Who the hell knows?
I voted for the guy. I have hopes for what he can do for the US of A, but I still have at least one foot on the ground. The expectations should be kept in check that he can somehow topple The System. At the very most, we can hope that he can give it the slightest nudge that might cause it to slightly alter its course. He's not going to move mountains, he's not going to part seas, and in his acceptance speech, he made that much perfectly clear. He acknowledge that it is entirely likely that the major policy initiatives he begins, may not completely bear fruit until after his first term, if then.
However, I think it is entirely appropriate to label his Presidency as one of a Transitional nature. And this isn't solely because of the man and his makeup. To be sure that is an element of this transition. The other, of course, is the time. We are at a transitory moment in our history. We are at a transition point in terms of demographics. The baby boomers are retiring and beginning to take the geriatric perch at the top of the American lifespan. The White Man will soon be in the minority, when compared to all of the other creeds and ethnicitys that make up the American Populous. We are at a transition point in terms of energy. It is quite clear that Big Oil's days are numbered. Unless we go into "Shock and Awe" exploration and drilling, the inventories will dry up in our lifetimes. It is time to find that next thing that will power our homes and our automobiles. With just these two huge landmark shifts, it is imperative to have leadership that can help us get from Point A to Point B. This will be part of President Obama's charge. And of course, it will be our charge to make sure he keeps his eyes on the road while he is steering.
What is known is that a significant majority of the electorate has recognized this time of transition that we are in, and that it is time for a newer and more modern perspective to guide the way. The paradigms of yesterday were rejected in favor of the possibilities of tomorrow. The palpable sense of needing to move on is pervasive. But equally as prominent is the uncertainty of the unknown. And so he needs to be as reassuring as he is realistic. To be as certain as he is seeking. To be as commanding as he is collaborating.
And so, what does an Obama win mean? As of now, all we know is that it means a new story will begin to be written and told. But it does not mean we just sit and watch the events unfold. He has said he will ask and expect our support in his efforts. He will make a call for service in the redirection of America's path. Some will answer, some will not. But what is clear is what has always been so. This is OUR future that he is attempting to shape. This means it is OUR time to make sure we are a part of that.
Because the reality is that when someone asks "What Does An Obama Win Mean?", we will have a big influence on how that is answered.
It means the pendulum is swinging back the other way. Sure, not in the grand, swift movements the other Western countries (aka Yurp) would like to see, but enough to make me happier about a presidency than I've been in more than 10 years.
We'll see how far the swing takes us and into what territory. I'd like to say, "There's only one way things can look from now on--UP!" but then I've been bitten in the ass by that sort of statement before.
So, I'll tamp down my hope and excitement over the OVERWHELMING win Obama got 2 days ago, and just cautiously sit and watch and listen. For now.
Folks are going to anticipate immediate change though, and it doesn't work like that, even Obama himself knows it doesn't work like that and said so in his victory speech.
Part of politics is appeasing the mob, and when he doesn't fix everything within a few days of taking the office, the bumfuck public is going to get ripshit.
He's not going to empower the blacks and minorities like they think he's going to (much like the GOP was hoping to get the womens vote for Palin hoping they had the same idea). I watched the news yesterday and this black punk was on TV like, "I can finally do something with my life now that we got a black president, yo."
It doesn't work like that, asshole. You've had those equal rights for years now, not to mention you're from Providence probably born and raised, not Alabama or Mississippi or some state where the KKK is gonna lynch you for wanting a fucking job, and if anything, you should use him as a role model and strive to be like him rather than expecting him to make things better for you.
Well, that's because people are stupid and don't know how the system works...Obama already built that into his speech on Tuesday night, though, I thought.
Quote from: Jenne on November 06, 2008, 07:08:07 PM
Well, that's because people are stupid and don't know how the system works...Obama already built that into his speech on Tuesday night, though, I thought.
He did. And also I think he made that quite clear thoughout his campaign. I watched and listened to him very carefully since he won the GE. It's been clear to me when he talks about "Change" it didn't mean acheiving wholesale change in his first 100 days, let alone, his entire 4 year term. The conversations were about the beginnings of change and the beginnings of solutions. The economic crisis is going to take time to solve. Energy transition is going to take time, and indeed, probably isn't acheivable in one 4-year term. It's about setting wheels in motion. Patience will be required as he gets started.
