Four Key Reasons Why Barack Obama Clinched The Democratic Party's Presidential Nomination
One will hear all kinds of reasons as to why Barack Obama achieved a seemingly impossible American dream: the first African American in place for the White House. There will be many people with numerous bits of 'evidence' as to why he is now the nominee over Hillary Clinton, who was the heir apparent up until October last year. There will also be countless words, specially from people who were against him but who will lay claim to have seen this victory all along, spewing all over the Internet and print media in tributes or blame. Get ready for the onslaught as the analysis begins.
However, I am not an American, which is perhaps why I do not view life in an American perspective. It means I am not befuddled by the usual fears and anxieties that might beset the average American voter. I am far enough away from the action, well across the Pond, to see what others who are closer often miss, and not affected by the negativity or euphoria that might have surrounded Obama. In such a position, one might miss some details, but one is then privy to an extraordinary panoramic view that one is often denied when one is too close to events.
I have been mesmerised by Barack Obama since I heard him speak for the first time at a convention, but my four reasons have very little to do with what you might hear from everyone else, especially those who are supposed to be the 'experts' on such matters. I am speaking from the ordinary voters' perspective, one who has watched a powerful force worm his way into our consciousness, and four things stood out about him from the time he began his campaign:
1. His leadership skills. Barack Obama ran a very tight ship in every way: financially, professionally and politically. It is fine to aspire to the greatest office in the land, and to say how you are the best candidate for the job, how you would be ready 'from Day One', but it is not words that demonstrate one's readiness. It is deeds, starting from the smallest acorn which turns into big oak trees. Barack managed his little acorn in a magnificent way which gives a powerful pointer to how he would manage the bigger oak tree. He did not wait to get into the White House to prove himself. As all good leaders do, they prove themselves in everything they do, no matter how small and insignificant, especially in the way they treat every person, whether high or low, and in the way they conduct their own affairs. That is what projected Obama head and shoulders above Clinton: the way he managed himself before he dared to try to manage his country or the world.
2. His brilliant team. David Axelrod needs a medal. What a team he ran for Barack and what a guy he is. By remaining firmly in the background, yet being the obvious powerhouse along the way, he reminds me of the quintessential Englishman, with stiff upper-lip and discrete presence. His new title should really be: David Axelrod, Kingmaker. He can write his own money now, thanks to the majestic way he turned Barack Obama, from a Senator with great potential to a president in waiting. The transformation is so subtle as to be taken for granted. But what a manager to have on your side. No histrionics, no drama, no upstaging. Just plain old loyalty, sincerity and fervent belief in his candidate. His team worked their guts out to keep him there, especially with crises. They say you can really tell a person's character by the way they cope with a crisis and Barack's team knows how to handle crises, how to get their man back on form and with minimum fuss and bother. With such a team in attendance in the White House, one feels a little bit more secure, because it will be in great hands.
3. His unwavering faith. 'Yes, we can' tells far more about Barack Obama and his nomination victory than everything else about him. It is indicative of his belief in himself, his team and his voters. As a newcomer, to be able to galvanise the youth of America, the disaffected older voters, and even women voters to turn out to vote is a feat that can be easily underestimated, but it is an incredible achievement. To inspire in such a way that others begin to believe you too, to be motivated enough to spread the word and play the pied piper to millions more is awesome. It also shows the power of the man himself to inspire, to lead and to give life to the most impossible of dreams: getting to the White House.
4. Finally, his determination and courage. There were times when Barack Obama must have felt at rock bottom, especially with the Jeremiah Wright debacle, but he never flinched from taking action; never shirked what he had to do and never let it overwhelm him. No matter what they threw at him, he parried it with gentlemanly, professional aplomb and statesmanship. He never sunk to the levels of his opponents and kept his head well above the fray. Most important, he never lost sight of his goal: to win the nomination, and he kept that determination in place even when he had not a hope in hell of winning certain States.
Barack Obama, by his amazing historical nomination would have inspired and uplifted an awful lot of people across America today. As one woman puts it: People forget that 50 years ago Black people could not even vote. Now we have one in line for president. That is some achievement which can be easily overlooked by those who have not been involved in the struggle for parity. Obama is a true inspirational leader who deserves that chance to show what he can do. I pray, along with many other Americans yearning for change, that he will be given the opportunity to demonstrate it.
