For those of you that haven’t seen it, President-Elect Obama has posted his first video. It’s more opposition talk, which I suppose is fair enough since he’s not yet been sworn in.

On the other hand, I find it kind of hard to see what he’s pointing to here. The notion of something that will relieve the squeeze is nice, but it’s really not clear to me what he’s talking about in concrete terms. He seems to point to a new New deal by putting people in work in road-building (middle class?) and greening up 5 million people.

I really don’t expect him to outline something in detail in a 4 minute youtube piece, but this really feels vacuous.

I am disappointed in California for voting against families, but I am unsurprised. There is a lot of hate, misinformation, and convoluted logic surrounding Prop 8, and it’s all on an issue that is emotional at heart and therefore impossible to argue. I take heart in two things. First, the prop will pass with a far slimmer margin than its older sibling did in 2000, therefore things are moving in the right direction. Second, California has domestic partnership laws that grant all rights of marriage that are within the state’s power to grant. (The federal Defense of Marriage act blocks the rest, and would have done regardless of Prop 8′s outcome.) While “separate but equal” is still wrong, it’s pretty darn equal in this case, and more equal in California than in other states. (J’accuse, Arkansas.) It’s shameful that such a “liberal and tolerant” state voted this way, but it’s not the end of the world.

I am proud of America for electing Obama. Regardless of what happens in his administration, he proved the American dream of equality of opportunity is reality and not merely a yet-to-be-fulfilled promise. I am proud of Obama for focusing on the work ahead and not resting on his laurels, and I acknowledge that racism in America still exists today as much as it did yesterday and the day before. But it is significant that yesterday morning it was possible for anyone but a white guy to become President, but today it is reality.

I am excited about electing a President who ran on a platform of being smart, capable, thoughtful, and articulate, not one of “Hey, I’m a nice guy and I’m just like you stupid people.” I am amused that even cries of “Socialist!” could not prevent Obama from being elected. I am pleased that I got to vote for a candidate and not merely against another, and I am elated that it was possible to run an honourable campaign that enjoyed success. That’s change. It’s good change.

It’s clear that there will be changes, and there is a great deal of information on what those changes might be. I’m looking forward to see how those changes are implemented, and what else lies ahead.

BARTLET I won’t lie to you, being fictional was a big advantage.

It’s interesting to watch the GOP regain control of the cycle, and to watch progressives lose their heart again. I am worried that we’ll have to take on the old cliché that the other side wanted it more.

It’s weak sauce, but it might help in keeping working-class males in the McCain pen, possibly.

With George Bush looking like one of the most unpopular Presidents ever, there is a need for the Democratic party to take the field. I don’t actually think that a Democratic candidate would help the world much, if they follow the worst of the party rhetoric and dump NAFTA, followed by caving the unions on tariffs and outsourcing.

However, if we are lucky, we will get a President who is a good economic centrist with his eye on lowering inflation and opening trade barriers as wide as possible. America is still the prime market, and it will be for a very long time.

I have two journalist pieces that are worth looking at for more thoughts on Obama. The first is an op-ed piece from the Wall-Street Journal called ‘Baghdad, Berlin, Barack‘. It’s interesting because it points to the fact that Obama is a highly consensual candidate, and that a lot of people like him.

It’s striking that his critics talk of him being ‘only’ 4% ahead, he’s on the sliding scale of expectation. It could be argued that that margin is inside the Bradley number, but I’m not convinced.

The second piece is from Reuters, ‘Obama message sinks in [...]‘. It’s a good piece on the nuance of what Barack Obama actually asked the people of Berlin for, and what the real cost to Europe will be if they get what they wish for.

Whatever happens, it’s hard to imagine we’ll see a Johnson or Nixon-style landslide. I think Obama will take 50-51% of the vote and be happy.

Then I read this.

When Obama goes to a church infused with James Cone-style liberation theology, when he makes ill-informed comments about working-class voters, when he bowls a 37 for crying out loud, voters are going to wonder if he’s one of them.

Dear God no, we simply can’t have a President who can’t bowl. How ever will he relate to me with a score like that?

So many people complain about how voters in America don’t consider the really important things when deciding who to vote for. With national newspapers printing things like that, it’s easy to see. I’ll never have a conversation with Obama, and I don’t have time to dig up details about his life and decisions that aren’t already uncovered. Who does this uncovering? The apparently brain-dead media.

Sheesh.

I’m also heartily sick of hearing about Rev. Wright and how awful it is that Obama attends a racist church. It boggles the mind that going to the wrong church can be as politically damaging as not going to church. I’m impressed that no one has mentioned Wright’s voluntary military service (he left college to join the Marines) or his time served on the White House medical team.

Even my favo(u)rite media outlets seem to have confused priorities. Considering there is no way I can personally make an impact on the Democratic nomination at this point, I think I’m going to crawl back into my subterranean hole and run some jobs, to emerge for the Democratic National Convention. I have a high threshold of absurdity tolerance, but this is testing even me.

Turned out to be a good move, as my impression walking away from it was so different from the analysis that I had to wonder if we’d all read the same speech.

I have no idea what people were expecting, but I was impressed. Reading it, I got the impression that whatever else is going on, the man (or his very clever speechwriters) is aware of what is actually going on in the hearts of many Americans, and he’s heard of some of the things that make people on both sides of some key divides very upset indeed. Couple that with the case he’s been making for months that he has good judgment (if not experience), and that’s a very heady mix of Good Stuff I Want To See In the Leader of the Free World.

I’m beginning to wonder if Obama is trying to redefine the election process here as something less like an audition (or a laundry list of hot-button issues — yawn) and more like a job interview. Many companies interview scientists here for jobs that have nothing to do with science. They’re here because they want smart people who can solve problems, and they don’t care so much that the interviewees haven’t actually solved anything related to the employer’s problems yet. Obama wants to convince America that he’s a smart guy with keen awareness and good sense, and that makes him qualified to lead the country. No wonder so many people have found him so compelling.

I’d quoted a few bits from the speech here, but it made the entry excessively wordy and it seemed wrong to extract carefully crafted points from their context. I encourage y’all to read the whole thing if you have the chance and form your own opinions. It’s about a leisurely mug of tea long.