Saturday, August 23, 2008

How do you attract 200,000 Germans to a Presidential campaign?

How do you attract 200,000 Germans to an American presidential candidate's campaign rally in Berlin?

A. With the charisma and reputation of the candidate?
B. With a compelling political message?
C. With lots of advance advertising?
D. With the top two rock bands in Germany giving a free concert with the American candidate coming out for a short speech between the bands?

Answer: 'D' of course

(Did you really think the Germans were interested in him?)

What the American media, following and fawning over Obama, failed to mention about his Berlin speech was why the crowds were really there. 95% of them could care less about Obama or American politics. They came to see a free concert with the German equivalents of Willy Nelson and Madonna headlining. Obama was an unwelcome and boring interruption giving a political speech in a foreign language between the acts which is why the crowd only gave lame applause a couple of times - after all, how many of them spoke English or cared less? Obama didn't care about the crowd either. His speech was really for the American media and the crowd was a backdrop for the photo ops.

And the American media bit on it hook line and sinker and just sorta, kinda forgot to mention the rock bands that really drew the crowds.

On another note. Someone did the math on Obama the Senator. He has only been a Senator for 18 months.

But with all the recesses, four day weekends, campaigning and absences, Obama has only spent about 6 weeks of workdays on the Senate floor as one of the most junior Senators. Most of his votes, about 80% when he was not absent, have been 'present' or 'abstain'. He also chairs a committee that has never met because the chairman has never called a meeting. As a trial lawyer he only tried 14 cases in court - and minor ones at that.

As a 'community organizer' his major cause was getting the asbestos out of a housing project. After 2 years of trying, the asbestos was still there when he left and is still there even now that he is a Senator and presumably has some pull to get things done.

That's it. His entire real world work resume ... 6 weeks work in the Senate with nothing to show for it. Two years as a lawyer and only 14 minor trials. And two years as a 'community organizer' with nothing accomplished.

Who, within their right mind, would vote for this neophyte?

Unfortunately, at this time he does not have the qualifications to run this great country of ours. Maybe in about 15-20 years he should try again.
~~~~~~~~~

(The above came from email)

I never really thought about why the Germans came out to see Obama. I guess I followed the hype (if that's what it really was) that they were there to see him. Many Europeans speak more than one language, (such as my Dutch uncle Paul - communicates in seven languages. Some he is fluent in, others he gets by) and many consider it important have English as one of their languages.

Many Europeans are interested in American politics. America is a Superpower after all, and what we do can and does, dominate and influence world events, so it came as no surprise that people come out to see him in whatever nation he spoke in. Add that to the fact that he is making history, and, whether he likes it or not, has a rock-star image, people are bound to want to see him. Shoot, I'd even go out to see him if he appeared locally. I did for Dan Quayle, after all.

Regardless of what the above has to say, he was speaking to the world when he said he was a citizen of the world. I believe he meant it. And, truth be told, we are all citizens of the world. After all, we do live on Planet Earth and we are stewards of her. Some take the job more to heart than others, but that's another story. Obama wasn't talking environmentally, though. I believe, as a Democrat, it's in his heart to unite not just the different segments of American society, but to unite the world into one large community.

Of course, that would remove all semblance of cultural diversity. And that may be the "master plan", if there is such. To make everyone look alike, think alike and say all the right things. No one will have more of anything than anyone else. And the world government will take care of all of us.

Was Obama speaking to the media? Of course he was. He knew what he said would be reported back to the American public. The American public who needs to be taken care of. The American public who thinks they have been abused and misused by someone else. It doesn't really matter who has been abused and misused, or by whom. He's playing on the victimization of America. If you've been victimized, you should be compensated in some way. Don't worry, the government will take care of you.

I don't believe that American is in nearly as bad shape as Obama and the Liberals want you to believe. Of course there are problems. But you know what? We've had these problems before and we've worked out of them. High gas prices? I remember high gas prices as well as a shortage back in the 70's. We could only get something like 5 gallons at a time and could only get gas on certain days of the week - something like how communities allow you to water your lawn today.

The economy getting you down? You ain't seen nothin' yet - think the Great Depression. Most of us only know the Depression from history books and hearing our parents and grandparents talk about it.

Housing? I remember when my brother was looking at houses back in the 70's - interest rates were double digit. I said at the time I would probably never own a house. Well, I was wrong. I own (with Citimortgage) my condo at a single digit interest rate. Interest rates did drop.

I can't compare the mortgage scandal to anything, but that's something a little different. That was caused by greed. Mortgage lenders loaning money to people who really couldn't afford to buy the amount of house they mortgaged. Who made out? The mortgage companies, of course, who really didn't care about the people they were mortgaging. We had a bank here locally that went under because of shady mortgage lending. One person has already been sentenced to jail time. Other cases are still pending. I anticipate that more loan officers will be doing jail time.

And, let's not forget that the people buying the houses aren't without some blame. Just because the mortgage lender says you can get this much mortgage doesn't mean you really can afford it. But their blame is more in the way of foolishness or, dare I say it? stupidity, rather than greed. Part of the American dream is to own your own house, and if a mortgage lender says you qualify for a $250,000 mortgage and you bring home $75000 between you, you're going to argue? You're so happy to get a nice, new house in a nice neighborhood that you'll worry about the details of how to pay for it later.

Of course, there are also the people who bought houses with the idea that it would go up in value and that they would make a bundle in a few years. I know a couple who did this. Every time they needed money, they would re-fi the mortgage. Not a bad idea, but considering that the mortgage increased every time they re-fied, and then the real estate bust, many people began to owe more than the house was worth. Luckily, my friends are able to pay the mortgage and they had planned to stay in that house for years anyway. So even if they do sell at some time in the future, it will (hopefully) be after real estate has started to boom again.

The question we have to ask ourselves is are we better off than we were four years ago? That's what I call a subjective question. For me, actually, yes, I am better off than I was four years ago. Other people are not. Some of the reason people are not better off or are even worse off is because they made poor personal choices. Some are worse off because of conditions out of their control.

When you ask yourself that question, you need to take an honest look at your answer. Especially if you answer no, you need to ask why. If you can honestly say it's all because of conditions outside your control, then you may want to vote for change. In any case, we all need to take stock of our lives and make honest assessments of why our lives are not where we want them to be.

When we enter the voting booth we can have honest, and well thought out reasons for voting the way we do. Whether you like it or not, we really need to vote with our heads not with our hearts. But, I have to admit, it's nice when our heads and our hearts agree.

No comments: