Thursday, February 19, 2009

OMG! OMG! OBAMA IS HERE!!!!!!

Discuss.

posted by calgarygrit at 7:51 a.m.

30 Comments:

  • I live in Ottawa, and my lucky frigging roommates are going to Parliament Hill to try to see him. *grumbles about having a job* I'm extremely jealous!

    By Blogger Devon, at 7:59 a.m.  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger sassy, at 9:27 a.m.  

  • Q - what was heard coming from the PM's office for most of the day on Feb 19, 2009.


    A - OMG! OMG! OBAMA IS HERE!!!!!!

    By Blogger sassy, at 9:29 a.m.  

  • Braniac - from the sounds of things, they won't see more than the tinted windows of his motorcade...

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 10:07 a.m.  

  • I can't understand why some people are CRAZY enough to stand in the snow from 4.30 am.

    CRAZY. I mean, Obama is the President of USA, not some Messiah!

    I want to let the guy do his job and let his results speak for themselves.

    By Blogger mezba, at 10:20 a.m.  

  • The power of packaging ...

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 10:25 a.m.  

  • I Heard they are going to just leave Old Air Force One's engine running for this short Coffee Cup visit, as it costs more to turn the planes off and on...lol. ( Or wait...would that be bad for the environment?)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:26 a.m.  

  • Obamafatigue.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:51 a.m.  

  • Better it is Obama who is here than John McCain!!

    By Blogger BeerBellyBuddah, at 11:39 a.m.  

  • YES WE CAN!
    YES WE CAN!
    YES WE CAN!

    This guy reminds me so much of Iggy. A leader who inspires hope!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:43 p.m.  

  • Obama is the last hope for western civilization. Only a pragmatic centralist can save us from the right-wing disease.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 12:58 p.m.  

  • The good citizens of the USA gave Obama the national credit cards and he is running them to the max.

    Party on dude.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:10 p.m.  

  • This guy reminds me so much of Iggy.

    True. Both of them have gone to Harvard and lived in the US for most of the past 30 years.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:12 p.m.  

  • They gave us Bush for the past eight years. The least they could do is give us Obama now.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:38 p.m.  

  • Did you see the Obama-Harper press conference. Why did PMSH look so sad?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 3:14 p.m.  

  • Screw you guys, I have decided to become caught up in Harper-mania.

    Harper was the original person to call for change but give us more of the same! Obama was just copying.

    Like Obama Harper is really of two solitudes... born and raised in Etobicoke, he moved to Alberta. That's pretty much as distant as Kenya is from Kansas.

    Harper also won leadership of his party by defeating a blonde woman who might have slept with Bill Clinton.

    Like Obama, Harper is a thoughtful intellectual. As Obama ponders legal theory and the implications of outside lobbying, Harper ponders how to crush his opponents.

    Harper also spent time as a community organizer that ran a campaign to enfranchise an excluded group from the electoral process. Obama fought to get minorities to vote, while Harper bravely fought so that right wing businessmen could run third party ads in elections.

    So lets all embrace the Harpandemonium and chant!

    Yes we might!
    Yes we might!
    Yes we might!*

    *Pending restrictions imposed by minority parliament, horrible economy, and lack of charisma.

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 4:59 p.m.  

  • Yes Oui Can[ada]!

    I saw Obama speak in Columbus on November 2nd when I went down to volunteer; quite an event.

    By Blogger IslandLiberal, at 5:07 p.m.  

  • "This guy reminds me so much of Iggy."

    I think Ignatieff is Canada's Obama.
    Iggy didn't enter politics to break barriers, but he sure would if elected. He would be the first grandson of a Russian count to be the PM of Canada - opening a door that has been shut for so long. And if a Russian count, why not a Viscount? A burgomeister? Dare I say, a Marquess?

    I yearn for a day when men will be judged, not by the content of their character, but by the blueness of their blood.
    I swell with hope at the mere thought of a day when finally FINALLY, your ordinary workaday baron or earl can say to his son: "one day you could be Prime Minister."

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 5:08 p.m.  

  • Obama is the last hope for western civilization. Only a pragmatic centralist can save us from the right-wing disease.

    He may be centralist by American standards, but by any other standards (including our Canadian standards), Obama is right-wing. Just not as right-wing as the last guy.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 8:14 p.m.  

