Saturday, January 26, 2008

Yes We Can!


I get teary every time. I know this blog is not about politics, but I just can't help it.

YES WE CAN!

YES WE CAN!

YES WE CAN!

"When I hear that we'll never overcome the racial divide in our politics, I think about that Republican woman who used to work for Strom Thurmond, who's now devoted to educating inner-city children and who went out onto the streets of South Carolina and knocked on doors for this campaign. Don't tell me we can't change.



Yes we can change.



Yes we can heal this nation.



Yes we can seize our future.



And as we leave this state with a new wind at our backs, and take this journey across the country we love with the message we've carried from the plains of Iowa to the hills of New Hampshire; from the Nevada desert to the South Carolina coast; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope; and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people in three simple words:



Yes. We. Can."
~Future President, Barack Obama during his South Carolina VICTORY Speech.

YES WE CAN!

34 comments:

Chloe said...

Stirring stuff...

I was just GRATEFUL that he smoked Clinton - we did a victory dance over that one tonight at Coldstone...

Anonymous said...

I am sorry to hear of your support for a Deomcrat. He will only raise our taxes and take away the freedoms this nation was built upon. He will lead us further into socialism - how's that for change???

Anonymous said...

I totally agree with the above poster.

marian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
E-Dawg said...

Barack, huh? I'm a little surprised, but, hey, I almost want to vote for him every time he speaks - he is an AMAZING speaker. I loved his NH speach, I almost cried too. Too bad his politics and stances are a little/a lot scary.

Anonymous said...

He does speak with conviction - too bad the Democractic stance will provide health care for EVERYONE - even those who don't want to work and will take money out of the pockets of us who have to work hard EVERY DAY! I don't have a problem with him being black - I like him personally, but not just as our future president making decisions like the above.

Anonymous said...

Change? Yes change. Higher taxes. Yes. Freedom for who? Nothing is free. Freedom cannot be managed for all by a government - it never has and never will be. It is idealistic to think that everyone will live and have all their needs provided, but it never will happen if the government has this responsibility. You have good intentions, Kage. I'm sorry that you can't see the end result.

Anonymous said...

Ditto to above.
I am disappointed to read this on your blog.
Aren't you Mormon?

Kim said...

"Aren't you a Mormon?" COME ON!! Such a dimwitted comment. As to all the posters above who keep saying that Dems take away "Freedom" - When have your freedoms EVER been taken away in this country by a Dem. president?! I do believe it's mainly REBUPLICAN candidates that want to take away a woman's right to CHOOSE. Whether or not that is a choice you believe in is another story. I guess by "freedoms" you mean only the ones you believe in or that apply to YOUR life. Kage, I applaud you stating your views on your blog, and I hope you don't let these anons get you down.

Anonymous said...

I'm always leery of "warm-fuzzy" rhetoric no matter who it comes from and no matter the arena. I realize the message is to foster hope in the American people--which is a message every candidate can stand behind, it just seems like political smoke screening every time it comes from a candidate running for office. And every candidate does it--Dem & Rep. Call me cynical.

I'll still probably vote for Obama though.

Anonymous said...

Barack??!!?? Blech.

Corinne said...

Wow. That is a serious amount of anonymous comments. Just so you know, Clint and I gave a high five when we saw the S.C. results too :)

Kage said...

wow, so much action on the blog while I was away.

Good Day and God Bless America.

LDS in the City said...

I'm going to guess that all of the "anonymous" posts were from one person. I'm Mormon and I'm a Democrat. In fact, there are a lot of us.

Just to add to the socialized healthcare comment. The overwhelming majority of the 44 million of uninsured people in this country are WORKING poor. These people are not sitting around waiting for a handout. Please, take some time to do a little research before making outrageous comments that are in my opinion mean-spirited and against everything I believe in as a Christian. Thanks. :)

marian said...

I deleted my comment originally because I didn't want to drag Kage's blog into a political discussion, but since that's already been done... I'll jump in. But I'll go ahead and use my "name", or at least my online name...

