Why Obama Must Win

I almost always avoid politics because of many things. The first is that people tend to classify others based on who they support and what they support with no thought as to the reasons that there is support for a particular candidate. Contrary to present political systems and what people expect of them, voting is not the core of democracy - informed discussion is.

I'm not buying into the cool-kids-say-Obama-is-cool mystique. I had and continue to have Obamitis because of the way Obama's name is punted about the blogosphere and Facebook. Frankly, I'm a bit sick of it - but I do believe that Obama is the right person for the terrible job left to do after the Bush Administration. There is a need for addressing the United States' image around the world. Electing Senator McCain simply won't handle that issue, as qualified as he may be.

John Cleese outlines, in the very beginning of the video, one of the very core reasons why Barack Obama must win the election. Sure, Colin Powell recently endorsed Obama - and while some are making that about race, Powell's statements demonstrate that he's endorsing Obama because change is needed. Outside of the United States - where I have been spending the majority of my life during George W. Bush's reign - the tone is incredibly different than that which seems to be portrayed in the United States media.

In essence, while everyone outside the U.S. likes the idea of living in the U.S. based on media advertising that says the United States is the land of milk and honey - people have come to terms with the fact that the milk may be sour and the honey is guarded by African killer bees. While the United States presents a large export market for the world, the purchasing power of the United States has decreased significantly during George W. Bush's reign - the last financial disaster added more injury than the financial hemorrhage of the war and subsequent occupation of Iraq (whether you agree with it or not). It's well and good to support the troops - I do - but supporting the troops requires more than making good decisions on the ground. Supporting the troops means assuring that the troops have (1) valid reasons for being there, and (2) not throwing away the lives and quality of life of the troops for reasons that seem to simplify to oil.

The world sees all of this. Maybe it doesn't speak openly of it, and it's quite possible that it doesn't speak openly enough. But there is a change in the tone when one talks about the United States, one that doesn't necessarily even make it onto the Internet because of digital divide issues, but it's there. Linger with an American accent in some places and you'll get an earful. The wars, the ticking time bombs of mortgages, foreign policy that dictates rather than discusses... no smart person bites the hand that feeds it, but if the hand that feeds is running out of food, there is a change in that status quo. A foreign policy of preventive war (would George Washington have approved?) doesn't make friends. It makes a nervous planet.

There has been a change in the status quo, on a global level. The United States, as large as it is, is only a part of the global economy. The global economy, after the cold war, isn't as much about keeping national marbles from mixing with the marbles of other nations. Marbles mix in the global economy.

Can McCain get that trust back? I honestly don't think so, and I haven't seen a lot of foreign interest in Senator McCain. But take a look around. The entire world is interested in Senator Obama. Maybe it was the confusion about his religion because he went to a Muslim school for 2 years¹.

Then there are the allegations of terrorist links through knowing William Ayers. It's a good thing that McCain didn't know Theodore Kaczynski, I suppose, but let's face facts: the present administration seems terrorist in nature to many people around the world in much the same way that it labels others as terrorist. And the whole time, guess what: the world watches the U.S. presidential election and affects foreign policy even as foreign policy is discussed.

And the world, as a whole, seems more likely to support Obama. Why? He's been labeled a Muslim, when Islam is the world's fastest growing religion. He's been labeled a terrorist, in a world where an Axis of Evil is said to exist. And while he is neither, by being accused of these things he stands with the innocents who have been accused of the same things. Frankly, McCain/Palin have seemed to make Obama's international weight greater, which means he'll have greater weight in foreign policy - something Bill Clinton is/was good at but his wife may not have been very good at.

Me? I'm a veteran. I'll always support the troops because that's what veterans do - but supporting the troops doesn't mean flinging them into danger whenever rich people feel the need to become richer or the powerful seek more power. It's time that the world saw a United States that it would like to have trade and political relations with - the United States of lore.

McCain can't do that. Obama can. This election can affect the global status quo - how it is affected, because of the media and the citizen journalists, is fickle. But at the end of the day, what one has to ponder is this:

Would the world prefer to deal with McCain or Obama? The world, if you listen, is saying Obama. These are the nations and peoples that the United States trades with, makes policy with, and otherwise negotiates with. McCain has shown his politics in his campaign, smearing his opponents whenever he sees fit. Is that the person who should be handling foreign policy and reporting to the American people? I think not.

Obama has to win. Poor guy. He's working so hard for a crappy job.

¹I went to a Roman Catholic school for 5 years and I'm not a Roman Catholic. I'm a Buddhist. You go to the schools available. And what does it matter what religion a President is? That this is even an issue demonstrates a small-minded voter base which is unfamiliar with the larger world.