Obama Speeches: 2004 Democratic Convention

Part One



Part Two



Here is the momentous speech where Senator Obama entered the national stage. I must admit that before this speech I had not heard of him, even though he was the leading candidate to be my next senator. His speech, and the subsequent victory in November, was the lone bright spot in a very disappointing election year.

From the bitter disappointment towards President Bush, to the incredible apathy towards Kerry, I really was not all that engaged in the 2004 Presidential race. It certainly wasn't very interesting, as Bush ran unopposed for the GOP nomination, and Kerry had it wrapped up after Super Tuesday. As the Democrats headed towards Boston for their four day festival of balloons and bullcrap, I yawned in anticipation.

For a while, I decided not to really pay attention to the conventions. I rethought that decision when I started hearing the buzz about the keynote speaker on one of the nights. He was a relatively young state senator from my home state. His name was Barack Obama.

I tuned into CNN that night, hoping for an entertaining speech. Senator Obama did not disappoint. His speech was heads and shoulders above anything I had heard from a political candidate, ever. It was a speech that spoke to a different type of politics, a philosophy that was so vastly different from the politics of the day. Instead of "wedge issues" and "swiftboating", Obama spoke to a sense of purpose, a sense of unity. He spoke to the idea that although Republicans and Democrats may have differences, what unites us is much stronger.

Needless to say, I was hooked. The moment he finished his speech, I was looking forward to 2008. When Kerry went on to lose to Dubya in November, the thought that Obama would be there in four years made it sting less. Many times in the four years since that warm July night I have watched that beautiful speech, and renewed my hope for the future. My only hope is that the speech is eclipsed by his acceptance speech for the nomination in Denver, and at his inauguration on January 20, 2009.

OMGZ!!!1! OBAMA TEH MUZLIM!?!?! WTF?!?!

This email is patently false

My fellow readers, if you get this moronic email in your inbox, delete it as soon as possible. Before you do that, you might want to reply to the sender, especially if it is someone you know. Tell them politely that it is utter hogwash, and cheerfully point them to this link.

If you ever forwarded this email on to someone, except for the purpose of making fun of its stupidity, shame on you. This is the political equivalent of the garbled spam promising FREE VIAGAARA HOT ENGORGEMENT!!!! Please show some common decency and sense, and stop forwarding on crap without verifying its accuracy.

The very fact these emails are still making news months after they were roundly debunked is troubling. Barack Obama already has an uphill battle to begin with, and he doesn't need outright falsities clouding the way.

Don't tread on me

As anybody who knows me understands, I love this country. I love our sense of independence, and our vast freedoms to be who we choose to be, not what someone tells us to be. I love that we have no state religion or language, and that we refuse to dip our flag to foreign leaders during the Olympics. Although not as easy as it used to be, I love the idea that any American can rise from obscurity just through hard work and determination. I have read the Constitution, and marvel in the words of Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.

However, there is one thing I do not do, one thing that might result in some people questioning my love for my country. I don't put my hand over my heart during the national jingoistic displays.

Yes, I don't put my hand over my heart for "The Star Spangled Banner" or "The Pledge of Allegiance". I haven't since high school, and I don't intend to start doing it now. Instead, I stand respectfully with my hands clasped in front of me.

Why do I do this? The symbolism, of course. I don't need to be told how to show my respect to my country. Saluting flags and standing at attention and all that other crap is something far too militaristic, far too anti-democratic to my tastes.

As far as the Pledge of Allegiance is concerned, I go even farther and don't recite the pledge. After all, this isn't some fascist police state (yet). Our rights are derived from nature, not from the benevolence of Uncle Sam.

Thus, I can't understand why people jump all over Barack Obama for not kowtowing to the American flag during the national anthem. If he so chooses to stand with his hands at his waist, so be it. I'm certain he loves this country, and respects those who have died for it.

If you choose to put your hand over your heart, by all means do so. If you wish to stand respectfully, go ahead and do it. Hell, if you wish to stand disrespectfully, or not even stand at all, go ahead. Some people may not like it, but that is the way it goes in a free society. They'll get over it, in time.

