Barack Obama has "it" and I am so excited for the future.
I just got back from Obama's first visit to the Pacific Northwest since becoming an official candidate — and at this point, the front-runner — and he was all I hoped he would be in that venue. I already know he is intelligent and literate; not just that he's written two books, but that he's written books that are interesting, compelling, and just plain good reads. I know he is dedicated to the issues he represents. He's served his community as an activist, a teacher and a state representative. He didn't turn his Harvard law degree into big bucks; he sought ways to continue his public service.
These things I knew. I committed to his campaign after reading "The Audacity of Hope," and everything I've heard him say since has reaffirmed that my decision was the right one. But I had not seen him in person, and after having missed on Howard Dean's visits to the Northwest four years ago, I didn't want that to happen again. I wanted to see and experience for myself what there is about Barack Obama that makes him such a compelling candidate.
And there simply is no way to explain it other than to say he has "it" — charisma, a calm presence before a screaming crowd, a command of his message, and a delivery that while undeniably practiced comes across as if he's speaking extemporaneously. The speech he's probably given now dozens of times sounds fresh because it's real. Obama is saying what he truly believes, and that's what comes across and is exciting.
In 1988, I was part of the student government at PSU, and I got to sit on stage when Jesse Jackson came for a GOTV rally. It was late in the campaign, and he had been going all over the country speaking two, three, four or more times a day — just as we saw from Howard Dean in 2004 as he worked tirelessly for Kerry. It was an amazing honor to be so near this great man, and yet his speech started so tired, so obviously rote. But then the magic happened. As he got deeper into the words he had repeated for weeks, the meaning emerged. Not only did it touch the full hall, it touched Jackson. The power and passion that makes him one of America's great orators filled his entire being, and the speech ended with as triumphant a ringing as any I have ever heard. It's still one of my most cherished experiences.
This is the passion and belief Barack Obama brings to every speech. While not quite at Jesse Jackson's level (few are), his own personality comes through brilliantly. What he has honed through practice and repititon gives him the ease and confidence to let what's in his heart flow out. That's what I wanted to experience, and I wasn't disappointed.
If I wanted a wonk for president, there are many good ones out there. There are experience, competent public servants. That are many Democrats who share my beliefs and are more in keeping with my left coast progressive politics than even Obama. But there is no one in the nation right now who can inspire hope as can Barack Obama. Four years ago, Howard Dean opened the door by preaching this great truth that Obama has taken to heart: "You have the power!" The crowd in Seattle today responded with joy to his words and his presence.
Let's get him to Oregon soon. The people of our state need a chance to meet the next president in person, too.
(And for more opportunity to talk about the campaign and what we can do in Oregon, come visit OregonforObama.net. Sign up to blog, join in a forum, or read and listen to more reasons why Barack Obama can, and will, be our next president.)
|
June 1, 2007 |
T.A. Barnhart
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: George Seldes | Jun 2, 2007 1:09:51 AM
Obama's for coal-to-liquids (the nazi method of making liquid fuels) in a big way. That's like pouring gasoline all over yourself and playing with matches. That's not "it," that's crazy.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Jun 2, 2007 2:28:27 AM
Ha, ha, ha.... The "nazi method of making liquid fuels". There's a surefire way to eliminate any discussion of a particular technology.
I'm an Edwards supporter, but Obama's support of coal liquefaction is a fine thing. This is the idea, previously discussed here at BlueO, supported most of all by Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-MT).
It's not a cure-all. It's a 40-year bridge to the hydrogen future. There's enough coal in Montana and Wyoming to create enough gasoline for 40 years.
The only question - and its an open one - is whether the CO2 produced can be safely, securely, and efficiently sequestered underground. Both Schweitzer and Obama support coal liquefaction ONLY if CO2 sequestration is plausible.
If you care about ending the war in Iraq, avoiding war in Iran and Saudi Arabia, and putting America on a path to energy independence... then the question becomes, what do we do now? Knowing that hydrogen is about 30-40 years away, and knowing that we don't have that long to wait, what do we do know?