Exactly but...again. The mob.
Time for bread and circuses to let the politicians do their job unhindered.
Quote from: Suu on November 06, 2008, 06:51:24 PM
Folks are going to anticipate immediate change though, and it doesn't work like that, even Obama himself knows it doesn't work like that and said so in his victory speech.
Part of politics is appeasing the mob, and when he doesn't fix everything within a few days of taking the office, the bumfuck public is going to get ripshit.
He's not going to empower the blacks and minorities like they think he's going to (much like the GOP was hoping to get the womens vote for Palin hoping they had the same idea). I watched the news yesterday and this black punk was on TV like, "I can finally do something with my life now that we got a black president, yo."
It doesn't work like that, asshole. You've had those equal rights for years now, not to mention you're from Providence probably born and raised, not Alabama or Mississippi or some state where the KKK is gonna lynch you for wanting a fucking job, and if anything, you should use him as a role model and strive to be like him rather than expecting him to make things better for you.
The belief that the south is more racist than the rest of the country is a myth.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on November 06, 2008, 07:50:54 PM
The belief that the south is more racist than the rest of the country is a myth.
True.
I've lived in a decent number of places, and i'd say, for instance, that new jersey was
much more racist than texas or alabama or florida...
Umm, I'm not sure it is possible, or useful, to try to determine what part of the country is more racist than the other. Racism is everywhere in the U.S. end of story.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 07:58:45 PM
Umm, I'm not sure it is possible, or useful, to try to determine what part of the country is more racist than the other. Racism is everywhere in the U.S. end of story.
Point is, there are people that have never been to 'the south' that constantly spout off about how redneck and racist we are. They are wrong.
Quote from: Iptuous on November 06, 2008, 08:00:26 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 07:58:45 PM
Umm, I'm not sure it is possible, or useful, to try to determine what part of the country is more racist than the other. Racism is everywhere in the U.S. end of story.
Point is, there are people that have never been to 'the south' that constantly spout off about how redneck and racist we are. They are wrong.
That's a perception thing, though. Racism is either overt or covert. In the south, it tends to be perceived as a bit more overt than in the north. Confederate flags as part of the state flag? The south. Racism? Everywhere.
Just look at Boston in the 60s and the whole busing issue. It was arguably worse in Boston than it was in many places in the deep south, and for a LONG time there has been an undercurrent of covert racism in this town. The discrimination was (and to a lesser degree still is) present in an unacknowledged way, but was/is definitely present. Irish vs. Black has been a long-standing conflict in Boston and it's really only in the last 10 years or so that that has started to shift. And Boston, the capital of Mass, is in the heart of the "liberal elite" of New England.
Does that mean everyone in Boston (or anywhere else for that matter) is necessarily racist due to where they are or where they're from? No.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on November 06, 2008, 07:50:54 PM
Quote from: Suu on November 06, 2008, 06:51:24 PM
Folks are going to anticipate immediate change though, and it doesn't work like that, even Obama himself knows it doesn't work like that and said so in his victory speech.
Part of politics is appeasing the mob, and when he doesn't fix everything within a few days of taking the office, the bumfuck public is going to get ripshit.
He's not going to empower the blacks and minorities like they think he's going to (much like the GOP was hoping to get the womens vote for Palin hoping they had the same idea). I watched the news yesterday and this black punk was on TV like, "I can finally do something with my life now that we got a black president, yo."
It doesn't work like that, asshole. You've had those equal rights for years now, not to mention you're from Providence probably born and raised, not Alabama or Mississippi or some state where the KKK is gonna lynch you for wanting a fucking job, and if anything, you should use him as a role model and strive to be like him rather than expecting him to make things better for you.
The belief that the south is more racist than the rest of the country is a myth.
I needed an example. I've also lived in Florida where there is still things called desegregation because the blacks still choose to live in a certain part of the city, and I've also done my fair share of time in Alabama where they publish KKK rallies in the fucking Dothan Eagle.
Not saying that the rest of the country isn't racist, far from it, it's just much more pronounced down south, because a chunk of people (not ALL of them) down there still think they're fighting the Civil War.
I just don't see it up here in Rhode Island like I did down there. Christ. It's a matter of perspective.
