An Impressive (and Maybe Historic) Speech
I’ve not said much about the US election to date. I’ll be voting in it, as an American abroad (even though I’m not really ‘abroad’). Still, being a citizen, it’s my right to do so, at least up until I give up American citizenship, which for practical reasons I doubt I’ll ever do, no matter how expensive the US government makes it to keep it (but who knows what the future will bring).
It should come as no surprise that I’m supporting the candidacy of Barack Obama. I was never a fan of Hilary Clinton. She was always too strident and never owned up to the mistake of voting for the Iraq war. A simple apology would have been fine for me (like the one Richard Clarke gave to the 9/11 widows). Lately she’s struck me as so unpleasant and shrill in so many ways (including more than a whiff of some of the worst intrusive and meddlesome self-righteousness that Modern Liberalism in the US can be; It Takes a Village indeed…) that I can even imagine her losing to John McCain on pure backlash, and a McCain in the Oval Office would be far worse then Hilary. I also hated the idea of the Presidency being a trophy tossed back and forth between two families that each felt themselves uniquely entitled to it. After Hilary’s stint, it would be Jeb Bush for two terms, and then it would be Chelsea’s turn, followed by… the twins? Sure; By that time the US would have been reduced to Third World Nation status, and it wouldn’t matter any more which Dynasty got their four or eight-year Time-share slot in the Presidential Palace.
But I digress…
Obama struck me as far more inspiring and interesting, (although admittedly not as much as Howard Dean did), but I couldn’t put my finger on why until the speech he gave today. He made the speech because he had to deal with the toxic statements made by the Pastor of his Church, and why he hadn’t distanced himself from the man who made it (in addition to leaving the Church itself).
That was the reason for the speech. What I heard instead, was a clear and eloquent meditation on why the US is still so divided, how it got to where it is today, and maybe, how it can begin to move forward.
Bush and the Republicans had been using Race as a way of splitting up the electorate, mainly to keep the South in their pocket. It has always been in their best interest to keep the dialog on racial inequality a taboo in public life, or to simply ignore it. With this speech, I think Obama began to open up the dialog about this topic, touching upon one exposed nerve after another: Slavery and the Constitution, Welfare, Affirmative Action, Immigration… He mentioned them all. In essence, both sides of the debate on race have merit, but we have to all move on now, if we have the courage to. It was the kind of speech that a patient, educated, and dare I say it – a wise Statesman (rather than merely a politician) would give. Whether or not Obama wins the election, I have a hunch this speech will be talked about and studied in history texts for a long time.
But don’t take my word for it. If you have the time, watch the speech on YouTube. I’ve embedded it here, despite the mediocre quality of the video and audio. If I find a better source, I’ll link to it. (I’ve done this, thanks to Al ‘Bokashi-man‘ Pasternak’s pointer.)
MikeFitz — March 19, 2008 @ 1:00 am
I concur. I too can imagine Hilary “losing to John McCain on pure backlash.” I’m sure McCain is quietly cheering Hilary on.
West End Bob — March 19, 2008 @ 1:33 am
Totally agree with you, David.
Hillary would not be a good choice for the dems this time around.
Obama sounds like someone that US citizens could actually be proud of, for a change . . . .
Al — March 21, 2008 @ 12:33 pm
A better link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrp-v2tHaDo
from the Obama Channel
Watching yours now. Wow! My inner cynic is getting real pounding with this one.
Someone showed me Marc Cooper’s response to the speech:
http://marccooper.com/we-o-boomers/
I agree with his concluding paragraphs:
Instead, we’ve looked around and reached three simple conclusions:
First, that John McCain, whose personal courage cannot be denied, and who has had some distinguished moments in public life, now finds himself positioned in the American political system with little to run on except a platform of militarized jingoism.
Second, the election of Hillary Clinton would be an absolute guarantee of the political status quo. There might be a forward shift here or there compared to the Bushies, but the system itself would remain intact. And we are convinced that her decision making would, indeed, continue in the well-known Clintonian tradition of unmitigated expediency — as has already been more than amply demonstrated during her lamentable campaign.
Finally, we do not invest naive hope in Barack Obama. We O-boomers are, I fear, ready to be disappointed by a President Obama. It’s a well-worn reflex with us. But for the first time, in a very, very long time, we can sense at least the mathematical possibility of some refreshing change if he is elected. His speech this week served only as a geometrical multiplier.”
David Drucker — March 21, 2008 @ 5:51 pm
Thanks for the alternative source, Al. I’ve updated the video to point to that copy, as its quality is better, and it is free of those distracting crawls quoting sound bytes uttered 2 to 3 minutes earlier as you watch it.