In a perfect universe, coal liquefaction would be easily dismissed. But in this one, it might be the only option in the next few decades to make America immediately energy independent.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Jun 2, 2007 2:29:34 AM
Typo... "what do we do know?" should be "what do we do now?"
Posted by: Eric Sundwall | Jun 2, 2007 5:06:17 AM
Obama is rattling off a typical statist message. Let government cure the ills of society. Universal health care and independent energy are false hopes. Market mechanisms and individual choice will always create opportunities, choice and ultimately fairness. The message is flawed however it's packaged. There is only one major party candidate who understands this and voted against the 'war'. Dr. Paul.
Posted by: PeteJacobsen | Jun 2, 2007 7:03:15 AM
The Coal liquification issue is what keeps me from supporting Obama. My first concern this election is global warming, and coal liquification is bad, bad, bad, whether or not the carbon is captured and stored.
I've read that the support for coal is in response to the southern Illinois coal business. If so, is it really that different from saying we won't do Kyoto because it might be bad for business? I really hope he will take a good look at this issue and change his stance. In the mean time, Edwards seems to get this.
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Jun 2, 2007 8:21:36 AM
when Obama speaks of government, he uses the word "we" and not "them". and after he speaks of government, he tells us that government alone is not enough. that's why i started with what Dean said four years -- "You have the power!" -- because i believe Obama has inherited that mantle: govt can be a good representative of us, but we are the ones who have the power, and the responsibility, to make sure those good things get done.
and Kucinich voted against the war. he's more of a major candidate than Ron Paul who has been at this for nearly 30 years, back since his days as Libertarian Party nominee when he was promoting an anti-democracy elitist message (which i heard in person at PSU).
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Jun 2, 2007 9:37:37 AM
When TA Barnhart and Jack Bogdanski agree on a candidate, you've got someone with broad appeal. Obama's the one!
(And you know, you don't need to limit the German-invented Fischer-Tropsch to the Nazis--Apartheid South Africa used it, too! Both countries also used the internal-combustion engine! And electricity! Technologies have no ideology, ideologues do.)
Posted by: Charlie Burr | Jun 2, 2007 9:48:41 AM
Excellent piece, T.A. My wife and I saw Obama in Tampa a month ago and were extremely impressed. We're now enthusiastic supporters and eager to help here too.
Posted by: Blue Dog Oregon (Jim) | Jun 2, 2007 10:14:32 AM
I like Barack...I like him alot. But where is the evidence that he is not only the most attractive candidate, but the one most likely to come out on top? He consistently trails Hillary Clinton by double digits, especially in Iowa and New Hampshire (to my chagrin).
I think he has great ideas...I just don't see how he wins.
Jim - a centrist democrat in Oregon
http://bluedogoregon.blogspot.com
Posted by: Dan E. | Jun 2, 2007 11:15:11 AM
Geez, Todd...try not to get so excited so soon.
"Cleanup on Aisle 10!"
Posted by: jallen | Jun 2, 2007 11:19:38 AM
Obama looks good, he's my second real choice (real because Dodd's going nowhere and Gore isn't in), but first of all, he's not the frontrunner as he only leads in Illinois, secondly Jesse Jackson is more of a populist, like John Edwards, while Barack doesn't seem like much of a populist at all (at least he doesn't to this populist), so naturally his speaking style should be different.
Posted by: nutmeg | Jun 2, 2007 11:26:26 AM
Obama has certainly caught the attention of many. Does he have the staying power needed to go the distance. This is a marathon; not a sprint as Dean discovered.
Liquifaction is not a new technology. It is, however one that has spent the past 30 years searching for a market. If it can be economical and environmentally perfected, then why be against it?
Posted by: jallen | Jun 2, 2007 11:40:21 AM
Oh, I forgot to say something about coal liquification. It isn't a long-term prospect, so I don't see why we should invest in something that would put a lot more carbon into the air then something that wouldn't. Despite what Kari said, we actually don't have that long a supply of coal. China currently is building coal-fired plants at an unprecedented rate, but indications are that they'll peak in coal production in the next 10-15 years, although they ar one of the biggest producers (and users) of coal today. If the world has a heavier demand for coal, and China will soon be running out, and we keep increasing our own demand by building new "clean coal" plants, and going in the direction of gasification and liquification, then we will likely peak in coal production production in the next 30-40 years. In short, we'll face the same problem with coal that we face with oil, except it's worse for the environment.
