To liveUnder the open skyDreams unboundedAnd hopes unfurledRipplingIn the windOur spirits riseCatching its currentAnd soarThrough timeAnd space
Across the landOver the seasInto the heavensOur spirits soarAn aerial balletOf aspirationAnd ambitionAn ambassadorOf our lifeTo the stars.
Into sun swept skiesAnd harsher climesOur spirits soarEver higherUnbound by roomsOr rulesOr guaranteesThey roostOnly to rest
Beneath these skiesOur spirits rootFreedom and fulfillmentPartners to the landAnd foundationOf our great claimLet lightning strike!Let kingdom come!We do not fearOur spirits soar!
Copyright © 2001 K. S. Shain. All rights reserved.
Listening to a podcast titled "Were the Robber Barons America's Greatest Philanthropists?" I was again impressed by my ignorance. Apparently guilt played a big role in the movement. Amazingly, Carnegie is quoted as "The man who dies rich dies in disgrace." and later explains the wealthy have a duty to give back to the society that let them achieve this status. So, I propose we skip over the guilt part and set corporations out to make as much as they can but in the bylaws it is fixed that all such (net revenue) will be used for the betterment of society (yes including providing health care). This is written into the bylaws and cannot be changed. So, I think the government should actually not just give tax breaks but actively help any corporation that declares to do this as it's mission in every possible way. Yes this is heading towards, I want to start one of these today would be nice. Well I published the mission statement back in July http://dreambridgefoundationforartistsurvival.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/the-for-profit-corporate-mission-statement-2/ Which I will repeat 1. Serve as a vehicle so that people can be paid to do what they enjoy and likely would do in any event. Thus, the business exists to pay people to do what they enjoy doing, throw in the other stuff as well: health care, retirement, etc. Implicit in this mission is intent to make a profit. How else can the mission be achieved? The motive behind the intent is not a question. Only intent. And just to equalize matters more: 2. A task deemed to menial to be of interest is a group responsibility to deal with (taking turns) until a way can be found to automate ot make it intersting to someone. Inherent in the notion:: if this task exists in the corporation then it likely is everywhere. By solving this, there is probably a market for it in the form of a product or service somewhere; and simply by handling this issue results in a probable market commodity. Let me follow that with the cover of the current issue of Michigan Engineer (I receive as an Alumni; BSE Engineering Physics) says "Alumni, Students, & Faculty in service to the world.": I rest my case. So, by having this as an inherent part of the corporate bylaws, we can bring the private sector into the picture without any question of ulterior motives.
No me. What was that bit on being represented somehow?
Ok, it's too screwed. Let's toss it and start over.
Remember a corporation is a legal entity. So create a bunch for people to hide their personal info behind "authorized corporate officer and signer" A corporation has it's own tax ID, and if private no info need be given out regarding the shareholders. So, you buy some shares, and you get to be an 'authorized corporate signer' and never give out personal info again.
Need a loan? Bring it up with the board of directors (who are elected and should be sympathetic) and prove your case and let the corporation handle it. Your phone, and other matters are now private as can be.
Why would this help marketers? Because there are obviously stuff you want and marketers want to target exact audiences. By publishing a nickname and a list of items you want to receive info on the marketers know they are not wasting time and money sending to the wrong people.
Does anyone lose? of course. Any of the get rich quick scams have no chance and get tossed to the evolutionary landfill. But that is a good thing.
This forces old fashioned customer service to return as automated systems cannot handle this level of ambiguity. And that's a good thing. It means companies will listen to customers once again.
Taxes: of course are a responsibility. However, having an associated 501c3 lets the citizens decide how their tax dollars are spent. Education, health care, charitable deeds - not lining some lawyer's pockets.
Oh yeah, as a corporation all shareholders will get health care benefits. Kinda nice. Also by being a corp, we have the power to reduce the amount of unethical behavior by boycotts and buying the other corp out and firing the people skimming off the top. Forcing the acquisition to adopt ethical standards.
One good thing that "birthers" have inadvertently done is to make everyone aware of President Barack Obama's birthday. This year, Thomas Pynchon (my favorite author) has a new, more popularly styled book out today.
