Could that even be a question? The President of the United States of America would suspend his regular daily duties to focus on one issue? Since when is that even realistic? The President has to, must, be able to do everything -- he has to be able to take on more than one question at a time and address multiple issues, no matter how big.
I don't think this is an appropriate or measured response. Senator Obama must carry on his regular duties as a Senator, as a candidate running for our highest office, as a father, and as an attorney. He has duties and responsibilities and cannot just put those duties on hold - no matter how bad the crisis may be. There will be crises during a Presidency, sometimes more than one at the same time.
Can you really take a time out? I don't think so.
I read the following on Red State this weekend:
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/aug/30/tale-of-the-tape-sarah-palin-vs-barack-obam/
and I felt the need to rebut the whole article. I don't understand how anyone could compare Palin and Obama, and go as far as saying she is equally qualified. Thus, in rebuttal, I created this table:
http://www.akota.net/blog/obama-v-palin-comparison.html.
I really feel like choosing Mrs. Palin, who may one day be qualified to be President, short changes women.
It seems Senator McCain really does have the same judgment as George Bush. I am a champion for women - I want to see women succeed and be treated equal to men. I'm not sure when or how that will happen, but I do know choosing women who do not have the credentials for the job is not the way to prove that women are equal to men.
I know I may be making the Justice Thomas argument here, but I do firmly believe that there are women like Hillary Clinton who have the credentials to become President of the United States or a Supreme Court justice. She actually has the education and experience for both positions. Unlike George Bush's pick of Harriet Miers, or John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin. While both women are probably women who have proved their own -- Harriet Miers as a great lawyer, and Sarah Palin as a great freshman governer. Neither proved that they had the credentials in education or in experience to be either position. Nothing would make me feel like either of these women are ready.
In his choice today, Senator McCain has made himself more like George Bush. Both decided to pick a token woman for a job that she does not have the credentials.
Having to prove your spiritual beliefs seems like the most ridiculous challenge required to be President. But unfortunately, it is a reality that cannot be forgotten. Today, the headlines are criticizing the Obama campaign for moving two women wearing a hijab from the backdrop of the Obama rally in Michigan. As Obama supporters, these women felt "betrayed."
First, I can understand their sentiments. For a candidate who has family members of every race and religion, I would be surprised. I may also feel offended. I believe there are quite a few people in America who share the sentiments with the young women who felt discriminated against at the Obama rally. And I know I can understand that in a perfect world, I too, would feel that the action is just plain wrong.
But these women seem to forget the deeper landscape in America. Even today, as an Indian American Jain woman, I find myself discriminated against, mistaken as a Muslim due to my last name. Unfortunately, the majority of our country - the votes we need to start moving in the direction of a more perfect world - does not feel the same way or understand those sentiments. Having Muslim American women in the backdrop of an Obama rally would further place doubts in the minds of those who do not believe he is a devout Christian.
In picking these battles, I don't mind losing the battles (even though I would rather be in a place where we can win the battles), if in the end Obama can win the war (in this case, the Presidency). It's making a bigger step in the right direction. And once he is President, I doubt these "perceptions" will no longer be what drives the members of his staff who are working hard to get him elected.
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world."- Mahatma Gandhi
Change has played such an integral part in Senator Obama's campaign -- the words change drove his campaign to the predicament they find themselves in. Winners of the Democratic Primary becuse Americans want to see change. And his winning the campaign shows how hungry Americans really are for a new politics and culture for the United States. One that also encapsulates the Biblical idea "Be your brother's keeper."
This November, I believe that Americans will follow Gandhi's advice and be the change they wish to see in the world, and our country will become Obamerica: a tolerant, forward-looking country that will remain the leader in the free world without asserting America through violence. I believe in America, I believe in future President Barack Obama, and cannot wait til our country becomes Obamerica.
I watched Senator Clinton's speech tonight, went to her website to see why she was directing us to www.hillaryclinton.com, and attempted to understand her new strategy. And I have to say, I think she is following the leader, copying him if I may say that. Barack Obama's campaign has definitely redefined election strategies, and Senator Clinton sees this and is adopting this winning strategy - the Obama playbook and mixing it with Karl Rove's tactics.
Except this COPYCAT CANDIDATE is using Senator Obama's infamous phrase "Yes we can" and tweaking it to say "Yes we will." No you won't Senator Clinton. You won't because Americans are smart enough to see that you are copying Senator Obama AND you are using a politics of fear to get ahead. And being a shrewd copycat who uses our playbook mixed Karl Rove tactics does not make you more experienced. Using the internet to fundraise is yesterdays news; remember Howard Dean's Presidential run? If anything, it shows that you Senator Clinton were surprised at the success of Senator Obama and took a bit too long to regroup, so long, that you had to turn to a politics of fear. That is not what I want from my President. I expect more, and Senator Obama represents more.