As well, I just read about some new breakthrough with hydrogen, which I don't remember any details about (except something about aluminum), but which made me less skeptical about it, and more hopeful.
Posted by: Terry | Jun 2, 2007 11:52:38 AM
If you want to end "the war in Iraq" and avoid "war in Iran", then vote Kucinich. Or Edwards. If you want national health care, vote Edwards. Obama may have "charisma", but on the issues he's squishy.
Too political, one might say, and too quick to pander to the powers --like the Israel lobby-- that might further his electoral prospects.
Posted by: jallen | Jun 2, 2007 12:12:27 PM
Well, I was wrong, I can't say that we will peak in coal production in the next 30-40 years, but it's likely the world will peak in the next few decades. I've been trying to link to this, but it hasn't een letting me make a neat link, so I'll just post the URL:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/13/151248/673
Posted by: Stacey Dycus | Jun 2, 2007 1:42:48 PM
I saw Obama back in early August of 2004 at an ACT conference in Ohio - he was amazing, I admit I teared up when he talked about his background as a community organizer and the power we help people find by organizing them.
I'm from Springfield IL and my folks still live there-they are Republicans (my dad fiscal, my mom social). The both voted for Obama, "That other guy (Keyes) is crazy" my dad said. My mom (who is not political at all or even a regular voter) stood in the cold for hours in February to see Obama announce his run for President. He is the first candidate she has volunteered for, donated to, or even been excited about.
Months ago, I asked her what positions she agreed with him on and she replied, "I don't know much about his positions, but I trust him because you can tell he is genuine and sincere and loves his mother, who has passed. She raised him right."
A former smoker, she wasn't even upset to learn about his ciagrette habit, "Everyone has a vice, at least you know what his is."
If Obama can get my non-political mom involved, he's special in my book. That said, my dream ticket is Gore/ Obama. And yes, I still think Gore can get in- his message is "not planning a run at this time" and he hasn't ruled it out. He can beat Thompson or anyone.
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Jun 2, 2007 6:01:08 PM
as a deaniac with memories of the last election, you might think i'd be more "temperate" about Obama. but i know that we are going to have to go thru the same kind of insane attacks that Dean faced -- Howard Dean, moderate governor of moderate Vermont, attacked as a rabid radical of the farthest left. the crap that will be thrown at Obama will be intense, and we have to be ready for it (as do all the Dems). i think that a clear-eyed appraisal of our candidates on the issues married with as much energy and passion as we can muster will carry us through the coming shit storms.
and thanks for the anecdote, Stacey. what your mom feels is the core of Obama's appeal. (and you did tell your mom he has quit smoking, right?)
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Jun 2, 2007 6:39:20 PM
Universal health care and independent energy are false hopes. Market mechanisms and individual choice will always create opportunities, choice and ultimately fairness.
France has universal health care and was rated No. 1 for overall health care by the World Health Organization in 2000. Little Andorra was second. The United States with its "market mechanisms and individual choice" was 37th, followed by embargoed Cuba at 38th. Was it "individual choice" that is responsible for our paying twice as much for health care as other developed countries?
Re Obama: I wonder if warmonger Joe Lieberman will return the favor and support Obama as Obama supported him against anti-war Ned Lamont. I would guess that if Obama will support a war against Iran, Lieberman will be happy to give him a helping, if bloody, hand.
Posted by: Chuck Butcher | Jun 2, 2007 7:50:06 PM
I really don't much care for Obamma's vote on the Bankruptsy Bill, that was one elitist POS on the neck of those who have little. One has to wonder exactly whose interest that vote was in? TA?
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Jun 2, 2007 8:47:37 PM
It looks like the bankruptcy bill was voted on before Obama was in the senate.
