*

4.6.08

Obama wins the nomination



You already knew that, but I'm psyched that it's finally finished. Looking forward to 8 years of things getting better.

29 Comments:

Blogger Mikkel said...

Slippery.

June 04, 2008 5:15 pm  
Blogger mrtn said...

Unlike senator Clinton, whose track record on Israel is, of course, phenomenally unslippery: she's been pro-Israel from the get-go.

So no, I wasn't hoping for Obama to fix Israel. But of the three relevant candidates I think he is the one most likely to change his mind. Best of the options.

June 04, 2008 5:20 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

Wow, that was fast.

June 04, 2008 5:58 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

1. Like I said, I don't support Hillary Clinton, but

2. at least she's up front about her idiotic opinions, and

3. what do you mean change his mind? Do you mean change his mind back? Obama is fully informed about the Israeli-Palestinian question and he still pretends to support Israel. Doesn't that tell you something about his character?

We don't have to discuss it, I'm just curious.

^______^

June 04, 2008 6:16 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

And furthermore:

Tsk tsk. For someone who follows American politics like it's a soccer league you are surprisingly ill-informed, old chap --- u___u

She hasn't "been pro-Israel from the get-go". When she ran for senator she actually had a pretty tough time winning the votes of the New York 4x2s before she cranked the crazy up a notch. What a bitch, huh?

Now here's a riddle for you: If Obama picks Clinton as his running mate, will that signify change we can believe in? I'm not predicting he will, I'm just curious.

O____ó

June 04, 2008 6:48 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

I'm just going to leave one more comment, but that's it, I promise.

June 04, 2008 6:49 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

OK, I lied.

June 04, 2008 6:51 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

I can't stop. Help me.

June 04, 2008 6:51 pm  
Blogger anon said...

... methinks I hear the sound of unsolved issues

but another thing: what's with the "can has"? am I dumb or something? I just don't get it ...

June 05, 2008 7:16 am  
Blogger Mikkel said...

Yes, you're dumb. Issue solved...

June 05, 2008 9:31 am  
Blogger mrtn said...

Anon: on the internets' tubes we have this thing called memes. One of them is called LOLcats. One of the most famous LOLcat captions is "I can has cheezburger?", also the name of the biggest lolcat site. Therefore all "I can has"-wordings are inherently funny. The above poster makes a play on the original slogan ("yes we can") and a reference to the LOLcat phenomenon.

Between this one and "I'm in ur X, Y-ing your Z" (which frequently shows up in LOLcats, see the Wiki article - im in ur Wikipedia, etc.), you now have all the basic skills necessary to dive into the white-hot molten vat of hipness that is internet culture.

Mikkel: sure, she has cranked up the crazy, but she was pro-Israel from the get-go. Just not as pro-Israel.

I used to hope for an Obama/Clinton ticket. Now I'm hoping for Obama/Edwards, I think. Mostly because I'm starting to think Obama is going to carry the election on his own.

As for Obama changing his mind, I'm really just saying that of the two, he's the only one I envision ever actually moving towards sensible middle-eastern politics. As I've already said, I don't think he's anywhere near perfect. I'm just happy that someone several orders of magnitude more sensible might be going to the White House.

June 05, 2008 10:08 am  
Blogger Mikkel said...

I think you're wrong about all of the above, and that Obama will most probably be a big disappointment. I think Clinton was, at best, a flawed candidate, but she deserved better than what she got. And there's no doubt in my mind she got what she got because she is a woman.

June 07, 2008 10:14 am  
Blogger Markus said...

I think Mikkel is right. Obama just announced his plans for the economy. Dig this: a 50 bill dollar tax cut. Change?

June 11, 2008 5:03 am  
Blogger mrtn said...

Fast, I'm on my lunch break:

Mikkel: Yes, I agree hugely with you that both Obama and Clinton are flawed candidates. I also agree with you that Clinton got hit a lot harder than she should have got hit (by the media, I mean), and yes, I agree with you that this is because she is a woman, not to mention a woman who refuses to quietly accept the role of women in US society.

I also think that Clinton dirtied up the campaign A LOT. She had a really bad advisor named Mark Penn who was probably responsible for this, but the fact that she didn't stand up to the idea of dirty campaigning was deeply uninspiring, and probably one of the things that really killed her for me as a candidate, besides the fact that Obama is a couple of notches more progressive on a lot of issues. His behaviour is convincingly different, and I believe he can change US politics. He is also far less stuck in the current system than she is. This is a good thing.

Markus: You're blogging! Excellent! Looking forward to reading it.

re: the tax cuts. Yes, I saw that, but the important thing here is not the tax cuts themselves, but who the tax cuts are FOR. Obama is going to end the Bush-McCain tax cuts for the wealthy, particularly for the top 1%, and replace them with substantial tax cuts for poor people and middle class people. And this is not a bad thing, considering the fact that the US seems to give less return per tax dollar to its citizens than any other industrialised country (they seem to spend a lot of it on foreign aid to the Iraqi mortality rate, rather than silly luxuries like health care and education).

