Monday, May 28, 2007
Death of a President: My thoughts
Today I just watched the highly controversial Death of a President. This is the mock documentary that caused a lot of people to go crazy because it dealt with what would happen if George W. Bush was assasinated. First let me say that all that controversy was way overblown. In fact, this movie was very understated in its approach and how they dealt with the subject matter.
I won't say too much about the actual film because then it'd ruin the last 15 minutes or so but I will say that the concepts and idea that were brought forth were very credible (if a bit exaggerated) and it really did have the feel of a serious documentary. The idea that the FBI and other agencies would immediately look for islamic names and more or less trying to fit terrorism into the assasination is VERY plausible.
That whole scenario is quite scary and plausible. I mean, the whole idea of targetting one group of people and not doing a real investigation but rather finding someone you can pin down and then trying to make the evidence fit the suspect is something that goes on in police states and not in a democratic nation like America.
Anyways I urge people who are interested in "what ifs" and actually thinking about these kind of things to watch this movie. It isn't some crazy Left Wing propaganda piece and it certainly isn't a case of foreigners damning the United States. (the film was made by British film makers)
Give it a chance and watch it with an open mind. I think you'll come away from it with a lot to think about.
I won't say too much about the actual film because then it'd ruin the last 15 minutes or so but I will say that the concepts and idea that were brought forth were very credible (if a bit exaggerated) and it really did have the feel of a serious documentary. The idea that the FBI and other agencies would immediately look for islamic names and more or less trying to fit terrorism into the assasination is VERY plausible.
That whole scenario is quite scary and plausible. I mean, the whole idea of targetting one group of people and not doing a real investigation but rather finding someone you can pin down and then trying to make the evidence fit the suspect is something that goes on in police states and not in a democratic nation like America.
Anyways I urge people who are interested in "what ifs" and actually thinking about these kind of things to watch this movie. It isn't some crazy Left Wing propaganda piece and it certainly isn't a case of foreigners damning the United States. (the film was made by British film makers)
Give it a chance and watch it with an open mind. I think you'll come away from it with a lot to think about.
Friday, May 25, 2007
Obama Nation?
It's been a while and well, i'm just going to accept the fact that i'm never going to be very regular with this but I will try to post something more often then I am these days.
Anyways, I was perusing the net as i'm want to do and I came across a very good blog entry from conservative collumnist Andrew Sullivan who happened to attend a Barack Obama function the other day. In the blog entry Mr. Sullivan more or less expresses his amazement and consternation about what Barack Obama represents not only in the '08 election but for the whole Liberal vs. Conservative battle these days. it's a very good entry and I will quote a couple parts of it.
I have to agree with Sullivan up to a point here. I mostly agree with his opinion that Obama is an agent for change and yes, he's the most effective left wing American politician i've seen in my life. There's just something special about the way Obama has captured a large segment of America with his seemingly geniune nature and personality. Obama wraps his message around the core values of the Democratic party that has been lost over the years. He harkens back to a more positive and hopeful message that the Democrats have abandoned post Bill Clinton.
Well first of all I have to say that you can't exactly call JFK a liberal in the sense that it's being used today. JFK's foreign policy was quite muscular compared to the policies advocated by his Democratic successors in the White House or those who've run for president. Nonetheless the comparison to JFK is spot on from my viewpoint.
I, like many people first saw and paid attention to Barack Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention (Actually that's a bit of a fib. I did see an interview with Obama that week before he made the speech) and I was blown away by what I saw. Barrack Obama showed himself to be a man with some substance and one that seemed to represent the true values of the Democratic Party. In many ways he completely outshined John Kerry that week. If you remember the speech it was one brimming with hope and one that was a throwback to an era where patriotism and love of country hadn't been hijacked by any one party or ideology. My favourite excerpt of the speech made me believe that if JFK were alive he'd say pretty much the same thing. Here's that excerpt:
I heard that and just said "wow". In fact, it was the most entrancing and captivating thing i've heard in YEARS. That portion of the speech captured JFK's message of hope with meaning and had the feel of Martin Luther King at Washington DC making his "I have a Dream" speech.
But back to Andrew Sullivan's remark about how Obama may be the Reagan of the Left and will more or less smash conservative agenda in one election cycle. I have to agree with him there. Obama has the wind at his back. He's leading a way for change and a fresh new approach in DC. The similarities are somewhat eerie in that Reagan was a rising superstar who not only captured the grassroots but awakened a potentially strong main base of the party. This is exactly what Obama is on track to do. If you remember the 1st quarter donation report for the candidates you'd remember that Obama raised $25 million dollars and most of it came from the grassroots. It didn't come from the big money donors but rather most of the contributions came from people who gave 15 or 20 bucks a piece. Obama is now VERY close to gaining the mainstream of the party. It's going to take strong performances in debates and continued success in terms of bringing in a diverse support group but I think he can do it.
One last excerpt from Mr. Sullivan's blog shows the kind of message that Obama is trying to bring out there. The simple statement from Obama in this excerpt precisely shows that Obama is a different animal. It shows that he can point out differences while not being divisive
I firmly believe that the "this is not who we are" line will become a major theme if Obama gets the nomination. As Sullivan notes it's a powerful repudiation of the current state of affairs in American political life at the moment but it's said in a way that is inclusive to everyone and offers up the chance to wipe the slate clean of the muckety muck that has been part and parcel of the Bush administration in the last 6 or so years.