To the Anon #1 who said that as a Democrat Obama will take away the freedoms that this nation was built upon - can you be more specific? Freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? Of the press? The right to vote? Representation? Unreasonable search and seizure? Due process of law? I think that the current Republican administration has taken away many freedoms that this nation was built upon. It's all matter of opinion.

As far as taxes go, I like to be comfortable, I like to have money to buy things that I need and even things that I want. But if millions of people around me can't heat their homes, feed their children, live a life that is fair and decent even as they work their hardest to do so, then I think it's my responsibility to sacrifice a little of what I have so that they can survive. And so no, I don't like higher taxes when they go to pay for useless wars, destruction of our environment, walls along the Mexican border. But if they feed my neighbor? I'm all for it.

Anonymous said...

Religion - Politics. I guess you should just keep them to yourself and VOTE how you wish.

Kage, is your household 2 party? Interesting.

By the way, I'm another anon. A very realistic anon. I'm voting for someone I want but not pushing for someone as a bandstander.

Rachel H said...

(Sorry Kage for being so long)
To Kim,

If as an LDS woman you feel that a woman's "Freedom to choose" is a huge part of why you are a Democrat I feel that you've not considered some things. Be a Democrat if that overall fits your view of the world, but this bit about Roe Vs. Wade and true freedom for women in relation to abortion says it amazingly.

Reflect on the impact of the choice made by attorney Sarah Weddington in 1973.
As her arguments for abortion before the Supreme Court made clear, Weddington saw the discrimination and other injustices faced by pregnant women. But she did not demand that these injustices be remedied. Instead, she demanded for women the “right” to submit to these injustices by destroying their pregnancies.
Weddington rightly pointed out the unmet needs of students: “…there are many schools where a woman is forced to quit if she becomes pregnant.” But Weddington didn’t argue against pregnancy discrimination or even for alternate solutions for a pregnant student.
Weddington did no better for women in the workplace. “In the matter of employment, she often is forced to quit at an early point in her pregnancy. She has no provision for maternity leave… She cannot get unemployment compensation under our laws, because the laws hold that she is not eligible for employment, being pregnant, and therefore is eligible for no unemployment compensation.”
For women with serious medical needs, she further noted: “There is no duty for employers to rehire women if they must drop out to carry a pregnancy to term. And, of course, this is especially hard on the many women in Texas who are heads of their own households and must provide for their already existing children.”
Weddington clearly saw the bind low-income women face when experiencing unplanned pregnancy: “At the same time, she can get no welfare to help her at a time when she has no unemployment compensation and she's not eligible for any help in getting a job to provide for herself.”
Weddington repeatedly said that women need “relief” from pregnancy, instead of arguing that women need relief from these injustices.
What if Weddington had used her legal acumen to challenge the system and address women’s needs?
By accepting pregnancy discrimination in school and workplace and the lack of support in society for pregnant women and parents, especially the poor, Weddington and the Supreme Court betrayed women and undermined the support women need and deserve.
Since then, millions of women have paid the price, struggling in school and the workplace without societal support. After all, when “it’s her body, it’s her choice,” it’s her problem.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortion in America, half of all abortions are performed on college-age women.
Since 1994, Feminists for Life has worked to address the unmet needs of pregnant and parenting students and staff on college campuses. For the past decade FFL’s Pregnancy Resource Forums on campuses across the country have revealed the still-unmet needs of pregnant and parenting students — especially a lack of housing, child care, telecommuting options, maternity coverage and medical riders for additional children. FFL found there is rarely a central place on campus for pregnancy and parenting resources. Even when resources are available, they are often not publicized. For pregnant and parenting students kept in the dark about the help they need and deserve, perception is their reality.
This March, which is Women’s History Month, Feminists for Life is helping college students make history for women by hosting Rallies for Resources on campuses across the country — so that women don’t feel driven to choose between sacrificing their children or their education and career plans.
The proposed Elizabeth Cady Stanton Pregnant and Parenting Student Services Act, a bipartisan effort led by Senators Elizabeth Dole and Ben Nelson and Representatives Marcy Kaptur and Sue Myrick, would make grants available for up to 200 colleges and universities to host pregnancy resource forums, create resource centers on campus, and communicate available support on and off campus.
There was one thing Weddington got right. “Whether she's unmarried; whether she's pursuing an education; whether she's pursuing a career; whether she has family problems; all of the problems of personal and family life, for a woman, are bound up in the problem of abortion.”
Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women.
Thirty-five years after Weddington capitulated to inherently unfair practices against pregnant and parenting women, those on both sides of the abortion debate should unite and say “no” to the status quo. Clearly women deserve better.