Found this insightful question on a blog and I felt it would be useful to share:
"Which is the more powerful act: acknowledging disagreement yet continuing a relationship or extinguishing the connection based on philosophical differences?"
I am sure working with Republicans, Independents, leaders from other countries and leaders within our country will have philosophical differences and different views on various topics. What is better for our country?
I was born in a suburb of Chicago. I am an American. My parents were both born in India. They are Indian. Both became citizens of the United States. They are American. When describing myself, I try to identify myself and place myself into a little box. Asian? Asian American? South Asian? Indian? East Indian? Indian American?
I try really hard to understand those around me. I do my best to make sure that I surround myself with varied ideas and varied beliefs. I really try to understand the stories of those who make up my country. I recognize and understand that this country is not made of people with one way of thinking and I want to make sure that the United States really is a country that can accept and encourage multiple points of view. In the end, that is what will make our country so much greater than any country in the world.
My best friend is a white, Christian American. She and I are so similar in our personal thoughts, but in our political thoughts, so different. I had trouble before understanding how it is that she, a beautiful compassionate human being, could not see that we all have different cultures. I learned soon, that not only does she recognize differences in my culture, she embraces them. Her compassion stretches as far as individuals. As groups, however, asking to be recognized or accepted, she has difficulty moving away from the status quo. Each time I think about it, it reinforces my liberalism. I realized that on the whole, most people recognize individual people, and are accepting. But when it goes beyond individual people, these notions of accepting something different threatens my fellow country women. And that bothers me.
I see something similar happening with Senator Obama and his church. There are some difficult things that Rev. Wright says in his sermons. Religions and sermons are never politically correct. They represent someone's religion, not their politics. And the Trinity United Church of Christ is more than a religious center. It provides an identity for so many fellow citizens in the South Side of Chicago. It gives them a place in our country. And what's more -- it asks for its congregation to ask even more of our country. Our great country. It criticizes the United States of America like a loved one would to push the country to live up to its ideals.
I've struggled with my own identity. Like Senator Obama, many of us, who are the children of immigrants, struggle with our place in this country. How is it that so many people are criticizing a church that gives so many people a sense of identity? Shouldn't the media start the conversation that makes the congregation agree with Rev. Wright, rather than try to bring down the most honest and inspiring politician of our time.
There is a myth, a fiction, created by the media where either candidate starts gaining momentum. Momentum is a myth -- not a myth when it comes a candidates gain, but a myth as far as any effect it has on the race. This campaign predicted all the races except for Maine.
With that in mind, the supporters have one main goal: to create a new momentum. The momentum that comes through a movement, through the hunger for change, but not the momentum created by a win here or a win there. It is this momentum that heps the math which will ultimately decide this election.
We as a campaign need to create that momentum -- the Maine like upsets. As a movement, we need to create more Maines. This will take speaking to lots of people who are buying the negative advertisements and the double speak by the Clinton campaign. Let's get the word out there -- tell those you know in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, Puerto Rico, etc.
First read: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=294426
I think it is clear that the longer the Democrats fight in the primary. the Republicans will be gaining ground by simply doing nothing. The Democrats will kill themselves, shoot themselves in the foot, by fighting one another. To protect the Democratic party from such an outcome, there are approximately 800 super delegates, and so far, only about half have pledged to a candidate.
In order to protect our party, they need to take a stand, they need to pledge to the candidate they believe is best. Those who have already pledged should take a hard look and make sure they are choosing who they think is best. Either way this will close the gap. (Of course, I am hoping that these superdelegates come out the way I have and support Senator Obama.)
The Democratic party cannot afford the fight within -- we need to beat the other party, not one another. So I ask all superdelegates to seriously consider history and step up to the role you have been given. Make sure that we go into this election as a united Democratic party.
For all the preparation that Senator Obama supposedly does not have, Senator Clinton really ought to re-examine her own campaign. For someone claiming to be ready on day one, the month of February made for a particularly poor showing. It should have been clear on February 6th when the Clinton campaign released information that the Senator herself had dipped into her own money to fund her campaign, and that Ms. Solis-Doyle stepped down that the Clinton campaign had planned only through February 5th.
Senator Clinton proved a lack of sound judgment without a Plan B. The same type of judgment she applied to her vote for the Iraq war. Senator Clinton's lack of a Plan B clearly shows someone who is not ready to be President of my country. I want my president to have sound judgment, and enough sound judgment to know there should be a Plan B when you are running in a Presidential campaign against some very qualified candidates.
Unlike Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama paved his own way when it seemed impossible. This should be key to our choice as Democrats or Independents in the primaries.