(First Published on Helium.com)
Why Can't African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, etc, Just be Called 'Americans'?
No they cannot. On the face of it, this should be an easy thing to do - claim to be just an 'American'. It's a simple label, right? No, wrong!
Labels do matter much more than we can ever appreciate because they give significance, demarcate communities and tribes and emphasise history. They are tied up with personal identity and aspiration and actually dictate values, perception, beliefs, behaviour and sense of inclusion. Most of all, such labels decide commitment and loyalty because it is all about how the users perceive themselves, and wish to be addressed, not what other people want for them.
The first 'Americans' were White Europeans. That has always been acknowledged and understood. In a truly equal society, everyone would be thrilled to call themselves just 'Americans'. But no multicultural society is ever equal because minority communities are always at the mercy of the majority who control the politics, education, economics, media and national narrative and also set the public standards of acceptable behaviour for all. In short, majority communities have the POWER which ensures racism continues at a brisk pace because there will always be vested interests in keeping the status quo which mainly benefit the majority.
Empowerment and pride
This tends to leave minorities feeling impotent and inadequate, if they cannot share that power in any meaningful way. In fact, in such diverse groups, one is likely to be judged first on one's colour and use of language before one is treated with any form of inclusion or accorded any real respect. In the absence of such respect, empowerment and pride come from emphasising one's roots. Many minorities believe that, by losing the cultural labels, they would be swallowed up in the social context of being simply 'Americans' without actually getting access to the respect, trappings and lifestyle many White Americans enjoy, an invisibility which then makes their situation worse. It also means their own progress is able to be charted against that of the majority community.
For example, it has a more powerful effect on the self-esteem and aspirations of African Americans to read that Oprah Winfrey is the first Black female billionaire than if it was just the first female one. The fact that she is Black, in a world dominated by White billionaires, gives hope to people like her. So the African label in this sense has a very empowering and reassuring role.
The term 'American' for White Europeans was appropriate when they went to the USA because they were the first newcomers, but if the Native Americans were simply called 'Americans', we would miss out on the chance to actually acknowledge their heritage, to see their culture at first hand and to learn from it because people would naturally assume they were White. Adding the Black, Latino etc prefix to the term 'American' is thus a statement of identity and pride. It suggests everyone is proud to be American, but even prouder still of their heritage and roots. In the public domain, it also allows for monitoring the reflection of that multicultural community at every level in a more effective way.
Why I am a BIG fan of Barack Obama! Two inspiring videos
I know that I come from way across the Pond and I am also painfully aware that i cannot vote. But the more I see of this man, the more he stands out as a leader and a one-off. I was sent these two videos of Barack in action the day after his presumptive nomination and if anyone needed any convincing of the guy's uniqueness, sheer charisma and ability to lead, these videos say it all.
1. Addressing Staff and Volunteers at HQ
Immediately after his presumptive nomination, he was at HQ thanking the real people behind his success: the team that helped to get him there, and what great words he gave them. Just look at the hero worship on their faces. Look at the diversity, the joy, the commitment. These people are pretty awesome in their own way. With such a leader to inspire them, I am not surprised that they are so successful too.
Says Barack to his team, with obvious sincerity: "I owe thanks to you. I am grateful to you. And you inspire me".
Simply awesome and motivating.
2. Thank You, Hillary
While Hillary was playing tantrums and being mean, Barack Obama was here singing her praises and paying homage to his formidable opponent. And quite rightly too. Excellent address which shows his generosity, even-handedness and sense of purpose.
Regardless of what happens in the future, this man is here because it is his time. I don't think Hillary could have stopped History in the making, no matter what she did. I will certainly be watching this last leg of the journey with much interest.
Enjoy.
The Single Overriding Reason Why Hillary Clinton Cannot be the Vice-Presidential Running Mate
Imagine the scenario: Hillary has been chosen as Barack Obama's VP candidate. They are in a town hall debate with John McCain and his VP. Everything is going well until the question of security comes up. Barack is on the ball with how he can protect the country and work with the generals, etc etc, and Hillary is backing him all the way with everything he is saying, bright smile included.
Then someone innocently asks from the audience: "Mrs Clinton, that is not really true for Mr Obama, is it? You told us not long ago that John McCain was a better commander-in-chief than Barack Obama. Why should we believe you now?"
