It is a rare thing to observe history - progress - being made. I am so proud of our country right now for having its first ever black presidential candidate. No matter where you fall politically (and I know my very scant readership is pretty split politically from super liberal to super conservative), you HAVE to see that this is an amazing moment in our time, this thing that would have been totally unthinkable not so long ago.
I would have written this same post had Hillary gotten the nod because it would have also been amazing to see a female candidate, but I'm really glad I'm not writing that particular post. I guess there is no way for her to gracefully exit the race at this point. She seems determined to..... something. Not really sure what.
I'm feeling very optimistic today! It IS possible for a nation, a people, to change, to advance, to rethink and rediscover themselves. Our history as Americans is too littered with ugliness. This is a bright time.
6.04.2008
Historical
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
As you well know, I could engage in a lengthy discussion with you about politics; but I really have no desire to do that. This whole primary season has been exhausting, and I am glad that it appears to be at an end. I would like to know--and perhaps other readers would, as well--just what it is about Senator Obama's apparent victory in the Democrats' primary that fills you with optimism.
Personally, I have grown doubtful about any politician's ability to influence true change. Whether McCain wins in November or Obama, I don't expect much to change in the way business is done in Washington. Apparently, you do...if Obama is elected President. I am just interested to know what you see based on the concrete agenda and plans he has outlined on the stump.
By the way, it's "historic," not "historical."
my candidate has no chance of winning... however much i support ron paul as the only true defender i've witnessed of my civil liberties....
with that said, i too am discouraged by the choice of candidates and have been throughout the primaries. i think obama is earnest if nothing else. i happen to think he is earnestly wrong in many of his ideals and plans for change. my hope would be this: i hope that his earnestness is true, that when/if his plans are proven to fail or fall short, he would have the humility and desire to take his earnestness and change course.
i had this hope for our current president and have been sorely sorely disappointed for the past 6 years. i am still deciding on whether i will even vote this year... but if i do, it will be obama.
and actually having more to do with your original point... i too am proud of our nation's ability to look beyond color and gender. it is funny to realize in the middle of an event that you are living through something that will be recorded in the history books. we will help our kids study this information for tests and quizzes....
-L
Joey, historical is a perfectly legitimate word (as is historic), look it up! My post really had more to do with the sheer fact that Obama won the nomination for Democratic candidate, that there will be something other than a rich old white dude on the ballot. That, in itself, brings me hope.
You did not use the word correctly. You should have used "historic." I looked up the word before I wrote the comment, and your usage is wrong.
Regarding your point about Senator Obama, former President Clinton was not a rich, old white dude when he ran for and won the office of President. He is a rich, old white dude now as he has traded on the prestige of his old job, though. Yes, the Republican Party has been stereotyped as the party of rich, old white people. (That's odd to me as someone who is neither rich nor old.) However, anyone with that idea has no grasp of history. Jimmy Carter was not poor; Lyndon Johnson was not poor; John Kennedy sure was not poor; Franklin Roosevelt lived near Vanderbilts, for goodness' sake. Truth be told, Senator Obama is not poor. Check out the price tag on his Chicago home--not poor. Might I also remind you that rich, old white dudes have personally contributed to your education and development? That rich, old white dude Dr. Ross and his rich, old (not really, Mrs. Ross, if you are reading this) white wife have been very generous to you down through the years. Also, that rich, old white dude David Ellis made it possible for you to earn your Notre Dame degree.
So, my guess is your problem really isn't with rich, old white dudes because "rich" applies to Democrats as well as Republicans. Is it, then, that you are optimistic because Senator Obama is not a old, white dude? You've a problem there because Senator Obama is not black; he is only half black. His mother is white. I find it reprehensible that people like Senator Obama trade on their lineage when it is expedient to do so. "He's the first black candidate of a major U. S. political party!" No, he is not: he is the first half-black candidate of a major U. S. political party. It's the same thing as when Halle Berry won the Oscar for Best Actress in a Motion Picture; she was lauded as the first black actress to earn the honor. Only, she's half-white, too.
When you get right down to it, you've got someone who is just like any other politician except that he is younger than most. That's fair. I don't know, though, that youth will be enough to move mountains in Washington. Youth will be enough to inspire hope, as has been demonstrated in your post.
I'll say this: he won't be any worse than a President McCain or a President H. Clinton. I'll not vote for Senator Obama, but I'll think it the end of the world if he wins. Likewise, if Senator McCain prevails, Democrats probably need not fear. His record is anything but conservative as defined by conservatives.
I am glad you feel optimistic. I'll feel glad when it is all said and done. A big deal was made when Representative Pelosi became Madame Speaker Pelosi--the first woman in that position. However, given the continued ineffectual nature of the House under her administration, I think it is safe to say that gender plays no role in good governance. My suspicion is that the same will ultimately said about race.
By the way, so much for not entering into a lengthy discussion...