To me, patriotism is standing up for what you believe. I believe in a free and open society, one where your love of country is shown through actions, not just hollow words and salutes. We fought a war over sixty years ago against two nations built upon jingoism and hollow nationalism. I'll be damned if I let this country that I love turn into one of those nations.

Taser This: F**K Standards

To me, the First Amendment is our most cherished constitutional right. The idea that we can question our leaders without fear of reprisal by the government is something I hold sacrosanct. Whenever someone tries to impinge this right, I will make my displeasure known.

That being said, this doesn't mean anybody can just spout what they want, and get away with it. Although the government has little right to limit speech (save for the old chestnut about yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater), the same right isn't expressly extended to private entities. For example, Fox can force The Simpsons to pixelate nude rear-ends, and Comedy Central can tell Stone & Parker to not show the image of Muhammad. I don't believe they should enforce those limits, but I do not deny they have the ability to do so.

The issue is a little grayer, however, when it comes to political statements and news media. The issue becomes even grayer when the media outlet in question is a student newspaper on the campus of a public university. Where is the line drawn? Is anything out of bounds, or are there things for these papers that can result in negative consequences for the writer?

Thus we come to the controversy at Colorado State University. I'd summarize the editorial, except for the fact that it is almost exactly the same as this post's title, with "Bush" in the place of "Standards".

In my opinion, the editor should be fired. Not because of his political beliefs, or even because he used "Fuck" in the story. To fire him because of a political view in an editorial would be disastrous, a serious violation of the First Amendment. The use of "Fuck", although rather vulgar and contrary to usual journalistic standards, is defensible, if used in a clever or meaningful way. This is especially so in a campus newspaper, which is bound to be looser and more irreverent than the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times.

He should lose his job because the statement wasn't exactly thought-provoking, humorous, or even all that bold. It was raw sensationalism for the sake of getting a rise out of people. Although there is a place for that kind of behavior, it isn't on the editorial pages.

One thing people seem to forget is that you have the right to free speech, but that also means people have the right to disagree with you. Your words have consequences, whether intentional or not. As this editor has the right to express his opinion, so do those who disagree with him. This is in clear force in this case, as the campus Republicans are pushing to bankrupt the paper until he is fired.*

So I ask on Mr. McSwane to do the right thing and resign. Not because I don't believe he has a right to say "Fuck Bush". His continued presence on the paper is harming its reputation, hurting its staff, and causing an uproar much greater than its true importance. If he won't live up to the consequences of his actions, the board in charge of the paper must act and remove him. Only by this action can the newspaper, and the students of Colorado State, move on.

*-The predictability and machine like actions of the Campus Republicans have their own disturbing elements, but I do not wish to get off on a tangent about the Republican party here.

The American Way: Ahmadinejad Speaks

I congratulate Columbia University for having the courage to let Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speak. What better way for our country to show the strengths of our cherished ideals by allowing a leader of one of our least favored countries speak?

I am personally tired of our nations attitude towards both Iran and Cuba. While I don't think we should treat these nations as friends exactly, I do believe its time to accept that their governments aren't going anywhere, and that they deserve a more official role in our diplomatic efforts. Its time we bury the conflicts of the past, and look towards tomorrow.

Tasteful Advertising

This is a wonderful PSA from Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. So tasteful that I might just take up smoking to spite the creators of it.

I mean it makes sense. 5.4 million people dieing because they chose to smoke cigarettes that they knew could kill them, versus thousands of people killed just because a few deranged madmen hated them.

Of course, it's a little out of date now. I took the liberty of updating it so it would be a more relevant American tragedy. Can't wait until Dec 7!

Blah Blah Blah: Bush speaks

Don't have much to say on Mr. Bush's speech tonight. Unless his speech includes "effective at noon tomorrow, I and Mr. Cheney shall resign our positions" or "I screwed up", I don't believe anything he has to say.

Naturally, the Dems will give him everything he wants (and possibly more) on any bill regarding the war. With an opposition party like them, who needs friends?

Ugh....