I know what Marc Cooper means about being disappointed so many times. I too have been disappointed, but usually it’s more by the American electorate than by the candidates. It will be a long time before I forgive the US for their votes of 2000 and 2004 (even if it was merely for not producing a majority great enough to overcome ‘the cheat factor’ that the the Republicans employed in order to claim victory).
The O-Boomer reference reminded me that I recently found out ‘Generation’ I am a part of; I am definitely not a ‘Baby Boomer’ as the experiences of the vast majority of Boomer’s are not mine; I was too young to participate or even identify with Woodstock, the Sexual Revolution, the Beatles or the Vietnam War, and I don’t quite identify with the cultural landmarks of Generation X, as Vancouver’s own Douglas Copland so aptly coined in his book of the same name. Instead, I am a part of Generation Jones. The Jones part is a common name that evokes the sense of a large, unknown group, but is also a reference to having a “jones,” or craving, for the ideals put forth in the ‘60s. As someone who came of age in the 1970s, a decade known for Watergate, bad clothes (polyester shirts with busy prints, side-burns) and the Nixon presidency. Generation Jones (born between 1954 and 1964), I can relate to how it started out optimistic like the 60’s, only to see idealism shattered by the financial hardships and Senate Hearings of the ‘70s. The character of that generation became a mixture of idealistic yearning and cynical alienation. It was the generation of ‘Whacky Packages‘ (Remember those, anybody my age? They were bubble gum with sets of stickers portraying disgusting parodies of popular consumer items. Instead of Skippy peanut butter, you saw a sticker for ‘Skimpy‘. Instead of Cap’n Crunch cereal, there was ‘Cap’n Crud‘. It was our way of equating everything we saw with decay, corruption and disappointment).
So I know what you mean by having to battle with your ‘inner cynic’. We’ve all got that big-time.
Al — March 21, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
Happy Easter David,
I’m Gen J too.:-), but I don’t remember Whacky Packages – maybe it was only in America. My favourite agitprop was an ad found in National Lampoon [a most cynical humour magazine of the times.] It was a sticker with a picture screw on it. You would peel off the backing and put it on the bumper stickers that read: “I ‘heart’ my dog.” I’m not sure if it was from the 70’s but matches the sentiment. I never bought the package but it made me laugh out loud when I saw it for the first time.
Today it would be cheap enough to make them at home but I don’t see many bumper stickers like that anymore…. Pity.
David Drucker — March 22, 2008 @ 11:08 am
It may be too late to start putting those ’screw’ sticker overlays on current stickers. I do remember, however, a great sticker that really ’stuck it’ to all of those ‘I support the Troops’ yellow ribbon stickers that you saw in great numbers, stuck to SUV’s (and ignoring the great disconnect between supporting soldiers and consuming large amounts of petroleum that had a lot to do with putting them in harm’s way in the first place) here.
David Thompson — April 23, 2008 @ 4:51 am
Just stumbled across your blog, I did. I also noted the news of Obama’s speech as extraordinary. If it was any politician that I know of, they would of denounced the person in question and moved as far away from them as possible, but instead of doing what every other successful politician would do, he took a different path and a truthful path. There is no doubt in my mind that Obama is the person who can restore the U.S.A. within and throughout the world. The obstacle I fear the most is the fear tactics from the Republicans. The war on terrorism will be a huge issue, and I think fear will be a factor playing for the Republicans.
Now about those awesome bumper stickers, where can I get one?
David Drucker — April 23, 2008 @ 8:19 am
Thanks for the comment. I wonder if Hilary will have worn out the ‘fear’ card for the Republicans? After enough times, the cry really does sound like ‘Wolf’
Actually, what is worrying me more these days is Hilary. With her win in Pennsylvania, she now has blunted Obama’s momentum. She will continue to chip away at him. The race for the Democratic nomination has gone on far too long already, and if it continues to the convention, you can then, indeed, count on McCain to beat whichever nominee comes out of that futile exercise.
If the Democrats do lose to the Republicans this time because they aren’t able to unite behind the right candidate to beat him, then as I’ve said before, it’s time to disband the party. There is no place in a 2-party system for a party whose sole purpose seems to be to lose elections and give the impression of choice. If Democrats can’t win after the most horrendous presidency in history led by the opposition, then they don’t deserve to exist. Hilary couldn’t beat McCain now, and it’s even less likely she could do so after limping to her own finish line — or worse, by getting the nomination through the fiat of a smoke-filled room in a brokered convention that feels like the Supreme Court Florida decision of 2000 all over again.