Why, indeed? Get out of that one, Hillary.
Throughout the nomination campaign, Hillary Clinton was so intent on winning at any cost, she forgot that she and Barack Obama were actually on the same side. While Barack behaved impeccably, in a statesmanlike way, not saying anything derogatory or pointedly about Clinton herself, or her competence, she laid into him whichever way she could, from whatever angle, and then came up with that priceless comment, a boon to Republicans all across America, that John McCain was a better president and protector. That lady did not foresee the consequences of her words for the Democrats, especially them becoming a rod for the Democrats' back.
To say your party rival is worse than your political opponent is truly catastrophic in any sense. She seems to have no respect for Barack Obama, no respect for the Democratic Party and what it stands for, yet would wish to be on the presidential ticket mainly through ambition and little else. If I vilified my rival to such an extent, I certainly would not wish to be his VP. How could I then take back all those inconsiderate things I said? And, if I cannot take them back, then I obviously meant them. And, if I meant them, how does that square with my integrity and desire to run alongside someone I clearly despise?
The problem with behaving badly in such a nomination contest, is that one tends to forget that one's words carry consequences further down the line. Barack Obama needs a vice president who believes in him, who respects his abilities and competence, who will not upstage him and, most important, who will act both publicly and privately in ways that suggest mutual purpose and alignment. In no way, shape or form can that apply to Hillary and Barack together. By denigrating a potential Democratic president in the eyes of the Republicans, purely for her own ends, she conclusively showed what she is like and also derogated herself in the process.
Being a vice president of the most powerful country in the world carries a lot of responsibility, integrity and accountability. It is not a game. Most important, it is about team work, both incumbents striding towards one national aim for the good of the country. Hillary Clinton killed her own chances of joining that team when she placed John McCain above Barack Obama. Anything else which followed in damage limitation would be sheer hypocrisy on her part.
So what if Barack Obama is flip-flopping? Who cares?
There has been a lot of talk lately of Barack Obama shifting his views on key issues like guns, Iraq and the death penalty. So what of it? The mark of an intelligent, caring, sharing human being is the ability to learn and, above all, to be flexible and willing to listen. The only person who takes the same unmoving stance throughout their life is a know-all, one who is stuck inside their own head, entrenched only in what they believe while hanging on to the past and using it to dictate the present.
Real leaders and thinkers have to do three important things to be effective in their leadership. They have to be flexible, they have to be prepared to compromise and they certainly have to make room for the unexpected. Leaders who become entrenched in their own beliefs, who do not listen to their people, who form unchanging opinions which remain stuck, despite evidence to the contrary, usually end up making the wrong decisions, being out of touch with reality and unable to deal with crises. They might have the 'experience' and unchanging beliefs, but they tend to be crap leaders, stuck in the same mode as change swirls around them.
Barack Obama is, first and foremost, a politician who wishes to be elected. But he also has to be realistic in how he plans to govern so that he takes as many of those voters with him as possible. Whatever change he has promised it doesn't come overnight. Real change takes many years, decades and even centuries, to change mindsets and undo old structures. Politicians often make promises there is no hope in hell of keeping not through deception, as such, but through ignorance and naivete of what really happens in that seat of power. Only the incumbent president knows the real nitty gritty of governing so it is pointless judging anyone before they get into office. Any newcomer would be talking hot air until they are actually installed in office. Their words are just window dressing for the real event, not to be taken as cast in stone. Their words give an insight into the person, but, as they are likely to change until the candidate is installed, words have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Politicians words indicate the direction, not the actual route to be taken. That usually reveals itself in office.
That is the only time to judge Barack, when he is the president, to see how he delivers and how that delivery matches up to his promises. Anything else is pie in the sky and part of the rhetoric of electioneering. As fallible humans we are all entitled to change our minds, especially when we have assessed the situation with more information and wish to act upon that. That's how we grow, develop and evolve. Changing opinions and making mistakes are part and parcel of that humanity.
I am more inclined to agree with Barack when he says:
"You're not going to agree with me on 100 percent of what I think. But don't assume that if I don't agree with you on something that it must be because I'm doing that politically. I may just disagree with you."
The mark of a real independent thinker.
Amen to that.