It is a bittersweet day for me, however, as it was also my father, Sam Musikar's birthday. He was a New York artist who loved jazz, and he would have loved to see the President who beat the Republican stranglehold on Washington, the arts, and the world, celebrate his birthday on the same day as he.
Henry M
If a Public Option is So Bad, Why are They So Sure that It Would Kill Private Health Insurance?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-sweeney/taking-the-pro-pot-positi_b_179653.html
Fast-forward to today's online town hall, and once again, marijuana legalization proved to be one of the most popular questions, with the most-approved-of pro-pot question being: "Should the U.S. legalize pot as a way to grow jobs and stimulate the economy?"With all of his usual charisma and endearing jocularity, our president laughed off the question, stating "I don't know what this says about the online audience, but, no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow the economy." The mewling sycophants in the East Room audience laughed and burst into applause.Once again, the Obama administration has greeted this question with an out-and-out rejection, with no reasoning underlying their position. Let's ignore for a moment that Obama's answer, in and of itself, is deeply wrong and ill-informed; moving from zero taxes on weed to any taxes is obviously an increase in revenue, not to mention the shift of growing and supplying jobs from the black market to legitimacy, which means more revenue in income taxes and more jobs.Now, couple this with the millions, if not billions, of dollars that would be saved without the government being responsible for the care and feeding of hundreds of thousands of nonviolent drug offenders. From 1965 through the election of Barack Obama, our government arrested 20 million people for possession of marijuana. That, folks, is a lot of stoners.In 2006 alone -- the last year for which statistics are available -- 829,625 people were arrested on marijuana-related charges, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Of these, 89 percent were arrested for simple possession.So, couple the tax revenues, both sales and income, with the savings involved in keeping potheads out on the streets instead of in the pen. Now, put that Everest-sized pile of cash aside for a moment and think about this: Who's losing money in the deal?According to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, fully 75 percent of Mexican drug cartels' cash comes from the sale of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would, of course, take away that massive source of income for the cartels, just as ending prohibition cut bootlegging as a source of revenue for La Cosa Nostra.Combining all of the above effects, the legalization of marijuana means billions of dollars saved or made, the creation of jobs and the curbing of violence along the Mexican border, which in turn means saving thousands of lives.Barack Obama can certainly be against legalization, but he owes it to nonviolent drug offenders caught in the horror show that is the U.S. prison system, the families of innocent victims of the Mexican drug wars and economically bloodied U.S. taxpayers to explain why. Ganja may cause the giggles, but legalization shouldn't be a laughing matter. And it certainly shouldn't be treated as cavalierly as it has by the current administration, especially when it has been proven to be a popular issue every time Obama has tried to go straight to the people.
Fast-forward to today's online town hall, and once again, marijuana legalization proved to be one of the most popular questions, with the most-approved-of pro-pot question being: "Should the U.S. legalize pot as a way to grow jobs and stimulate the economy?"
With all of his usual charisma and endearing jocularity, our president laughed off the question, stating "I don't know what this says about the online audience, but, no, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow the economy." The mewling sycophants in the East Room audience laughed and burst into applause.
Once again, the Obama administration has greeted this question with an out-and-out rejection, with no reasoning underlying their position. Let's ignore for a moment that Obama's answer, in and of itself, is deeply wrong and ill-informed; moving from zero taxes on weed to any taxes is obviously an increase in revenue, not to mention the shift of growing and supplying jobs from the black market to legitimacy, which means more revenue in income taxes and more jobs.
Now, couple this with the millions, if not billions, of dollars that would be saved without the government being responsible for the care and feeding of hundreds of thousands of nonviolent drug offenders. From 1965 through the election of Barack Obama, our government arrested 20 million people for possession of marijuana. That, folks, is a lot of stoners.
In 2006 alone -- the last year for which statistics are available -- 829,625 people were arrested on marijuana-related charges, according to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Of these, 89 percent were arrested for simple possession.
So, couple the tax revenues, both sales and income, with the savings involved in keeping potheads out on the streets instead of in the pen. Now, put that Everest-sized pile of cash aside for a moment and think about this: Who's losing money in the deal?