I have been all over the US and the most racist place I have ever spent time in is Southern Michigan, followed closely by New Hampshire.
I think I can start trusting southerners when they stop referring to The Civil War as The War of Northern Aggression. But it's true that us *REDACTED* [STATE] liberal elite are in no short supply of racism. Count a few of my family among them. If you want to examine ignorance as a regional phenomenon you'll have to take an in-depth look at the entire fucking world.
Unfortunately, much of Obama's time is going to be spent dismantling the engine of stupidity elaborately built in the last 8 years by our administration and their blind engineers. I do think you're on to something with it requiring the support of the American people. If anyone can kick us into action it's this guy. My personal favorite part of his election night speech was to the effect of "To those of you whose support I have not yet earned...I will be your president too." And I do think this is genuine. This is a guy with a lot of ambition and no short supply of ego, but he's very much all business and very much interested in getting people to understand and listen to one another.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on November 08, 2008, 02:59:51 PM
I think I can start trusting southerners when they stop referring to The Civil War as The War of Northern Aggression.
In that case, I think you're going to be waiting until we start referring to it as 'The First War of Norther Aggression'. :wink:
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on November 08, 2008, 02:59:51 PM
Unfortunately, much of Obama's time is going to be spent dismantling the engine of stupidity elaborately built in the last 8 years by our administration and their blind engineers. I do think you're on to something with it requiring the support of the American people. If anyone can kick us into action it's this guy. My personal favorite part of his election night speech was to the effect of "To those of you whose support I have not yet earned...I will be your president too." And I do think this is genuine. This is a guy with a lot of ambition and no short supply of ego, but he's very much all business and very much interested in getting people to understand and listen to one another.
Are you saying that you think Obama
will be able to be a unifying force , or just that he
desires to be? Because some of the policies that he supports, i can't see being anything other than very divisive.
I think he wants to be one.
Unfortunately for him, some people will not accept a black President, others will not accept a "socialist" President (which may or may not be a justified if incorrect critique of his policies, or just general wingnuttery) and others still may be butthurt about the whole Hillary thing.
Also, some people do not want a ride on the magical unity pony. They want to keep on smacking the fucktards who ran the country into the ground until they bleed, and then do it again if they look like getting up. Obama's appeals for unity will not go down well with them, either.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 08, 2008, 12:44:23 PM
I have been all over the US and the most racist place I have ever spent time in is Southern Michigan, followed closely by New Hampshire.
I read once that someone (no idea who) did a study and concluded that Arizona was the "Most Racist State", followed by North Dakota.
I personally think the administration would be more effective in resolving the issue of racism by first addressing the increasingly pressing class issues.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on November 08, 2008, 02:59:51 PM
I think I can start trusting southerners when they stop referring to The Civil War as The War of Northern Aggression.
A. I'm a southerner.
B. I don't refer to it as that. I refer to it as "the war that Lincoln waged because he refused to let the Union be divided". Also "the war that really had nothing to do with slavery".
Quote from: Iptuous on November 08, 2008, 04:08:37 PM
Are you saying that you think Obama will be able to be a unifying force , or just that he desires to be? Because some of the policies that he supports, i can't see being anything other than very divisive.
One such policy would be increasing gun and ammo tax. I know many people that aren't happy at all with that.
Gun and ammo tax?
shitfuck, it says right there on change.gov that they plan on pushing forward another 'assault weapon ban'. that's gonna piss off a ton of us. (make criminals out of a ton of us, who won't readily comply, to boot)
How about the compulsory three month service plan they are kicking around? that's not going to sit well with a good lot, either.
Quote from: Iptuous on November 08, 2008, 08:52:07 PM
Gun and ammo tax?
shitfuck, it says right there on change.gov that they plan on pushing forward another 'assault weapon ban'. that's gonna piss off a ton of us. (make criminals out of a ton of us, who won't readily comply, to boot)
How about the compulsory three month service plan they are kicking around? that's not going to sit well with a good lot, either.
Not really sure if I agree or disagree with banning assault weapons again. Also I can't find anything about compulsory service on change.gov but I've seen it talked about on a few other sites from a quick search.
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 08, 2008, 08:24:02 PM
B. I don't refer to it as that. I refer to it as "the war that Lincoln waged because he refused to let the Union be divided". Also "the war that really had nothing to do with slavery".