Why Barack Obama is so Popular
Increasingly, nationals who have criticised America in any way have been regarded by many as 'unpatriotic' or not loving America as they should, or being traitors to its values. But the mark of a great country is how much it can withstand criticism, learn from those voices of dissent and become even greater through the process. The United Kingdom is prone to acute dissent from its population. Someone, somewhere is always complaining, even if it is about the weather. Yet, far from being divisive, that has helped us to keep a sense of focus, a sense of perspective and fairness, to learn from our mistakes and become even stronger from them. Which is why Britain, despite its small size, continues to be very influential in the world. We tend to see the mote in our own eyes first before we care to see that of others.
America is one of the most blessed, and glorious places on earth, but by ignoring the consequences of its bad decisions or policies, like the effects of its gun laws, for example, its critics of those who dissent do it a great disservice in not appreciating the need for such contrary voices. Confidence, progress and appreciation do not come from ignorance and denial. They come from self belief, self knowledge and constant self-review.
There has been a lot of criticism of America lately, especially because of its invasion of Iraq. But it is not just about country bashing. It is about recognising what is wrong before one can address it and put it right, not just harping on the good points with heads firmly in the sand about the rest. No change can ever result from such ignorance of the facts. By ignoring the bad points in America and being in denial about them, like being an alcoholic, things merely get worse, not better.
With the war dragging on relentlessly, taking America's reputation and finances with it, people want something good and wholesome to believe in about their country, which is the only reason why Barack is so popular. It's not that he promises to be the best president delivering the earth. He merely promises a change from what is happening now and that is enough for the people to feel that something will be different. The main thing to remember about 'belief' is that it is primarily based on 'faith'. Without faith, there is no belief. Their faith should then help them to go beyond that belief to the actual reality, hopefully to be more tolerant of their society, to lessen the criticism and to achieve even more in the process.
We can never be truly objective about our life. Our background, values, culture, religion, beliefs, etc., will always interfere with that 'objectivity' to reflect our life experience, its effect upon us and the personal aspirations we have, especially if they are not being fulfilled! In effect, whether we like it or not, we are always slaves to our subconscious desires and expectations, no matter how much we might try to consciously mask them and pretend otherwise. Our wish to learn more about ourselves might give us an 'open mind' but it always opens so far and no more, until we feel uncomfortable with what we hear, then objectivity goes out the window! That is why it is so difficult to take criticisms.
One has to start from somewhere and the the important thing now is that Obama offers something different from the usual negative fare to galvanise the public and restore their faith in the political process and the country. Whatever the outcome when he gets to the White House, the main thing is that he would have served his purpose in restoring faith and belief in America at a time when it was sorely lacking, to enable the country to start the rebuilding process of itself by examining what it stands for and where it is heading.
Obama and Michelle Portrayed as Terrorists on the New Yorker cover: Is This Racist or Wot?
There is an awful lot wrong with the latest cover of the New Yorker which portrays the Obamas as terrorists residing in the White House and paying homage to Osama bin Laden while the American flag burns ominously in the cosy looking hearth. The fact that it was placed on their front cover was meant to be sensationalist and designed to attract maximum attention. Trying to bolster credibility, the New Yorker's press release said, in the most blase manner, that its cover: "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama's campaign", just like the scare tactics and misinformation they were using themselves, I suppose. They forgot to add that it was highly offensive, derogatory, biased and incredibly racist, unless we see a matching portrayal of John McCain and Cindy in una-bomber attire shortly, for example. After all, he was White.
The main question to ask about that cover is this one: Had the Obamas not been Black, would they have been portrayed in that offensive and derogatory way, no matter what point was being debated? Well, as I have yet to see a White politician in this election being presented in those openly racist terms, one has to assume that, no, they would not. In fact, John McCain appears to have been treated with a lot of dignity and respect, even when he is being criticised, which is what all politicians are entitled to, regardless of their colour. So one has to ask if this is the modern day revival of Jim Crow and symbolic media lynchings of Black public figures when fear stalks racist mindsets?
It is a very disturbing caricature primarily for two reasons:
First, the divisive message it gives out to all Americans that being Black, per se, is anti-American, anti security and pro-terrorist. That Black people are not bona-fide American citizens who also fear for their own safety, but are simply waiting to destroy the world of White America in the form of a pro-terrorist Black president. That is a very powerful, negative and racist message, as though only a White politician or president would be anti-terrorist.
