The Day Dawns..
So it's finally here, November 4..
I have never been so engaged by a US Election. It's not that I haven't cared previously, but I have not been gripped at such a profoundly emotional level.
I'm not even American, I'm Canadian, and since this began I have anxiously kept up to date on news, I've tried to make sense of wildly disparate poll numbers, I've watched videos, and I've wished, for the first time in my life ever, that I was American. I feel incredibly privileged to be witness to an election so momentous, and my academic background in history only amplifies my sense of awe at being alive to see so pivotal a moment unfold.
And despite poll forecasts I am nervous...anxious... Will Barack Obama, a Black Democrat from the more progressive side of the party, actually break down those long-entrenched barriers? It all seems so tinged with unreality, it has the quality of a fairy tale.
Alongside all of this, assuming Obama is elected as President, I hope people in both the US and around the world, temper their expectations with pragmatism and recognise he is not a miracle worker... He will have such a tremendous mess to clean up... an economy that is beyond tatters, a war that continues to bleed untold lives and resources, healthcare... to say nothing of tackling myriad issues related to the environment. No easy task, not for anyone..
I almost wish I were religious, I could at least pray. But, I am not, certainly not in any mainstream definition of the word, so all that is really left then today, as History is woven, is Hope.
I have never been so engaged by a US Election. It's not that I haven't cared previously, but I have not been gripped at such a profoundly emotional level.
I'm not even American, I'm Canadian, and since this began I have anxiously kept up to date on news, I've tried to make sense of wildly disparate poll numbers, I've watched videos, and I've wished, for the first time in my life ever, that I was American. I feel incredibly privileged to be witness to an election so momentous, and my academic background in history only amplifies my sense of awe at being alive to see so pivotal a moment unfold.
And despite poll forecasts I am nervous...anxious... Will Barack Obama, a Black Democrat from the more progressive side of the party, actually break down those long-entrenched barriers? It all seems so tinged with unreality, it has the quality of a fairy tale.
Alongside all of this, assuming Obama is elected as President, I hope people in both the US and around the world, temper their expectations with pragmatism and recognise he is not a miracle worker... He will have such a tremendous mess to clean up... an economy that is beyond tatters, a war that continues to bleed untold lives and resources, healthcare... to say nothing of tackling myriad issues related to the environment. No easy task, not for anyone..
I almost wish I were religious, I could at least pray. But, I am not, certainly not in any mainstream definition of the word, so all that is really left then today, as History is woven, is Hope.
Total Comments 5
Comments
-
Hmm... I have to agree and say it has indeed been quite fascinating! The Danish medias have been flooding with the american presidential election the last three months.
I'm just hoping for things to change. because from over here it seems as if Bush made quite the mess of America. But then again it's difficult for me to say what is to blame on Bush and what is to blame on american culture... Cause America is just so different than Denmark that it might as well be another planet alltogether.
But at least from what I have pieced together Obama has the vision to do what I think must be done.
I have to admit that the whole thing is quite confusing to me :S I mean... There's the president, the congress, the senate, the house, cabinate departments and the supreme court and what ever
I just don't understand how the whole system operates... The danish system is soooo much different...
I guess the results has to speak for them selvesPosted 11-05-2008 at 05:17 PM by sort-vampyr
- Post Script
Where to start? I have voiced in a clumsy sort of way here and there my feelings of awe.. of elation. I am still having trouble believing this is real.
For a long time I was involved in activist politics, and as I mentioned above, I have a background in history. I never thought I would ever see a day like this, not ever...
I'm not deluded, I don't view Barack Obama as a sort of Messiah of progressive politics. Even if Obama wants to initiate an extremely progressive administration, he will be limited in what he can actually achieve. Further, there is no way he'll be able to fulfill all of the hopes and expectations upon him, especially not with the economic situation as utterly grave as it.
But, I can't help but be swept away by the symbolism, nor can I help but be elated that the Bush era has come to a close. I also can't help but feel optimistic that the US once more has a president who is articulate, intelligent and highly rational. I care because this election directly affects the entire planet. I care because of what this means. In a very real way Obama's triumph brings hope to millions of people, both in the US and around the world, who have long felt their voices could never be heard... and that... that is extraordinary.Posted 11-05-2008 at 05:40 PM by dragon wench
Updated 11-06-2008 at 12:58 AM by dragon wench - I wouldn't mind if Obama went more for the left-wing side, but I've come to the understanding that the left-wing isn't really populair in the US.