:/
Quote from: Kai on November 09, 2008, 08:44:30 AM
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 08, 2008, 08:24:02 PM
B. I don't refer to it as that. I refer to it as "the war that Lincoln waged because he refused to let the Union be divided". Also "the war that really had nothing to do with slavery".
:/
what's with the look kai?
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 09, 2008, 08:47:27 AM
Quote from: Kai on November 09, 2008, 08:44:30 AM
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 08, 2008, 08:24:02 PM
B. I don't refer to it as that. I refer to it as "the war that Lincoln waged because he refused to let the Union be divided". Also "the war that really had nothing to do with slavery".
:/
what's with the look kai?
Nothing to do with slavery?
Quote from: Kai on November 09, 2008, 08:55:15 AM
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 09, 2008, 08:47:27 AM
Quote from: Kai on November 09, 2008, 08:44:30 AM
Quote from: Shadowdaemon on November 08, 2008, 08:24:02 PM
B. I don't refer to it as that. I refer to it as "the war that Lincoln waged because he refused to let the Union be divided". Also "the war that really had nothing to do with slavery".
:/
what's with the look kai?
Nothing to do with slavery?
At least not from those that started it. The south wanted to be their own country, Lincoln said "Fuck you, not on my watch".
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Hell, Lincoln was VERY explicit about stating that he thought that Negros were inferior and should not mix socially, professionally, or sexually with white folk, he just knew a huge pool of potential soldiers who would fight for cheap when he saw one.
Most people that i have talked to about this topic don't believe me when i tell them that there were states that allowed slavery in the union, and that when Lincoln issued the emancipation, that it didn't apply to those slaves in his country.
Hm.
History is fucked, yah know?
Kai,
Was reading A Peoples History of the United States but didn't get up to the civil war yet.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 01:59:41 PM
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Exactly.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 02:01:30 PM
Hell, Lincoln was VERY explicit about stating that he thought that Negros were inferior and should not mix socially, professionally, or sexually with white folk, he just knew a huge pool of potential soldiers who would fight for cheap when he saw one.
Yeah, I'd also heard that he actually wanted to just ship all the black people back to Africa but I've not seen any proof of it(most likely because if it exists I never searched for it).
Lincoln wanted them to go to Liberia:
http://www.etymonline.com/cw/lincoln.htm
Frankly, while I can see where Lincoln was coming from, I believe that people once transplanted no longer belong to the land they may have come from, but the land in which they now reside. People who focus too much on race and ancestry underestimate the power of the land in shaping its immigrants into a new tribe.
Historically, my Apache ancestors and their less migratory cousins, the Navajo, believed that a nations' history begins when it chooses a new place to settle. Therefore, although the two groups came from the same ancestors and settled the Southwest at the same time, they are two nations, because they chose different environments and different lifestyles. Monster Slayer and Child of Water; one heritage, two nations.
On the other side, my Welsh ancestors also believe that the people belong to the land they choose to live in. The land shapes us. Once here, our ancestors no longer belonged to whatever land they came from, and their new tribe became those they lived with.
I don't know enough about my African ancestry to say boo to what they believed, so who knows? Anyway, it may be just a bunch of hippie-dippy nonsense, but I think there's a lot of truth in it.
have you read American Gods?
if not, you should.
Strangely enough, I read the exact quote by Lincoln a couple of days ago that you are all probably talking about:
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything."
- Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:15:13 PM
have you read American Gods?
if not, you should.
I have not, but on your advice I just ordered it and will be reading it shortly, thanks!
Quote from: Nigel on November 10, 2008, 12:49:11 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:15:13 PM
have you read American Gods?
if not, you should.
I have not, but on your advice I just ordered it and will be reading it shortly, thanks!
I second that! It's an awesome book... and I'm in it...
Also, that's a great quote Cain. Lincoln is one of the most misunderstood individuals in American culture. He and the whole Civil War, in fact.
Quote from: Kostatar on November 10, 2008, 06:32:18 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 10, 2008, 12:49:11 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:15:13 PM
have you read American Gods?
if not, you should.
I have not, but on your advice I just ordered it and will be reading it shortly, thanks!
I second that! It's an awesome book... and I'm in it...
Also, that's a great quote Cain. Lincoln is one of the most misunderstood individuals in American culture. He and the whole Civil War, in fact.