Second, the one thing all Americans, and those watching keenly internationally, would hope for (speaking personally as a Brit and a great admirer of that country), is: whatever the outcome of this historic election, that it was fought fairly and squarely by all concerned, with all politicians treated equally.
But how is this fair to Obama and his wife? Two highly intelligent, qualified professionals who have given a lot to their communities, being depicted to the public in such fearful terms simply because of their colour? All the New Yorker has proven is that when the chips are down, racism lurks menacingly under the media psyche, a biased perspective that is prepared to use any cowardly means at their disposal to instill fear in the minds of ordinary Americans who simply desire a free choice of candidates without being influenced arbitrarily.
As to this cartoon being 'satire', that's the real laugh. It is completely out of context, it certainly does not make anyone laugh, except the racists who might agree with it, and it is depicting a threatening situation which not many Americans, White or Black, would wish to laugh at or find remotely funny. Satire is not about cherry picking certain people because of their colour - and certainly not a possible president of the United States - and using them as the butt of racist jokes. That is well below the belt and a very serious matter.
In reply to a concerned Obama supporter who expressed his hurt and distress, the cartoonist Barry Blitt said his drawing was "intended to appear preposterous and ridiculous". He added, "I cannot actually believe this cartoon, which was meant to mock the bigots and xenophobes who spread lies, will actually give them license."
Perhaps if it were placed somewhere else in the magazine with an appropriate article, in context, one could accept that amazing degree of naivete. But that response beggars belief.
Shame on the New Yorker for stooping to such gutter politics. Is it time for their readers and advertisers to ask if that is the kind of magazine they wish to support? It has certainly crossed an ethical line. One hopes that members of their audience and sponsors, who were offended by that blatant racist image, one which tarred all articulate Black people with the same innuendoes, will gradually decide what else to do with their hard earned cash when they have considered the implications and confronted that offensive racism for themselves.
Why Jesse Jackson Really Said the N-Word
There appears to have been a furore over Jesse Jackson's recent remarks relating to Barack Obama, accusing him of "talking down to black people" and telling the "niggers" "how to behave". But there is nothing so surprising about Mr Jackson's behaviour. Despite his apology, the only surprising thing for me was that it was actually said in public, while he was being interviewed, when anything is bound to be noticed. Whether that was intentional or not during the break, to get maximum coverage, one will never know, but his increasing resentment of Barack Obama is at last laid bare for all to see. Now there can be no illusions.
Jesse Jackson's behaviour was unacceptable but inevitable. This is a man whose presence dominated the Black community for years, who himself was dictatorial in telling them how they should think, act and behave, who lost out on being the first Black presidential nominee. Together with Al Sharpton, they were the terrible duo who could bring people into line, who could lay down the law, accuse someone of racism and knew it would stick, and draw an awful lot of attention to the causes they espoused through their public persona and entrusted authority. Until Barack Obama, the upstart, came on the scene and threatened to change all that. To move America from the old divisive ways of thinking, the old negative, narrow mindsets, the acceptance of low self worth, the submission to oppression and the lack of hope. Here was a young man who was not only speaking words people wanted to hear, but was also galvanising all sections of the community with his vision of hope and positivity. He was bound to create enemies among the old Black guard. Jackson perhaps thought that Barack would need him to garner the Black votes, but Obama immediately dethroned Jackson, refusing to ask his advice or publicly associate with him more than the necessary, making him obsolete and irrelevant at one stroke. Hell hath no fury like a man scorned.
There is really nothing worse to people in authority than a displacement of power, a shift in the hierarchy, and Jesse Jackson would have been very resentful of the movement Barack Obama has been slowly, but surely, engineering so successfully, and without his input. The man cannot do anything wrong, a fact that appears to have jettisoned old stalwarts like Jackson into the grieving process of their lost positions and influence. First, he was in denial about Obama and wouldn't back him. Now he is in the second stage of anger, a reaction that emphasises how far back in time and thought he is that the N-word slipped so easily from his lips with a venom that was unmistakably childish. Anyone who does not wish to hear the message will always believe they are being talked down to. But, as Eleanor Roosevelt famously said: No one can make you feel inferior without your permission. Talk of how Obama "would get his balls cut off" also hits at the heart of a man's power, his manhood: the surest way to debilitate and disable him. That crude form of verbal aggression is Jackson's way of feeling powerful, in control. He is still stuck back there, in the old world of his kind of aggressive politics and approach, the hypocritical one that sees him barely 18 months ago (27 November 2006) encouraging people not to use that awful word, while it is obviously still the best word in his armoury to show his contempt for Obama. Where is his credibility in that?