According to Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, fully 75 percent of Mexican drug cartels' cash comes from the sale of marijuana. Legalizing marijuana would, of course, take away that massive source of income for the cartels, just as ending prohibition cut bootlegging as a source of revenue for La Cosa Nostra.
Combining all of the above effects, the legalization of marijuana means billions of dollars saved or made, the creation of jobs and the curbing of violence along the Mexican border, which in turn means saving thousands of lives.
Barack Obama can certainly be against legalization, but he owes it to nonviolent drug offenders caught in the horror show that is the U.S. prison system, the families of innocent victims of the Mexican drug wars and economically bloodied U.S. taxpayers to explain why. Ganja may cause the giggles, but legalization shouldn't be a laughing matter. And it certainly shouldn't be treated as cavalierly as it has by the current administration, especially when it has been proven to be a popular issue every time Obama has tried to go straight to the people.
More than a hundred DVD's featuring Barack Obama are on sale at Amazon.com
Hundreds of other DVD's and Blu-Ray discs are also on sale.
It ain't over until we've won the hearts and minds of a greater number of the haters such as those passing around emails like the following:
Family members of people killed on September 11, 2001, and in other terror attacks say they are outraged by President Obama's draft order calling for the suspension of war crimes trials of prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay. "To me it's beyond comprehension that they would take the side of the terrorists," said Peter Gadiel, whose son, James, was killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11. "Many of these people have been released and been right back killing, right back at their terrorist work again." Obama's request on the first full day of his presidency came as a draft order was being prepared ordering the closing of the Guantanamo prison within a year. A judge responded by halting the case against a Canadian detainee accused of killing an American soldier in Afghanistan, issuing a 120-day continuance in the case. Click here for photos. "I see no reason why we should delay these proceedings. Let justice be served," said Jefferson Crowther, whose 24-year-old son, Welles, was killed in the Twin Towers after he saved the lives of several others. Critics blasted Obama's decision, which they said would delay justice in cases that have already been waiting for the better part of a decade. "There is no need to suspend [the military tribunals]. There is no reason why [Obama] can't conduct a concurrent review at the same time that the military commission process is moving forward to render justice for the terrorists that have murdered thousands of people," said former Cmdr. Kirk Lippold, who lost 17 sailors during a suicide bombing attack on the USS Cole in 2000. A suspect in the case is being held at Guantanamo. "It demeans their deaths because we seem to be more concerned with the rights of detainees than we are with the justice that is being denied to my sailors that were killed," Lippold told FOXNews.com. Obama's request may mark the end of the system used by the Bush administration to try terror suspects. War crimes charges against 21 men are pending at Guantanamo, though the detainees may have to be moved to America or extradited, depending on the administration's plans for them. The Obama administration is calling for a systematic review of each detainee's case to determine who can be released and who cannot. "It is in the interests of the United States to review whether and how such individuals can and should be prosecuted," says the draft order released on Wednesday. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said he would take the detainees in his own district, which lies just a few miles from the field near Shanksville, Pa., where United Flight 93 crashed after it was hijacked by terrorists on Sept.11, killing all 44 people aboard. "Sure, I'd take them. They're no more dangerous in my district than in Guantanamo," Murtha said, calling the Guantanamo prison a "sore in the United States' moral standards." "There's no reason not to put them in prisons in the United States and handle them the way they would handle any other prisoners." But some 9/11 families said they were concerned that if the trials were moved to criminal courts in the U.S., the proceedings would put civilians at risk. "The safest place to have these trials is Guantanamo Bay. If they were to move to the homeland it would endanger all of us," said Lorraine Arias Believeau of New Jersey, whose brother, Adam, was killed on 9/11. But human rights groups welcomed the president's draft order, calling it an important first step for his administration. "It is a major positive step in the right direction," said Jamil Dakwar, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union who observed pretrial hearings at Guantanamo this week. If transferred to U.S. courts, some of the detainees might be freed because of the aggressive interrogation techniques used against them. Mohammed al-Qahtani, the alleged "20th hijacker" in the Sept. 11 plot, was interrogated so severely at Guantanamo Bay that Bush administration officials said he was tortured and did not refer his case for prosecution. Some of the accused terrorists, meanwhile, were impatient to have their trials proceed. "We should continue so we don't go backward, we go forward," Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks told the judge in their case. He is among five detainees accused in the attacks who have asked to be given the death penalty, believing they will become martyrs if they are executed. Lippold, who helped determine detainee policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a strategic planner, said he feels he has a large investment "in making sure that these guys do not return to the fight, that they do not kill again." He said moving the cases to civilian courts was primarily a political act and could make it difficult to proceed with cases without compromising vital intelligence sources and methods. "The whole issue of detainees has become so politically charged that people forget that Americans lives are at stake," he told FOXNews.com. Crowther, a volunteer fireman for decades, said he does not care where the trials take place, but he wants to see more action from his government. "I'm constantly doing my part -- I want my government to do its part for me.I want those people who participated in my son's death and the death of some 3,000 others, I want to see them punished, if found guilty, in a court of law," he said. If the cases don't go to trial, Crowther said, "many, many families are going to be very upset." The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Family members of people killed on September 11, 2001, and in other terror attacks say they are outraged by President Obama's draft order calling for the suspension of war crimes trials of prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay.