It's not surprising considering that's how the American Civil War is taught.
Quote from: Vene on November 10, 2008, 06:33:35 PM
Quote from: Kostatar on November 10, 2008, 06:32:18 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 10, 2008, 12:49:11 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2008, 12:15:13 PM
have you read American Gods?
if not, you should.
I have not, but on your advice I just ordered it and will be reading it shortly, thanks!
I second that! It's an awesome book... and I'm in it...
Also, that's a great quote Cain. Lincoln is one of the most misunderstood individuals in American culture. He and the whole Civil War, in fact.
It's not surprising considering that's how the American Civil War is taught.
troof 100%
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 01:59:41 PM
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Slavery was certainly not an issue for much of the southern populace (who suffered greatly because of the economic situation it created), and was basically used to gain support in the north, but do you really believe that only the states with a slave owning elite class joining the rebellion was coincidence?
Quote from: Requiem on November 13, 2008, 03:52:23 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 01:59:41 PM
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Slavery was certainly not an issue for much of the southern populace (who suffered greatly because of the economic situation it created), and was basically used to gain support in the north, but do you really believe that only the states with a slave owning elite class joining the rebellion was coincidence?
Of course it wasn't coincidence. Conflict over slavery was the reason that southern states originally seceded. That was not, however the reason that there was war. I think that is all that is being said here.
Quote from: Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 04:01:19 AM
Quote from: Requiem on November 13, 2008, 03:52:23 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 01:59:41 PM
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Slavery was certainly not an issue for much of the southern populace (who suffered greatly because of the economic situation it created), and was basically used to gain support in the north, but do you really believe that only the states with a slave owning elite class joining the rebellion was coincidence?
Of course it wasn't coincidence. Conflict over slavery was the reason that southern states originally seceded. That was not, however the reason that there was war. I think that is all that is being said here.
I thought it had something to do with a tariff on manufactured goods from Mother England, which forced the South to purchase lower-quality higher-priced goods from the North. The South tried to overturn it a couple of time, but when the North kept rejecting their efforts, the South realized that it was essentially existing for the economic benefit of the North. They had both taxation and representation... just less representation than the northern states.
As with most wars, there seems to be a convergence of multiple interests of varying power that lead to it. The ecoomic impact of slavery was likely more important than the moral issue, but the latter sure looks better, both to posterity and to the English at the time, who dominated world trade and were on something of a post-Wilberforce meets economic interest crusade to rid major powers the benefits of slave labour.
Quote from: Iptuous on November 13, 2008, 04:01:19 AM
Quote from: Requiem on November 13, 2008, 03:52:23 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on November 09, 2008, 01:59:41 PM
Troof. Slavery was really not the central issue in the Civil war, it was just the most powerful appeal to emotion that either side could come up with for the PR machines.
Slavery was certainly not an issue for much of the southern populace (who suffered greatly because of the economic situation it created), and was basically used to gain support in the north, but do you really believe that only the states with a slave owning elite class joining the rebellion was coincidence?
Of course it wasn't coincidence. Conflict over slavery was the reason that southern states originally seceded. That was not, however the reason that there was war. I think that is all that is being said here.
That makes more sense.
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on November 08, 2008, 02:59:51 PM
I think I can start trusting southerners when they stop referring to The Civil War as The War of Northern Aggression.
Or how about:
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on November 08, 2008, 02:59:51 PM
I think I can start trusting southerners when they stop referring to The Civil War
It's been 147 years. It's over.
Yeah. Whats even funnier is that would be rebels think theyd win if theres another one.
Aw, I was so bright eyed and bushy tailed in 2008.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 06:08:01 PM
Because the reality is that when someone asks "What Does An Obama Win Mean?", we will have a big influence on how that is answered.
Things are still broke and nobody is doing anything.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on December 26, 2012, 10:25:07 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on November 06, 2008, 06:08:01 PM
Because the reality is that when someone asks "What Does An Obama Win Mean?", we will have a big influence on how that is answered.
Things are still broke and nobody is doing anything.
Sure they're doing stuff. For a given value of "stuff".
Yep, it's the governmental equivalent of the ole four-corners play in basketball.
Looting everything not nailed down is doing something.
It's just not something everyone would approve of.