Posted by: Matthew Sutton | Jun 2, 2007 9:35:49 PM
Well my 9 year old son and I made an impromptu 7 hour drive up to Seattle from Southern Oregon for the event. We checked out Mount St. Helens on the way up, but even more amazing was watching Barack connect with the audience of approximately 5,000. He brought the house down! I was amazed at how "on fire" he was after wisking in from Nevada the same day.
He reminded us of how great America is and how many major major problems our Country has overcome when we have pulled together. He inspired us to pull together on Iraq, healthcare, energy, education, the environment and the other major issues of our day. "We can do that!" Here's hoping we can get his message out to the rest of America!
Thank you Barack for an amazing experience that we will never forget!
Now a few comments on some of your comments above.
No Wonk? That's what I thought until I saw him do a town hall event. I thought he was just an inspiring speaker. Wrong. He has an amazing grasp of the issues and data, and an ability to talk about it in a very direct and soft spoken way.
You don't see how he'll win? Take a look at the latest Zogby "head to head" poll on the Zogby website. My recollection is that according to the poll, he is the only Dem that a majority of people say they would vote for over the major Republican candidates. He just doesn't have the baggage that the other candidates have. I don't see how they will win.
Posted by: jallen | Jun 2, 2007 9:47:17 PM
Bill Bodden- the bankruptcy bill came up many times, in many sessions, in many incarnations. When it came up in 2005, Barack voted against it.
Posted by: nutmeg | Jun 3, 2007 10:42:00 AM
"France has universal health care and was rated No. 1 for overall health care by the World Health Organization in 2000."
Well yes, and they also had the single highest per capita infections of HIV via a tainted blood supply AFTER the cause was known. Canada, another universal health care nation quietly had a HUGE HCV contamination of their blood system a few years back that infected many with a disease just as debilitating as HIV.
Not placing any blame; just pointing out that government run, universal healthcare may not be the panacea some think it is.
Posted by: Chuck Butcher | Jun 3, 2007 11:35:35 AM
My apologies to Barack & all, he voted Nay, I misread.
Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jun 3, 2007 12:33:25 PM
And, as Chico Marx said, "You can keep it".
Bob Tiernan
Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jun 3, 2007 12:36:10 PM
T A Barnhart:
It was an amazing honor to be so near this great
man [Jesse Jackson]
Bob T:
Scam artists and con men cannot be "great" men. Period.
Bob Tiernan
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Jun 3, 2007 2:11:23 PM
Well yes, and they (France) also had the single highest per capita infections of HIV via a tainted blood supply AFTER the cause was known. Canada, another universal health care nation quietly had a HUGE HCV contamination of their blood system a few years back that infected many with a disease just as debilitating as HIV.
In any human endeavor you are going to find flaws. It has been a long time since I studied the WHO report, but I'm sure its authors noted the shortcomings in all countries. Just because France was rated No. 1 didn't mean it was flawless. The flaw in the United States system is that there are an estimated 40 million people, including an estimated 20 million children without health insurance. Even people with good insurance plans can be only one serious illness away from bankruptcy.
Another problem with health care in the United States is that many people see it as a socialist system without realizing that two of Europe's best known conservatives - Bismarck in Germany and Churchill in Britain - supported national health care schemes. They didn't follow this course because they were latent bleeding-heart liberals but because they realized they needed healthy citizens if their nations were to be strong economically and militarily. Of course, now that we do so much outsourcing some people may not see the preceding as imperative for this nation. Regardless, an impoverished and unhealthy segment of a nation is a drain in many ways.
Not surprisingly, our distribution of health care parallels the maldistribution of wealth. If we continue on this trajectory of the rich getting richer and the poor becoming poorer then we are heading for a feudal society that will very likely have one of two futures: apathy and despair among the masses or revolution.
Of all the announced presidential candidates only Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich would be likely to push for policies to reverse current regrettable trends. The others, including Obama, are not likely to do much more than talk since they are dependent on big donors for campaign donations (bribes) who want to get wealthier and fewer in number while the poor get poorer and more numerous as members of the middle class drop out and fall into the lower economic strata.
