Youngsters and seniors
WASHINGTON DC: I wonder if my wife captured the essence of the Obama message to young people when - half-watching his victory address from the sofa - she mis-heard the chant "Yes we can!"
"Why are they shouting 'Next weekend!'?" she asked.
Rather a fitting rallying cry for a campaigned fuelled so much by cheery youngsters, with time on their hands and hookups political and personal on their minds.
On a weightier note: on what appears to be a highly significant endorsement, following the
"Kennedy confidantes told the Globe today that will appear with Obama and Kennedy's niece, Caroline Kennedy, at in Washington tomorrow to announce his support. That will be a potentially significant boost for Obama as he heads into a series of critical primaries on Super Tuesday, Feb 5."
Let's hope the senior senator steers clear of senior moments like
Hello, I'm 
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌý Post your comment
maybe your wife was having a senior moment when she mis-heard the cheers of the vast and furiously moved obama supporters! YES WE CAN and YES HE CAN!!!
I believe that the future president of USA has a tough job, i emphasize again,a tough job. In only four years...if he or she is elected again, then it would be maximum 8 years. In that short time, he or she must solve US economic problem that begin into recession since Bush administration.
Although i am not an American citizen,i wrote this not because i care for your country,honestly, but because your economy affects the rest of the world.
So, American people, choose the candidate WHO HAS CLEAR ABILITY AND CAPACITY to lead, not ability or capacity just speaking in front of the crowd. Believe in me...doing is much more harder than just talking! Don't be blind again like you did when you all chose Bush.
I'm a bit tired of the insinuation that only carefree youngsters support Obama. I'm a hard working, single mother of twins. I don't get any government assistance. My time is very important to me and I support Obama.
I thought Ted Kennedy had already decided to stay neutral in this contest? Obviously not. But Barack Obama being pictured with the two most prominent Kennedys will surely provide a huge boost to his campaign. Isn't Ted Kennedy regarded as THE icon of the Democratic Party?
And of course John McCain has just had a big endorsement having receieved the backing of Flordia's governor, Charlie Crist, which must feel like a slap in the face to Rudy Giuliani.
The reason that Obama is beating Clinton 3-0-1 in state delegate majorities is simple: Grassroots organizing, invented by Saul Alinsky...in Chicago in the 1960s. Obama beats opponents because voters who should not be there, are there on election day.
Here in Minnesota (88% white), Obama has five field offices to Clinton's one. Same in many Super Tuesday states. The CA Teachers Association rank and file rebelled today to stop a Clinton endorsement.
This is a street fight, and Chicago pols know how to knock you out.
Caroline's heartful, singular endorsement for Barack came to her -- and from her to us-- as a mother. It is good to hear. I am touched, because I remember Caroline's mother.
Not because she was fashionable, or because she nearly single-handedly saved Grand Central Station. I admired Jackie because she was -- real. She answered her own phone at Doubleday, and she was not figurehead. She edited some wonderful books, among them Joseph Campbell's The Power of Myth.
When John Kennedy died, when asked, "What now?" the young widow quoted Carlyle, saying one's first duty is that which lies closest to you. She was speaking of her children.
These deeper if less observed elements of Jackie's character are from an essay in Gloria Steinhem's 1983 bestseller, Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions, "Jackie Reconsidered." Character is different from celebrity and charisma, and is frequently absent in personality cults ... and in the Clintons' case, the personality cult of predatory power.
Justin mentions Dick Morris in a previous blog. While his skill at prognostication is dismal (in 2005 he predicted a Condoleeza v. Clinton contest) he is, after all the father of triangulation and Clinton architect. (The Clintons and Dick will patch things up again; they always do. In any case, 2008 marks thirty years of close association as both best friends and arch-enemies.)
I believe what Caroline is responding to in Obama, in his message and in his campaign is the absence of triangulation, a vapid if effective strategy akin to cock-fighting and chess. Pit opponents (and VOTERS) against each other and wedge between them, thus controlling, in a very twisted manner and if you can still call it that, the center of the board (party). Scolding (or still advising?) the Clintons from his New York Post column, Morris wonders why "her campaign professionals (including Bill) decided to stress experience, precisely the wrong message in a Democratic primary. Prematurely appealing to the center and abandoning the left, she fell between two chairs - not sufficiently centrist to win independents or liberal enough to attract Democrats."