Lisa said...

I am intrigued by all the anonymous posting. If you really believe in something, state your name for heaven's sake! Kage is brave enough to state hers!

Natasha said...

you go K! If you want to post about politics you can!

I can just hear little O chanting. .

I wish I knew more about the candidates. ..I should do a little more research!

Beth said...

Wowza..... interesting! I don't have much to say, except I am a Mormon who happens to know A LOT of democratic AND republican Mormons. Just sayin'.....

And yeah, Obama sure is a great speaker.

Beth said...

Oh yeah, and I think two-party households are pretty cool. :)

Linz said...

Seriously anons, state yo' name!

It's Kage's blog, she can say what she wants. It was your choice to visit it and read.

I'm not voting for Barack at this point, but respect most candidates for one reason or another. And if all Mormons thought exactly the same, that would be scary! Thank goodness for a world of many different personalities and life experiences.

y said...

Here's what I appreciate about Obama:

He doesn't believe in forcing people into the neat little cubby-holes our society creates for them. (Something the rest of us are so intent on doing). For example: all Mormons are republicans and shouldn't put Obama on their blog. Or rich people don't care about poor people and poor people don't work, take advantage of the system). Black people and white people won't vote together. Republicans and democrats won't either.

His message of hope and transcendence is so inspiring because it strikes at something real. Our political system is broken right now. Look at these comments here on this blog.

In order to make a point, many people feel the need to pull out the "party politics." (You're not on my team! You're a Mormon! How could you?) Make broad generalizations that are not based in facts (about health care, poor people, the war, whatever). That's how Congress operates ... just on a bigger scale. And not to quote Dr. Phil but ... how's that working for us?

This is not about ideaology (do you love universal health care or hate it). This is about choosing a leader with the capacity to inspire and motivate a nation (and a world) to engage in a new kind of politics.

I'm a person who wants to believe in uniting people and ideas and beliefs, not dividing them. We don't have to hunker down and scream at each other till we can't scream anymore. Maybe ... just maybe ... we can look at our similarities AND our differences and see a way to fix what's broken. That seems more practical than screaming.

And maybe if we stop screaming ...

we can.

Tracey said...

I apologize in advance for this long post.

I agree, I would love to live in a country where all could get the health care they need. The only disagreement I have with Obama and others who favor socialized medicine is the method with which they hope to achieve this end. I have just a couple of points.
First, the 44 million uninsured that is often quoted is very misleading. Let’s look at the facts of the 44 million (according to the US Census Bureau)
• 9.5 million are illegal aliens
• 17 million make between $50 and $100K per year and could afford health care but choose instead to spend their money on cell phones, cable TV, vacations, restaurants, etc. I personally know two people in this situation and choose to take this risk because they “never get sick”.
• At least 10 million qualify for existing government programs but choose not to apply for whatever reason.
This leaves about 7.5 million people who are considered “poor” (earn less than $50,000 per year) and do not qualify for existing programs. Still too many, so what do we do about them?

Many have proposed socialized health care. This means, create a tax on the wealthy and redistribute the money to those that are poor in the form of free health care. When we look at major changes like socialized health care, we have to look at the incentives it creates for people to understand how it will affect society. Here are a few:
• It kills incentives of people to provide for themselves. Why should I get better education, work for the better job, when I get it for free anyway. Result: overall lower educated country
• It kills incentives for people to find the cheapest way to fix their health problems. People will go to see doctors for the most minor of afflictions. . . why not, its free!!! Result: overcrowded hospitals (been to the ER lately?), doctors offices, delaying services to people that truly need them.
• It kills incentives for doctors to be competitive or excel. Why should a doctor try to do his or her best, increase his education, study new techniques, when business prices are fixed and whether he/she is good or bad he/she gets paid the same?
• It creates an incentive to get a friend in the government. For those who have been to a communist country they know what I am talking about. Those who have “friends” in the government or dept. of health get access to the best/quickest services and those who don’t wait for years. So, the people spend their time schmoozing, brown nosing, giving gifts, rather than trying to make their life better by getting more education, adding a skill etc.


