocation was great. Say what you want about Warren's record and previous statements, but his invocation was about as inclusive and unifying as I could imagine an Evangelical being, while still invoking Jesus. And his invocation of Jesus was to introduce the Lord's Prayer, which is about as uncontroversial a thing related to Jesus as you could recite. I'm Jewish (as, of course, was Jesus), and to my knowledge, the only strong objection Jews have to themselves reciting the Lord's Prayer is that it is associated with Christianity. None of its content is un-Jewish in any way, nor would I think that, except in name and association, it's un-Islamic. I wish someone from Ethical Culture, the secular Humanist association whose members are mostly atheists or at least agnostics, would someday be chosen to give a speech at an inaugural, or that prayers with the implication of official sanction could simply be dispensed with. But as long as Evangelicals are selected, I really don't see how you could do much better than Warren's invocation.
Oh and a lot of people seem excited that he managed a shout-out to non-believers. The day an atheist President is elected is the day the US will truly be free.
YIPPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Only a petty man would try to use Obama's family against him. You don't know Obama's extended family; you don't give a damn about them, you wouldn't know their names if not for their famous relative. Your use of them as a brickbat against him is cheap, easy, and sleazy.
You sound as silly as the prat who posted We will be no more consequential than Trinidad and Tobago by the end of Obama's first term.
Troll away, you're not going to dampen anybody's spirits today, except maybe your own.
Cue Hartigan:
EIGHT. LONG. YEARS. YOU SON OF A BITCH.
Mostly, I liked the speech a lot. The one thing I thought was missing, the thing that he walked up to the edge of but never said, is something like this:
"A few generations ago, America willingly sacrificed her blood and sweat and comforts to help save the world from a great evil. Those Americans, living and dead, will hold us in justified contempt if we cannot bring ourselves to do likewise in our own time of crisis."
I found Obama's "shout out to non-believers" as Michael put it the msot jarring thing in the speech. It may undo all the good he has done himself with the faith community of late. Bone headed.
Only in the USA. As someone who lived in Italy, let me say that Europe has yet to achieve something like this.
mirrormirror, can you imagine an Arab President of France? A Turkish President of Germany? Or even more farfetched, a Moroccan PM of Spain or a Libyan PM of Italy? How about an Asian (please excuse the common bigoted expression, "Paki") PM of Great Britain? I don't think the main issue is the percentage of population. Yes, Benjamin Disraeli, a Jew who had converted to Anglicanism, was PM of Britain a long time ago. Yes, you've had a female PM. Yes, you deserve credit for that. But please remember that blacks have faced the most brutal persecution and prejudice in the history of the U.S., with the possible exception of Native Americans. Remember that we're talking about a "race" that is mostly composed of the descendants of former slaves (though that doesn't apply to Obama). There really isn't any exact analogy to Europe. But perhaps if a Romany (Gypsy) could ever become the PM of Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic - heck, ANY country in Europe - that might be something of a comparison.
Awww...I was hoping to wake up to news of an assassination of Obama...how disappointing.....
As for the article, the reason the rest of the world would not have elected Obama is because they do not have as many retards there, as there are in America.
People read the newspaper in Europe and can talk about real issues, instead of "OMG...Sarah Palin is wearing $150K worth of clothes! That means Obama is amazing!"
Excuse me, nb, but I know enough about Obama's relationship with his family to see that there is a hole lurking within the heart of this man. Indeed I am suspicious of someone who could care so little for his brother and Aunt as to leave them flailing about unaided and unremarked upon, while still publishing correspondence to his children the media.
mirrormirror:
"The day an atheist President is elected is the day the US will truly be free."
Heck, the day an open atheist or agnostic can run for President without their non-belief being an issue people care much about, and ditto about an openly gay candidate...
But it's foolish to overlook the incredible significance of this moment. So many Americans believed that this day would never come.
Who could have predicted the only two wingnuts who had a prominent role would strike the only sour notes on a day for progressives?
At least John Roberts presumably apoligized to President Obama for his incompetence. Now that snake oil salesman Warren needs to apologize to the First Lady. I swear, Michelle Obama actually cringed a little. Thank Christ for Rev. Lowery!
rays242, I hope the Secret Service is monitoring your homicidal daydreaming.
PeteKent:
"I found Obama's `shout out to non-believers' as Michael put it the msot jarring thing in the speech. It may undo all the good he has done himself with the faith community of late."
I usually ignore your trollish ejaculations, but this is really stupid. Being inclusive enough to acknowledge the believers and the non-believers, and the gays and straights, will turn off only completely closed-minded people who form part of the 20-some-odd% of people who will root for Obama to fail, no matter what. Such as you.
Thanks, Nate, for the guidance throughout the campaign. Kept me sane!
it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader
I don't know about "unlikely", except in the sense that Obama's presidency HERE was also unlikely. But it is an interesting question: how many democratic countries have freely elected an ethnic minority to their leadership? (Ignoring colonial and apartheid-like situations). Fujimori of Peru is the one that springs to mind; there are probably others, but we would certainly be surprised to see a Pakistani become Prime Minister of Britain, an Arab become President of France, or a German become Prime Minister of Japan. That's not to put those countries down, but we liberals do get caught up sometimes in the notion that the United States is less "enlightened" than other Western nations, and so we should take pride in the fact that this is an unusual occurrence, not just here, but in the world.
(I'd seriously like to know more examples of minority heads of state.)
PorridgeGun, apologize for what? Did he slightly mispronounce Michelle Obama's name? I just don't remember. I thought it was Sasha and Malia's names he pronounced slightly funny.
wv: balse. Something which Obama has and which I hope the Democratic leadership in both houses of Congress grow.
Obama's mistake was expecting Roberts to administer the oath the same way Rehnquist did in 2005: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2B8-RME13I
Interestingly, that itself was the exception to the norm, including the younger Bush's *first* inauguration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQhWtRW-KKA
And the elder Bush almost had a false start himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJF1iQrvd0M
Other than that, Roberts was the one who fumbled it. Understandable, given it was his first inauguration and considering the historical enormity of the moment.
But honestly, I thought it was an incredibly humanizing moment for Obama, who has been uncharacteristically (but justifiably) somber since election night.
It was also a nice reminder of how relatively casually our democracy handles the "pomp and circumstance" of state ceremonies. Put a smile on this populist's face, anyway.
I assumed that the oath kerfuffle just indicated that Chief Justice Roberts really doesn't know the constitution http://tr.im/avw0
Although, on second thought, it will probably turn into a new birth certificate wingnut zombie mythos, i.e. that Obama is not the president because he didn't take the oath properly.
mirrormirro is wrong.
While the Brits every now and then get it right like by electing Margaret Thatcher they are a people who famously are known for treating their dogs better than people.
Europeans are among the most bigoted and racist people on Earth and Michael certainly has it right when it comes to them and the rest of the world who seem incapable of overcoming tribal loyalties and are largely ungovernable but for the assitance of Western Civilization. The White Man's Brden, indeed, as Kipling called it.
I must say that with Obama as 44, putting aside his likely deeply ingrained character flaws, America can stand proud as the world's greatest democracy, the best and fairest people on Earth.
We all deserve a pat on the back today.
The leaders of the World will have a tough job bucking the will of the United States. The anti-Americanism of the past is crumbling perhaps irrationally in the face of Obama's ascendancy. He has done nothing yet and what he has done looks like BUSH III, but the world likes the guy.
Lucky for us!
"rays242, I hope the Secret Service is monitoring your homicidal daydreaming."
I am sure there are many other people who hope the same thing.
After all, it would have been the perfect reversal to a miserable election season!
I found Obama's `shout out to non-believers' as Michael put it the msot jarring thing in the speech. It may undo all the good he has done himself with the faith community of late.
Bollocks. The President should have said atheists and agnostics. "Non-believers" is how wingnuts refer to people who put their faith in science rather than religion.
BTW, Shaddup!
@ PeteKent, right, because non-believers aren't really Americans, and acknowledging their existence is an affront to people of faith everwhere. ::rollseyes::
It's really funny; when Bush took office in 2000, there was an awful lot of talk about how "I didn't vote for him, but as of January 20, he's our president all the same." Conciliatory statements like that abounded.
Fast-foward to the converva-trolls here. 2008 was a landslide, where 2000 was decided by the courts. We have a president entering office with unprecedented goodwill, both at home and abroad. And yet, we get these sorts of comments coming from the right. It's great to see what "respect for the office" and "faith in and respect for the electoral process".
Hey, whatever happened to that whole "patriotism" thing, guys?
It appeared to me that Obama muffed the oath, not Roberts.
And what did Warren do that was so bad?
I was profoundly impressed when he lead the assembled in the Lord's Prayer. I wondered if Obama knew the words . . . .
t's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader.
I guess it depends on what you mean by "someone like"
Fujimori of Peru was elected. Of course, he turned out badly.
But one exception lends credence to a general rule.
Scott:
My comment was eaten. Anyway, heads of government are the issue, not heads of state, because in many countries, heads of state are purely ceremonial, so that Jayaratnam, President of Singapore, doesn't really count.
There have been Jewish (or converted Jewish) PMs of Britain, Singapore (before independence), and I believe France. There have been white or light-skinned elected leaders of Guyana and Jamaica (Michael Manley). Do we include Bolivia, with a large Native American (mostly Inca/Aymara) majority having never elected an Indian PM until the current one? Isn't part of the issue a consideration of whether the minority group has been underprivileged, historically? I mean, the lower castes and untouchables are probably the majority in India, yet a victory of an untouchable would be a cataclysmic event in Indian history.
(I'd seriously like to know more examples of minority heads of state.)
Not really that significant, but Nicolas Sarkozy's father was Hungarian (though Sarkozy himself was born in Paris).
"Fast-foward to the converva-trolls here. 2008 was a landslide, where 2000 was decided by the courts. We have a president entering office with unprecedented goodwill, both at home and abroad. And yet, we get these sorts of comments coming from the right. It's great to see what "respect for the office" and "faith in and respect for the electoral process".
Hey, whatever happened to that whole "patriotism" thing, guys?"
Because George Bush was the better candidate in 2000. Al Gore might even be worse than Obama with all his "global warming" garbage, even when temperatures near Chicago last week were -35!
But McCain was clearly the better candidate. If Romney had been chosen as his VP, McCain still wins the election, even with the NUMEROUS advantages Obama had going in.
Yet even with such a huge turn-off by Sarah Palin, Obama still barely won the election by 3 points.
What a joke candidate who is making a mockery of the Presidential position.
Michael, I can't speak for the other European nations - in countries such as Italy, for example, you hardly ever see a black face - but yes, I can absolutely imagine a half black or half Asian person being elected in the UK, if they had the obvious qualifications and qualities of Obama.
On a lighter note I found it amusing that Aretha (who was fab) was singing the British national anthem - you guys can never escape ;)
Greg,
You have got to be kidding me. the Libs attacked Bush from the get go, never letting go of the notion that his Presidency was illegitimate.
I am as Pattriotic as any and I honestly wish Obama and the nation well, but I not going to be part of his "Amen" chorus. That's not patriotic; its blind and unthinking allegiance. Having seen and heard from so many of Obama's supporters among the people, I have learned that most have no idea what the man stands for or believes in but voted for him b/c they thought he was "cool".
Now as Obama's administration takes shape and he seems to be giving the back of his hand to the Progressive movement, particulary the Gays and the anti-War movement, I am a little relieved that he won;t be so doctrinaire, but I am left a little sad by his lack of principles.
It's really funny; when Bush took office in 2000, there was an awful lot of talk about how "I didn't vote for him, but as of January 20, he's our president all the same." Conciliatory statements like that abounded.
Fast-foward to the converva-trolls here. 2008 was a landslide, where 2000 was decided by the courts. We have a president entering office with unprecedented goodwill, both at home and abroad. And yet, we get these sorts of comments coming from the right. It's great to see what "respect for the office" and "faith in and respect for the electoral process"
I call bullshit. An enormous pile of it. You are cherry-picking and/or using the most anecdotal of anecdotal evidence.
In 2000, there were many conciliatory liberals/progressives just like there have been many conciliatory conservatives here in 2008 with the election of Obama in 2008.
Back then, there were plenty of liberals/progressives who were already on the hate-mongering superhighway and bashing Bush before he ever set foot in the Oval Office. Much like today with what some idiot conservatives are doing to Obama.
It works both ways so quit trying to make a dogmatic assessment about how each side has behaved - both then and now - based on your observations of probably no more than 20-25 comments on random blogs or eavesdropped conversations.
Both have been guilty of slander and unfair partisanship and both have shown a penchant for reconciliation and support.
Rick Warren was an embarrasment. If I knew nothing about him or his past comments, I'd still be thinking WHO THE FUCK IS THIS MORON?!? Just a totally hamfisted performance. They cut to the First Lady after his pronouncement of Sasha, and she was like WTF?!? Albeit it was minimal.
Senator Byrd has reportedly collapsed.
It was Ted Kennedy. FUCK.
Obama was correct - Roberts stumbled as MSNBC indicated in their comments afterwards. Obama repleated Roberts incorrect words while he and Michele obviously enjoyed this slight misstep. There's nothing like instant replay to Double check who is correct - MSNBC- or FOX. I had been wondering why President Obama's 35 words were a problem but 21 minutes of words were not!!!!!!!!!!!!CTkate
Best part of the ceremony for me was Lowery's hipster closing rhyme. That was just... I dunno, fun. There's room for fun, surely?
Hey rays242, talk some more about how you want Obama dead. Put it in personal context if possible, with a name, specific plans, and an address for the Secret Service to follow up on.
The people at the dinner don't look too shook up. Hopefully it's not serious.
I heard the speech on BBC radio. They did not broadcast Rick Warren.
I thought it was a pretty good speech - it moved ME, anyway. I was encouraged by what he said about military power not being a solution, that you need to talk and engage, and by the fact he stuck in some environmentalism.
But the most interesting bit was the bit where he said that EVERYONE was equal.
I was busy yesterday and missed out on the previous thread, which kind of got hijacked with an argument about GLBT issues. This is a subject which has come up many times on this site, and has raised fierce passions. I can see why people like DCM and Statler are disappointed with the signals sent out by the selection of Warren, and I can also see the other side of the argument, which is that it may be too early to tell what Obama is going to do. But what I am not sure I really understand is exactly what people are *looking for* Obama to do. And without knowing what people want, I can't tell whether Obama is failing or not.
Clearly DCM and Statler can't talk for the whole so-called "gay community" - like all other big groups, gays are all different and want different things with different priorities. But they can talk for themselves. So if I lay out what I think I have gleaned that they want, can they tell me whether I have got it right?
1 The right for people of any sexual orientation to serve in the military, and for their sexual orientation to be irrelevant to everybody, including whether they want to make it public or private.
2 Similar rights to 1, but in all forms of employment.
3 This one is a bit more difficult to express clearly, especially for a European who doesn't really understand the separation between state and religion in the US, but I'm going to have a go. That the legal form of "marriage" should actually be a civil ceremony sanctioned by the state, which confers the same rights on "spouses" whether they are same sex or different sexes; and that couples could also go through a religious ceremony if they wish, whether they are same sex or different sexes, provided that they can find a religious organisation prepared to conduct the ceremony. And that these rights (i.e. the right to be legally "married" in a civil ceremony regardless of sexual orientation) should be the same across the whole of the US, and not subject to the whim of states.
4 That crimes inspired by homophobia should be dealt with as hate crimes.
Does that in any way cover what you want Obama to do? And can you tell me whether there is anything I have missed? And which one (if any) you would rank as number one priority?
Thanks, and good luck to Obama, because he is going to need it.
Oh and Greg, 2008 was not a landslide. Ronald Reagan won by landlsides. The commonly accepted view in America is that landslides start at 10 pts, I dont think Obama's final margin was 7. Why do you feel the need to exagerate the size of Obama's victory?
Don't get too full of yourself. About half the country did not vote for Obama. That's a lot of people to try and win over int he next four years.
Given his wasteful trillion dollar bailout plans I think he is about squander a whole lot of that goodwill.
It appeared to me that Obama muffed the oath, not Roberts.
Sorry Pete, but it would appear that you, like Roberts, have never actually read the constitution. Roberts first put the word "faithfully" at the end of the second line, then again stuffed it in at the wrong place when trying to recover. Eventually Obama just repeated the first version of Roberts' flub rather than wait for manage to get it right.
Fuck that darn!!
I wrote a lengthy post but when I try to log in my password doesn't work. It's the third time I have to create a new account!! Fuck! Shit! Fuck!!
I just wanted to say that I disagree with Nate when he says that:
"it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader"
If he refers to racial prejudice, I dan't think he's right. Racial inequity plays before the polling place by allowing too few people from the minorities to be candidates because they generally are poorer and less educated people.
In France for instance, I think if we had a candidate of the quality of BO, we would have elected him.
There's one thing that I think too many people overlook: it's that what is striking about BO is not that he's black: it's that he's smart and honest (at least, he seems a lot more honest than all the other).
This kind of candidate, black or white, really rarely happens. I would say mainly because it's most often the crooks that manage their ways to power.
And If america is the first country to elect a candidate from an oppressed minority as its leader, I think it a matter of luck that so many qualities were combined in that man that he managed to be such an outstanding candidate at the same time as he was able to make his way to where he was able to compete in the primary election.
DiFi and harry the Mormon. Holy Shit...the ENEMY right there...IN THE SAME ROOM!!!
Hey Rays242, yeah, global warming is not happening because it was cold today where you are at. Let's ignore all the scientists and the fact that the polar ice caps are melting because it was cold where you're at. And of course, all Republicans will clearly be better than all Democrats, because you are one. It is so simple now, I can't see why I never noticed this before.
Larrouturu for Prez:
Hey, put a sock in it!
You French are the most racist, intolerant people on Earth. if you did manage to elect a "noir" for President it would be b/c of some enormous fraud or corruption that resulted in having the election stolen for him.
You have your Arab minorities rioting all the time over there.
You might learn something from America, bud.
You Frenchies and the rest of the Euro-trash are going to have to get used to America calling the tune. We have Barrack now, no Bush! Can't disrespect us no more!
Larrouturou for President is right. Americans are INCREDIBLY lucky to have had a candidate and now a president like Obama. I really wish we had such a candidate but believe you me if we had such a candidate it is not just in America that he or his equivalent would be elected...
Jim: But, but, but, Roberts is a REPUBLICAN! Surely that fact alone absolves him of any and all errors, mistakes, flubs and gaffs a priori. Why, if that's not the case, then PeteKent's whole world is built on a foundation of quicksand. QUICKSAND!!!
Just got in from the speech. Took an hour or so to get home, walked all the way from the Washington Monument to Pentagon City but it was totally worth it.
God bless America.
And let us not forget that Pakistan, an islamic nation elected a female as its prime minister
And with regards to "it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader"
If by that you mean a minority leader, you might be right. But you still have to fight the problem with sexism.
But as Stephen Colbert, I don't see color. So I interpret it to mean a 'smart man/woman'. Then I have to disagree. In that sense there is nothing unique about Barack Obama.
Chris 1974:
You wrote -- "Let's ignore all the scientists and the fact that the polar ice caps are melting because it was cold where you're at."
In fact it was reported the other day that polar sea ice is at its most expansive in decades. And temperatures rose for like the sixth year in a row.
It seems global warming is reversing itself.
The explanation I heard that explains the so-called phenomena of global warming is that it arose when many more temperature sensors were placed in urban areas and we lost many in remote areas, thereby introduicing bias into the system. Cities are naturally warmer than rural areas.
It think its from all the hot air given off by community orgnanizers there!
Global climatalogy is measured in cycles of 1000s of years, it was mistake to generalize from a few recent years.
Back in the 80s the NYTs published a front page story saying that US temps had been steady over the past 200 years. No notion of global warming then.
GW is a fiction being perpetrated by Liberal activists who want to use it to take over our lives. With the Fall fo Communism it became their favored means of geting into our shorts.
Let's ignore all the scientists and the fact that the polar ice caps are melting because it was cold where you're at.
The fact is that global sea ice is at the same level it was in 1979.
Global Sea Ice
One more thought - I can't believe some of you are making hay over the slip of Roberts (or Obama). Big deal. He accidentally slipped where he inserted "faithfully." What are you all? Two years old?
Geez. And the partisan bickering continues.
Did I see some partisan asshole(s) above say it was an underhanded conspiracy to delegitamize his presidency by forcing him to say an incorrect oath?
Go back to looking out for little green men and investigating the grassy knoll.
Anyone watching the inauguration? MSNBC.COM is reporting that Senators Kennedy and Byrd were "stricken" during the inaugration..
On a board I hang out at, NBC is reporting that Teddy Kennedy "had an extended seizure"
Be sad to lose some of the Democratic Party's legends at the same time we inaugurate the new one..
"In France for instance, I think if we had a candidate of the quality of BO, we would have elected him. "
In France, you have an unmarried woman as a Justice Minister who earlier this month gave birth to a baby girl and refuses to name the father. Not bad for the daughter of a North-African immigrant. I doubt there are many Western democracies that would be so tolerant.
A somewhat bitter and divisive speech. And the non-bitter and non-divisive parts were very average.
Your News Analysis Pal,
Bugboy
Petekent, all I have to say is OMG. Whose explanation? El Rushbo's? Hannity's? Seriously, very few scientists are buying that. And Edge, that post is from a conservative columnist who didn't post any evidence to back up his claims. In short, not proof of anything. It's funny, this debate is between scientists and others who know what they are talking about and right wing media figures.
Folks, if you're fir im or agin' im, lighten up. If you're agin' im, take pride in the peaceful transfer of power. Take pride in the symbolism and take pride in your country's ability to move forward. It's not a small thing that a man who just 50 years ago would have had to use a separate drinking fountain in almost half the country is now president.
But if you're fir im, take a chill pill, too. We've promised ourselves more in health and retirement benefits than can ever possibly be paid, even if we tax the rich to kingdom come. We've removed so many people from the income tax rolls, tyranny of the majority is here. There's only so much one man can do. For now BHO has the power to steamroll the vested interests of his political opponents but what will he do about the vested interests of his political allies?
---
.. it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader.
---
There are countries that have elected minorities to highest positions. Indian Prime Minister is a Sikh (some 1% of population), Peru had a president of Japanese Descent.
eplekjekk:
Pakistan has elected a woman PM _twice_, and Bangladesh has elected _two_ women PMs. Sri Lanka and India have also elected women PMs. There are actually a lot of countries that have elected women heads of government. In Nordic countries, it's quite common to do so. The U.S. is far behind in that respect.
Have not been here for a while---but things certainly have not changed. The lines are being drawn and the attacks are taking place. Guess no one really listened to Obama's speech. Our country is in trouble and the partisinship and the I am right, you are wrong attitude is not going to solve a thing. I hope we can find that middle road.
Nataraj: Great point about India.
Nam Vet, things may not have changed online, but they surely have in DC. Wait and see.
Update:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/20/inauguration.kennedy.collapse/index.html
Yikes. Kennedy was still in the throes of the seizure when they put him in a wheelchair to get him to the ambulance.
And now the ambulance is having a hard time getting to the hospital due to the crowded streets.
Not good at all.
Michael, I truly hope we have real change in DC on both sides. I think it is the only way things will get better. Obama has a tough job and the old way of doing things are not going to work. His speech gave me a lot of hope.
Nate I usually read your comments with great delight, however, today I find them slightly offensive.
I refer to the comment that "only in America" could this happen. Sorry, Nate, this is simply untrue and shortsighted. I don't believe that many nations would have not voted for someone of the calibre of Obama if they had that opportunity.
Or are you indicating that America only voted for Obama because he was AA? I believe that by and large Americans voted for him not because he was black but rather inspite of that. They voted for him because he has depth, integrity, wisdom, he is a wordsmith, amazing orator, intelligent, level headed and cool. Surely you, Nate, should credit your fellow Americans with a little more intellect and nous than that comment indicates.
"Only in America" is a phrase that has no place on a day like today, it belongs to yesteryear. There is nothing that happens that does not have it echoes in history. We are none of us islands.
I know it's petty of me, especially given the solemn dignity and uplifting eloquence of President Obama's inaugural address, but some of the most memorable words I've heard today were "Former President of the United States, George W. Bush..."
Wow. What a day. I am incredibly proud to be an american (living in Germany).
Not a perfect inauguration, but a damned good one. And honest. And refreshing.
Hey, my (Canadian) cheif of state is a female francophone Haitian Immigrant.
Not that she was elected, but we don't directly elect any of the leaders.
wv - stinkt.... too easy. I abstain.
@Petekent:
Hilarious comment! I see that you know France very well and surely better than I do.
Regarding your comment about how we should take a lesson from america, I totally agree. Maybe you could have thought that this is why I'm trolling around here.
The principal things about your system that I think are really interesting are all the checks and balance (independance of justice!) in the constitution and the primary system (which includes in my mind the de facto bipartism) even though I'm not sold on this last part.
@Werner
It's true that we are very tolerant with the personal life of our politicians (divorce, extraconjugal affairs and the like). We also are very tolerant to atheism.
And Edge, that post is from a conservative columnist who didn't post any evidence to back up his claims. In short, not proof of anything.
Global Sea Ice
The University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center is reporting that satellite data show global sea ice levels at the same level they were in 1979, the year satellite observations began.
Do a little more research before you dismiss me as a troll, asshat.
Nice to see this post hijacked by the nonsense about global warming and France!
