Hanging with Obama

Hey fam,
Just wanted to share my impressions of seeing Obama today at the University of Denver... First off, it was crazy the number of people there. I've never been to a presidential campaign stop, but I doubt that candidates normally get this much interest. There were multiple lines, each stretching around the entire campus. The arena holds 4 or 5 thousand, at least 20 thousand showed up! I got there late, but managed to finagle my way into the main arena. Everyone else sat in an overflow gym or on the soccer field. I guess Obama spoke for a couple minutes to them and then came to speak to us in the main event.

Lots of electricity, and Caroline Kennedy introduced him. It was cool to see the connection in history between JFK's daughter and the man deemed his successor in a sense.
See http://www.newsweek.com/id/106240 for more about Caroline's connection.

It took Obama many minutes to walk the hundred feet to the stage. He was greeting *everyone* along the way. Now I knew why it took so long for this thing to get started... He gave a strong speech, I'll give it a 7 or an 8. He didn't completely bring the house down, but the man can speak. I'm a little skeptical about all this talk of change (that's the campaign moto and something cliched too much)...change to what? But he did have more flesh to his proposed policies than expected. And one of his themes I'll remember is that it's not just enough to improve the policies, we need to change the politics that made Bush's failed policies possible - ie. special interests, attack ads, etc. And I think that overall Obama's run a campaign different in that sense than we're used to.

The day was notable as it was the first time Caroline Kennedy made a campaign stop with Obama. Also, John Edwards withdrew, and Obama praised him, along with even giving Hillary some praise. That didn't last...with McCain looking like the Republican winner, Obama's beginning to frame Hillary as not being very different from McCain - their voting records are similar on Iraq, Iran, etc. He presented himself as the candidate that contrasts with McCain.

So there ya have it, there didn't seem to be anything revelational to get super excited about, but it was a cool experience. The last time I was in the same arena, it was for Peace Jam over a year ago. During that event, I listened to multiple Nobel Peace Prize winners talk about how we need to get our country back on track, re-instantiate Habeus Corpus, shut down Guantamo, etc. Now here I was, in the same stadium, listening to our possible future president talk about doing all of those same things. Now that's neat...

Love, Dan

Dad straightens me out, Mom keeps it real

Pops,
Question, do you think Bush is to be blamed for the recession that is almost upon us? Specifically, it is said that Bush's strong belief in deregulation is at the root of the mortgage crisis that is bringing the economy down.

On the topic of Bush's deregulation, it's also said to be responsible for the toys full of lead, and poisoned pet food we're seeing coming in from China.

What do you think? If you do think Bush's deregulation gets good share of the blame, how come more isn't made of it?

Wow – Piling on ole George W. Let’s see what else we can blame him for: the lousy season the Bears had, the crisis of too many horses in the US (the animal activist closed down the horsemeat slaughter houses and now tons of horses are starving because owners can’t afford to take care of them), the crummy roads in Lake County, the transit crisis in Illinois (due to a bonehead governor we have), the cold and flu season, the lousy television etc, etc.

What recession? The Democrats are praying for one to skew the November election. A sure way to get one is to keep talking up that we are going to have one (thanks Hillary).

I am neither a Republican nor Democrat, but a proud independent voter. I have voted for both parties in the past. A big concern I have is too much government regulation. A free market is what made this country strong and although it is not a perfect system it is better than any other that nations have come up with. The root of the mortgage crisis is pure greed. I don’t think you can regulate that. Just like the 7 year run the stock market had in 1993-2000 eventually greed burst the bubble. The market corrected itself and will so with the mortgage mess. Blame the brokers, banks, mortgage companies, the bond insurance companies and the borrowers for not paying attention.

In regards to lead in toys, it is shear folly to blame Bush on that. The toy companies have known about lead for years and need to police their own product. Would you like the government to OK every product you produce (e.g. making sure your code does not infringe on existing copy rights etc.)? The more bureaucrats involved the worse the process (look at the corrupt city of Chicago that has more officials in jail than any in America). Again the market will correct itself.

The new economy we are experiencing is not what we had in the past and changes have been happening since the Civil War. It is an uncomfortable economy for many or most, but more regulation is a sure way to make things even worse. In listening to many Democratic candidates they seem to want to put trade walls up around the U.S. History has shown that is a sure way to recession and depression.

Some things I would like our politicians to do (either party), but they don’t have the guts to try:

1. Why does not one candidate talk about eliminating the duties on Brazilian ethanol? It is cheaper to make than ours, more efficient to produce, but no body wants to upset the farm lobby (Iowa Caucus).

2. Why don’t we put a tax on imported oil from the Middle East? With the money generated lower our other taxes, pay for health care, education, energy research and the added results of more conservation.

I think in general whoever gets voted in things really won’t change. Change is the favorite word of all these candidates, but everyday lives will hardly be affected by what the Federal Government does. I think the future means more sacrifice for everyone, as the world gets more populated and the limited energy resources become scarcer. Don’t believe any politician that promises to take us back to the good ole days (whenever that was).

We may not agree on many of these things, but it is great to have the dialog.

DAD

Dad,
Cool, I respect your opinion, that's why I asked.

I don't have a clear opinion on government regulation, but I doubt that the Bush administration would have ever done things like require seatbelts for cars. Would the market have corrected itself on that? Or would Bush done something like create the SEC, a regulatory commission that was key to reviving the trust that got us out of the Great Depression. These are two examples of government regulation that we can't live without. In my opinion, we need a good balance of free market and regulation.

As for trade barriers, here I disagree with someone like John Edwards. I am for globalism, it's an extension of the changes we've had in our own economy, where people lose their old jobs and have to re-train or innovate, being positive in the long run. From what I understand, Obama does not want more trade barriers, just rules that our trade partners need to adhere to standards on human rights and the environment, and that appeals greatly to me!

Change IS possible with the right leader, it's happened in our past and it will happen again. We are all very cynical because of the past however many years of bad politics, so on that Obama may have stuck a note...

Hey Buddy, I know that these are important topics--but let's hear about what's REALLY important---how are the wedding plans coming?????????????? Are Lindsay's parents giving you any input? At some point it might be a good idea for the parents to talk?!?!?!? We're home if you or Lindsay want to talk. Love, Mum