"To me it's beyond comprehension that they would take the side of the terrorists," said Peter Gadiel, whose son, James, was killed at the World Trade Center on 9/11. "Many of these people have been released and been right back killing, right back at their terrorist work again."
Obama's request on the first full day of his presidency came as a draft order was being prepared ordering the closing of the Guantanamo prison within a year. A judge responded by halting the case against a Canadian detainee accused of killing an American soldier in Afghanistan, issuing a 120-day continuance in the case.
Click here for photos.
"I see no reason why we should delay these proceedings. Let justice be served," said Jefferson Crowther, whose 24-year-old son, Welles, was killed in the Twin Towers after he saved the lives of several others.
Critics blasted Obama's decision, which they said would delay justice in cases that have already been waiting for the better part of a decade.
"There is no need to suspend [the military tribunals]. There is no reason why [Obama] can't conduct a concurrent review at the same time that the military commission process is moving forward to render justice for the terrorists that have murdered thousands of people," said former Cmdr. Kirk Lippold, who lost 17 sailors during a suicide bombing attack on the USS Cole in 2000. A suspect in the case is being held at Guantanamo.
"It demeans their deaths because we seem to be more concerned with the rights of detainees than we are with the justice that is being denied to my sailors that were killed," Lippold told FOXNews.com.
Obama's request may mark the end of the system used by the Bush administration to try terror suspects. War crimes charges against 21 men are pending at Guantanamo, though the detainees may have to be moved to America or extradited, depending on the administration's plans for them.
The Obama administration is calling for a systematic review of each detainee's case to determine who can be released and who cannot. "It is in the interests of the United States to review whether and how such individuals can and should be prosecuted," says the draft order released on Wednesday.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., said he would take the detainees in his own district, which lies just a few miles from the field near Shanksville, Pa., where United Flight 93 crashed after it was hijacked by terrorists on Sept.
11, killing all 44 people aboard.
"Sure, I'd take them. They're no more dangerous in my district than in Guantanamo," Murtha said, calling the Guantanamo prison a "sore in the United States' moral standards."
"There's no reason not to put them in prisons in the United States and handle them the way they would handle any other prisoners."
But some 9/11 families said they were concerned that if the trials were moved to criminal courts in the U.S., the proceedings would put civilians at risk.
"The safest place to have these trials is Guantanamo Bay. If they were to move to the homeland it would endanger all of us," said Lorraine Arias Believeau of New Jersey, whose brother, Adam, was killed on 9/11.
But human rights groups welcomed the president's draft order, calling it an important first step for his administration.
"It is a major positive step in the right direction," said Jamil Dakwar, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union who observed pretrial hearings at Guantanamo this week.
If transferred to U.S. courts, some of the detainees might be freed because of the aggressive interrogation techniques used against them. Mohammed al-Qahtani, the alleged "20th hijacker" in the Sept. 11 plot, was interrogated so severely at Guantanamo Bay that Bush administration officials said he was tortured and did not refer his case for prosecution.