Sorry to see the day marred by the twin collapses of Kennedy and Byrd. Byrd can perhaps now go to his maker atoning for his own racist past and assoication with the KKK and Teddy may yet learn to drive in heaven.
Only in America!
Godspeed thee to thy rest!
Maybe I should have just sent you here...
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/
Want to keep denying facts so unabashedly as you accuse conservatives of doing?
What do you mean, "It's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader"?
A minority? Blacks have been ~10% of the US population for centuries.
We've had three Jewish Prime Minister, and they're only about 1% of the population.
Our President of the Senate from 1948 onward would have had to ride at the back of many of your buses, as he was the grandson of a slave, and what you'd have called a "negro" at the time.
Congratulation on your great new president. Sincerely. No need to make shit up, though.
Good for you, Edge. These global warming folks are a bunch of Stalinists. They are trying to take over our lives with it.
It reminds me of Carl Sagan crying about "nuclear winter" in the 80s and the Libs eating it up and trying to get Reagan to backdown from his Cold War with the Soviets. Reagan did not back down and Soviet style communism is gone and Europe is now a largely free continent (the exceception being France, I think).
The glabla warming nuts are using pseudo-science to acheive political ends for reasons that are obscure. Let us hope the facts will prevail.
And now the French are attacking Nate!
O'brave New'Bama Worl;d!
nixar, well-stated.
I have some thoughts in response, but they aren't fully formed, so I'm not even going to say anything right now except that you've made your point very well.
Arctic sea ice is still way below the average over the last 30 years and has been in general decline.
The NSIDC observes a "substantial recent change observed in Northern Hemisphere sea ice" and "the lack of a substantial change in Southern Hemisphere sea ice"
I liked the shout out to non-believers.
Thanks for all the examples of minority leaders. I agree with Michael that one needs to make the distinction between oppressed minority and privileged minority (which I kind of alluded to with my apartheid remark).
Women are not (in and of themselves) minorities so I don't include them in my thinking, though of course Pakistan and Britain and all the rest should be proud for electing women to high office. Again, my point was not to bring other countries down, but to raise my own up, as it were.
Also, the fact that certain countries haven't elected an ethnic minority doesn't mean that they wouldn't, given the right candidate. If circumstances had been different, or if Obama hadn't been as talented as he is, then we wouldn't be in this situation either. For all this talk of MLK's dream being realized, we won't really be equal until a "mediocre" (by Presidential standards) African-American can run for president and be considered a viable candidate.
The problem with nixar examples is that none of these were as directy elected as BO was. (Prime Ministers are named by the president and president of the senate is elected by the others senators who are themselves elected by other elected people)
Moreover, it does not matter as much if you are a jew as if you are an arab, a black man or a muslim (in France at least) except maybe in the case of Leon Blum because it was in a time where antisemitism was strong.
I think the main point is that all the 'only in America' crap that we hear on the media all the time in the US, is just that, crap.
Yes, there's no disputing it's a big deal for the US - but the 'only in America' business is borderline offensive to many other nations and I'm surprised Nate fell for it.
Le's not forget about Switzerland and Ruth Dreifuss, a practicising jew and the country's first female president who took two turns to head the government in the 1990ties. Among other things, in her capacity as the interior minister, she effectively legalized drugs and got voters to support that measure by a two-thirds majority not once, but twice. And I am not making any of this up.
"it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader."
Sorry Nate, but IMO that's complete balls. If a politician came in along in the UK of Obama's quality - regardless of race - he'd have a good chance of being elected. We elected a woman 30 years back remember, and don't forget Disraeli a long time back. We also have no problem electing Scots as a majority English nation. I'm not saying it's easy - it would require an exceptional candidate as I'm not so blind as to think there is no bias - but that is true of Obama in the US as well.
I very rarely disagree with you but you're being heavily partisan with that statement I'm afraid and really should retract it.
CNN: Kennedy doing better, speaking to his family.
THANK FUCK.
Rays, you are clearly a right wing wack job. At least get your facts straight. Obama won by almost 7 pts.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/2008president/
PeteKent, you continue to be the douchebag everyone hates, nothing new there. Chief Justice Roberts flubbed the oath, he acknowledged it and apologized to Obama at the luncheon following the ceremony. Don't let the facts get in the way of your argument though.
Cheney in a wheelchair...hmmmm, the only thing better would have been handcuffs.
Today is a very happy day. I get a President who is a leader AND an intellectual.
GW Bush is on a Marine Helicopter NOT called Marine One when airborne and gets to go back to clearing brush on a useless ranch in Nowhere, TX.
Our new President has repudiated many of the things that our newly-minted EX-President believed.
Finally, did anyone enjoy Lionel Barrymore portraying Dick Cheney at the inauguration? We all know that when a bell rings, an angel gets it wings. What does a Potter get?
Jeez, the conservatives sure are foaming at the mouth here today. Don't you guys think your vitriol makes you look just a little immature?
You know what? There was an election a little while ago, and your side lost. Your side has been driving the buggy for quite a while, and now it's in a ditch. Perhaps if we all pull together we can get the cart back on the road, instead of simply jeering at anyone who tries.
MRS B
I vowed to try to be only sunshine & light & full of HOPE for REAL CHANGE today
so I will not be drawn into 'issues' deeply on this historic day when BUSH & CHENEY ARE FINALLY OUT !!!
that alone is something for the whole world to celebrate !
but in brief, for the past 2+ years Obama & his reps have made outreach to LGBT & represented that he is a 'fierce advocate' for cicil rights [despite his personal opposition currently on the record to gay marriage - even though in the 90's he was publicly in favor of gay marriage as well as Rev Wright who he could never disown...]
since the election, BHO has made no major appointments of LGBT to any positions [as Clinton did] or has any public advisors of note & has only given minimal lip service
EXCEPT for reasons of political pandering, he CHOSE Rick Warren who preaches he can 'cure' gays & is anti-choice & anti-stem cell research & anti-gay marriage with a vengeance of a righteous warrior of god & pro-assasination of the Iranian president and on & on
that does NOT reflect real CHANGE that we can believe in - it is so far more of the same old same old
we are seeing & hearing NOTHING of import from Obama himself, rather we see cozying up to our sworn enemies who look to do us more harm
that is all - we do not expect miracles, but we resent hypocrasy & insincerity
BUT we need to keep pressure on & HOPE for better days ahead although the initial messages being sent are that we may be looking at further marginalization for political expediency & we resent that we become a bargaining chip to appease Rick Warren's ilk
fwiw
still, even though I refused to watch or listen to the Invocation, and I thought Obama's speech was droll & lacking energy [as apparently did the crowds]
I am enjoying Rev Lowery's benediction [as did Obama] even though the crowds in DC were stampeding out as he stole the show imho
it is a new day - but what will the future hold we must wait to see if Obama's action will speak louder than his symbols & rhetoric
fwiw
Oh and let's not forget that in most European countries there is some form of legal civil partnership or marriage for gay people; atheist or agnostic politicians are probably the norm rather than the exception(I don't know because we don't enquire much into people's religious beliefs); and there is no category of people called 'Latinos', we call them 'whites'.
To hold the US up as some beacon of exceptional tolerance is just plain WRONG.
I think when people state "only in America", they point to the irony and contradiction relative to US history. We're not stating that in no place else in the world would this be possible. Most of us are not that arrogant anymore.
We are a nation founded on an ideal to create a "more perfect union". It is not perfection, but it is what we have. And so far, I think its the best democratic system currently in operation.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
"Mirrormirror" - We Latinos do not want to be called white. We do not want to associate with the oppression inflicted upon world history.
Thank you for being so thoughtful, but some of us Latinos want to make that distinction. But don't call us Hispanics.
MIRROR
excellent point - in many ways our USA is a third world country in terms of real institutional human values
besides equal civil rights for ALL - what about on health care & true social security ???
some are more equal than others - let's HOPE all these inequalities will be progressively advanced real soon !!!
WV - lieries [lying liars & the lies they tell = lieries]
@Rafa
""Mirrormirror" - We Latinos do not want to be called white. We do not want to associate with the oppression inflicted upon world history."
ermmmm....ok, colour me confused. Basically when Europe conquered the world the main countries involved were Spain, Portugal and England, with France, Holland, Denmark and Germany all doing a bit as well.
Point is that in the "oppression of the world" stakes you can hardly classify people of spanish/portuguese heritage as entirely clean of the blood of thei fathers - assuming such a thing exists (personally, I don't think it does or should be condiered - but you clearly do).
condiered = considered in that last post. Must remember no edits here...