Jesse Jackson is obviously still a 'nigger' in his head, tragically appealing to others who perceive themselves as 'niggers' too, and still back there fighting yesterday's battles. Hence why he found it so easy to be so resentful, jealous and vindictive of the new boy on the block. The reaction to his remarks and condemnation of them would have surprised him. So watch his next predictable reactions as he continues though the stages of bereavement by trying to bargain (the apology), then depression as the truth hits home, being increasingly sidelined and ignored before his final acceptance that America is really in a new era and there is no going back to his 'nigger' age. It is time Black people really started taking some pride in themselves with a new mindset of hope and send such hypocritical and fossilised 'leaders' way into oblivion where they belong.
The Day The Republicans Lost The 2008 Presidential Election
Watching pictures of the very statesmanlike Barack Obama on his first overseas tour has not only been extremely uplifting and enlightening in the power of this man to win friends everywhere, to treat people with empathy and respect and to make his own impact on the hardest heart, but it suddenly brought unfavourable comparisons with John McCain. Up to now, I have tried meticulously, not to compare the two men because it is very easy to do so, if one is malicious. To begin with, there is nearly a thirty year gap between them. Being 60 myself, I couldn't care less about ageing itself. But I do care when people look old and, worse still, act it. And John McCain does both with gusto.
He is making huge geographical gaffes relating to foreign policy issues yet is trying to hold the moral high ground about being more experienced in dealing with such issues. Well, he and his aides must be squirming pretty badly every time they see the easy, affable and clearly successful pictures of Barack Obama looking every inch the Commander in Chief with such consummate ease. McCain challenged Barack to show what he was made of on foreign issues and got far more than he bargained for: a confident, competent politician who clearly relishes his interactive role as America's ambassador of goodwill. Looking at the winning smile, the confident body language and the ease with which he makes people feel welcome and valued, one cannot help but admire Obama and the asset he will be to America when he gets into the White House.
There is no hope in hell of the Republicans winning this election unless they change their nominee at the last minute for one simple basic rule of thumb: You never pitch two diametrically opposing candidates against each other. Where the comparison is too stark, the younger more vibrant one will win out every time. The same happened with the UK and the British elections 11 years ago - Tony Blair for Labour against William Hague for the Conservatives(Tories). Simply no contest. Labour came in with a landslide. The same in 2001 against Ian Duncan Smith. It didn't matter what new policies the Tories had, what great ideas they would put in place, the voters focused on the leaders, and the boring Tories with their old mindsets and approach were no match for the youthful, springy, handsome Blair. Women voted for him in droves. The same with David Cameron. While he was pitched against Tony Blair, there was hardly a change in fortune for the Tories, even though he too was a new broom and equally dishy. The minute the older and staid Gordon Brown took over, the Tories gradually climbed 12 points and has stayed there since.
We are in a televisual age now, where presentation and image are at least 50% of what is on offer, whether we like it or not. People are not just listening to the message anymore, they want the whole package: visual, emotional and practical. To pretend that how a person looks these days, sounds and acts do not matter is very silly. In today's blogging age where everyone has an opinion, voters want to feel good about the candidate, to empathise with him/her, to have a kind of eye-candy to cheer them in their dull moments. John McCain as eye-candy? Jeez. There is nothing wrong with having an older person running as a candidate but he must look and act youthful, must be ready to challenge his rival in all sorts of ways that he too can deliver and, above all, must also appeal to the 50% of the population who are not as political as the men but are silent and deadly with their voting patterns: women. John McCain, not surprisingly has a significant male following: 57% to 43% for women, whereas with Barack Obama it is almost the reverse: 60% female and 40% male. Another chilling statistic for Mccain is that currently his website gets only 3% Black traffic and 88% White, while Barack Obama's get 33% and 59% respectively. Which candidate has the broader appeal and is clearly attracting a mixed audience?
