...Well. This is it. Barack Hussein Obama is the new President of the United States.
I was watching in the cafeteria at school, and for the record, the TV was too quiet to hear, there were people talking around me - and I still feel like I just had a life-changing experience.
I'm happy to say I voted for him, but I'd be lying to say I'm not nervous. After all, he's a man, not a Messiah, and even some of our most experienced politicians had trouble handling the problems the US, and the world, hve been going through. But no matter what happens, I think the next four years will be the most important years of my life, in part because of this moment.
So, forgive me this one cliche: Congratulations, Mr. President, and God bless America.
LET THE POLITICAL GAUNTLET BEGIN!
*whippish*
Indeed. Give the man a helmet and some shoulder pads. He's going to need them, methinks.
On behalf of the United Kingdom, I was wondering if we could maybe borrow him for a bit? We desperately need someone with a bit of a clue over here as well. We'll give him back afterwards, promise...
Quote from: Amber Williams on January 20, 2009, 12:36:09 PM
LET THE POLITICAL GAUNTLET BEGIN!
*whippish*
For Obama, or this thread?
Quote from: bill on January 20, 2009, 12:39:20 PM
Quote from: Amber Williams on January 20, 2009, 12:36:09 PM
LET THE POLITICAL GAUNTLET BEGIN!
*whippish*
For Obama, or this thread?
Little of column "A", little of column "Be seeing you"
I have to say that I do not envy Mr. Obama at the moment. If he can't fix those problems in a year or two, the history might end up blaming him and think that it has because of him that it all went wrong in the first place. Just a guess, but we've seen this happen so many times before.
I do wonder who we (the rest of the world) can make fun now. I mean Bush Jr. was an easy Target, being a dumb old white man. If we start treating Obama the same way, the black people will blame us for racial discrimination. Berlusconi would be a good target if he wouldn't have connections to Italian mafia.
And the problem is that the problem doesn't have an easy fix. President Obama needs us to give him a chance, and he needs us to be patient. America has a lot of problems, problems that can't all be solved in a year or two. I'm afraid that the biggest problem he'll have to face is a culture that wants easy fixes and quick patches, and wants it now.
But in the meantime... congratulations, Mr. President. Let's see where we go, shall we?
This (http://dont-read.com/imghost/dur.jpg) just in. ((Warning! Contains a naughty word!))
Quote from: Mao Laoren on January 20, 2009, 12:38:24 PM
Indeed. Give the man a helmet and some shoulder pads. He's going to need them, methinks.
After Bush? The man's going to need a nuclear-powered tank-city to defend him.
Those shoes can be lethal.
I was actually worried while watching the inauguration that Obama's head would kick back, and it would all be over. That truly would have been the end of the American dream for me. Fortunately there was no such outcome. For me, hope for the world lives by a sliver of thread.
Now, now. Don't worry. Obama won't get killed by an assassin's bullet. He'll just be silenced by the press, as seen in the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxVUYrZKi-g
Quote from: Tapewolf on January 20, 2009, 12:39:05 PM
On behalf of the United Kingdom, I was wondering if we could maybe borrow him for a bit? We desperately need someone with a bit of a clue over here as well. We'll give him back afterwards, promise...
Speaking respectfully as a representative of the United States, I would like to say: NO HE'S OURS GET YOUR OWN
:3
I admit, I'm nervous as hell, but that was a monumental occasion. I'm thrilled I was able to watch his inauguration. My whole school tuned in.
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on January 20, 2009, 02:17:38 PM
Speaking respectfully as a representative of the United States, I would like to say: NO HE'S OURS GET YOUR OWN
How about a time-share? :<
Quote from: Omega on January 20, 2009, 12:50:47 PM
I have to say that I do not envy Mr. Obama at the moment. If he can't fix those problems in a year or two, the history might end up blaming him and think that it has because of him that it all went wrong in the first place. Just a guess, but we've seen this happen so many times before.
To cover himself, he did say that he did not expect these problems to be fixed soon in his inauguration. Still, I guess that is a legitimate concern, and he does have a lot on his plate... down economy, a mess to clean up in the Middle east, 10.6 trillion dollar debt... (Approx 75%-80% of the GDP, if my numbers are correct).
I'm not holding high hopes for the immediate future, but still, I think this is a good step in the right direction.