Here's another oldie, but a goodie. I think the people exercised their right to institute a new government on November 4, 2008, in a fashion the founders would have preferred.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Here are some fun links of Cheney as Potter from its a wonderful life.
All googles after my silly comment.
http://ryanpez86.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/thats-my-trick-ear/
http://www.lizandlaura.com/2007/12/20/vice-president-dick-cheney-and-mr-potter-from-its-a-wonderful-life-separated-at-birth/
All these wonderful, creative people.
Jeez, the conservatives sure are foaming at the mouth here today. Don't you guys think your vitriol makes you look just a little immature?
Way to project there, hoss.
I've seen only a handful of conservatives even on this thread - maybe five at most (and I guess I'd be one). To suggest there is rampant foaming at the mouth and vitriol is simply a lie.
Have there been inappropriate and hateful comments? Of course. Then again, I've seen just as many hateful and loathing comments from liberals on here still full of rancor over the Bush presidency.
Let's try not to make broad assessments based on what a few loose cannons say on a message board. How 'bout that? It's worth a shot.
Otherwise, I'd ask you about all the vitriol hurled the last several years under Bush. Don't you think that was quite immature as well?
He who is free of hurling bitter, vitriolic, partisan insults, let him cast the first stone of judgement.
"Otherwise, I'd ask you about all the vitriol hurled the last several years under Bush. Don't you think that was quite immature as well?"
Difference being, they were justified.
DaWolf - There's a reason we don't like to be called Hispanic. Your point is the same as mine. To clarify, the preferred term is Latino Americano. We are a mixture of European and Native American blood. And yes, every 10 years on the US Census we do fill in the bubble next to "Race" that indicates "White", but we also bubble in the "Ethnicity" of "Latino". It's a small point and not relevant to the joyous day, but my point is that mirrormirror almost wanted to pass it off as a compliment for Latinos to be called white in Europe, whereas I view as just being. Not better, not worse.
@DaWolf,
Bitter, hateful discourse is never justified. Never.
Edge...
I rest my case.
DCM in FL:
The national Democrat party has pretty much abandoned the pro-gay agenda it was moving to under Bill Clinton.
Neither HRC or BHO paid any real attention to the issue in the campaign.
Recall how John Kerry even tried to make a wedge issue out of the fact that Dick Cheney's daughter is a "lesbian".
You are expendable. A nuisance to your party. Long shunned by society in general, Gay people are given tolerance b/c it is the politically correct thing to do, but please don't raise too much of a fuss. Best keep to the back of the bus, okay?
I think any form of hatred or discrimination based on characteritics obtained at birth is shameful and wrong -- from the right or the left.
Mark my words: If Obama's agenda of unfettered genetic engineering combined with unrestricted abortion is allowed to come to pass you will be extintct within a few generations. Finding the "Gay gene" (I am not talking 501s) will mean the end of your kind.
The only women who will bear gay babies will be mom's like Sarah Palin who see the unique value in all human life.
You are right to fee lost and abandoned by Obama. The pattern started with Rev. Wright.
Inconvienient people need not apply.
I am telling you, Obama is BUSH III
no worries Rafa. Makes sense actually.
In point of fact you wouldn't be called latino in the uk but probably Brazilian or Argentinan, wherever you were actually from...South American would be the broader term. We tend to refer to most people as the country they are from not their racial heritage. Unfortunately that can sometimes be used in a derogatory manner.....
Hi,
I noticed that the statement "only in America" unleashed an hell of discussion.
Basically I agree whit DaWolf 3:00PM.
But,if the statement doesn't work in general for Europe,('couse,dear Nate,give Europe a candidate as good as Obama and they would vote Him in droves:
did you already forget about the crowd during Obama's Berlin speech ??)
Sadly I have to admit that the statement is correct for my country:Italy.
We are living in the darkness right now and racism is spreading all around the country.
The day Obama won the election our prime minister addressed Him as "suntanned",WHAT A SHAME FOR US ALL.
So,congratulation,yet again,to the american people,I really envy you this very moment.
aloha.
:)
Does Europe have as many TROLLS as America?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Rafa, you of course have every right to call yourself whatever you want - you would just find it difficult to call yourself 'Latino' in Europe as it just doesn't exist as an ethnic group.
I'm more intrigued though by your assertion that US democracy is 'the best democracy currently in operation'. In what way is it so much better than other democracies? With all the talk of stolen elections; massive lines to vote; and the need for millions if not billions of dollars in order to fight a successful campaign it looks from my point of view to be one of the more flawed democracies I have lived under.
@matador
I still don't get how Berlusconi keeps getting elected. From the outside it seems clear he's a crook...
@Joe The Fake Virginian
not sure about as many, but we definitely get some who are complete arses deliberately.
@Rafa
I would really question your "best democratic system currently in operation".
Have you ever taken a look at the system in Germany, in the Netherlands, in Spain, in France etc.
Just to remind you:
You can have a system that:
- focuses the campaign on several battleground states;
- allows candidates that do not have the majority of the vote to be elected.
- allows heavily gerrymandered congressional districts.
That said, I aknowledge that the american system is not as bad as I previously thought. But I wouldn't post such a comment as yours without knowing about the systems in at least a good number of other countries.
@Pragmatus,
DaWolf seems to think it's justified. I would venture that PorridgeGun does as well, as he seeems to insinuate with every other post that anyone to the right of Barbara Boxer should be burned at the stake. But I digress.
I'll continue to take the high road.
I thought I lived in a constitutional, representative republic and not a pure democracy.
I must not have really been paying attention in all those history classes.
It's is a broad statement. How many countries have elected their political leader from a historically oppressed ethnic minority of poor or humble origins raised by single mothers? This is not someone born to a privileged class, nor was Clinton. These men rose up from their humble beginnings to assume the role of POTUS. I may be ignorant, but I think Europe is still more rooted in class distinctions then people are willing to admit.
@DaWolf
I don't get it either.
anyway:
every people elect the prime minister, or the president, these people deserve in that very moment.
It's a fotograph,a polaroid of the state of art.
We elected Berlusconi... for the third term,that said it all.
:(
@Joe the dear Virginian.
Yes Joe and much many more.
I write on blogs,her in Italy ,were the fascist violence of the trolls is simply unbeareable.
Petey is a daisy compared to them.
;)
Joe - you are right, and that is exactly what's great. Direct democracy does not work. Just look at how bad my fellow citizens of California have wrecked our economy by so many ballot box measures.
And for the snobs, the term democracy and representative republic are intertwined in modern language to the point where they are equivalent outside of the political science arena.
I don't think that Obama made a mistake in the oath. Roberts mixed up the word order, and Obama clearly was expecting to say them in the right order, so he paused and then he said them in the order Roberts did.
Nate, then how do you explain the polls (scientific) showing Obama with a huge lead over McCain in every European country? How do you explain the crowds in Berlin? I don't think it's about him being AA, it's about the qualities he's shown as a leader etc. If we in Europe had a candidate running for office with the qualities of your new president we'd be likely to elect him too. I find the comment about European nations as being "higly unlikely" (with polls showing otherwise) to elect someone like Obama a little offensive...
her=here
were=where
sorry.
:)
Hope is a noble thing but not tangible
So is freedom but it's important all the same.
Yeah, let's enlighten the Yanks about Europe a bit more. Berlusconi keeps getting elected because 1) the French Revolution never really crossed the Appenin and certainly never hit Naples, as a friend of mine likes to say, and he is from Naples. Modern statehood is a concept alien to Italy with the exception of a few northern provinces, most notably Veneto. In most other parts of the country it's family and other affiliations that determine your political choice. And Berlusca knows a family or two south of Rome. 2) Berlusca is a "furbo", a smartass who knows how to play and beat the system. That is somehow very appealing to our fundamentally pre-modern Italian friends. He'd probably even get elected without the backing of the mob.
Also, on the day of Obama's Berlin speech, "Bild" newspaper, the country's largest daily, published a front page photospread of the country's leading politicians, all digitally enhanced to look a bit more like Obama, dark skin and all. the Headline read something like "Do the Obama for us", meaning "Be more like him and things will get better here to." Our friend who suggests that Europeans would have voted for Obama in a second if a candidate of that caliber appeared on their political stage seems to be onto something.
Still waiting from that French President with parents from Senegal, though. Or Morocco, for that matter.
Obama played no part in Roberts' mangling of the oath of office. Twice he fed misstated words to Obama. The first time, Obama paused to let him restate it, but Roberts repeated the mistake, and then Obama had the good grace to simply repeat the line the way Roberts had said it. You can check it yourself:
The oath:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0878064.html
The videotape:
http://thepage.time.com/obama-takes-the-oath/
A few thoughts on the above
never mind the sea ice, what about the glaciers
"Many glaciers will disappear by middle of century and add to rising sea levels, expert warns• Melt rates for 2007 fall but still third worst on record"
I'm not good at links but the reference is http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/19/glacier-rising-sea-levels
Anyone who wants to take the risk that global warming is a myth at this stage is an idiot.
On what other nations have done about electing people, well yes, the UK did have a woman PM in Thatcher. Personally I would rather have done without her, given her record. You think Bush was devisive, I can tell you Thatcher is still dividing the country. Recently there was a government leak suggesting that she would get a state funeral when she died. Reaction from those of us on the left? Well at least that way we could be sure she was dead.
Final thought on that: the character of the person you elect to lead you is more important than who their parents are, their ethnicity, wealth, gender, sexual orientation or belief system. I would rather have a competent decent and upright white man than an incompetent corrupt black woman (for example). Unfortunately, I don't think the whole of the rest of the population has caught up with the idea of colour/gender/sexual preference blindness.
DCM - thanks for the feedback. I find it very hard to understand howin this day and age some are still more equal than others. But I suppose even your founding fathers struggled over that stuff, because they proclaimed freedom and liberty, but seemed totally blind that they were only applying it to white male landowners.
Don't despair, change is possible.
You are expendable. A nuisance to your party. Long shunned by society in general, Gay people are given tolerance b/c it is the politically correct thing to do, but please don't raise too much of a fuss. Best keep to the back of the bus, okay?
Oh, look. The wingnut's pretending to be concerned about gay people.
Well Margaret Thatcher's father was a shopkeeper in a small provincial town; John Major's father was a circus performer - both of pretty humble origins.
Ibter the fact that the UK does not allow political TV advertising and it doesn't cost nearly as much to run for office means that we see far fewer political dynasties such as the Kennedys, Clintons, Bushes, Jacksons, Cuomos etc. who's main qualifications for office appear to be name recognition and fund raising ability.
Look at the EuropTrash insulting our Democracy and only the right wingers defending it!
Raja: given what you have to say, I am not at all sure the white race would want to claim you anyway!
European democracues are ephemeral fragile things. Look at the Fascism and communism and socialism that Europe slips in and out of until they start crying for the Birthplzce of Freedom, the US of A to save them -- again and again.
The Europeans want to see America fail so they can finally forget what weak spineless ingrates they are.
Cynical bankrupt nations --the lot of you!
Vive L'Amerique dans L'Epoque Obama!
BHO can be useful afterall!
Enjoy the Balls, y'all!
I think Roberts was fumbling the words on purpose so that Obama would not fulfill the one duty specifically outlined in the Constitution. Then, when the case comes before the Supreme Court in a month, John Roberts can lead the majority decision invalidating his Presidency.
Or maybe we should stop caring and recognize that Obama is now President and John Roberts has been good so far. And I consider myself a pragmatic progressive for anyone that cares to attack this view.
whoops... WHOSE main qualifications...
Joe TFV
nice to see you back.
On democracy I think I agree with Winston Churchill, who said something like: democracy is the worst system of government except for all the other ones that have ever been tried. (I think his actual words were more elegant than that).
All democracies have flaws, but the ones that use majority voting systems (First Past the Post) tend to be less "democratic" than the ones that use a form of proportional representation. That's my view anyway, fwiw.
Pure democracy works at near or about the New England Town Meeting level. 50-200 people of the age of majority talking about simple stuff like who will plow the roads this year and whether to hire another teacher.
Beyond that, it becomes a gigantic C/F.
"we see far fewer political dynasties such as the Kennedys, Clintons, Bushes, Jacksons, Cuomos etc. who's main qualifications for office appear to be name recognition and fund raising ability."
Yes name recognition as in Barack Hussein Obama!
nate is getting his ass kicked by the EurosTrash!
Now Europe is the Liberals problem -- just like Wall Street!
You will never keep that trash happy and they will try and eat Obama alive!
@Mrs B
"On what other nations have done about electing people, well yes, the UK did have a woman PM in Thatcher. Personally I would rather have done without her, given her record. You think Bush was devisive, I can tell you Thatcher is still dividing the country. Recently there was a government leak suggesting that she would get a state funeral when she died. Reaction from those of us on the left? Well at least that way we could be sure she was dead."
damn straight. However, what I'd say about Thatcher: I loathe her policies but respect her political talents, and she's a clear example that in the uk someone of political talents can rise despite race/gender.
Of modern women in British Politics: Jacqui Smith is useless and awful and that's got nothing to do with her being female: she is useless and awful regardless of her sex. However if she was better than atrocious she would have a chance of becoming leader of Labour (Beckett wasn't that far off). No-one else really in a position where they have enough to run on yet.
When Thatcher finally dies I for one will probably comment along the lines of "ding dong the witch is dead" without much of a care. Since she cares so little for so many I won't be fussed not caring about her.
PK
Happy Inauguration Day to you.
Whatever planet it is you are on.
@Joe The Fake Virginian
Trolls in europe...
I can speak for France. In fact, I can't because I took interest in the blogosphere only with the american election this year and read only american blogs.
But what seems to me is that trolls like MR (I dare not utter his name) or PeteKent could not exist.
The debate is much less violent in France between the left and right.
Maybe because in France there is no such media as Fox News (or to a lesser extent MSNBC) and no radio shows such as Rush Limbaugh's.
Media (of that kind of importance) do not blatantly support one party in France. Even if I find most of them much too kind for our ridiculous evil moronic president.
mirrormirror:
You've convinced me. Your arguments are correct.
Scott:
Considering that France had a government during the Nazi period that killed or conspired with the Nazis to kill hundreds of thousands of Jews, I think that EVERY Jew who is PM of France counts for quite a lot. France has suffered from anti-semitism much more grievous than anything that's happened in the U.S. At the same time, there are many French people who don't care what a politician's nominal religion is, as long as that person practices secularism. France has much stricter separation between church and state than the U.S. does, in large part because of its history. A big motivation of the French Revolution was that the Catholic Church owned a very large percentage of the land, while loads of peasants were landless.
Actually many of the problems in Italy - whose democracy I agree is flawed - stem from the US via the CIA propping up the Italian Christian Democrat party for nearly half a century as a bulwark against the Communist party.
It must be a hard day for PeteKent, to see his world view so thoroughly rejected by the electorate,
to see his voice in the political sphere becoming increasingly insignificant, to see change coming
that squelches his tired political philosophy.
It must be terrible, Pete, to feel that level of defeat, but breathe it in, buddy, breathe it in deep,
and know in your heart of hearts that you indeed have been defeated. Your view of things as they
should be is not the way most of the people of this great country think they should be, and so it is
with great pleasure that we see your views gradually extinguished.
We’ve all read your ugly, wrong comments on this great day, and we all know they come from a
place of great pain. And we all smile.
@MrsB,
Yes, those are the big four issues for gay rights at the federal level, typically known by shorthand:
1) is "DADT" (the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy we'd like repealed);
2) is "ENDA" (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act we'd like passed);
3) is "DOMA" (the Defense of Marriage Act, which means the opposite of what you'd think); and
4) is "Matthew Sheperd" (the crucifixion victim the hate crimes bill is named after).
In terms of how important they are, ENDA then DOMA then Sheperd then DADT (I go by the number of people that would be affected). In terms of how likely they are, the reverse order, of course.
The Rick Warren choice raised such a storm because at the time, the transition team was saying we shouldn't even expect to see action on DADT, and there had been no friendly appointments; and so, Warren seemed to be the only signal directed at us at all, and a distinctly unfriendly signal it was. I think things have changed; but I'll never forget the feeling of being kicked while we were down.
Vinzenz.Hediger said...
...Berlusconi... he is from Naples.
January 20, 2009 3:53 PM
nope.
He is from Milan, up in the north.
agree whit the rest of your post.
:)
The extent of Arctic ice has returned, but not the thickness. The "recovered" icecap is much thinner than before, so come summertime, it will be gone pretty quickly.
(Arctic icecap thickness for several decades is known from records of nuclear-submarine explorations of the Arctic, during the Cold War.)
@Bob X
thanks for the reply. I will now learn all the relevant acronyms.
No word from Statler today. I wonder how the supplies of Franzia are holding up?
Larrouturou, what you're saying about politics in France is very interesting. I would have thought otherwise. The U.S. has no equivalent of the Front National, though you could say that somewhat analogous elements exist within the Republican Party (people like Tony Tancredo), nor is there any really functional Communist Party of any type (Are there still Communists in the Parlement?). Of course, part of the difference has to do with the lack of a Parliament here and the first-past-the-post system. But the other difference is that French people seem at least in part to be more militant, more willing to strike, and more willing to riot. Do you feel I've misunderstood something? I admit that though I've spent 3 summers in France (2 as a student) and when in practice, speak French at a good conversational level and read French well, I am no expert on France.