Universal health care is not the answer!!!!! Wherever it has been tried, the result has been needless death and suffering as fewer and fewer people actually get anything resembling health care from the national health bureaucracy. The reason for this is simple: no government can effectively run a social program. I had access to gov. health care at one time and it was totally unorganized, time consuming and inefficient. Not to mention most of those in line with me had cell phones, acrylic nails and did not look like they were wanting for food.

Rather, the answer is that well-intentioned people need to stop being well-intentioned and move to being well-doing and start a charity that collects money from people who WANT to give it and provide health care to those who REALLY need it. Where would you rather spend your money . . . on a gov. beaurocracy where only .10 of every dollar goes to someone who needs it or a well run charity where .80 goes to people who really need it? I would much rather give my money to the latter.

y said...

Just a fact checking moment here:

Barack Obama is not proposing a plan for "universal" health care. Perhaps you would like to read about his plans, proposals, and ideas at barackobama.com?

HappyGoMommy! said...

I'll stand behind my comment - I was anonymous poster #1 - the only comment I have posted on this post until now. I didn't post with my name simply b/c no one here knows me - but I will gladly leave my name and blog site if you want to see the person behind the comment.

I, too, am a Christian. I feel very badly for many in today's society who are poor or are suffering in some way. We are a one-income family living within our means, but we do not make much for a 5-person family. We make cuts where necessary so we can pay for the necessities - not ask the government to provide them for us!! Healthcare, as with many things, is an issue for our family as well.

HOWEVER - I do not believe it is the government's responsibility to take care of everyone in its society. That is OUR role, as Christians. If we are Christ's body in action - WE should be providing for the poor, feeding the hungry, and taking in those who need shelter. We should be doing this by CHOICE - because we love others and love the Lord, NOT because the government forces us to. That is socialism....we don't want that for our society! We should still have the FREEDOM to choose whether or not we want to provide for others - not be forced to do so by the government.

I have no problem that Kage is sharing her political views on her blog - I do on mine, as well. It's our freedom as they are our own blogs. I'm just sad to see who she is supporting.

Tracey said...

I went to barackobama.com, saw that one of the first things he says under his health care plan is that 45 million (later on he says 47 million) AMERICANS are without health insurance when, as I explained above, the actual number is 7-8 million . This leads me to believe that he either 1. does not do the necessary research to find out the truth about how many Americans can't afford or get existing government health insurance or 2. he is trying to mislead.
Whatever the case may be, there is one thing that IS true and that is,if you are inputting incorrect information, your answer is ALWAYS going to be wrong.

Kage said...

We still fighting on this thread? wow.

e said...

Tracey - I'm sorry that figure kept you from reading about Obama's health care plan. The 2006 census does list 47 million people as being uninsured. It then breaks that number down by category including income and citizenship. But the figure is accurate. We can argue over semantics - "Americans" vs "people living in America", but I think our time is better spent discussing how to make the system better.

Do you think it's wrong that millions (we agree that it's millions) of Americans want health care but can't afford it? Would you agree that health care premiums are too high across the board?
How would you feel about lowering health care premiums so that more people could afford to purchase them?

Barack Obama's plan is basically just that. He's not proposing a government run health care system. It's still privatized. It's not mandatory. (Unlike Clinton and Edwards' plans) It's about lowering costs so that more people can have the option of purchasing coverage. If you want to know how Obama proposes making health care affordable without raising taxes take a look at his proposal. You still might not agree with it, or think that Mitt Romney has a better plan. But please do your research before making statements about a candidate's position or proposals.

Happygomommy - my personal belief is that as Christians one of the ways we can care for the poor is by supporting public policy that reflects our Christian principles. Many people feel this way about public policy regarding abortion or same sex marriage. If we feel a moral obligation to vote our conscience on these issues why don't we feel the same in regards to caring for the poor?