Some of the accused terrorists, meanwhile, were impatient to have their trials proceed.
"We should continue so we don't go backward, we go forward," Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks told the judge in their case. He is among five detainees accused in the attacks who have asked to be given the death penalty, believing they will become martyrs if they are executed.
Lippold, who helped determine detainee policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a strategic planner, said he feels he has a large investment "in making sure that these guys do not return to the fight, that they do not kill again."
He said moving the cases to civilian courts was primarily a political act and could make it difficult to proceed with cases without compromising vital intelligence sources and methods.
"The whole issue of detainees has become so politically charged that people forget that Americans lives are at stake," he told FOXNews.com.
Crowther, a volunteer fireman for decades, said he does not care where the trials take place, but he wants to see more action from his government.
"I'm constantly doing my part -- I want my government to do its part for me.
I want those people who participated in my son's death and the death of some 3,000 others, I want to see them punished, if found guilty, in a court of law," he said.
If the cases don't go to trial, Crowther said, "many, many families are going to be very upset."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
KCUF, Still the Most Eclectic Music on the WWW, Now at 128 Kb/s on Shoutcast Unlimited: http://tinyurl.com/kcuf-on-shoutcast-limited to play and http://www.urdomain.us/kcuf.htm to see what's playing
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28784
WASHINGTON, DC–Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
President-elect Bush vows that "together, we can put the triumphs of the recent past behind us."
"My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."
Bush swore to do "everything in [his] power" to undo the damage wrought by Clinton's two terms in office, including selling off the national parks to developers, going into massive debt to develop expensive and impractical weapons technologies, and passing sweeping budget cuts that drive the mentally ill out of hospitals and onto the street.
During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.
"You better believe we're going to mix it up with somebody at some point during my administration," said Bush, who plans a 250 percent boost in military spending. "Unlike my predecessor, I am fully committed to putting soldiers in battle situations. Otherwise, what is the point of even having a military?"
FWIW, KCUF will be playing an Inauguration Day playlist from today till 6:30 this evening, Eastern Daylight Savings Time, with a very special hour-long Obama Remix starting at about 11 am.
"Brand New Day" by Marc Johnson, from Chicago:
http://www.dreamyjazz.com/audio/13-Brand%20New%20Day.mp3
Lyrics:
"Quit your fronting and your fightingThrow your sadness and your heartache away!We're living in a Brand New Day.The world's abuzzing with the novelty of all the thingsWe've heard and read and seenA sea change igniting our dreamsFraming all of our hopes andDefining the possibilitiesNever been a better time to be and to be freeIf you believe as I believeWe're living in a brand new dayWe've got fences to mendBridges to build and hearts to healOvercoming obstacles from without and withinIt's a (crazy) lot of work but I know that once it beginsWhat an amazing place we'll find ourselves inSo hey don't delayPut one foot in front of another and begin this brand new dayWe've got fences to mendBridges to build and hearts to healOvercoming obstacles from without and withinIt's a (crazy) lot of work but I know that once it beginsWhat an amazing place we'll find ourselves inSo seize the day, this brand new dayGonna stir it up, gonna break it downMelt it like we shouldBringing love and light and hope to every neighborhoodIt's a Brand New Day."
A Brand New Day Is Here
Obama Wins!
*President-Elect Obama*
Wednesday, 3:15 a.m. Popular Vote
Barack Obama 52.0% 59,508,943
John McCain 46.8% 53,533,145source: Politico
Electoral College (270 needed)
Barack Obama 349 John McCain 165
Obama wins Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Florida, Virginia, Colorado & Indiana (49.9% to 49.0%).
Obama leads in N. Carolina, 49.8% to 49.6%, with 100% in. (12,160 vote Obama lead)
McCain with 5,000 vote lead in Missouri, 99.94% reporting.
Montana just called for McCain.
If Missouri and N. Carolina go respectively for McCain and Obama, this gives Obama 364 electoral votes, a huge landslide in every sense of the word.
All others decided.
Democrats make gains in Senate, House, but no bloodbath:
Senate: 56 Democrat, 40 Republican, + 5 Dem
House: 249 Democrat, 169 Republican, Democrats projected to gain about 20, 17 uncalled.