With Barack on top form, clearly liked by youngsters and women, he could be unstoppable. At the rate things are going, the day the Republicans lost this election is the day John McCain became the presumptive nominee against a virtual unknown. A youthful, intelligent, people person who makes McCain look really ancient and irrelevant. The Republicans need to learn that fighting current battles with yesterday's tools never work. Unless you are fighting like for like, there is no hope of winning hearts and minds because the disparity between the two candidates, as now, would be too great for people to appreciate or feel comfortable with. It is time the Republicans moved into the 21st century, especially in appreciating the way America is evolving . Above all, time for change in the outdated mindset of predominantly White, male perspectives which is clearly losing them a broad appeal, especially to women and minorities.
What's the real difference between Barack Obama and John McCain?
If anyone wants to see what separates Barack Obama from John McCain, why Obama is increasingly looking like a winner, while McCain looks so incompetent, and just over a few short minutes, this video tells it all .
McCain sounds outdated and repetitive, without adding anything of his own thoughts and policies on the issues, only focusing on Obama all the time. Whereas Obama clearly deals with the questions he was asked and did not give soundbytes for soundbytes sake. He stuck to his guns, regardless of how he might be perceived.
Who could be happy with McCain representing them as president of the USA? Unless they too are stuck back there in the politics of the past and denial! This man has clearly had his chips and should be quietly tethered out to grass. A truly awful performance. Katie Couric summed it up beautifully in her final question. McCain is really getting more frustrated with Obama's continuing impact, and is clearly not sure what to do about it. And, boy, is it showing now!
As the Daily Kos says with insight:
The anger and jealousy of John McCain is really kind of sad. He was the man who OWNED the media. He was the media darling and now he is lucky to get a word in edge wise.
Is this fair? In all honesty, no. But we are in a different time, different campaign and different candidate. Barack Obama is the first. Yes, first person of color who can seriously become the President of the United States.
Amen to that!
Two Simple But Essential Reasons Why Barack Obama Would Make a Fantastic President?
Sometimes the best things in life are the simplest and what we often take for granted, yet they are likely to make the biggest impact on others and their life quality. On his current successful trip abroad, Barack Obama is exhibiting those two aspects in abundance, which would have raised his stature tremendously among everyone at home, especially the doubters. One only has to look at how he was received by everyone, from world leaders to ordinary members of the military, to see how those elements were appreciated and admired.
The first reason is his obvious people skills. The man is like a sponge in dealing with people, mopping up their adulation and respect then reflecting it back upon them in triplicate to make them feel valued, wanted and inspired by his presence. He easily mirors others and loses himself in their presence which many aloof and detached leaders cannot do. He is not afraid of sending himself up either and people love that.
In essence, Senator Obama is an indisputable people person. He knows how to motivate others, to encourage and inspire them, and they can sense it a mile. Not everyone has the knack of confidently putting others at ease, welcoming them in a sincere manner, relating to them on their level and in their terms, sharing their joys and pain with understanding, being empathetic to their perspectives, generating so much excitement from them and eliciting such admiration and adulation. That is a rare gift indeed, and Barack Obama certainly possesses a lot of it, which should come in handy in calming jittery leaders and dealing with international crises.
The second and simplest reason is his SMILE. What an all embracing smile it is, ready to warm the hearts of everyone and he uses it generously and unstintingly. To be smiled at by Barack Obama, knowing that it is well meant and just for you, must be quite a feeling of being valued and appreciated. A smile speaks across borders, across barriers, across languages and cultures. One does not need words with any broad smile. It has a language all of its own. A great smile has the power to draw, to immerse, to calm, to reassure and to uplift anyone within its reach, and Barack Obama is blessed with one. More important, he knows how to flash it to his advantage too. Barack would have simply cheered a lot of people on his journey with his smile and genuine care for others. More than anything they might remember about his trip when it is all over, they will remember his warmth and smile on days when they might not have much to be happy about, and be thankful they experienced it.
No wonder the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, was so impressed with, and enamoured, of the Senator. When asked at a news conference what she thought of him, regarding his role as a future president, she said, "I would say that he is well-equipped -- physically, mentally and politically."
An awful lot of women - and men - across the world would certainly agree with her!