Couple of bits that stood out to me.
One from Nate of FiveThirtyEight.com:
QuoteFor as much as some parts of the world have developed a habit of looking down on America, it's highly unlikely that any nation in Europe or most of the rest of the world would have elected someone like Barack Hussein Obama as their leader.
I know someone who was in France before the election (for some time, too) that told me that almost no-one in France thought Obama would win. They thought it was great he was a party's nominee, but that there was no way America would elect a black man. They hoped, but they thought that it was simply impossible that the ignorant Americans would actually press the "Obama" button. (Obviously this is second-hand anecdotal evidence and it's impossible to truthfully say NO ONE thought he'd win, but the impression I got was that this was the general consensus.)
To them, this phrase is particularly strong: Yes, we did.
Another thing I've noticed was from the speech itself.
QuoteTo the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
In particular "know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy" really strikes a chord with me. I think that whole paragraph right there is excellent.
Another really excellent bit is
QuoteAs for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more.
That feels so excellent to hear. To know that Obama GETS IT. Just following through on this will win us an awful lot of international goodwill back.
More thoughts later, for now, class time.
Quote from: Tapewolf on January 20, 2009, 02:23:33 PM
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on January 20, 2009, 02:17:38 PM
Speaking respectfully as a representative of the United States, I would like to say: NO HE'S OURS GET YOUR OWN
How about a time-share? :<
No, no, you see, if we timeshare him with you, then we would have to timeshare him with every other country or we (and by extension he) would look bigoted. Well, more so.
And I doubt 5 hours a year is an adequate time investment to run any of those countries.
Quote from: Cvstos on January 20, 2009, 02:38:24 PM
That feels so excellent to hear. To know that Obama GETS IT. Just following through on this will win us an awful lot of international goodwill back.
I missed the speech (I was trying to fix some bugs at work), which irritates me given that I've been rooting for him for a while now, but I'm reading the transcript here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?ref=politics
...and it really does sound like he 'gets it', as you say. I hope he's able to pull it off.
Quote from: Destina Faroda on January 20, 2009, 02:15:47 PM
Now, now. Don't worry. Obama won't get killed by an assassin's bullet. He'll just be silenced by the press, as seen in the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxVUYrZKi-g
oh man, i expect them to be boycotted, picketed, and sued. really, the only explanation is if they didnt think this was important, or perhaps they didnt think obama was a REAL president for reasons which would make them sound dumber then they already do
oh, and tape, would you consider the united states and the united kingdom to form some kind of trans atlantic united empire? if we can get iceland and jamaca to come along we might get some real government going on
Quote from: Destina Faroda on January 20, 2009, 02:15:47 PM
Now, now. Don't worry. Obama won't get killed by an assassin's bullet. He'll just be silenced by the press, as seen in the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxVUYrZKi-g
You're just now noticing that the press can do that? They've been doing it rather well since the 1960's. Just never as overt as this with as popular an event as this.
Quote from: Valynth on January 20, 2009, 03:58:08 PM
You're just now noticing that the press can do that? They've been doing it rather well since the 1960's. Just never as overt as this with as popular an event as this.
I expected the supposedly liberal media to actually let the man speak. I mean, what's the point of covering the story if you don't cover it?
Quote from: Brunhidden on January 20, 2009, 03:50:00 PM
Quote from: Destina Faroda on January 20, 2009, 02:15:47 PM
Now, now. Don't worry. Obama won't get killed by an assassin's bullet. He'll just be silenced by the press, as seen in the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxVUYrZKi-g
oh man, i expect them to be boycotted, picketed, and sued. really, the only explanation is if they didnt think this was important, or perhaps they didnt think obama was a REAL president for reasons which would make them sound dumber then they already do
oh, and tape, would you consider the united states and the united kingdom to form some kind of trans atlantic united empire? if we can get iceland and jamaca to come along we might get some real government going on
Unify by language and to a lesser extent, ideology. U.K., U.S., South Africa, Australia, New Zealand. Get Oceana really running :P
Quote from: Destina Faroda on January 20, 2009, 05:58:30 PM
Quote from: Valynth on January 20, 2009, 03:58:08 PM
You're just now noticing that the press can do that? They've been doing it rather well since the 1960's. Just never as overt as this with as popular an event as this.