Begging, absolutely starving for the question, who is Hillary? I just can't vote for someone with the supreme lack of imagination to have supported Nelson Rockefeller in 1968. If you think about it, Goldwater Girl to Neo-Dem Dame is a very short walk to the curb. Hillary worked against Jack in 1960 and against Bobby in 1968. Hillary has a lot of experience "triangulating," successful or not. The experience she is missing is having been a real Democrat. Even if Bill didn't inhale,he breathed some '60s air. Hillarywas a Goldwater Girl whose father casually used the "n" word until his death in the early 1990's. Some families talk this way. Some families don't. Some campaigns talk this way. Some campaigns don't.
A president like Caroline's father doesn't talk that way ... it divides the nation and is antithetical to the spirit and mission of the office. Caroline's uncle didn't talk that way and neither does Mr. Obama.
First--Regarding comment #2, the last paragraph, literally reeking of arrogance and condescension and dismissively categorizing Americans as ignorantly incapable of rational decision making---clearly defines why the American public votes for its own interests and dismisses the notion that we should be led around on a European leash for our own protection. The entire tone of the comment is wretched and insulting.
Secondly, as a Republican I can honestly say that I've never given so much thought and support to a candidate as I do Barak Obama. As with so many people I speak with, it's ABH---anyone but Hillary. Clinton is untrustworthy, vindictive, manipulative in dangerous extremes with a sinister ability to fashion the "truth" out of a moment in passing. To that end, if a Republican cannot win the White House, Obama with his candor, fresh ideas and determined agenda for change would be acceptable for me. While much of the country beyond the East Coast does not take Ted Kennedy seriously, I do hope his endorsement of Obama propels the candidate forward.
Although Webb's blog here hasn't taken this approach, I see elsewhere on the Ö÷²¥´óÐã website that analysis of Obama's victory in SC emphasises a 'polarised' or deeply divided electorate.
how ironic (and how frustrating for Obama's team) that one candidate who has made repeated and seeming sincere attempts to run as unifying candidate (thus getting brick bats for not being "black enough") still sees his convincing win characterised as something somehow negative.
Sometimes, you just cannot win -- even when you win. And I'd put money on it that the Billary campaign will make this innuedo part of its approach, especially in racially mixed states such as NY and Calif.
Justin continues to suggest the Obama campaign is lightweight or in some way laughable. Individual voters, of any ethnic background, will surely decide for themselves who they think is fit. It seems Obama had a good proportion of white Democrats voting for him in South Carolina. Why not more in other States? Latinos likewise.
Re comment 7, first sentence, I can understand the vitriol, which seems to epitomise a greater sense of the so called anti-american sensibilitiy.
As a european I am particularly interested in who becomes the next president of the United States of America, those combines states have an overwhelming influence on my future. Our governments are inextricably linked to the economy of the USA, the British foriegn policy is chained to the USA and her presidential preferences. "European leash", I think not. Having said all that, is there some way this damaging void of misunderstanding can be changed? Neither side of the ocean seems to appreciate fully the problems of the other. Perhaps it is for Justin and his fellow reporters of all countries to focus on simple unopinionated truths and leave the readers, listeners, to decide their preferences.
I have been enjoying this blog as an American in Britain to Justin's Briton in America, but also for its Ö÷²¥´óÐã punditry as opposed to the perspective of the US media.
I have to say, however, that I am becoming increasingly disillusioned with how quickly Justin has jumped onto the tacitly anti-Obama bandwagon. Dismissing Obama's win in SC as 'racial' or indeed trying to imply that his success is due only in part to mistakes on the side of the Clintons (I use the plural purposely) is not only unfair and unsportsmanlike, but as deeply irresponsible as any of the American media have been behaving. If this campaign has shown us ANYthing it has shown that pundits apparently know as little as politicians about how voters (or as I prefer to think of them, people) will think or behave. All of the pundits are so deeply immersed in the behind-the-scenes of campaigning that objectivity is clearly impossible, but could they please try and exercise some restraint and "chill"? If you personally support Hillary, fine, but please back the hell off of everyone elses decision-making time and territory; it is my right to be educated by the media but not unduly influenced. To be honest, the media outlets, commentators and bloggers (your fine self included, Justin) are making colossal jackasses of themselves, one and all, by tripping over eachother to be the first to gossip, conjecture and bitch.
And finally, I would just like to reiterate the disdain expressed above at No. 2's comments: the voting population of America is showing a great deal of dignity under the global microscope right now. They are acting as engaged, informed and responsible citizens, but most of all they are showcasing the time-honoured diversity of opinion that America has always been proud of, even if the world often forgets. They did not 'all' elect Bush, and they will not 'all' elect November's winner, but they will vote and honour the democratic privilege that entails. I have found that British opinion is not always or even often ill-informed but it IS always ill-equipped to cast the first stone. Try taking a very good look at the voting habits of your own democracy, no.2, before you cast any aspersions on ours.