  • “Obama is right-wing. Just not as right-wing as the last guy.”

    Robert,

    You don't really believe that? Obama believes in environmental responsibility. The right-wing guys want to take the profits and leave the other people to stew in toxic waste.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 5:36 a.m.  

  • The right-wing guys want to take the profits and leave the other people to stew in toxic waste.

    And you don't seriously believe that, do you?

    Given that Harper and Obama have virtually identical positions, are you saying that Harper isn't right-wing either?

    If so ... fair enough.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 10:10 a.m.  

  • "Given that Harper and Obama have virtually identical positions"

    I think that an unbiased person can find a dozen major points of ideological difference between harper and Obama. How many can you identify?

    Here's a a major point of difference. Both claim to be Christians. Obama seeks reconciliation and peace. Harper seeks confrontation and domination.

    Who follows in the path of Jesus? Who wears the shoes of Caesar?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 8:03 p.m.  

  • h2h: Harper also won leadership of his party by defeating a blonde woman who might have slept with Bill Clinton.

    LOL!

    JimTan: Harper seeks confrontation and domination.

    Yes, we all remember Harper's unilateral invasion of Wallis & Fortuna.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:14 a.m.  

  • "I think that an unbiased person can find a dozen major points of ideological difference between harper and Obama. How many can you identify?"

    Well lets look at some issues with high salience.

    1. Afghanistan
    Obama supports US involvement in the war in Afghanistan with no announced end date. Harper wants to pull out by 2011.
    Outcome: Obama's position is more hawkish

    2. Gay Marriage
    Obama opposes gay marriage, but supports civil unions. Harper also opposes gay marriage (but has not really fought much to overturn it), but is a longstanding supporter of civil unions and non-discrimination, even as a Reform MP where his views were unpopular.
    Outcome: its a wash

    3. Health care
    Obama supports universal healthcare for children, operating within the context of a mostly private system. His proposals, if enacted would reduce but not eliminate the ranks of the uninsured. Harper supports universal healthcare, while allowing individuals to purchase additional private coverage.
    Outcome: Harper is to the left of Obama

    4. Taxes and spending
    Obama's stimulus plan involved a mix of tax cuts and spending hikes (about 40-60). Harper's stimulus also favours spending over tax cuts, and while he has cut taxes since 2006, he has also increased spending rapidly. Both Obama and Harper emphasize deficit reduction in the medium term. Both have emphasized tax cuts (consumption taxes in Harper's case, special tax credits in Obama's) that primarily benefit the lower and middle class.
    Outcome: its a wash

    5. The Environment
    Harper favours the development of new technology and intensity-based emission targets. Obama has also emphasized new technology (eg. clean coal, "creating new jobs"). Obama supports hard caps.
    Outcome: Obama is the bigger environmentalist

    6. Abortion
    Harper has never taken a stand on either side of the abortion debate and has attempted to shut down any such debate in his own party. Obama is strongly pro-choice.
    Outcome: Obama is the more pro-life candidate.

    A counter-argument might be to say that Harper is more right wing, and Obama more left wing than they are allowed to be politically. This may be true, but is a problematic standard to adopt. Do we really know the actual leanings of politicians? For instance, it certainly surprises many that Pierre Trudeau once had fascist sympathies. Secondly, putting politicians in different settings does not necessarily yield expected results. Nixon, for instance, had a broad mandate to govern as a conservative (and he was ideologically very conservative) in 1968. He was, in practice, a centrist.

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 2:22 a.m.  

  • A brilliant analysis from Hose. What can I add?

    Ah! Let's talk about Christian conservatism. You can't understand policy decisions without the personal context.

    Christians have a strict moral code. And, Obama and harper represent different kinds of Christians. Obama follows the example of Jesus who forgave sinners and cured the crippled and diseased. He asked the pivotal question about who would cast the first stone.

    Obama is willing to forgive the gays and the aids-afflicted. Heck, he even embraced George who was standing next to him on inaugural day.

    Obama isn't willing to allow gay marriage; an ideological issue about marriage in the eyes of God. However, he is willing to spend in order to help the unfortunate.

    You can see the impact of this ideological difference between Obama and Bush during this economic crisis.