I expected the supposedly liberal media to actually let the man speak. I mean, what's the point of covering the story if you don't cover it?
It's not so much about liberal vs. conservative, it's about them saying "there is no need to adjust your set. We control all that you see and hear."
Quote from: Corgatha Taldorthar on January 20, 2009, 06:01:46 PM
Unify by language and to a lesser extent, ideology. U.K., U.S., South Africa, Australia, New Zealand. Get Oceana really running :P
Meh, the E.U. is desperately trying to do that through emulation of the U.S. With limited success due to culture/language differences.
And I don't see even the most liberal of policies actually achieving that future.
Congratulations, Mr. President.
And Tape? At least the Conservatives aren't in charge. I don't trust them in the slightest. Try to have a little more faith, it might do you some good sometime.
I'm just a cynic, I guess, when it comes to politics. The words of those sage musicians (Who, you ask?) keep running through my mind. Here comes the new boss, same as the old boss...*strums guitar*
It's not anything about Mr. Obama at all, really. I just don't trust our government any farther than I can throw the Capitol building.
I hope he -can- bring positive change about. But I will wait and see.
What do people mean when they say Obama 'gets it'. What exactly is there to 'get'? I fail to see how following the world's example and the world's opinion means anything.
If history has taught us anything it should be that the world's opinion has generally been foolhardy. Our nation, if you recall, was rather unpopular during its inception. Virtually the entire rest of the world was monarchic.
Popularity does not equal good. I hope Obama will not seat his foreign policy on cow-towing to everyone who doesn't like how we do things.
To those who thought America would never elect a black man, I think that opinion is several decades too old now. I think it could've happened as early as the 1980's. It just so happens that neither party put up a black candidate until now. If anything caused the delay, it was the party leaders' fears of losing rather than the nation's supposed racial intolerance.
But we're still evil and racist! WERE ARE ALL THE NATIVE AMERICAN PRESIDENTS?!! RACISM!!!! >:O
Zinacat for President 2012. :3
Allow me to just say the following:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/Nethilia/Macros/roflbot-iJqb.jpg)
Quote from: Cogidubnus on January 20, 2009, 06:58:27 PM
It's not anything about Mr. Obama at all, really. I just don't trust our government any farther than I can throw the Capitol building.
But how far
can you throw the Capitol building, Cog?
I THOUGHT YOU HAD THE STRENGTH OF FIFTY THOUSAND MEN. YOU LIED TO ME.
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on January 20, 2009, 07:57:48 PM
Quote from: Cogidubnus on January 20, 2009, 06:58:27 PM
It's not anything about Mr. Obama at all, really. I just don't trust our government any farther than I can throw the Capitol building.
But how far can you throw the Capitol building, Cog?
I THOUGHT YOU HAD THE STRENGTH OF FIFTY THOUSAND MEN. YOU LIED TO ME.
I SHALL RESPOND TO YOUR SPURIOUS CLAIMS, WOMAN
I can only use my tremendous strength if the world is in danger, or if General Hospital is on. And, I'm not missing General Hospital to go move the Capitol, so... :T
I just have to say... HE'S NOT REALLY PRESIDENT OMGWTFBBQZ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LUtNway9x4)!
Quote from: Tapewolf on January 20, 2009, 12:39:05 PMOn behalf of the United Kingdom, I was wondering if we could maybe borrow him for a bit? We desperately need someone with a bit of a clue over here as well. We'll give him back afterwards, promise...
Sorry, but Obama's British citizenship ended in 1963 (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html).
Quote from: Cvstos on January 20, 2009, 02:38:24 PMI know someone who was in France before the election (for some time, too) that told me that almost no-one in France thought Obama would win. They thought it was great he was a party's nominee, but that there was no way America would elect a black man. They hoped, but they thought that it was simply impossible that the ignorant Americans would actually press the "Obama" button. (Obviously this is second-hand anecdotal evidence and it's impossible to truthfully say NO ONE thought he'd win, but the impression I got was that this was the general consensus.)
Yup. Dear The UK and France, you're the two other countries that have significant minority populations. We're waiting. (South Africa gets a bye because they had minority presidents until 1993)
Quote from: Alondro on January 20, 2009, 07:38:51 PMIt just so happens that neither party put up a black candidate until now. If anything caused the delay, it was the party leaders' fears of losing rather than the nation's supposed racial intolerance.