PeteKent said...
nate is getting his ass kicked by the EurosTrash!
January 20, 2009 4:00 PM
@Petey,
can't you understand that it possible to talk together about an issue, having different point of view ,without being classified as enemies ?
anyway my dear,condolence from the bottom of my heart for this saddest day of yours...
:P
Right, mirrormirror. And to be even more accurate, propping up the Mafia. The Mafia and other organized crime syndicates (the Camorra, the Ndragheta) were totally in control of not only the Christian Democrats, but all the other perennial coalition partners (Republicans, Socialists, etc.). I understand that the history of U.S. use of the Mafia goes back to at least WWII, when they welcomed the U.S. liberators who would stop constraining them. They subsequently tried to petition to make Sicily the 49th U.S. state, so I've been told. Maybe the last two sentences are urban legends, but the rest is true. Aldo Moro was honest, and that's why he was assassinated. The rest were all crooks.
time to get some sleep for me.
thank you americans for this unforgettable day.
:)
Thank you, Mrs B.
Good to be posting!
I think there is a linguistic difference. Pure democracry, as described by Plato (quoting Socrates) and practiced in places like New England town meetings, has severe limitations.
Representavtive Republics are labelled "DEMOCRACIES" by the press and others, but the democratic part comes in how the representatives are chosen. By electing our representatives, we are exercising our constitutional rights. Our representatives can then pass, enforce and interpret laws.
Churchill's quote is both powerful and prescient. In the end, all countries have terrible systems of government and it becomes a question of degree, which does the least harm while doing the most good.
Governments are institutions created and managed by people. Therefore, there cannot be perfection. In fact, we expect the opposite.
Still waiting from that French President with parents from Senegal, though. Or Morocco, for that matter.
There has been ~10% of blacks in the US for century, and just now, JUST NOW do you have one in office.
There are currently ~10% of North African people in France, but this has been so for less than 40 years. Yet Rachida Dati is a single mother and the Justice Minister, which is the second most important ministry per the Constitution.
About antisemitism in France.
True ther was this horrible "collaboration" with the Nazis. But antisemistism, as strong as it was compared to what it is now, never represented a large majority of the people. It was precisely because the military power of the nazis helped them that they committed so many attrocities.
Moreover, I think the mentalities changed a lot on the subject after the end of the war also because of the rejection of this "collaboration" (for good or bad reasons I can't say but you never want to be on the side of the loosers).
As a result, it was hardly, if ever, mentionned that Pierre Mendès France or Laurent Fabius were from jewish ascendance. And I don't think it played a lot when people were putting their ballot in the ballot box. If for anything, because, as I mentionned, you don't vote for Fabius or PMF, you vote for the socialist party and then the president (or the congress in the case of PMF) chooses a member of the majority to be the prime minister.
@Joe the Fake Virginian,
You're right, at least as far as Plato and Aristotle saw democracy. (The Greeks of their day invented it, for those of you who slept through civics...) Plato thought it wouldn't work for communities (i.e. city-states) larger than 1,000, while Aristotle thought 2,500 should still work. But Greek democracies didn't have leaders, per se, but relied upon the gathering of the citizens to debate and decide important questions.
Aristotle also made the first observation of political manipulation, reporting that citizens of Athens deliberately called town meetings of such rapid frequency that the outlying citizens who were agriculturalists could not possibly attend regularly, and thus add their voices to decisions. Their views were considerably more conservative than the average city-dweller.
Larrouturou for president said... The problem with nixar examples is that none of these were as directy elected as BO was.
Oh really? REALLY?
Directly elected ... REALLY?
Ever heard of the ELECTORAL COLLEGE?
Joe
A thoughtful post.
The best system therefore has to be one with lots of checks and balances, so that if a "bad" government comes in, they can't drive things too far off the rails. But of course, that means that there are a lot of obstacles for a "good" government to overcome in order to get anything done.
Plus, of course, a truly "bad" government will just drive a coach and horses through any checks and balances if they don't like them.
My personal preference is for a system in which the government is elected by some form of proportional representation, so that it reasonably well reflects the wishes of the populace, and is unlikely to produce an enormous majority which would allow a single party to go mad, with an independent judiciary. I do not favour electing law enforcement officers or judges (but appointing them can be fraught too). I would rather have an elected head of state than a royal family (nothing personal, but on principle). I want 2 chambers (both fully elected), to provide checks on each other. I would place heavy restrictions on election spending, and forbid political advertising on TV and the radio other than a few slots a year, to avoid rich people and parties buying elections. And I would have election dates fixed, to avoid the ruling party/parties being able to pick a date to suit themselves.
Almost none of those apply in the UK at the moment. Very few of them apply in the US either. Some European democracies have some of these features.
And now, like Matador, it is time for me to retire to bed.
Not to take away your moment but had Barack Obama been running for Prime Minister in Canada I have a strong feeling we'd have elected him in a heart beat.
That said as a Canadian we're happy for you America!
"Sri Lanka and India have also elected women PMs. There are actually a lot of countries that have elected women heads of government. In Nordic countries, it's quite common to do so. The U.S. is far behind in that respect."
Women would be terrible presidents. We could get attacked, but as long as they sent a diplomat with a tearful apology, she probably would forgive them.
"The lines are being drawn and the attacks are taking place. Guess no one really listened to Obama's speech. Our country is in trouble and the partisinship and the I am right, you are wrong attitude is not going to solve a thing. I hope we can find that middle road."
We should just split the country into Democratic USA and Republican USA. Each side hates the other with a passion. We can either divide now or have a Civil War in 25-50 years.
The Border States and McCain States go to Republican USA and the solid Obama states go to Democratic USA.
The reason the Border States go to McCain is because they only went to Obama, because of the Electoral College system.
Truly historic! So glad the criminals have left the building!
Barrack Obama!
re: "shout-out" to non-believers
I'd be willing to bet money that Obama is an atheist himself. He's very intelligent, so he's likely not a big believer in boogeymen.
It's certainly understandable that he can't admit as much -- at least not anytime soon.
"Nam Vet, things may not have changed online, but they surely have in DC. Wait and see."
Are you kidding me? DC voted for Obama like 90-10. Obviously, it will look like everyone loves Obama!
rays242-
Feel free to secede, you can have the uneducated and insane that are all the repubs have left. We will have the rest.
@Michael
For the Front National. First, you're right that some elements of the republican party are similar to the Front National. I would not say that it's the most important part of the GOP that is as extremist as the FN if not with the same ideology. Remember it's easier for small parties to exist in France, mainly because of the voting system (proportionnal or two turn elections) so people from the Front National don't have to adhere to the UMP (maybe not so true now...).
And the Front National has a really limited access to media.
And the people who vote for it are mainly people who are not interested in politics most of the time. They're voting for the FN mainly because they're just fed up with the main stream politicians (and xenophobic too but that's not the main point I guess).
About the communist party. Yes it still has a representation. It's much different now than
what it was (they repudiated the stalinist heritage). And back then, it was not always the more extreme party (eg making alliances with DeGaulle or pushing for ending Mai68).
In any case, they have around 2% of the vote.
Finally, strikes and riots in France are not ideological in general.
To put it simply:
Strikes are simply workers defending themselves. Riots are pure violence from desperate people.
Matador, my friend who likes to say that the French Revolution never made it to the mezzogiorno is from Naples. Berlusconi is from Milan. You are right.
Mistakes or no mistakes in the oath
Doughboy Bigot Warren or Rev. Lowery's fantastic prayer
Somber speech or realistic words
Aretha's hat or YoyoMa's cello
Dickface Cheney in a wheelchair or Teddy Kennedy dragging his ill-healthed, thickheaded Irish body to the ceremony....
Barack H. Obama is now the President of the United States and I am proud! I believe he can fix somethings, though not all, as our country is broken...I think we need a whole new attitude in this country and it'll start with him.
My favorite moment, though was when the helicopter was lifting Bush in the air and the crowd broke into: "Nananana, nananana, hey, hey, goodbye!" Ba-bye, Shrub!
