Monday, February 04, 2008

Super Tuesday and Beyond - Obama in '08

Friends and family,

While many of you are well aware that I have been an ardent supporter of Barack Obama over the last year, I feel an important need to reach out to you today and ask for your support in getting Obama the Democratic nomination. While I have been very interested and involved with politics before, it had usually been with a cynical approach. My 2004 vote for John Kerry wasn't in support of Kerry and his policies, but was a voice of frustration against the policies of George W. Bush (especially concerning Iraq). Things are different this year as I have found a candidate that I not only support, but am enthusiastically excited to help reach the White House. That person is Barack Obama.

I am not alone. Over the last year of campaigning, there has been a growing support of Obama as many across the spectrums of age, race, gender, class, and party have found a candidate that not only seeks out the policies and change in politics that are desperately needed in this country, but also has the ability to motivate and inspire the American people as no president has since the late John F. Kennedy. And unlike many of today's politicians, Obama is a man of integrity whose ideals have not changed with the polls of public opinion but are a part of who he is. Not only was he against the war in Iraq from the beginning, his ideals for social and political change have been a part of him from the beginning. A year ago I read both of his books /Dreams of My Father/ and /The Audacity of Hope /(he wrote the former before he was involved in politics). In both of these, you can see the ideals and politics he will accomplish for our nation - from his early service as a community organizer to his abilities and ideals to bridge the divides of faith, race, politics, class, and gender in finding common ground and pushing America forward.

So in the primaries and caucuses of tomorrow's 'Super Tuesday' and in states following, I urge you to join in the effort in making a positive change and progress for the United States by placing your vote for Barack Obama. In many states, the democratic primaries are open or semi-open allowing those who are not registered as democrats to still participate in this important election.




  1. "bridging the divide" is a great campaign tactic. it brings in young and new voters with the message that he can rise above political fighting between the two parties and unite everybody to move the nation forward. it's nice rhetoric but it will never work. Just because Obama says he wants to do it doesn't mean it will happen. As if I'm going to believe that just because he gets elected President then suddenly the Republicans and conservatives are going to just become putty in his hands while quietly and dutifully following his lead. He's got some great rhetoric, but I need more than rhetoric in a President, I need somebody than can win a fight for change not just expect that his election alone will achieve it.

  2. Anon,

    Here is a great post on substantive reasons to vote for Obama. One indication that he will "bridge the divide" is his history of doing just that.

    The criticism that Obama is all rhetoric and no substance isn't credible; it only reveals the critic's ignorance.

  3. I don't believe that Obama is all style and no substance, but I'm concerned that if he is the nominee thing won't go well for him. His relative inexperience in Washington, liberal voting record, and the fact that he hasn't had to win a tough campaign against a Republican before spells trouble. I just don't see how, in a one on one with McCain (the other media darling and media protected candidate) that he will successfully stand up to increased scrutiny and Republican attacks. Even if he does survive it he won't come out unscathed, and instead will arrive in the Oval Office as just another politician.

    On the substance front, in terms of getting things done, I think it's all sham too. The President can't just show up and be nice and get things done. It's all about the Senate and it doesn't matter which Democrat gets elected, the Republicans in the Senate will do their best to block every Democratic initiative and attempt to render him ineffective.

    So I guess you could say that I, unlike Lloyd, haven't overcome my cynicism...

  4. The Silent Observer2/06/2008 9:04 PM

    While I don't think I could ever bring myself to pull the lever for Obama, I wouldn't be sad at all if he somehow ended up as the HNIC. His politics are deplorable, but he is obviously a man of character and intelligence. It was only after I read The Audacity of Hope that I realized not all Democrats are morons. He's generally well-spoken, which is a refreshing change from the past 8 or so years, and an oft-neglected but critical part of the job in my opinion.

    Also, I can't wait to see the look on all the antiwar Dems' faces when Obama clocks out on his last day in office and we are still in Iraq.

  5. Apparently Obama is finally showing his true thoughts. It's always hard to trust what someone says on the campaign trail but usually we have some background on them to compare. Obama was a bit different - he's a newbie who's promised change and talked a lot about how we need to stop spending over seas and start spending on us. At least that's what he said. he's got two bills going through one that calls for 200+ billion to be spent here in America - that's good. The other however is 800+ billion to be spent in other nations. One of these bills, I don't recall which one exactly, tries to mandate that the US follow the Kioto treaty and takes away the "small arms" - read no one can own a gun.

    This is another reason I can't vote Obama

  6. anon,

    the Kyoto protocol is an international treaty to decrease greenhouse emissions and has nothing to do with arms. Furthermore, Obama would never pass a bill prohibiting small guns as such would violate constitutional rights.

    Perhaps the reason you wouldn't vote for him is your own ignorance.

  7. silent observer,

    i used to think you could intellectually add to a conversation.

    i was wrong.