Ahem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_jackson#1988_presidential_campaign). (Yes, I know Jesse Jackson is a joke. Still.)
Quote from: superluser on January 21, 2009, 01:57:12 AM
Yup. Dear The UK and France, you're the two other countries that have significant minority populations. We're waiting. (South Africa gets a bye because they had minority presidents until 1993)
Call me a cynic, but there won't be a black prime minister for a while yet. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't think there will be.
It's fantastic that the US now has a black president, but I was somewhat afraid people would start to get on their moral high horses about this.
Quote from: Gareeku on January 21, 2009, 03:03:42 AM
Quote from: superluser on January 21, 2009, 01:57:12 AM
Yup. Dear The UK and France, you're the two other countries that have significant minority populations. We're waiting. (South Africa gets a bye because they had minority presidents until 1993)
Call me a cynic, but there won't be a black prime minister for a while yet. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I just don't think there will be.
It's fantastic that the US now has a black president, but I was somewhat afraid people would start to get on their moral high horses about this.
It's America. When have we ever been OFF our moral high horse?
Quote from: Gareeku on January 21, 2009, 03:03:42 AMIt's fantastic that the US now has a black president, but I was somewhat afraid people would start to get on their moral high horses about this.
Honestly, I couldn't care less what race he is, but the foreign press wouldn't shut up about it. And that's fine, but if you're going to do ``Wow, America's so backwards they've never even had a black president'' stories, maybe you should make sure that that's actually an exception and not the rule.
Quote from: superluser on January 21, 2009, 01:57:12 AM
Yup. Dear The UK and France, you're the two other countries that have significant minority populations. We're waiting. (South Africa gets a bye because they had minority presidents until 1993)
What are the UK's significant minorities? Scottish, Irish and Welsh? Homosexuals?
Quote from: Kasarn on January 21, 2009, 04:03:41 AMWhat are the UK's significant minorities? Scottish, Irish and Welsh? Homosexuals?
African and Asian subcontinent, mainly. Compared to countries like Italy, which are almost entirely European, the UK has a significant non-European population.
I suppose I should add the Netherlands to the list, as well.
There's a significant number of New Zealanders in London - half a million or so, I think. Out of 12 million, that's not a huge number, but if you throw in Australians over here on their big OE as well, we start adding up...
And whilst we British tend to outnumber we Australians, and seriously outnumber we New Zealanders, there's still enough of us around to make things somewhat interesting.
(Don't you hate it when you're in multiple opposing groups at the same time?)
Copy/paste from the CIA World Factbook:
United Kingdom
white (of which English 83.6%, Scottish 8.6%, Welsh 4.9%, Northern Irish 2.9%) 92.1%, black 2%, Indian 1.8%, Pakistani 1.3%, mixed 1.2%, other 1.6% (2001 census)
United States of America
white 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)
note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean a person of Latin American descent (including persons of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin) living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.); about 15.1% of the total US population is Hispanic
Quote from: superluser on January 21, 2009, 01:57:12 AM
I just have to say... HE'S NOT REALLY PRESIDENT OMGWTFBBQZ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LUtNway9x4)!
Lol, wow.
I have to say, this image sums up FoX news quite nicely:
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/6/69/Faux_news_.jpg/136px-Faux_news_.jpg)
You could also quite accurately say that about CNN.
Show me a news network that doesn't have an agenda.
I wish journalism would go back to reporting the world events instead of manufacturing them. There is so much politically-motivated spin it's giving me motion sickness.
Quote from: Alondro on January 21, 2009, 09:22:29 AM
I wish journalism would go back to reporting the world events instead of manufacturing them. There is so much politically-motivated spin it's giving me motion sickness.
I don't believe this ever happened. As long as information contains power within it, there are advantages to influencing people with less information, more advantages than informing them. Demagoguery has existed far longer than newspapers.
Quote from: Alondro on January 21, 2009, 09:22:29 AM
You could also quite accurately say that about CNN.
Show me a news network that doesn't have an agenda.
No other news station even comes close to approaching the magnitude of bias that FoX has. I never claimed that other news networks don't have their own agendas, of course they do. However, I can accurately say that FoX news is a putrescent festering mass reeking out globules of propaganda out of every pore of it's existence. Fact based reporting is a wonderful thing... though it's something that FoX news seems to avoid almost entirely, evident by their continued production of clips like the one displayed above. If I recall, they also are the source of far more controversies as well.