    Bush and harper represent the other face of Christianity. The fire and the rod! The righteous and the others! Death to the infidels, particularly foreign infidels. Bush/Harper have more in common with Osama than Obama.

    Harper is willing to spend more money on guns, armies, police and prisons in order to protect the righteous. He isn't willing to spend money on rehab and harm reduction for the others. Let them hang, if they commit murder! Revenge is mine!

    Obama hopes to bring peace globally and inclusion domestically. The harperites hope to settle old scores, and to create paradise on earth. But, it will not be God's paradise.

    The harperite's paradise is only a vote away. Don't let it happen to you!

    By Blogger JimTan, at 2:39 p.m.  

  • So in other words, Jimtan, the primary difference is that you like Obama and not Harper.

    "Harper is willing to spend more money on guns, armies, police and prisons in order to protect the righteous."

    Obama is planning to cut the size of police, number of prisons and military spending?

    "He isn't willing to spend money on rehab and harm reduction for the others."

    Okay, so Harper scrapped safe injection sites. I'd like to see Obama even suggest he would implement a similar policy.

    "Let them hang, if they commit murder! Revenge is mine!"

    Uh, Harper has never proposed bringing back the death penalty. Obama, in contrast presides over a country that has the death penalty, and has taken no steps to reverse it.

    "The harperites hope to settle old scores, and to create paradise on earth. But, it will not be God's paradise."

    I have no idea what the hell you are going on about here. That's the unique beauty of Jimtan - in a world of trolls, you sir are an ogre.

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 4:28 p.m.  

  • “I have no idea what the hell you are going on about here.”

    Hose, How can you hope to understand a religious conservative unless you understand what the religion is about? Do you mean to tell us that you have written 000s of words without understanding the origins and development of Christianity?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 11:48 p.m.  

  • So in other words, Jimtan, the primary difference is that you like Obama and not Harper.

    Bingo.

    And not just for JimTan, that would be the universal consensus.

    The public and media adoration for Obama and not for Harper is not based on policy, but personality.

    By Blogger Robert Vollman, at 10:18 a.m.  

  • "Hose, How can you hope to understand a religious conservative unless you understand what the religion is about? Do you mean to tell us that you have written 000s of words without understanding the origins and development of Christianity?"

    The notion that Harper or Obama are defined primarily by their religion is utterly ridiculous, and not supported by their positions on the issues, or their actions as leaders.

    I would be willing to bet good money that your typology of Christians would correlate almost perfectly to partisanship anyway, which begs the question of whether religion has much independent explanatory value.

    That is particularly true when your explanation isn't even religion (Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush are members of the same religion), but somebody's personal ideological spin (according to you) on their own religion.

    In Harper's case and Obama's case their faith came AFTER their political awakening.

    Harper was raised as a mainline protestant, but had his political awakening when he moved to Alberta, and saw the impact of the NEP. He joined an evangelical church (the Christian and Missionary Alliance) AFTER he joined the Reform Party. Moreover, the evangelical church he adopted is oriented towards good works (as opposed to moral purity).

    Obama first joined Reverend Wright's church (a protestant church with roots in liberation theology) in the late 1980's. By this time Obama had already been a community organizer, and Harvard student, and had well-established ideological views.

    My point is that if you do the process-tracing (instead of fitting facts to your already-drawn conclusion), the religions adopted by Obama and Harper are more a reflection, than a cause, of the kind of people they are.

    Actually, I think it also illustrates something else they have in common. Both Harper and Obama were smart guys who were outsiders in the places they ended up (Obama in Chicago, Harper in Alberta).

    By Blogger french wedding cat, at 3:57 p.m.  

  • “That is particularly true when your explanation isn't even religion (Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush are members of the same religion), but somebody's personal ideological spin (according to you) on their own religion.”

    Some would say that Jimmy and George have different Gods, even if they both believe in the same end game.

    People galvanize to the mythical type that fits their psyche. Obama follows the redemptive path of Jesus. Harper follows the old testament God. He can't be wrong because he's one of the righteous. It's alright to smite your enemy when you are righteous.

    It's hard to gauge an elected official's intentions because the policies of a minority government are subject to compromise. However, a person's spirituality is the best guide to his personality and his ultimate intentions. Have no doubt that Harper has ultimate intentions. The harperites won't play nice anymore once they get a majority.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 6:34 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home