I really think people expect to much of Obama, but it is certain he'll go into history more as a symbol than as a president.
Today, I've heard something interresting (and maybe this should be posted on the actual forum). Barrack Obama's view on Iraq. He is going to retreat Iraq, but what of Afghanistan? I think I heard some guy say he's going to bring them to Afghanistan, but I missed his arguments. His ending was 'the Americans don't realise it yet'. It frightened me and I saw writen 'Iraq=>unclear'.
Every president has something unexpected to deal with, and only then his real president skills are tested. I can only hope that Obama will not go from "Messias" to "Anti-Christ".Posted 11-06-2008 at 03:22 PM by SupaCat - @SupaCat,
Yeah.. Obama can't veer too far to the left. I mean, we are talking about a country where the word "Liberal" has negative connotations in some places
People do expect a lot of him, and I really do not think he can deliver on even half of what people are hoping from him. He's only human, he's only one man (though he looks to be assembling a good team of people), and he'll also be up against the age-old Washington hierarchy. All of that being said though, I did just watch his first press conference and I was actually pretty impressed. He came over as firm, fair, stable and decisive, so it was promising. We'll see what the future brings, t'is early days yet...
@sort-vampyr,
I find the US system confusing too, and I live next door!
Canada has a constitutional monarchy very much like Britain's, and I find that to be far more straightforward than the US system.
I think that Obama's vision, as well as his ability as an organiser, has actually been critical to his being elected. People tend to respond very positively when a potential leader has an inspiring vision, even if they know deep down that the person will never be able to entirely fulfill it. I'm very much reminded of when Canada had its one and only inspiring Prime Minister... Pierre Elliot Trudeau.
Note
For anyone who is interested this article in The Nation is an eloquent and well-written read.Posted 11-07-2008 at 06:56 PM by dragon wench
Updated 11-07-2008 at 08:44 PM by dragon wench - Hey there. I'm an American from New York City. I'll explain the US federal government as simply as I can. Hopefully I can clear up most of the mystery for you.
1. The government is separated into 3 branches: legislative, executive, judicial. The Congress is the legislative branch. The President is the head of the executive branch. Cabinet Secretaries are members of this branch answering directly to the President and they serve at the President's pleasure like all members of the executive, including the humblest executive branch bureaucrat. The various courts, including the Supreme Court, make up the judicial branch.
2. Congress, being the legislative branch, has the *sole* power to make the laws of the nation. Treaties with foreign countries must be ratified by Congress to take effect because treaties, once agreed to, are considered a part of the Law of the land. Individual laws, of course, can include anything from how much money may be spent on the army this year to whether you may marry a man or woman regardless of your sex. What makes Congress truly powerful is that it has the *sole* power of the purse. No government money can be distributed without Congress's authorization. The army, the FBI, the bureaucracy, bailouts for Citibank, etc. etc. are funded only because Congress authorized their funds. If you guessed that Congress has the sole power to tax, you are correct. It makes all tax laws, just as it makes all other laws. Additionally, Congress has the *sole* power to issue formal declarations of war. The Congress is made up of 2 chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Speaker of the House is the leader of the House of Representatives. The Senate Majority Leader is the de facto leader of the Senate.
3.The President, being the head of the executive branch, has 4 major duties: he/she is responsible for *enforcing* the laws of the nation as made by Congress, he/she acts as Chief Diplomat, he/she acts as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, and he/she acts as the *symbolic* Head of State. As the enforcer of the nation's laws, the President is the ultimate head of all federal law enforcement agencies - the FBI is one example of a federal law enforcement agency. The President may also *implement* law (as opposed to simply enforcing it) if authorized to do so by Congress. I'll use FEMA to illustrate what I mean. If you recall, FEMA is the federal disaster relief agency that did a horrific job of helping victims of Hurricane Katrina. FEMA was enacted into law by Congress many years ago. Congress, however, decreed that the administration of FEMA would be the responsibility of the President, making FEMA a part of the executive branch in effect. In other words, all of FEMA's operating procedures, methods, appointment of executive officers, staff, etc. etc. are the President's responsibility. Now, whether he actually manages these things himself or delegates is of course up to him. Considering the vast number of agencies that are the responsibility of the President, I would think that over 99% of his duties are delegated to the executive branch bureaucracy. You can think of the Cabinet as members of the President's bureaucracy. The Cabinet are appointed by the President and they are, in effect, the CEO's of their departments. They also usually serve as the President's chief advisers, spokespeople, and representatives on matters that their departments handle. This explains why Secretary of State Rice, who is the head of the diplomatic corps, makes appearances in foreign countries in the President's stead. It also explains why she is a powerful figure, though she can do nothing without the express or tacit approval of the President.