I read a journalism report... I found some of their numbers interesting: http://stateofthemedia.com/2005/narrative_cabletv_contentanalysis.asp?cat=2&media=5
Some things which I picked out...
QuoteIn the degree to which journalists are allowed to offer their own opinions, Fox stands out. Across the programs studied, nearly seven out of ten stories (68%) included personal opinions from Fox's reporters -- the highest of any outlet studied by far.
Just 4% of CNN segments included journalistic opinion, and 27% on MSNBC.
Fox journalists were even more prone to offer their own opinions in the channel's coverage of the war in Iraq. There 73% of the stories included such personal judgments. On CNN the figure was 2%, and on MSNBC, 29%.
The same was true in coverage of the Presidential election, where 82% of Fox stories included journalist opinions, compared to 7% on CNN and 27% on MSNBC.
Also some stats they pulled on covering the Iraq war
QuoteThe study this year also tried to assess the tone of coverage.4 When it came to the war, Fox again looked different from the others by being distinctly more positive than negative. Fully 38% of Fox segments were overwhelmingly positive in tone, more than double the 14% of segments that were negative. Still, stories were as likely to be neutral as positive (39%) and another 9% were multi-subject stories for which tone did not apply.
On CNN, in contrast, 41% of stories were neutral in tone on the 20 days studied, and positive and negative stories were almost equally likely -- 20% positive, 23% negative. Some 15% were multi-faceted and not coded for tone.
MSNBC's stories about the war were most likely to include several issues or subjects, so that no one area could be coded for tone. Fully four in ten stories were of this nature. Otherwise, the network's coverage, like CNN's, was more neutral (28%) with positive and negative stories almost equally prevalent, (16% positive and 17% negative).
So yes, any station is 'full of it' to some extent, but to say they are equally so is faulty.
Quote from: The1Kobra on January 21, 2009, 07:43:40 AM
Quote from: superluser on January 21, 2009, 01:57:12 AM
I just have to say... HE'S NOT REALLY PRESIDENT OMGWTFBBQZ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LUtNway9x4)!
Lol, wow.
I have to say, this image sums up FoX news quite nicely:
(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/thumb/6/69/Faux_news_.jpg/136px-Faux_news_.jpg)
I would now like to quote from the gospel of John Oliver:
Quote from: John Oliver, Terrifying Times
I once challenged myself, recently, to watch eight straight hours, uninterrupted, eight consecutive hours of Fox News. And, well...interesting, because I actually won that challenge against myself; yet, in winning it, I fear that I may have lost something deep down in my soul, that I am struggling to claw back. Because it is around the fourth straight hour of mainlining Fox News, that it hits you that you could grab any Fox journalist square by the shoulders, shake them backwards and forwards, scream into their face: "BE WORSE at your job!" And they'd be entitled to look straight back at you and say: "...How?"
As a side note, I saw a choir singing for Obama on the news today. As I walked away, I turned my iPod to the song I believe is truly appropriate for his presidency: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doHoE156RAo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doHoE156RAo)
I have nothing to contribute to the conversation other than the fact John Oliver is hilarious. :3
Quote from: Alondro on January 21, 2009, 09:22:29 AMYou could also quite accurately say that about CNN.
``One of CNN's anchors suggested that Barack Obama wasn't president because of a misplaced modifier in his oath, and that the matter may be headed to the courts.''
Actually, no, I can't say that accurately.
Quote from: Black_angel on January 21, 2009, 01:57:57 PMAs a side note, I saw a choir singing for Obama on the news today.
Speaking of which, did anyone else feel that Air and Simple Gifts borrowed too heavily from Copland? I realize that Copland himself borrowed that bit from an old Shaker song, but there's so much variation that you can do on that theme, and I feel like an opportunity was missed.
lets elect robin williams after obama is done
presidential cameo....in japan
http://www.onemanga.com/Air_Gear/226/01/
http://www.onemanga.com/Air_Gear/226/16/
http://www.onemanga.com/Air_Gear/226/17/
http://www.onemanga.com/Air_Gear/226/18/
http://www.onemanga.com/Air_Gear/227/08/
he has a different name, but he looks very similar.