Saturday, January 05, 2008

Don’t just Boot Bush – Reboot

It’s pretty clear that the American people want to boot Bush & Co. out of the Whitehouse. Barack Obama’s message of change absolutely resonated in Iowa, stunning the country with an astounding win. Even on the Republican side, the insurgent who criticized the President’s “bunker mentality” beat the corporate Bush-apologist in Iowa. Change has been the recurring theme of this campaign so far. However, I think we need more than change. We need to not just boot out Bush: we need to reboot the system.

Let’s face it. If any of the Democrats are elected, change will come. There is little doubt that Barack Obama, John Edwards or Hillary Clinton would change some of the Bush policies. Let’s be honest here. If you read the position papers of all three Democrats, you will find that most of the differences in position are tinkering around the edges. The core messages are the same. Healthcare is broken and needs to be fixed. The environment is in crisis and must be healed. Education is weak and has to be supported.

We also need to restore America’s standing in the world. The pictures of Abu Ghraib still circulate on the internet as inspiration for would-be terrorists. The Bush Administration has held prisoners without trial, based on secret evidence, while Bush hides behind a veil of “state secrets” and executive privilege. It is shameful.

One difference between Barack Obama and his Democratic rivals is his ability to not just change the reputation of America in the world, but to reset it, to give us a fresh start, to reboot the political system. The election of Barack Obama as president does more than continue the conversation with different players and an altered message. It completely changes the context of the conversation.

There are times when a system doesn’t just need to close the old programs and open new ones. Until we completely reset the system, there are programs that can continue to run in the background unnoticed. We need to reboot with Obama.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, December 31, 2007

Karl Rove’s Poison Pill

Tonight when Karl Rove makes his New Year’s resolution, I’m betting it has something to do with helping Hillary Clinton win the Democratic nomination. Rove’s suggestion of her inevitability has been picked up like a mantra by the GOP, Rove’s surrogates and even many in the media. Rove knows there is only one way for the Republicans to win the Whitehouse in 2008 and that is to divide the country.

Let’s face it. This country is roughly 1/3 conservative, 1/3 liberal and 1/3 moderate. It’s the middle 1/3 who choose a president. A Clinton nomination would be so polarizing; there is no way that the moderate middle will cross over to vote for her. Of course, the Republicans could also nominate a polarizing person, increasing the likelihood of a third-way political party led by Bloomberg and company.

As an independent voter in Iowa I’ve got a ringside seat to the fight for the presidency and I have to tell you it’s pretty ugly. I have supported Republican candidates in the past – before they decided that torture is a moral right; habeas corpus is an inconvenient legal technicality; and that they have the right to declare anyone they choose to be an enemy combatant. At the same time, as a moderate voter, I can’t see myself supporting Hillary Clinton for president.

So, now the choice for the Democratic Party is clear:

  • There’s a divisive Hillary Clinton nomination.
  • There is battlin’ John Edwards. I think he’s an amazingly good man. I supported him early on, but he’s run a take-no-prisoners campaign, and that’s not what it takes to unite the country. Sorry, John.
  • And there’s the one candidate who stands for uniting red states and blue states – Barack Obama. Obama is the middle way. He is the one who can win my vote.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, December 29, 2007

Now is OUR Time

NOW is the time to make a difference, and YOU are the one to do it. Our children are watching what we do. What legacy are you going to leave them? The writers of the history books will look at this time and report on what the American people did. How will history treat you?

Why Now?

Let’s think about this moment in the context of history:


  • Our government holds prisoners without charge for years at a time.
  • The gap between the rich and poor widens every day.
  • The government searches our private information without a warrant.
  • The earth warms, the ice melts and our lives hang in the balance.
  • The Bush-Cheney Whitehouse authorizes the torture of prisoners – and then orders the destruction of evidence.
  • We are fighting a war based on intelligence failures, enmeshing us in a civil war.


If you’ve listened to Barack Obama speak more than once, you’ve probably heard him quote Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., using the phrase “the fierce urgency of now.” Have you ever wondered about the context of that phrase? You can read the entire speech here, but if you don’t want to plow through the entire speech, then at least read this one paragraph:

“We are now faced with the fact, my friends that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked, and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at flood-it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is adamant to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residues of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words, ‘Too late.’ There is an invisible book of life that faithfully records our vigilance or our neglect. Omar Khayyam is right: ‘The moving finger writes, and having writ moves on.’”

- Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., "Beyond Vietnam," address delivered to the Clergy and Laymen Concerned about Vietnam, at Riverside Church, New York, NY, 4 April 1967. You can hear an audio recording of the entire speech here.

As Barack Obama said at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner,

“I am running in this race because of what Dr. King called ‘the fierce urgency of now.’ Because I believe there is such a thing as being too late – and that hour is almost upon us. America, our moment is now.”

This is the time, and you are the key.

It’s About You

Not only is this the time, but you are the one to make a difference. This is the chance to change the conversation – to take back our country from the special interest groups. This is our chance to win, but it is up to us.

If you want to understand your role in healing our nation, watch this video. Here is Barack Obama on February 11, 2007, in his own words, telling us what it is that he is trying to do. He says:

“I want to win, but I don’t just want to win. I want to transform this country. And the only way we are going to do this is if YOU make this a vehicle for your hopes and dreams.”

“Ultimately, the country changes when millions of people come together and their voices speak out on behalf of change.”

“When ordinary citizens are awakened, they accomplish extraordinary things.”

Do you get it? This race isn’t about Barack Obama. This race is about us – We the People. This is our chance to rise up and to be heard. The time is now, the place is here and the person to make a difference is you.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, February 11, 2007

What exactly is a "conversation," anyway?

Barack Obama looked right at me and said, “I want to have a conversation.” This might have been a heart-stopping moment for any political junkie, but of course, he was also looking at 2,500 other people packed into the gymnasium at Kennedy High School in Cedar Rapids, IA.

It's a nice sentiment to think that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will be in my living room for a "conversation" - a two-way give and take - asking real questions and getting short answers. But as far as I can see, that's just not going to happen.

The term “rock star” candidate has been used excessively to describe Senator Obama. That’s shorthand for someone who can pack a large venue and still appeal to the crowd. When it comes to the music of politics, there are accessible candidates like Tom Vilsack and John Edwards, and then there are "stadium bands," like Hillary and Obama.

Since people are being fast and loose with their comparisons of Senator Obama, comparing him to John F. Kennedy, let’s try another analogy, the Rolling Stones. Hey, if he’s a rock star, then this might not be a bad comparison. The Rolling Stones have rabid fans, the same as Senator Obama. They can pack a stadium anywhere in the world, anytime they wish. At this point, Senator Obama can do the same. The challenge for both the Rolling Stones and Senator Obama is, just because it works in the stadium, does not mean it will work in your living room.

The Rolling Stones have been able to bring their large stadium show to more intimate settings, for example playing the Aragon Ball Room in Chicago in 2002. More importantly, the Stones have infiltrated our most intimate moments by being the soundtrack to our lives. We hear certain songs and we connect.

Senator Obama is trying the same thing with his web site, which by the way is very well done. I can go onto Senator Obama’s web site and use social networking tools similar to Facebook and MySpace, but that does not really connect me with Senator Obama. It might connect me with other fans of Senator Obama, but not with Obama himself. With the bus loads of journalists, the satellite trucks and the rabid fans, it is hard to see how Senator Obama will be able to make it to anyone’s living room. So, here’s a suggestion.

The answer to the “rock star” challenge might be as old as Socrates. If candidates like Senator Clinton and Senator Obama are serious about a “conversation,” then let’s have more sincere and sustained question and answer time. I’m sure the people at Kennedy High School would have stayed late into the night asking questions and listening to the answers.

Steve Sovern did an admirable job of being the gracious host of the event in Cedar Rapids, and as such pitched the Senator some nice softballs. The five questions from the audience were well worded, showing a sophisticated level of political understanding. But Senator Obama's answers were so verbose there was little time for the pretense of a conversation.

If candidates are sincere about having a conversation, then let’s have a conversation. As the people on the campaign stops, let’s do our homework and ask great questions. Candidates, answer the question and then shut up. That gives us time for more questions. Here in the heartland, that’s what a real conversation looks like.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,