You are wack. I am not up for this debate. Of course rich old white dudes permeate both parties. I never said otherwise. I stand behind my original point. I don't believe that if Obama is able to instigage true change in Washington that it will be because of his race. That is ridiculous. You put a ton of words in my mouth, and for that, I will kick. your. ask.
p.s. I HIGHLY resent your friendly "reminder" about the people I am indebted to for my education and other things. I have always been and will always be grateful for them. My excitement about there being a black candidate has NOTHING to do with that.
To everyone out there who thinks Joey and I are really getting mad at each other, we're not. This is just how we roll. I love my brother, even when he is being like this. :-)
"I'll not vote for Senator Obama, but I'll think it the end of the world if he wins." I left out a word in that sentence. It should read: "I'll not vote for Senator Obama, but I'll NOT think it the end of the world if he wins."
"p.s. I HIGHLY resent your friendly 'reminder' about the people I am indebted to for my education and other things. I have always been and will always be grateful for them. My excitement about there being a black candidate has NOTHING to do with that." I am glad to know that. However, when you wrote about being glad that it is not some rich, old white dude who was nominated on the Democrats' side, you invite the speculation that you are, somehow, opposed to rich, old white dudes or that you think rich, old white dudes cannot move the country in the right direction. Otherwise, why draw the comparison? Why not just say, "I am glad Senator Obama appears to have clinched the Democrats' nomination. He's a great guy?" Instead, you contrasted him with a rich, old white dude, implying that he is better or more desirable because he is not rich, old, or white. However, is 1.5 out of three: wealthy and half-white. I'm just trying to figure out at what percentage he is too much like a rich, old white dude to be unappealing to you. Right now, I know he can be at least 50% of a rich, old white dude and still earn your respect.
*Disclaimer: I echo my sister's earlier remark that, though it may appear we are engaged in heated banter about politics, we love one another very much and are not upset with one another because of differing political views. We may, however, throw down over her insistence of the use of "historical."
"However, is 1.5 out of three: wealthy and half-white." That should read "However, HE is 1.5 out of three: wealthy and half-white." Also, really it should be "rich, old, white dude" rather than "rich, old white dude." "Rich," "old," and "white" are all adjectives modifying "dude." The comma between each adjective is substituted for the word "and": "rich and old and white dude."
With all due respect (and an extreme appreciation of your shrimp cooking abilities for the rehearsal dinner), I think you are misreading the spirit of Laura's original post.
The idea is that this is the first 'serious' African-American presidential candidate. And yes, he is African American. If our nation can enslave generations over a one-drop law, we can most certainly declare Ms. Berry and Sen. Obama as members of the black community.
I think the sentiment has been that the wildly successful in this country have been white, rich, and male. At least here in the last 2-3 decades for SURE... as America slowly feeds the fire devouring the middle class and enslaving its marginalized and poor. Whether or not one believes that this reality is the result of too much government interference, or not enough, it does not change the nature of the reality. So to have a serious female candidate, or a serious black candidate, is a monumental occurance for a country that has not consistently honored either subgroup since its inceptionover 2 centuries ago.
The hope for change is present not necessarily in Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton, but in the minds and hearts of those who would put aside prejudice and ethnocentrism to accept leaders that aren't white males. Not that anything is inherently wrong with white males... hell, my candidate is old, rich, and white- but has integrity :)
I do not think that Obama will bring radical change. Nor, do I believe Hilary would have. And I definitely do not think Sen. McCain will. But I do believe that the American people have the ability to change their everyday life with compassion and tolerance. And those are the changes that I saw exonerated in the original post.
peace,
-L
It was our brother who provided the skrimps. I cannot take credit for that.
I'm with Joey. It's a grand social change, but not so much politically.
I think in a 300 million person society, that's more difficult than social change. Too much trying to please everybody.
Historic: Important to history
Historical: Relating to the past
(e.g. historical movie)
Joey wins.
With all the flaws of the past two generations, our progress with race, gender, and orientation is stunning. Just ask Jack Tripper.
Lauren, I could not have said any of that better myself.
John, that was really my point. I had no intentions of getting into a debate about Obama being the catalyst for great political change. That is a totally separate issue to me. It was really more of a "wow, look how far we've come" kind of post.
I refuse to concede on the historic vs. historical debate. Traditional grammar rules dictate that there is a very subtle difference in how the two must be used, but modern dictionaries accept that they are interchangeable and that this is acceptable.
I have spent way too much time on this comments page.
Well, to jump in here with you youngers...I would say that I'm not really all that impressed with Obama's win. For one thing, exit polls indicate that he had an absurdly high black vote. While that may not be surprising it kind of tells you that it's not such a huge cultural event after all. Now if he carried the vote across the gender and race lines, I would say that it was a bigger deal. In a sense, the way he was able to motivate and get the black vote gives credence that the racial division may be greater. The other thing I would say, is that I probably could have done pretty good against Hillary. She has certain strengths and qualities, but if you look in the dictionary under "baggage" you're probably going to see the comment "see Clinton, Hillary".
Black or white, the problems I have with Obama is his position on abortion and the fact that all I see from him is smoke and mirrors. I have this distrust of any candidate that doesn't really have a history.
But I love you anyway, no matter who you vote for!
Post a Comment