I apologize if this is a bit complicated. I will try to simplify it as best as I can. This is important.You may have seen this on TV recently.It is widely known that the Bush Administration long ago went to the telephone companies like AT&T and asked them to provide data. Data like all the Internet traffic that goes through their equipment. This should require a warrant issued by a judge in the same way that a search warrant is required if they want to search someone's house. However, the administration said that getting a warrant took too much time and made other arguments. All but one of the companies complied without asking the government to show them a warrant because the government did not have one. The interesting thing is that the applicable law, still available to them allows the government up to three days after the fact to get the warrant. They never bothered. The idea is to stop abuse of power by requiring the government to show that they had some reason to do this search. They can't just go search on anyone they want to just because they woke up that morning and felt like peering into a particular person's life.Several individuals and groups sued the telecom companies for this. And these suits are at various stages. There is a law that was passed after 9/11 called the PAA (Protect America Act). This law allowed the government more flexibility to do surveillance on individuals. This law expired on Feb 16 2008. It has to be renewed.Some lawmakers want law to be renewed with a provision that telecom companies would be immune from law suits based on the information they provided to the government. They broke the law in the past and now they want lawmakers to protect them.This is where things get a little strange and politics takes over. The House passed a version of the bill that did not grant immunity to the telecoms. The Senate version gave immunity to the telecoms. This is not uncommon. What usually happens is that the Senate and House form a joint committee to come up with a law that they can both pass. The president said that he would veto any bill that did not include immunity for the telecoms.On the one hand the administration is saying they need the surveillance capability provided by PAA or we are all going to die. But they won't accept any bill unless the telecom companies are excused from being sued for doing something illegal. That just doesn't make any sense. Is there no rule of law any more? Can some individuals and companies break any law they want and get away with it if they have enough money and connections? I don't think we want to accept that as a country. It just isn't right.If you saw the ad on TV, either ignore it or call your representative and tell him that you do not support immunity for telecoms. That's what I did.
My support for Senator Obama to be president is no secret. At this point, he has won Wisconsin decisively. And it has given him a little lead which, coupled with the momentum that appears, for the moment, to have given him enough of a lead. If I were a betting person, I would bet on him.All of this isn't really my point. The point I do want to make is that the Obama movement, is a combination of two things. The first is the man himself. He is indeed special. It isn't just my opinion but that of many who have said that we have not seen a person of his like in ages. He has a way of inspiring that no one has seen. The ability to inspire like this is huge. He makes the country dream again.The second part of the equation started back in 1992. There was a guy by the name of Jerry Brown in 1992. He had a Washington outsider grass roots campaign drive by a 1-800 number which he shared anywhere he could. He got a good number of small donors which was sufficient to keep him in it all the way to the convention. There was something about his campaign that was different than any that came before it. It was people driven and it gained some traction. Brown was seen as a maverick, an outsider and non-mainstream. Of course he didn't win anything. But it planted a seed.Then again, in 2004, there was a guy named Howard Dean. In many ways Dean's campaign was very much like Brown's. There were two differences. Dean wasn't seen as much of an outsider as Brown was. He was more mainstream. Brown was never really taken seriously. For a while, Dean was taken seriously. The second difference was the Internet. Dean attracted some bright folks that understood how to use that tool better than ever before. He also instituted a decentralized way to drive a campaign that was effective. Dean eventually ran out of money. Most people think it's because of some stupid yelling he did in Iowa. Not true. Dean himself said that he did not expect to have a campaign that went all the way. And he did not have a financial machine to do that. Dean built on the Jerry Brown model by devising a way to drive a campaign without having to do it directly.In many ways, Dean's campaign was a success because it taught how to run a people driven campaign using the Internet as a backbone. Entities like MoveOn.org and DailyKos.com are children of Dean's campaign to name a few.Obama's campaign has not taken any lobbyist money. Most of the money it has collected has been from small donors. Most of it has come from the Internet. And so in this way, Obama, has taken the lead in a movement that already existed before he came on the scene. It was a movement of the mind that was seeded 16 years ago by Jerry Brown. There is no doubt that Obama has encouraged this movement to grow. And it is refreshing to someone like me to see something people driven take root.I hope the people do continue to engage in the political process. People should care about their political leaders. These people affect our lives to a great extent.