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Jun 3, 2007 4:07:54 PM
few people have done more good for civil rights, both here in and around the world, than Jesse Jackson. he has his flaws, but so what? most of what we see about Jackson is what the media has created over the years. same with Sharpton, of whom i am no fan, and Oprah (how often will the tabs & "women" mags write about her weight?) -- in fact, anyone who doesn't know their place.
Jesse Jackson is a great American and one of my heros.
Posted by: Rev. Chuck Currie | Jun 3, 2007 5:09:32 PM
Why I’m Joining Obama For America: “People of Faith for Barack”
Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jun 4, 2007 12:02:38 PM
T. A. Barnhart:
few people have done more good for civil rights, both here in and around the world, than Jesse Jackson.
Bob T:
What does he say, and do, about the repression of women
in Muslim cultures, particularly the Middle Eastern version? Was he doing anything about the executions of
women in Afghanistan for listening to music, or working,
showing their faces, or attending a clandestine school?
Or was that stuff seen as "cultural diversity" to be
"honored"?
T. A. Barnhart:
he has his flaws, but so what? most of what we see about Jackson is what the media has created over the years.
Bob T:
Actually, the media has protected him more than it
has done anything else, which is why so few Americans
know the extent of his scams and cons.
T. A. Barnhart:
Jesse Jackson is a great American and one of my heros.
Bob T:
Well, this is a thread on Obama so I will end this
Jackson diversion here, but the point is that while
Jesse Jackson deserves points for what he did in the
60s or so, when he was among those sticking their necks
out, he has for many years now been a con and scam artist who plays the race card for power and personal wealth.
Like those statists who always want to convince people that there's an enemy out there, Jackson highly exaggerates racism for the same reason. A better role
model would be Shelby Steele, but then he doesn't say
what lefties want to hear.
Bob Tiernan
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Jun 4, 2007 12:24:54 PM
Re the issue of liquid coal, it doesn't look like it is such a great idea. Reference the Sierra Club, the US PIRG Education Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Fund who, among others, don't think it is such a good idea.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Jun 4, 2007 12:29:39 PM
I was not able to catch the debate last night, and have had no luck running down a transcript online. Does anybody know if the entire thing is up online anywhere (transcript or video)...?
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Jun 4, 2007 1:35:35 PM
Ron Paul's realization that the war is bad is great, but that's about as far as it goes for him being any kind of good guy. he ran for President on the Libertarian ticket years ago and was anything but an advocate for widespread democracy. that's probably why he's an R in Texas these days: less democracy to worry about.
don't get suckered by a few good words about the war. or even the fact that he's right about why they attacked. he's a lousy candidate for president.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Jun 4, 2007 1:42:45 PM
I was not able to catch the debate last night, and have had no luck running down a transcript online. Does anybody know if the entire thing is up online anywhere (transcript or video)...?
A re-run of the debate is scheduled on C-Span this afternoon at 3:00 pm Pacific Time (6:00 pm eastern). It is a re-run of CNN's broadcast. Not surprisingly, Blitz Wolfer did a lousy job.
Posted by: DJ | Jun 4, 2007 3:37:57 PM
TA Barnhart - you're an Obama backer, yet publicly compare him to Jackson??? With supporters like you, who needs detractors?
I can see the bumper sticker of Obama's demise now: "Rejuvenate Jesse: Vote Obama '08!"
Posted by: Joe12Pack | Jun 4, 2007 3:41:19 PM
Come on Barnhart, let's be honest about your primary objection to Dr. Paul. He's about as far from a socialist progressive type as you can get. He truly believes in limited government, accountability, personal responsibility and all the rest of that awful stuff that modern liberals seem to loathe. You know- a genuine classic liberal. He's no neocon either, which puts him at odds with most of the knuckleheads who currently occupy his own party. No way in hell he's their nominee, but he'll probably get my vote come election time. The only thing the BIG candidates like Obama, Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Romney and Giuliani have on Ron Paul is obscene amounts of campaign cash. Where do you suppose that comes from and who are they beholden to? The people is it?
Posted by: Matthew Sutton | Jun 4, 2007 4:25:10 PM
Joe12pack, you are way off base with respect to Senator Obama. Unlike his competitors, approximately 90% of his contributions in the first quarter were for $100 or less.