In a country with such a huge gap between rich and poor, which is now back to the level of the roaring twenties, before the Great Compression, the rich can pay for a lot more than they do. And I hope they will. I would rather see vastly increased public spending, funded by sensible taxes, but we can't have it all.

But on this, as in almost all other things, an Obama presidency will represent a change over the status quo. A substantial, positive change. Don't start foaming at the mouth when you hear the words "tax cuts". The biggest issue in the US right now is raising taxes on the wealthy and using those taxes to build a welfare state. Everything else can wait.

June 11, 2008 11:25 am  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

You can´t have it all. Fair enough. But what do we get with Obama? Does he give us any clues?

What was it with his healt care plan that you felt was better that Hillary´s? Now, I am really interested. (by the way, the woman who owns the house we are subletting, her grandfather is the architect behind Obama´s health care plan)

June 11, 2008 5:14 pm  
Blogger mrtn said...

Actually, her health care plan was better. But Obama seems to have turned a corner in the past two months on healthcare. Last thing that happened was that he announced he would partner with Elisabeth Edwards, John Edwards wife, on fixing health care. She has very progressive opinions, and said publicly during the primary campaign that she thought Obama's health care plan wasn't good enough (and also had a very nice smackdown of McCain's "plan" at one point). Either it is another cunning tactic by slippery populist rhetoricator Barack Hussein Obama, or maybe it's another example of him being capable of changing his mind. We'll see.

June 11, 2008 5:35 pm  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

by changing his mind, you mean flip-flopping? (haha, no, I´m just kidding)

It is good that he can change his mind, but still I´m suspiscious of a man who starts running with such a bad health care plan. It shows that he´s as right-winged as all the others. Perhaps he will come to his senses and become a friend of ours one day, but right now he isn´t.

June 11, 2008 5:47 pm  
Blogger mrtn said...

No, def not as right-winged. There were many, many people in the race further to the right than he was - notably, ms. Clinton. She just had better health care skillz. Edwards was further to the left than the both of them (but his campaign wasn't very well-prepared, either. Lots of things he didn't have any good answers on), but he had to drop out pretty early.

But anyway, he hasn't done anything wrong yet. Odds are he will, some day. But I think he's the best option. We'll see.

June 11, 2008 6:17 pm  
Blogger mrtn said...

Of course, I may flip-flop on this any minute.

June 11, 2008 6:18 pm  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

Haha! That is the problem with you elitists: you think too much. If you stop thinking you´ll stop flip flopping. Thinking makes you weak.

But how was Hillary more right winged than Obama?

June 11, 2008 6:24 pm  
Blogger anon said...

... eh, what's with the gaupaas?

June 11, 2008 7:30 pm  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

The name, you mean? That is my name.

June 11, 2008 7:49 pm  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

My mother suggested that I should start using it after they announced my name in the radio. It sticks to your mind on a completely different level, than just "Johansen", she feels. (and she has studied psychology)

June 11, 2008 7:58 pm  
Blogger Mikkel said...

I concur.

June 12, 2008 7:39 am  
Blogger Mikkel said...

You know the vice-presidential search committee? For chairman, how about Jim Johnson? Remember, the guy who tried to give the head of UnitedHealth Group $1.4 billion in stock options?”

June 12, 2008 10:36 am  
Blogger mrtn said...

Yikes! Embarassing! Glad he's out. He was the guy who chose Joe "actually a republican" Lieberman for John Kerry's VP.

Also from the same article:

"Perhaps in an attempt to differentiate the cases, the McCain spokesman said: “America can’t afford a president who flip-flops on key questions in the course of 24 hours.” Under a McCain presidency, the bleeding would presumably go on for weeks and weeks before the inevitable occurred."

No, they're so right. We should have a president who makes really bad decisions and then sticks to them. Oh, wait. We do.

June 12, 2008 11:41 am  
Blogger Markus Gaupås Johansen said...

But, Martin. You are making this into a question about character more than politics, I feel. Obama is a great guy, and he can change his mind if he needs to, but he seems politically weak. He is lacking a clear direction in his political thinking, there is no coherent structure, no ideology that lies behind his decisions.

June 13, 2008 12:14 am  
Blogger Mikkel said...

OK, I change my mind. I'm all for Obama. But the little fucker better not let me down.

June 18, 2008 2:11 am  
Blogger mrtn said...

You sure? His health care plan isn't that hot.

I'M KIDDING! Welcome to the club. Here's your Kool-Aid.

June 18, 2008 10:59 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home