Here's the link to Mr. Sullivan's blog entry so you can get the full context: The Reagan of the Left?
Anyways, I was perusing the net as i'm want to do and I came across a very good blog entry from conservative collumnist Andrew Sullivan who happened to attend a Barack Obama function the other day. In the blog entry Mr. Sullivan more or less expresses his amazement and consternation about what Barack Obama represents not only in the '08 election but for the whole Liberal vs. Conservative battle these days. it's a very good entry and I will quote a couple parts of it.
This guy is a liberal. Make no mistake about that. He may, in fact, be the most effective liberal advocate I've heard in my lifetime. As a conservative, I think he could be absolutely lethal to what's left of the tradition of individualism, self-reliance, and small government that I find myself quixotically attached to. And as a simple observer, I really don't see what's stopping him from becoming the next president. The overwhelming first impression that you get - from the exhausted but vibrant stump speech, the diverse nature of the crowd, the swell of the various applause lines - is that this is the candidate for real change. He has what Reagan had in 1980 and Clinton had in 1992: the wind at his back. Sometimes, elections really do come down to a simple choice: change or more of the same?
I have to agree with Sullivan up to a point here. I mostly agree with his opinion that Obama is an agent for change and yes, he's the most effective left wing American politician i've seen in my life. There's just something special about the way Obama has captured a large segment of America with his seemingly geniune nature and personality. Obama wraps his message around the core values of the Democratic party that has been lost over the years. He harkens back to a more positive and hopeful message that the Democrats have abandoned post Bill Clinton.
From the content and structure of Obama's pitch to the base, it's also clear to me that whatever illusions I had about his small-c conservatism, he's a big government liberal with - for a liberal - the most attractive persona and best-developed arguments since JFK.
I fear he could do to conservatism what Reagan did to liberalism. And just as liberals deserved a shellacking in 1980, so do "conservatives" today. In the Bush era, they have shown their own contempt for their own tradition.
Well first of all I have to say that you can't exactly call JFK a liberal in the sense that it's being used today. JFK's foreign policy was quite muscular compared to the policies advocated by his Democratic successors in the White House or those who've run for president. Nonetheless the comparison to JFK is spot on from my viewpoint.
I, like many people first saw and paid attention to Barack Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention (Actually that's a bit of a fib. I did see an interview with Obama that week before he made the speech) and I was blown away by what I saw. Barrack Obama showed himself to be a man with some substance and one that seemed to represent the true values of the Democratic Party. In many ways he completely outshined John Kerry that week. If you remember the speech it was one brimming with hope and one that was a throwback to an era where patriotism and love of country hadn't been hijacked by any one party or ideology. My favourite excerpt of the speech made me believe that if JFK were alive he'd say pretty much the same thing. Here's that excerpt:
Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us -- the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of "anything goes." Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America -- there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America -- there’s the United States of America.
The pundits, the pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them, too. We worship an "awesome God" in the Blue States, and we don’t like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and yes, we’ve got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.
In the end -- In the end -- In the end, that’s what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or do we participate in a politics of hope?
I heard that and just said "wow". In fact, it was the most entrancing and captivating thing i've heard in YEARS. That portion of the speech captured JFK's message of hope with meaning and had the feel of Martin Luther King at Washington DC making his "I have a Dream" speech.
But back to Andrew Sullivan's remark about how Obama may be the Reagan of the Left and will more or less smash conservative agenda in one election cycle. I have to agree with him there. Obama has the wind at his back. He's leading a way for change and a fresh new approach in DC. The similarities are somewhat eerie in that Reagan was a rising superstar who not only captured the grassroots but awakened a potentially strong main base of the party. This is exactly what Obama is on track to do. If you remember the 1st quarter donation report for the candidates you'd remember that Obama raised $25 million dollars and most of it came from the grassroots. It didn't come from the big money donors but rather most of the contributions came from people who gave 15 or 20 bucks a piece. Obama is now VERY close to gaining the mainstream of the party. It's going to take strong performances in debates and continued success in terms of bringing in a diverse support group but I think he can do it.
One last excerpt from Mr. Sullivan's blog shows the kind of message that Obama is trying to bring out there. The simple statement from Obama in this excerpt precisely shows that Obama is a different animal. It shows that he can point out differences while not being divisive
At a couple of points in his speech, he used the phrase: "This is not who we are." I was struck by the power of those words. He was reasserting that America is much more than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and Gitmo and Abu Ghraib and Katrina and fear and obstinacy and isolation. And so he makes an argument for change in the language of restoration. The temperamental conservatives in America hear a form of patriotism; and the ideological liberals hear a note of radicalism. It's a powerful, unifying theme. He'd be smart to deepen and broaden it.
I firmly believe that the "this is not who we are" line will become a major theme if Obama gets the nomination. As Sullivan notes it's a powerful repudiation of the current state of affairs in American political life at the moment but it's said in a way that is inclusive to everyone and offers up the chance to wipe the slate clean of the muckety muck that has been part and parcel of the Bush administration in the last 6 or so years.
Here's the link to Mr. Sullivan's blog entry so you can get the full context: The Reagan of the Left?