Even as a non-American, the comment of #2 makes me bristle with annoyance and more. Hery, you are of course entitled to your views, but if you "don't care for America" it would be more polite and civil not to declare that before proceding to lecture on what you think Americans should do. Dear Americans, please don't assume No.2 speaks for Europe - if s/he comes from Europe; indeed, I doubt anyone British would assume the mantle of such arrogance!
As both Matt Frei, Justin Webb and, if I can include myself in such company, have found is that spending time in the USA is a thrilling and live-enhancing experience. For me it was the friendliness and optimism that "tomorrow will be a better day" that was striking; oh... and the baseball! Indeed - the land of the free and the home of the brave!
The Ö÷²¥´óÐã portrays a very different position to other mainstream (non US-based) media outlets in describing the recent events in South Carolina. In fact, after reading about 'Obamonster's' victory on the Ö÷²¥´óÐã, one can be forgiven for thinking it is largely a symbolic win with minor consequences, going so far as to claim that the victory was slightly above par
The Economist, on the other hand, describes his win in SC as a 'trouncing'. In fact The Economist rightly proclaims that, "No candidate, Republican or Democrat, has won by such a margin in any seriously contested primary state of this campaign."
Like Billary, the Ö÷²¥´óÐã doesn’t seem too keen on believing Obama really is a serious contender – a fairy tale even? Report the facts, offer insights and be balanced.
I suppose I can take solace in the fact that I don’t rely on solely US-based sources for my current events (despite being a citizen and living in the US).
Watching Barack Obama's unctuous speech following his endorsement by the three Kennedys one would have thought that Teddy is a paragon of all the virtues. Obama colorfully described the Senator as the "Lion of the Senate" and the banner carrier for American workers. When I was working, I cannot recall benefiting from any legislation that Teddy got through the Senate. And a paragon he ain't.
I am reminded of the picture of an awestruck young Bill Clinton shaking the hand of his idol JFK. Given the fact that JFK's youngest brother has now endorsed the only remaining threat to his wife's nomination, I wonder what Bill is thinking now.
To #2:
I vote not because I care about your country, but because I care about the future of my own.
Although my dull wit, unrefined accent, and low intelligence can use all the help they can get, I must respectfully pass on your offer of "sage advice." Of course, I will take your concerns into consideration when I make my way to the voting booths next week, please understand that Americans are not completely without value, despite what it may seem! They must be accounted for!
The reason you see so many "energetic, young folks" supporting Obama is because they, not your bank account, will inherit the mess we have created. Right now, the future is a very bleak place, but there is a glimmer of hope that we can change this dark regime. A vote for Hilary is not a vote for regime change.
#2
While this is incredibly old hat, i feel compelled to note that the American majority did not in fact choose Bush.
Justin exposes a lack of openness and a failure of understanding on what is happening here. As a Brit currently in America watching Obama truly engage the possibility that the US is a place that can achieve transformation if it truly unites and believes in itself, I am left wondering whether such idealism, authenticity and integrity can survive our pedestrian, reductionist, entitlement driven mediocrity in the UK. Justin appears to just be a regular Brit who triumphs on cynicism and lack of imagination. Go on Justin laugh at those of us who dare dream and keep living your nightmare eventually if lucky you will turn into another John Humphries a bitter old man depressing everyone's day with pessimistic commentary. Only in the UK can such a man wake people up in the morning.
As for Obama it is to the credit of a cross section of the US and an increasing chorus across the world that they can see the chance to create historic change. If only what we all get is Yes I can ,then it is better than living on nothing is possible. Other than a reality in which a few hold the dreams of the plenty as a prisoner of their intellectual laziness and a desire for control. i am truly tired of the baby boomers and their sixties addiction, their arrogance that their generation is the only one that matters. The only one that is capable of transforming the politics and direction of people. It is up to the rest of us to stand up not just in the US but across the world for a new dialogue and engagement. Obama 2008 is only the beginning this generation too must make its mark. Eventually Justin Webb will not even be a footnote in the history of what is emerging.
As an american(african american)I view the blogs as a live cartoon...you must also. American voters are used to the politics. Let me educate you...all states won't vote until November. We(all) will only vote on either Clinton vs. Mccain/Edwards vs. Romney/Obama vs Mccain etc...The caucasus and primaries are voting now(They will narrow it down to one person). They decide who goes to the large caucus(Dem or Repu)then we vote.The back and forth about Clinton vs Obama doesn't matter if your not a delegate.
Perhaps you missed on important point.
While we breath we hope, I hope those in Britain haven't forgotten what it takes to change.