Oh Brother. This piece should have been called Yet Another Case for Obama. Enough already. Well, it's important. I firmly believe this nation is undergoing a transformation. In fact, the world as a whole is being transformed. Not because of Barack Obama. This transformation started even before that. Remember Howard Dean? Obama is merely in tune with that transformation. But that really isn't my point here. I've been thinking of this ongoing horse race between Obama and Clinton. Thinking about it a great deal. I'm not deciding between the two. I've been in the Obama camp for a while. I was open minded to allow that one of the other candidates might have pushed him out of my number one spot. That never happened. John Edwards came close.
It is clear now that both candidates have defined themselves. One represents fundamental change, vision and is uniquely inspirational. The other is somewhat more experienced, certainly a better politician in the traditional sense. Both have redeeming qualities. And that brings me to one point for Obama supporters that might be reading this. Do not have negative things to say about Clinton supporters or Clinton herself. You will not convince them to switch camps. If you have something to say, keep your focus on Obama.
Now that I have those thoughts out of the way, I would like to present my recent thoughts on Obama and Clinton. Everyone acknowledges that Senator Clinton has more experience. I don't buy that she has the self proclaimed 35 years of experience. But I do give her the experience edge. The Clinton machine is also well oiled are one of the best at bringing political pressure to bear in key areas. If everything were done in back rooms with arm twisting, there would be few that could best Clinton. I am hopeful that such things are rare and that things are done more in the open in this 21st century.
Senator Obama is acknowledged to be more inspirational. His personal charisma is certainly unique. He has a vision and can communicate that vision. We Obama supporters get the sense that he would be a president that brings much more than a CEO to manage the company. He will get America to dream again. To reach for the stars. And one thing is certain, what America dreams, it can achieve.
The question then is do you want the person who is more experienced or do you want the person who can inspire? I propose to you that the inspirational aspect is the more important. I can hear the Clinton supporter saying hold on a second. Experience is the more important. Very well, let me tell you why I think that in this case, the experience should be second. First, realize that Senator Obama is not without any experience. He did not graduate high school yesterday. Therefore, we are talking about Obama having less experience, not no experience. I do think that, to some degree, experience can be managed. Let's say that it's January 2009 and you are Senator Obama being sworn in as president. You realize that you need to mitigate the experience issue. What would you do? I know what I would do. I would go find myself some experts who I trust who do have experience in the areas where I needed help. Is there any doubt that this would work? Barack Obama is certainly wise enough to do this and do so effectively. Experience is something that is gained. As time moves on, president Obama would gain more experience. In short, the experience thing get diminished over time.
The inspirational aspect of this race is important. A president that can communicate to the public as effectively as he does is very valuable. There is no doubt that leaders that have such gifts bring great things to the organizations or nations they lead. I pointed out in the previous paragraph that any experience deficit gets diminished over time. This isn't the case with charisma and the ability to inspire. What you see in Senator Clinton now is the best you will ever see from her. She is at the top of her game. In contrast, Senator Obama is only just getting started. Obama has more upside and potential than Senator Clinton.
My point here then is that the experience factor goes away over time. However, there is no way Clinton can learn to do what Obama does. If you look into the future, you have to look past day one. I would like to see a president that is ready and able on day 10 or day 1000. I want to see a president that is ready to embrace this changing paradigm the world is undergoing and have the ability to understand what that means.
Regardless of which of these two become the nominee, we can expect good things from them. I hope, as you read this, I can inspire you to pay attention to your government, speak up, vote and make a difference.