I am a woman who wants to support a woman presidential candidate, but I find myself having difficulty supporting Senator Hillary Clinton. This is not because she is not qualified, but because she never would have gotten to where she is if it were not for man named Bill. I want to vote for a woman who stands for what I believe in. When that woman, however, can only become a presidential nominee because her husband paved the way; I am troubled. I want to support a woman who did it on her own, who created her own legacy, and who made herself worthy without first becoming a known figure through her husband.
I think Senator Clinton has not done what Senator Obama has done. He rose on his own; he didn't cash in on social capital like Senator Clinton, rather he created social capital of his own. I find it much easier to support Senator Obama, especially now that the Clintons are going after his jugular by any means necessary. This race is no longer just Senator Clinton by herself -- it looks like the office of President has changed to fit a married couple, where two individuals are interchangeable in terms of experience and decision making, thus a Presidential reign can now rule for a total of 16 years.
I will not support a woman candidate who is not self-made, and is described as the product of feminism and women's rights. And I do not support a married couple that changes the office of President to effectively fit two people when it's helpful to them and the opposite when it's not helpful. So I support Senator Barack Obama, a true believer in our Constitution who understands the Executive Branch better than an ex-President.
Just yesterday I got a phone call from my friend Sylvia. Sylvia called to tell me her boyfriend got to shake Barack Obama's hand. And we both shouted in excitement. "Really? Lucky Ed." And then she went on to tell me the better story. The story about a guy who was at the rally and really wanted to shake Barack's hand. He tried to move forward, tried to get closer, just to shake the hand of our future president, a president we could actually trust and believe in.
He got pretty close, but not in arm's length. Without really thinking about it, he screamed as Senator Obama passed, "I believe in you." Senator Obama turned and locked eyes with this young man to acknowledge his presence for about ten seconds. The young man left the rally to share this story, and was brought to tears.
In the end, that's the bottom line, I believe in Barack Obama. I have never believed in any other candidate the same way I do him. I think that is true for most people. I just pray and hope that most people decided to register as Democrats and vote in this Primary. How can we make sure that happens? I think that should be the goal!
I have his speech from the 2004 DNC -- before he even thought to run for President, on my ipod -- the mp3 file. I take it with me everywhere and share it with anyone and everyone who has not heard Senator Obama speak. Each week when I get emails from the Obama campaign, I want to be a part of this campaign more and more. In the last few years prior to Obama becoming a household name, I've shared his 2004 speech with at least 20 individuals. And they too are now excited about this bright eyed and ambitious individual.
I hope that the excitement I am feeling and I hope to ignite is inside everyone around me lasts into early next year, so that we can get Obama on the ticket. Let's do this -- ipod in hand. ;-)
Senator Obama visited my home state this week. He held a rally in Los Angeles -- in Crenshaw to be precise. I went to the rally, skipped a part of the work day to go (which means I had to get up early the next morning to bill hours and make up time).
I was thrilled to finally see the man whose speech from 2004 is on all my computers, and on my IPod Nano. His DNC 2004 speech still inspires me to this day . . . and when someone has no clue who Senator Obama is, I make them take 20 minutes out of their day to listen to him. I believe in him . . .
But this rally in Los Angeles burst that bubble for me. I have been watching him since the day he spoke at the DNC, I read most of the articles about him, and try to watch his interviews. I watch all of BarackTV . . . and I expected a little bit more. I expected Senator Obama to take the speech he made in Springfield to the next level.
What do I mean by the next level? I expected the Senator to connect his over-encompassing ideas, the seemingly shallow statements that make the whole country smile, and add substance to these ideas and statements in terms of Los Angeles. I expected him to take his healthcare program and put it in terms of the tax dollars spent in Los Angeles or in Crenshaw, and how much more funding there can and will be. I expected him to have the statistics for teachers salaries in the Crenshaw district and tell us that it will and must change to a salary that makes a teachers job in Crenshaw or Compton the most sought after. I wanted to hear his broad ideas in terms of the voter from Los Angeles, California.
I believe Senator Obama could do this, and do it so easily. But doing so would make him connect to me . . . he already connects to Mansi Shah the American . . . but definitely did not connect to Mansi Shah the girl from Los Angeles. Give me the picture as you see it . . . from the largest forest to the smallest tree. I want to know you (Senator Obama) have thought about the issues more than the shallow (albeit inspiring) statements you say in each speech you give across the country.
"Washington must change, we must learn to imagine" (paraphrased from Senator Obama's remarks on Tuesday) -- Imagine Senatory Obama, imagine what Los Angeles could be if you were President, and tell me all about it. Because that is what I was curious about this Tuesday . . . not the words that I already heard on your website from Springfield, Illinois.
