This is a follow up to my last post on Barack Obama and lengthy rebuttal to beanonfire [original post] and others:
As with just about every election I can remember, on both sides of the border, there is a great deal of ‘mud slinging’ that goes about to try and make the opposing candidate look bad and attempt to bring out some hidden past or lie. Barack Obama has more then had his share ever since he announced his candidacy back in January 2007.
At first they picked on his name – a Muslim name – and purposely referred to him as Barack Hussein Osama. Those against him saw that as such easy picking in a country that has an extreme case of ‘Islamphobia’ and jumped on his alleged Muslim background as proof he is wrong for president. This along with many of the points you have mentioned in your post have been circulating since the fall of 07. And all of it was an effort to educate people into the truth behind Obama. [ see video here of how mud-slinging works ]
Except that these were in fact, wrong, exagerrated or fabricated.
I have been following his story for nearly a year now because he intrigued me from the beginning. Then as his popularity grew, and I got to see some of his speeches on YouTube, I began to take notice and wondered who is this man and why is he so different then any other politician I’ve watched before?
During the televised and YouTube democratic debates over the latter part of ‘07 many of his opponents, including Hilary Clinton, brought up many of these same points and directed his response to the email being circulated around the internet. He addressed and denied these allegations on CNN as lies and falsehoods [ Video: Barack debunking the myths on CNN ]. In this clip, he even cites the wrongs by Insight Magazine, the one quoted in your post. Also, the quotes from the UK Daily Mail may be true about the nature of his biological father, but Barack had not seen him since he was a baby boy so how is that relevent today? This is the same type of attack as used against Arnold Schwarzeneggar’s father’s Nazi ties – the opposition loves these types of ‘moral bombs’ to drop on their opponents in hoping the people can find some wrong, but in both cases, their father’s actions did not influence or effect them as they hardly knew them and were not active parts of their lives.
Further to that point and his upbringing, the facts are all wrong and have not been hidden. Matter of fact, Obama has written 2 books that predate his campaigning which in both he explains his upbringing, his biological father who abandoned him and his white, agnostic mother when he was 2, and how his step-father a non-practicing Muslim who had never forced the religion onto him. The school he went to in Kenya was a mixed religion school, and then a gifted school on top of that, where he was exposed to the Muslim faith for 2 years, but also spent 2 years later in a Catholic School. By the age of 10, he was living in Hawaii and attending normal school since then. CNN and others explored the alleged ‘madrassa’ schools for what they are (see all the relevent links at end of this post).
Barrack also has publicly said he has been a Christian for over the last 20 years and regularly attends church in Chicago, Illinois, where he currently resides.
He also was open in his books about his drug abuse when he was a kid and he uses that as an example that only helps him to be a stronger person today. As well, most dismiss the smoking up issue altogether citing past leaders like Bill Clinton.
The greater fear lies in most peoples misunderstanding of the Muslim faith and the difference between Muslims and Islamic extremists (ie Al-Qaida). Its the same difference between Christians and Christian fundamentalists (ie KKK & others) On both sides, there are extremists who interpret their religious texts that best suites thier goals to violently go against anyone who does not share their beliefs.
Overall, it is easy to fall into the hype because the US, the world, is looking for and wanting a new, different visionary to help bring back the things that are right. But the real power is more then the man but in his message – together, we can bring about positive change – and this scares alot of people who have gotten very used to, and quite complacent, with the status quo under Bush for so many years. Skepticism has replaced faith. Fear has replaced fear. War has replaced diplomacy. But hope is still there, albeit barely, and as Barack said about the cynics who continue to dismiss new ideas as false hopes, ‘There is nothing false about hope.’
It is the idea – the strength in that message – that if the people really do want to change, that we ALL have the power to do so, and in ALL working together, that yes we can bring about change. What you call a cult, others say is a movement – and one that is long overdue. But what can not be dismissed is how strongly the message is gaining support across the US.
It is easy for anyone to try to counter his ideals, his background, his objectives, and in any great leader we do need the skeptics to make sure things are kept in line and honest. To date everything that has been thrown his way in attempts to damage his reputation or honesty have been dashed or brought to a proper light for all to see them as false or misconstrewed. The strongest point against him seem to be his lack of experience and being a young senator. Hilary may be the better candidate in that respect, though a ‘dream candidacy’ that is being thrown around is having a Hilary-Obama running together as Pres/Vice Pres for 2008.
You mentioned that his speeches are pre-written, as are all public speakers for the most part, which is why they sound good, but if you watch any of the interview videos or live debates you will see he really does come across as someone who truly and genuinely believes and knows what he is talking about. He also offers something new to the presidency that no really ever has before, and that is a more worldly view and understanding thanks in part to his mixed upbringing which offers him a level of credibility when he meets with world leaders from Arab nations (see 5 mins into the Google prt 1 video for his own words). He just may be the real deal, and if he proves himself to be then his legacy will be comparable to that of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King (many others share this view too).
In comparison, no matter how well the written speech may be, George Bush proved time and time again, the person delivering it still needs to have some level of competency. LOL!
Now I would not go so out of my way to post and spend time building up such a reply because I truly believe in Obama and even more so in the vision and ideals he represents. Its that kind of inspiration I have not seen or felt from a public figure in a very long time (the early days of Bill Clinton). With that, I have watched alot of videos and read many articles over the year to formulate the thoughts and opinions I share today – here are a few links to reputable sources to support the points above:
Link: Snopes debunking the email sent out depicting Obama as a Muslim, and other allegations
Link: About.com also debunking the emails
Link: CNN debunking story about Muslim school
Link: Washington Post – Foes Use Obama’s Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him
Video: Barack debunking the myths on CNN
Video: The YouTube Interview: Barack Obama
Video: Barack Obama On What Can Be Done (debate response)
Video: Barack Obama: Q and A from Google employees prt 1 – 22 mins
Video: Barack Obama: Q and A from Google employees prt 2 – 22 mins
Video: FULL 65 min Candidates@Google video (has same part 1&2 listed above)
The questions then lies why so many religious analogies are used when referring to Barack’s campaign, almost as if he were the leader of some new cult? For starters, his message put out in his speeches and videos may speak to their minds but have truly won their hearts. In any successful campaign the key is to appeal to people’s emotions as this then creates a solid connection of comfort and attachment that is far more powerful to appeal to your intellect.