  8. Narrator

    I said "AND" take away guns - as in both issues, issue 1 kyoto treaty issue 2 take away guns. Maybe I'm not ignorant maybe you can't read. To further my thought that you can't read:

    Global Poverty Act passed today - sponsered by your boy Obama. Obama has said: "it's time to stop spending billions of dollars a week trying to put Iraq back together and start spending the money on putting America back together." That's why he proposed $210 billion yesterday to create jobs (we can talk about it's break down later). At the same time he proposed the Global Poverty Act. The Global Poverty Act, if passed, will commit the United States to spending .7% of our gross national product on foreign aid, which will amount to around $845 billion over what we already spend on foreign aid. But here's the great thing - we're committing it to the United Nations! Now, the bill has defined the term millennium development goals as the goals set out in the declaration given by the United Nations. Just so you know, those Millennials goals not only care about poor starving children, there's other ideas in there as well. For instance, the declaration commits nations to ban small arms and weapons, ratifying a series of treaties including the International Criminal Court treaty, the Kyoto protocol, the Convention on Biological Diversity. We would be committed to the ratification of the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women - does that mean the UN will suddenly fight Islamic extremism with us, considering how they treat their women? Also we would ratify the convention on the rights of a child.

    I'm not going to get into those last two, mostly b/c I don't know much about their discrimination against women, but I don't even want to start on the "rights of a child" crap. However, it's still a hell of a lot more money going to help put another country back together than spending it on America. There is also, as defined by the bill Obama propsed a ban on small arms and weapons ... so does he support it or not? According to HIS bill, he wants them gone.

    Of course to know this you would have had to read it ... :P (please read heavy sarcasim I'm not trying to be an ass)

    sorry about the anon earlier

  9. "and takes away the "small arms" - read no one can own a gun."

    the absolute BS contained in this statement made me pretty not much care about what else you wrote. "No one can own a gun"? Are you serious? Ryan, your reasoning continues to amaze me.

    Here's something from today's Salt Lake Tribune:

    Obama says US must end gun violence

    Associated Press Writer

    MILWAUKEE (AP) -- Barack Obama says the country must do "whatever it takes" to eradicate gun violence but believes in the right to bear arms.

    Obama says he's offered his Senate office to help Northern Illinois University with the investigation into a campus shooting rampage. The shooting happened in his home state. Obama was campaigning in neighboring Wisconsin.

    The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, says he believes the Second Amendment to the Constitution grants individual gun rights.

    But he says it's subject to commonsense regulations like background checks.


    No one can own a gun? Give me a break.

    As far as your obejection to foreign aid goes... very Christlike of you. But even if you didn't care about what Jesus says, the benefits of foreign aid will be cost-beneficial when the resulting decrease in defense costs is considered. Finally, Mr. Bush's war in iraq cost much much much much much much much more than Obama's foreign aid bill. I still haven't seen you bitchin about that.

  10. Loyd

    I'm not opposed to Foreign Aid - never once have I said I was against it - I've never ever done anything like it - EVER! I was pointing out Obama's "flip-flop" as people like to call it. He proposed a bill that would commit the United States to some the United Nations goals. IT'S IN THE BILL - READ IT! The declaration commits nations to ban small arms and weapons - READ IT! Obama has said we need to stop spending so much rebuilding other nations - yet he then turns around a proposes two bills one for "rebuilding America" and one for "rebuilding other countries" the other countries is 4x what he wants to spend on America - he says "spend less elsewhere and more on America" yet he proposes bills that are the exact opposite - READ THE BILLS!

    don't tell me it's BS when I've given hard evidence - THE BILL - that it's not and then not back it up with YOUR OWN! I don't give a damn what his office said - that same office propsed a bill supporting the idea of getting rid of arms! That's called flip-flopping

    Explain to me where my logic is flawed, because when I read a bill that says (in summary) get rid of small arms - call me crazy - but to me that means Get rid of small arms! Where is the flaw??? Yes Loyd, you'll have to read the bill - not pretend lollipops and gumdrops magically spring up at Obama's feet!

    For the record I'm very much in favor of helping other countries - but only when we are in a position to do so ourselves. We currently are but if government as a whole - ALL PARTIES - don't change direction and fast we won't be able to help even ourselves. However this would require a course in Economics and I simply don't have the time or desire to get into right now.

  11. the silent observer2/15/2008 1:10 PM

    What? You're not a fan? I was being sincere!

  12. Lloyd, unlike the rest of your visitors that seem to be happy with continuing the retarded war and mess our country is mired in, I have and will continue to vote for Obama. What the hell else is there to do?! Vote for warmongering "100 more years trash the planet bankrupt the economy and get NOTHING for it" McCain? Puh-leez.

  13. ryan,

    your logic makes the jump when you claim that a ban on small arms means that nobody can own guns. if you believe that's how it works, then you're crazy. but i still love ya anyways.

    i don't even know what this flip-flop is you're referring to. clinton has been straining to make flip-flopping claims. she hasn't even stooped as low as you.

    as far as helping out with foreign aid goes, by ending our disastrous war that your hero mr. bush put us into, the u.s. can secure important funds that can be used to help regain our international image that has been so severely tarnished by the aforementioned disaster of a president.

  14. So, when can we expect a speech from Obama on religious tolerance in light of what Bill Maher said about the Pope recently? I'm sure that if Don Imus had said anything like that towards a group of people Barack Obama would be calling for his resignation ... oh wait, Don Imus did say something, not nearly as bad and Senator Obama DID call for his resignation ... so we should be expecting this speech on religious unity and understanding despite past wrongs when???

    Or is it not going to happen because Senator Obama's political ambitions aren't on the line with this one??? How convenient for him ...


  15. i don't know what bill maher said about the pope.


Please provide a name or consistent pseudonym with your comments and avoid insults or personal attacks against anyone or any group. All anonymous comments will be immediately deleted. Other comments are subject to deletion at my discretion.