Am I being clear so far? Hope so.
OK, as for the President's duty as Chief Diplomat- it's pretty much as it sounds. The President is responsible for handling foreign affairs, within the bounds of the laws made by Congress. For example, if Congress has approved a trade treaty with a foreign country, the President's responsibility is to work with that country's government to ensure that trade is adhering to the terms of the treaty. As Chief Diplomat, the President is also the negotiator of treaties with foreign governments though, as I said before, treaties go into effect only if Congress approves them. This arrangement explains why foreign affairs can get so heavily politicized and why you see members of Congress go on "fact-finding missions" to foreign countries. The President's role as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces is just as straightforward as it sounds, though, as I said before, the President may not formally declare war on another country and he/she must get funding for the military from Congress. In other words, if Congress really wanted to, it could end the war in Iraq today by simply cutting off all funding for the soldiers in Iraq effective immediately.
And finally- the President's role as symbolic (as opposed to effective) Head of State. You can intuit from what I've written that it's hard to say that the President is the effective head of state because he/she can't make law and there are many checks on his/her powers. However, since he is the only American politician (besides the Vice President) who is elected nationally, he gets the power of the "bully pulpit". In other words, he can have enormous influence over what Congress does, depending on his relationship with the American people. For example, if the President is popular and he tells the American people that he thinks the health care system needs reform, Congress would be wise to start working on some health care reform legislation. Thus he has the potential ability to shape (but not dictate) what the government's policy goals are. If his own political party controls Congress, life is usually easier for him of course. And finally, he can shape Congress's actions by refusing to sign its legislation into law. He can't make legislation, but he *can* refuse to approve legislation. Legislation usually doesn't become law unless he literally signs it. If he refuses to sign, Congress can still "override" his "veto", making the legislation law despite his disapproval, but this is usually not easy to do.
And finally...
4. The judicial branch functions like courts do almost everywhere. Now, of course, one important characteristic of the American judicial system is that it is an appellate system. Almost all court cases are first heard in lower-level courts and can be appealed again and again to higher and higher level courts. The Supreme Court is the last court of appeal; its verdict is final. The Supreme Court can hear any appeal it wishes to. In practice, it hears only a minute percentage of appeals. By tradition, the Court will hear an appeal only if there's a doubt about the constitutionality of the law(s) that pertain to it. The Constitution is the highest law of the nation; no level of government, whether federal, state, or local, can enact laws that are contrary to it. The Supreme Court ultimately decides whether laws violate the Constitution or not. In practice, this often isn't a very cut-and-dried process; the 9 Justices of the Court often must personally interpret the meaning/intent of the Constitution as it pertains to the law(s) in question. Historical precedent is also often considered. For example, the Court, in the Roe v. Wade case, ruled that women have the constitutional right to an abortion, overturning a law that made abortions illegal. Now, of course, the Constitution doesn't even mention abortion at all. The Court came to its conclusion by reasoning that abortion is a personal affair included in the constitutional right to privacy. Of course, the constitution also says nothing at all about privacy. The right to privacy was declared a constitutional principle by a previous Supreme Court ruling! Puzzled? So were a lot of Americans, especially ones that disagreed with abortion to begin with. You can partly understand now why abortion is just endlessly, tiresomely controversial in this country. A candidate for Supreme Court Justice is named by the President, and Congress must vote to approve the nomination. Justices serve for life or until they resign or are impeached.
Well, there it is. I can't believe I've gone on about this for so long but it was fun. Anything to help people understand us wacky Americans. Hopefully I succeeded somewhat.Posted 01-10-2009 at 05:23 AM by Bigby's Nose