Incredibly patronizing. As well as ignorant. "Those youngsters, what with all of their hook-ups, and free time, and cheeriness!" You dont know me, nor my political motivations. Please dont presume that everyone of my generation can be so neatly pigeon-holed into the various gross generalizations that media-outlets spoon-feed you. (This young Obama supporter is hungry for change, for no apparent reason! This one here is tired of "old politics as usual" and all the "Washington fuddy-duddies!") Nor should you blindly discount the importance of a contemporary politician that excites and motivates the below 30 demo to become involved in government. And restores their faith in the political process. Especially in the wake of the "legacy" of the current administration. To my understanding, its an energized, informed, passionate grass roots out-reach, no matter what the age-range of the participants, that is, at least SOME what important to this great and on-going experiment we call Democracy. I may, of course, be mistaken. Or perhaps Ive misread your words, in that absence of tone that typed content can have. Perhaps that was an attempt at...what is it called? Oh, yes. Humor. Well, in any case, no matter what the intention, Ill leave you to your "weightier notes".
re#14: Unctuous? For saying he was humbled to receive the Kenedy's support? I suppose he should have thrown their endorsement back in their faces do avoid appearing 'unctuous',right?! Anyway, keep it up Justin, you Obamaniac!
I can understand why American ire is provoked by the comments of the second poster (are you in cahoots with Dr Evil Number 2?). My own experience however, is that any opinions expressed by an outsider, even if they demonstrate a positive view of the USA, too easily unleash an aggressively defensive reaction from some quarters.
A sizeable number of Americans find it difficult to grasp that this campaign particularly, is seen as tremendously important not only for the future of America but for all of our futures. Some of you will say that you don't care what the rest of the world thinks, but you will never the less be aware of how the Bush presidency has damaged the reputation of the US worldwide.
Bush is not representative of every American of course (even if some idiots seem to think so). And not all Americans resent European interest and commentary on their election (or else you wouldn't be coming to a Ö÷²¥´óÐã blog I imagine). But neither is Number 2 demonstrating a European wide arrogance and condescension toward the USA.
Many of us, like many of you, just care too much.
(ps. I agree with comments that suggest that Justin Webb is doing a poor job of hiding his support for Hillary Clinton. It's a shame that he can't grasp that the Obama impact is about far more than sound bites and youthful enthusiasm)
I wonder is it just my particular bias but I cannot abide listening to Barack Obama. I find his oratory particularly preachy. In fact, I can safely say I can never really understand a word he says because it is couched in a style of delivery that positions in firmly in church and not state. But I find it quite interesting also and wonder whether this is a product of geography?
What a stellar one-sided commentary from the pinched lips of a cornered Clinton Dynasty supporter! While I understand it can be fun to generalize Barack's constituents as hormone-motivated kiddies, your commentary lacks some important details. Obama's campaign has the MOST individual financial contributors of any candidate in this election. The seeds of a successful White House run are being sown and your seemingly distant, condescending commentary is way off the mark. Why not any quips about Hillary-loving baby boomers wetting their Depends adult diapers with news of the NY Times endorsement? Left to the aging, bitter tongues of baby boomers, the Obama campaign will continue to be irresponsibly covered as a giddy parade of youngsters. Yet I understand that the ever-humorous field of American politics lends itself well to jeers and jabs, sometimes much more personal than factual.
Sharron @ #21:
Not geography, I think - his speaking style (to me) borrows a lot from the preaching style of the African-American church (which basically was the center of political life for African-Americans through the 1960s and 1970s); it's offputting if you don't recognize that, I think. It's a very effective style when combined with his general themes, but it's also one that can indeed be offputting to more secular audiences - such as most Europeans - who aren't used to hearing the style of speech.
Re No. 19: I see No. 21 found Obama's speech, a nauseatingly flowery acceptance of the Kennedy endorsement, "preachy". On reflection, it does seem to me that Obama's delivery is reminiscent of some of those strident TV evangelists who infest the air waves with their rhetoric.
If, heaven forbid, I was a Democrat, I would agree that Obama is by far the best choice for the liberals who want to dump the tax cuts and raid our wallets for more give-away programs.
What critics of Obama seem to constantly miss about the man is his ability to motivate people, to work together, and for him. Many of those who came out and caucused for him in Iowa, both young and old, black and white, Republican and Dem, had never caucused in their lives. Is that not the beginning of Unity? Is that not the beginning of Change? Positive Change, to be precise. Is this not his campaign promise that he has already started to deliver on? He doesn't claim to have all the answers, but he genuinely believes that if he gets people to work together that we can actually solve problems. If he can actually motivate the normally apathetic and unite Dem and Repub (many who didn't vote for him can't find much to dislike about him) voters don't you think he's got a genuine shot of making it happen in the Federal government, especially if he's got a high approval rating and Reps and Senators who want to be re-elected.