So his support IS coming from the people.
Posted by: 上海数据恢复 | Jun 5, 2007 7:25:26 PM
Ron Paul's realization that the war is bad is great, but that's about as far as it goes for him being any kind of good guy. he ran for President on the Libertarian ticket years ago and was anything but an advocate for widespread democracy. that's probably why he's an R in Texas these days: less democracy to worry about.
don't get suckered by a few good words about the war. or even the fact that he's right about why they attacked. he's a lousy candidate for president
Posted by: Patricia | Jun 6, 2007 10:46:55 AM
Barack Obama has a rare quality which is immediately noticeable when you see him speak in person (which I did for the first time in Seattle last week). More than a great orator, he is a leader in the truest sense of the word - he inspires each of us, motivates each of us, and reaches into the hopeful place in each of us that believes we can change our country together with the right leader.
I've heard Barack being described as the "celebrity" candidate. His appeal (which draws huge crowds wherever he goes) is more than just charisma or impressive rhetoric. He is a leader who inspires us to be fair-minded, compassionate and uncompromising in our beliefs. We need this in our country more than ever. After watching the latest round of Democratic and Republican debates, I was struck by how polarized the country still is on key issues - immigration reform, the war on terror, reproductive rights. We need someone who is willing to look for common ground while still recognizing what is not compromisable. Barack Obama is the best candidate for this job. He manages to rise above petty partisanship while remaining firm and fair in arguing his positions. I respect him immensely, and will do whatever I can to support him in his bid for President of the United States.
If you want to support Barack Obama's bid, consider attending our Oregon Wants Obama fundraiser on June 28th at McMenamins Edgefield (go to link below for details and to register):
http://my.barackobama.com/page/event/detail/4jtlc
Posted by: t.a. barnhart | Jun 6, 2007 5:47:28 PM
Patricia, would you go to OregonforObama.net and drop me a line about this event. i'm hoping to come down from Seattle and i'd like to talk to you about follow-up. thanks.
t.a.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Jun 7, 2007 12:18:48 PM
The most important issues for me are:
- ending US imperialism
- moving constructively toward the post carbon economy
- providing good healthcare to all Americans
- promoting real democracy, both political and economic
I don't see Obama coming close to Kucinich or Edwards on these issues.
Posted by: Tom Joad | Jun 30, 2007 4:52:15 AM
T.A. Barnhart's post are always so funny they crack me up.
Obama for President!!! ...like that's ever gonna happen.
Barnhart is like a barometer, he always picks the lamest of the lame. I guess you could call him an Obama barometer.
The only current Democrat worth a damn is Richardson!!!
Ron Paul & Fred Richardson! ...now that would be a team!!!
Posted by: Butner J. Creedmoore | Jun 30, 2007 5:00:40 AM
So let me get this straight?
Barnhart thinks that Jesse Jackson is a
"great American and one of my heros" and
that Barrack Obama is the savior of the Democratic
Party, yet he doesn't think very highly of Ron Paul.
Well, I guess that settles it.
Results are in: T.A.Barnhart is an idiot.
Posted by: 上海数据恢复 | Dec 2, 2007 6:41:12 PM
We need someone who is willing to look for common ground while still recognizing what is not compromisable. Barack Obama is the best candidate for this job. He manages to rise above petty partisanship while remaining firm and fair in arguing his positions. I respect with my critique called WMD (Weapons of Mass Deception) that did get exposure, theatrical screenings and TV broadcasts worldwide.
Posted by: automotive repair manual | Jan 10, 2008 4:02:28 PM
don't get suckered by a few good words about the war. or even the fact that he's right about why they attacked. he's a lousy candidate for president
Posted by: Atlanta Homes For Sale | Feb 10, 2008 7:45:31 AM
This is a good thing if the war can be ended. i am sure it is not as easy as they are talking about though. I think he would do a good job as president.
Posted by: Insurance News | Mar 8, 2008 1:46:06 AM
Young presidents are always good.lets wait and see will he do what he is saying.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Posted by: Jack Bog | Jun 2, 2007 12:59:16 AM
I hope you're right.
I doubt you're right.