Larrouturou,
I agree with you that there wasn't a large majority for anti-semitism in France during WWII, and the evidence of that is that many Jewish lives were saved, by comparison with many other European countries. Just the same, there have been strong strains of both philo- and anti-semitism in government affairs since at least the Dreyfuss Affair. The fact that the Jewish origins of leaders of major political parties haven't been an issue in post-war France is a tribute to the relative lack of prejudice based on religious heritage in France today. I doubt an Orthodox Jew could attain high office in France, but the problem then would be the individual's religiosity much more than his/her religious heritage. Here in the U.S., unfortunately, it's the people who don't at least pretend to practice a religion who have no chance to become President.
nixar: The Electoral College isn't really relevant to this discussion, because it obeyed the will of the voters, who technically speaking, elected Electoral College members, but practically speaking, considered that they were specifically electing Barack Obama as President, not simply the Democratic Party, which was represented by whichever leader the members of Congress or something chose. With all their imperfections, don't forget that we have primaries here that get a lot of participation. I don't suggest that our system is better than France's; in some ways, your system is better. But it is different.
In the 'Audacity of Hope' Obama says he used to be an atheist, but has now become a believer. He doesn't discuss what caused his conversion (beyond political expediency?). Maybe he discusses this elsewhere.
Isn't it awful that he couldn't admit to being atheist if he were? That there is only one openly atheist congressman? One of the great things about European politics is that we shipped all the religious nutjobs over to the US...
@ nixar
"Directly elected ... REALLY?
Ever heard of the ELECTORAL COLLEGE?"
Hence the "as directly elected as".
I should have said people did not have the names of Leon Blum, PMF or Laurent Fabius on their ballots. (outside their own "circonscription" of course)
I find it funny that even in one of our brightest moments we can all unite as Americans to spite the French on this board. Two words: Marshall Plan.
I know this is wrong, but it's too funny to deny. We will build bridges with our defeated Republican brothers by denigrating French attitudes of superiority.
rays242, I wasn't talking about rank-and-file DC, but about political DC - you know, the Legislative and Executive Branches. I know very well that the citizens of DC are overwhelmingly Democratic all the time.
Rafa, you can unite against the French. I love France and the French and won't participate. They're "Freedom Country," remember? :-P
@mirror
Agreed that it's a sad state of affairs. Some recently published polls show that Americans are absolutely not ready for an atheist president.
A Christian lesbian hispanic stripper would absolutely slaughter any atheist in a presidential race.
I am glad a fellow atheist is heading up the country now, though. :) Even if he has to make believe he's not. Maybe we can make some tiny inroads into cutting the "religions are tax-exempt" garbage.
@ Rafa
I can't see who you're targetting here. If it's me, then I will indeed take an attitude of superiority by suggesting that you should reread my comments.
The simple fact that I'm reading this blog which never talks about anything else should be enough to show how interested I am in understanding US politics. I would add that that it's a real, genuine interest, not some sort of sick need to have something to denigrate.
What the American people has wrought, not even the trolliest of trolls can lay asunder: Barack Hussein Obama is President of these United States.
At long last, a man of character, vision, intellect, and dreams will lead this country. There is no story out there greater than that at this incredible moment in our nation's history.
we shipped all the religious nutjobs over to the US...
And the persecution of Christians continues...just as it was back in the day and was prophesied in the books of Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation.
The two most hated groups throughout history? Jews and Christians.
The most hated person in history? Jesus Christ. Massacred as the innocent sacrifice for the guilt of the entire world.
Yet far too many extremists will not rest until they have the opportunity to drive a stake right through the heart of a believer. They are strict adherents to radical atheism and immediately write you off if you show even a hint of faith in a Supreme Being. May God help us from this tyranny that is about to take hold of the world in the coming End of Days.
mirrormirror said...
Oh and a lot of people seem excited that he managed a shout-out to non-believers. The day an atheist President is elected is the day the US will truly be free.
how very open minded of you. don't spoil a momentous day with your own cynicism and hating.
Count me as another American who likes France and the French.
Larrouturou: I should have said people did not have the names of Leon Blum, PMF or Laurent Fabius on their ballots. (outside their own "circonscription" of course)
Well, guess what, Britain will never have an Obama, then. Nor a Blair or a Thatcher, for that matter.
What's your point?
It's been a while since I've seen classic, sick trolls like petekent and rays and the other poisonous, dessicated souls at work here. Mental illness can be treated. Please consider it.
I'm a Brit but I spent half my youth in the USA and much of my family are now American. Today was truly special and you are right that nowhere in Europe has a similar thing happened yet - Disraeli had to hide his background and convert tot a faith he manifestly did not believe in to gain his high office. Thatcher for all her many faults was a genuine trailblazer but she remains, 31 years later, a one off. Even an Asian British PM (which is surely coming, slowly) would not represent the deep break with the past that Obama does.
Today I'm proud to be a friend of America
@nixar
The difference would be that in britain, you know who will be the prime minister when you vote. In France you have hints but you're never sure and some prime minister are not nominated after an election (Fabius for instance). But I recognize that you have a good point: it would not be the same if the prime minister of the UK was black as it is in america because of the voting system.
No cynicism or hating here. Just someone who believes that religion and politics should not be mixed. I thought the Founding Fathers agreed with me, but having witnessed the overt religiosity of the campaign and the inauguration I think they failed in that respect.
Oh and Edge the only person conflating 'religious nutjobs' with 'Christians' is you...
Nate, I don't see why you'd be any more (or les) produ than if McCain or Hillary had been inaugurated today.
Obama, sadly, is a pretty typical politician, whose path to the White House was paved with low ethical standards and bad luck (for most Americans). He race-baited his way through the early primaries, was put over the top by superdelegates when voters kept rejecting him late in the primary season, and trailed in the general election until the financial markets collapsed. Not really something to be proud of.
He's never actually run anything in his life, and now he's having to do OJT in the most important job there is. Maybe he'll be worthy of it; I doubt it.
The irony of atheism is that, depending on how strict the person's "beliefs" are in there not being a Higher Power, some of them hold positions that aren't even valid.
Wikipedia starts by saying:
Atheism, as an explicit position, can be either the affirmation of the nonexistence of gods, or the rejection of theism. It is also defined more broadly as an absence of belief in deities, or nontheism.
The strict position, one of affirming there is no God, is not valid. To state with certainty that there is no all-knowing, all-present, all-encompassing Power with infinite capabilities, one would have to have such infintie capabilities and omnipresence themselves. To my knowledge, no one does, and as such, can not say for sure there is no God.
Political junkies do not understand humor. It's a twisted sense of humor, but you need to understand that we do need to build bridges with our fellow republicans, no matter what the far lefties say.
As far as Brian Jenkins oblivion, I don't see how Obama lowers any bar. The US has voted in far less qualified Presidents in its history. The reality is that there is no job in America, including VP, that prepares somebody for POTUS. Against what bar do you measure candidates for a job that is unmeasurable? The closest thing to the job is a governor, but the difficulty of being governor varies depending on the size and geography of the state governed. Even then, governors deal almost exclusively with domestic issues, save a few states.
If all Obama does is bring hope to the next generation and inspiration to the current one to volunteer and build a better US, then he has done what only a few Presidents have ever done.
Godspeed.
And science and religion are not mutually exclusive. As a true scientists will tell you, scientists try to explain the "how", not the "why". Einstein himself was driven by the desire to see God's language (mathematics) and he outright rejected (incorrectly) quantum theory because of its similarity to a pair of dice.
I don't much care if others believe or not. I myself do not actively practice my religion, but too often I see atheists or agnostics use science as the reason for their beliefs. This is incorrect.
I hope Obama follows through on his message to reinvigorate the sciences.
PS - When will blogger recognize that Obama is not a misspelled word?
Ah, the naysayers continue their whining and extrapolating and reaching for something negative. I suppose they're a necessary part of society. I often wonder why, if he's accomplished nothing in his life, people (well it's just a few fringe republicans at this point) don't give him the opportunity to get to work and THEN judge him on the substance of his accomplishments or failures. It seems the opposite of the perception of Bush; he ran the country into the ground, but there was always an excuse or a reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. Let's all extend the same benefit to a self-made, educated, eloquent, leader who has inspired 80% of the country. If he turns out to be another Bush, I'll be happy to judge him, but based on his performance so far, he seems to be Bush's complete antithesis.
Brian Jenkins, let me clarify it for you:
- McCain: an academic failure, a gambler, a failed pilot who kept crashing his planes by flying recklessly, an adulterer, who only became a Senator because because he had admirals and generals as Dad and Granddad.
- Hillary Clinton: a competent intelligent politician, who however was counting obviously on the "Clinton" name recognition and her stint as first lady.
- Barack Obama: an unknown, born in relative poverty, raised by a single mom and grandparents, who achieved his position through talent, intelligence and hard work.
That's why everyone has more reason to be proud for Obama than we'd have for "VIP ancestors"-McCain or "former first lady"-Clinton.
Clear now?
Post a Comment