What was really silly about Clinton's LBJ/MLK statments wasn't just that she demeaned the importance of one of the greatest American's of all time, it's that yet again the Clinton's are completely missing the point. LBJ was certainly brave for the bill he passed, but ultimately nothing would have changed if MLK wouldn't have motivated people way before LBJ and way after his assasination.
If the ability to create unity, my friends, is not positive change, if that is more shallow than the bipartisan bickering that the Clinton's have accumulated and seeminly searched for, than I clearly do not understand my goverments three branch checks and balance system.
Maybe it's worth noting those "youngsters" are not young forever and that their experiences will form their opinions in the future just as it does for all us old geezers who seem to think we know everything. I found this interesting:
Well, Justin, it feels just great to be stereotyped as a crazy kid too interested in my personal "hook ups" to think of politics as anything more than a diversion. It also feels great to know that this is the attitude that many of the older generations take towards those who will inherit their country as well as pay for their social security. I have a job, am a full time student, and somehow remain reasonably politically informed. I also have friends. No, I'm not some kind of weird exception.
While I understand numbers 2 and 20 are worried about how our elections will effect their economies as well as the US reputation, number 20's assertion that most Americans fail to "grasp" this sense of global importance is still a bit elitist. There's no way to know that definitively, and it's still a baseless claim. Number 2 has already been dealt with, so I won't even go there.
This illustrates a principle reason I support Obama. I want the rest of the world to hate us less. I understand the negative sentiments, and I'd really like to live in a world where maybe Europe didn't despise us. The United States needs a new face to represent it so that our reputation can be at least a little bit better.
I may just be some "youngster" with "time on my hands," but hey; my vote counts as much as yours.
Yeah...
I'll try not to take offense at Mr. Webb's insinuation that the bulk of Obama's support comes from those too occupied with FaceBook and, "That cute guuuy...who lives in the apartment down the haaalll..." to wrap their brains around more weighty matters.
I am, in fact, comfortably under 30, but I am also a mother to two young children and the wife to a deployed US Serviceman. On that, I actually have very little "free time" on my hands given my matter-of-fact 15 months of imposed single parenthood, and I certainly don't have time for hook-ups.
A good deal of my energy is expended upon questions such as:
* Has my husband survived the flight back up to FOB Warrior from Anaconda?
* How _will_ we afford health care if/when my husband chooses to leave the armed forces?
And my personal, though perhaps fleeting, favorite:
* What can I do to lend my support to the candidate who seems the best enabled to unify and enliven a good portion of America, both communicate and demonstrate our _true_ values to the global community, and direct and fortify citizens and government staff to tackle and overcome the myriad problems facing our Republic?
Like others who have commented, I object to the insinuation that a lot of Obama's young supporters are out for the romantic connection as well. That strikes me as on the same level as some of the TV ads in between football plays. Firstly, I'm a 64 year old with a family at home who are proud that I've campaigned for Obama both in Lebanon, NH and Myrtle Beach/Conway, SC. Secondly, every single kid I've met has been committed and absolutely focussed on the campaign at hand. And I've met plenty. Perhaps Mr. Webb has forgotten what it was like to work with a team of enthusiastic people dedicated to a higher cause - who offer high 5's at little triumphs, hug the stranger they have just canvassed with, and who dine together on coffee and donuts for adrenaline strength not romantic hookup. That remark of his was a cheap shot. Of course, that could have been the way he personally approached that sort of experience. Go Obama '08 !
What a condescending attitude you have towards young voters, Mr. Webb. They are not merely "cheery youngsters, with time on their hands and hookups political and personal on their minds" -- they are every bit as important in this election as any other group of voters. The fact that young people are actually getting excited about an election is a wonderful sign, especially since young people are usually dismissed as being apathetic about politics. Young people can be every bit as intelligent and informed as older voters -- the fact that you seem to think this impossible says more about yourself than it does about them.
Young people are not afraid of change, and that is why they are enthusiastic about Obama. I am a young Canadian and I am hoping for Obama to become the next President. He will be a breath of fresh air for a very disillusioned nation, which has grown weary of war and polarized politics.
Fellow Posters,
Don't be so overly sensitive ... in fact, shared politics is a great basis for a relationship, unless, of course, you're James Carville and Mary Matlin, in which case you play hesedshesed on Sunday morning news shows.
The political is the personal ... unless you're a Bolshevik.