I think the debate about how to best provide people with the opportunity to live the American Dream is a good thing. The fact is that the American Dream is getting further and further out of reach for many people. The top 1% of the country accounts for 17.4% of the national income - the highest concentration of wealth since the 1920's. (I'll link to my sources below.)

For me this election is about the hope that the American Dream is still available to me and my family, and especially my future children. I'm willing to listen to anyone's ideas about how we can get there. I think Mitt's got some good economic ones and there's a lot I like about McCain. I've watched the debates of both parties, read up on their positions and proposals and feel that Obama's vision best matches the direction I would like to see our country go. He inspires me and seems the most capable of reaching through the entrenched ideologies of both parties to find a way to get things done.

I would love to hear some thoughts on the policies and proposals that draw you to the candidates you all are supporting, not why the other side is "wrong".

Thanks for the starting a great discussion kage - I might try to get something going on our blog. My next post will be entitled "Why I hate Puppies"

As promised - the links:
Census:
http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/health/h01_001.htm
Barack Obama Health Care Plan:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/
Distribution of Wealth:
http://www.slate.com/id/2182353/

Anonymous said...

im sure this should be left alone but i just have to give a super quick point of view from near the border. i live in texas and the mexican immigration problem hits home alot. i believe everyone has the right to have a better life but there are MANY reasons why there needs to be change. the universal healthcare idea is a bunch of crap that will make this country worse. we are firemen and nurses in my household and deal with overcrowded and free healthcare situations all the time. it is bringing the country and hospitals down. have you ever been to the apartments where nobody speaks english but can tell the firemen exactly where to go to take them for free healthcare as alot of them but not all are sitting around refusing to pay taxes or learn english and getting drunk, causing wrecks, not paying for them...i could go on and on. the crime rate with illegals is horrifying. i know i probably sound awful to some of you. i am american indian and white. im not a racist. but when it affects your job, your children, your children's health and education you tend to think a little different. i have kids in elementary and high school and i have always been a democrat but things do change when your seeing things affect your life more than just cultural changes. i love variety and different cultures but america was built on the melting pot theory and its just fading from that and it is so sad to me that so many people just dont get it. i pay tons for healthcare and my brother's immigrant workers make what most people make that work at walmart who pay taxes. they dont have to pay taxes and get free food, school lunches, dental, medical. is that really fair? unless you are in the process of getting your citizenship then it is not fair!! sorry-i meant for this to be short. i wont bring up politics on this blog anymore, thanks kage for allowing me to vent. actually, 2 more quick questions that i hope somebody can answer. why does obama not put his hand over his heart during the pledge and also does it bother his supporters that he was sworn in with the koran?

e said...

Anon - Both the hand over the heart and the Koran rumors are false. Obama is Christian and does put his hand on his heart for the pledge. Brian Williams brought it up in the South Carolina democratic debate and it was debunked.

I think that this is a good example what's wrong with the political discussion in our country - people don't bother to check their facts before drawing conclusions about candidates. Google makes it pretty easy if you take the time...

The link for the koran rumor:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2007/dec/20/chain-email-gets-obama-religion-wrong/
Hand over heart:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/obama-says-flag.html

Anonymous said...

Obama is pro-abortion. If you are pro-abortion you are not Christian! "Before I shaped you in the womb, I knew all about you." Jeremiah 1:5. I believe that everyone who supports a candidate who supports abortion rights will one day stand in front of God and give an account for his actions here on earth. Obama further supports gay rights. "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination." Leviticus 20:13. Dr. James Dobson, the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family is endorsing Mike Huckabee not Obama! Obama might make excellent speeches but would Jesus endorse him?

Anonymous said...

I'm a lifelong Mormon, temple-worthy, mother, feminist, career woman, anti-abortion AND pro-choice (yes, that is possible), and a Republican. And I'm voting for Obama. Sign me up for a seat in hell, because if heaven's letting in any of the Jesus freaks from the Bible Belt, I'd rather be anywhere else.

Sam said...

To those who say Obama is a good speaker...
Hitler was a good speaker, too.
Just because they can stir crowds with their words doesn't mean they have the skill to run a country.