GOP's Liddy Dole loses North Carolina Senate seat to Dem Kay Hagan; 4 Senate seats still to be called.
*****
From today's article in The Huffington Post, by Gary Hart (November 5, 2008): Stating the various interpretations of what this election means, he says: "there is something here for everyone. This was a cyclical referendum with the pendulum bound to swing back to Democrats. The president-elect represents a new, post-Clinton, beyond centrism, post-racial, new politics, internet-driven phenomenon. The nation is fed up with neoconservative imperialists, radical fundamentalists, and failed supply-siders. And so on."
One thing is certain. Something has changed in American politics. These are a NEW POLITICS of UNITY, not division, as was partly shown in McCain's own gracious concession speech. America has shown, not only that it is ready to put racial identity behind it as any important sort of cultural factor, but that it is hungry to leave the failed past behind it, and move on, in the hopes of a more just, fair, progressive and happier future.
May God Bless and guide Barack Obama as he leads these United States of America.
People, go out and vote for a healthy democracy. Vote for the future of your kids and a proud country.
The rest of the world watches and suspends its breath. The rest of the world prays that you give an example and show the wisdom of the right choice. United, bring us the hope. It's the time to actively participate, the time to express your views and opinions, the time to celebrate on the 4th.
Vote and be happy! Go and vote - do it now!!
The World With Its Eyes on America
U.S. Presidential Elections – Global Polls
A poll made by Gallup about who would the world’s citizens choose if they could vote in these American elections shows a smashing victory for Obama – 3 in 4 people would vote for him. McCain would only win in Georgia, Laos and Cambodia (due to more or less obvious reasons). These results confirm the data obtained by previous polls and give some strength to Obama’s lead when dealing with undecided voters in the US.
65% of the citizens in 14 different European countries consider that the US elections are relevant to their own country, with this number rising to 80% among the British, 77% of the Irish or 71% of the Norwegian and French citizens. 83% of the Japanese, a higher percentage of people than in America itself (80%) are following the American Presidential campaign closely.
In Europe, 74% of the Dutch and Portuguese[1], 71% of the Norwegians, 69% of the Danish, 67% of the Irish, 64% of the Swedish and French, 60% of the U.K. electors, 62% of the Germans, 4 in 5 Finns and Greeks and 3 in 4 Spanish or Italians would vote for Obama. In the rest of the world, he’s also the favourite for 64% of Australians, 66% of Japanese and 67% of Canadians, 76% of Ethiopians and Tanzanians, 89% of Kenyans, 70% of Malians and 85% of the Ugandans who answered the poll.
During the eight years of the Bush Administration, the favourable opinion about the US decreased dramatically in Germany and Spain (less than one third of the population has a favourable opinion), fell from 80% to 53% in the UK and from 78% to 50% in Japan. Last Wednesday, more than 33 million Americans saw Obama’s infomercial aired in primetime and The Daily Show had record ratings of 3.6 million viewers with Obama’s appearance.
The election of Obama would be symbolic in many ways. The first African-American to be the President of the most powerful nation on Earth would mean, in itself, quite a bit of History being made this week, representing the symbolic transposition of great mental, cultural, historic and prejudice barriers. But this candidate seems to concentrate hopes in almost every continent: in the Spanish-speaking South America and Brazil the newspapers announce that Cuba is hopeful that a new era in its foreign relations with the US will be possible.
And this hope extends to the whole South America as Colombia, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile or Argentina would also vote for Obama, who gets the sympathy of the people facing the paramilitary and guerrilla groups which McCain helped to finance. While Europeans wish for more dialogue and diplomacy, a solution for the situation in Zimbabwe is anticipated with the election of Obama, or at least the possibility of developing very special and involved diplomatic relations with Africa.
In Asia people seem to care less about the American elections, still Obama is more popular in India, China and South Korea (nowadays the country with a more favourable opinion about the US – 70%). In the Middle East, Lebanon and Palestine favour Obama, while Israel doesn’t know what to think – many people in Israel would vote McCain, but the majority of the US Jewish community and pro-Israel lobby will vote Obama, according to the polls.
Curiously, and still about the votes by the American citizens (the ones that count, right?), the organization Sentency Project informed that 5,2 million Americans will not be allowed to vote in this election – 1 in every 41 Americans – because they committed some type of severe crime. These citizens cannot vote currently or permanently (in Virginia or Kentucky all the people condemned for severe crimes lose the right to vote for their entire lives). From those 5,2 millions, 4 millions are not in prisons anymore, but on parole or have already completed their sentences, and 1,4 million are black men.
The definition of “severe crime” varies much from State to State and is not necessarily related with firearm robbery and physical threat, white-collar crimes, murder or sex offences. Generally, “severe crimes” are the ones which lead to a sentence of more than one year in jail, and can be related with things like planting some vases of marijuana in the backyard. After completing their sentences, many of these people simply move to another State and don’t go back to their State of origin to ask a judge for their right to vote again (in the cases in which they could do so, of course).
But these elections mark a profound change in the way how the electors interact with the campaign actors and contents as well. Millions of electors get information about the candidates through the internet, and they often add original contents and opinions to that online soup. Some of them are directly thrown to the centre of the debates and get media attention, depending on the originality of their efforts. On the other hand, comedians have been assuming an informative and pedagogical role, something which is deeply ironic and… surely fun.
The candidates adapt their speeches, schedules and answers to these new phenomena, and McCain-Palin tried to please or glue themselves to comedians while disdaining the “liberal media elite” (well, they disdained the comedians too, at first). In most cases, the entertainers glued themselves to a certain candidate first, and assumed that choice clearly before the nation, while treating both with “comic impartiality”. Jon Stewart, Ellen, Saturday Night Live/Tina Fey, Letterman, Leno, O’Brien or Ferguson, they all had important roles in this campaign. So had the media lady Oprah. Or W. the film. Or the books concerning Bush Doctrine.
Interviews and deep scrutiny by top comedians, vote hunting through internet social networks, incentives to election registration and participation by… the comedians too, thousands of home videos on youtube expressing opinions (from around the world) and political sympathies or denouncing true and fake scandals, news and conspiracy theories, phenomena like Obama Girl and Joe the Plumber (not to mention Tito the Builder) mark a modification in the nature of the campaigns, sometimes for the better/more democratic, some others for the sillier.
The candidates ask their supporters to contact people from their region or ethnic group by phone, e-mail and door-to-door, to have a conversation about the elections with their friends, to vote early, to take other people to vote on Tuesday. The world is positively impressed with Obama. Is the world hoping too much? He certainly can not do magic – Jon Stewart underlined that already.
The world is craving for dialogue, peace and disillusioned with most politicians. The world is in the hands of common people, people who may not come from privileged backgrounds and are equal in rights independently of those backgrounds – that’s maybe what Obama symbolizes for many. A more participative and inclusive democracy is already his victory. Let’s see about the rest, expect for the better, express ourselves often about what happens and what we think should happen.
[1] National poll.
Hi,
I am Paul Evans, owner of Evans Web Design, a recent startup. I have worked as a volunteer for Barack since before the Ohio primary. I recently got the Progressive Blog Digest to link to the politics page of my combined business/personal website, Evans Web Design. I put a liberal politics page, http://www.evans-web-design.com/politics.html, with a lot of content for Barack on my business website despite the fact that this antagonizes prospective Conservative customers. I have been canvassing and phone banking for Barack as well. I am just inviting everyone to take a look at my politics page and perhaps to put some progressive content on their own business website. If we talk the talk we should walk the walk, so it seems to me. If I lose half or a third of my customer base, so be it.
Also, I have not been terribly active at MyBarackObama.com, partly because I take care of an elderly parent and have a girlfriend who lives 60 minutes away, and because my company is a recent startup and there has been a lot to do, plus of course working for the county Obama team. So I thought I would say hi!
The rest of the world watches and suspends its breath. The rest of the world prays that you give an example and show the wisdom of the right choice. United, bring us the hope.
It's the time for actively participating, the time to express your views and opinions, the time to celebrate on the 4th.
Vote and be happy!
