Entry 695, on 2008-02-12 at 21:25:59 (Rating 2, Politics)
Yesterday I watched an on-line video of a speech by Barack Obama talking about religion and politics. I expected to be depressed but quite the contrary was true: I was actually quite impressed by both what he said and the way he said it. After years of the current American administration I have a very poor opinion of US politics but if Obama does become president (and the consensus now seems to be that he will) and he can maintain some of the ideals he has now, I think he might make a great leader.
Of course, there have been past leaders who demonstrated idealism before being elected but quickly changed once the reality of political life hit them, but we can always be optimistic, can't we?
So what were some of the things I liked so much? Well he claimed to be a serious Christian but it would be political suicide not to make this claim and, if the way he spoke is a good indication, I see signs that maybe he isn't that committed, or at least he has a realistic view of the value of Christianity. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he's not really a Christian at all, which is ironic since he mentioned in the speech that he has little respect for fake religion. Normally I would not find that sort of tactic acceptable, but he really has no choice so I do understand his position.
He totally rejected any literal interpretation of the Bible and he ridiculed the idea by pointing out the consequences of following some of the rules in Leviticus and Deuteronomy which is something atheists often also enjoy doing.
He talked about how unthinking commitment to authority is dangerous which is another theme I often pursue myself. So even though he speaks highly of faith he clearly understands its not necessarily always the best approach (some would say it never is). He said that Americans are sick of faith being used as a tool of attack which is surely a point which should resonate with any reasonable person.
He specifically talked about the rights of non-believers and how they also have a part in the political process. Considering past leaders have commented that atheists aren't even citizens, this must be a positive sign.
On several occasions he identified himself with being progressive and by American political standards he probably is. But I got the impression he was being careful about admitting to being too progressive.
I haven't taken a lot of notice of the American presidential election process. After all I live on the other side of the world so why should I care? Well America is still the most powerful country in the world and its leadership is important to everyone's future so I do care. And after watching this speech and doing some research on Obama's background I feel a lot more positive about the future. Maybe there is hope after all!
Comment 1 (1146) by SBFL on 2008-02-12 at 22:35:14:
Good to see you are supporting a Christian. Would be keen to see the online video - got a link?
"if Obama does become president (and the consensus now seems to be that he will)" OJB - what planet are you living on (or rather what network are you watching?). Do you know what 'consensus' means?
PS Preview function still fails when there is a < i > tag.
Comment 2 (1152) by SBFL on 2008-02-12 at 23:42:47:
For the record I am very excited by Obama's progress and his voting demographic resonates with that of my own. I hope he beats Clinton for the Dem nomination, resulting in an Obama vs McCain general election. Two strong candidates can only be good for the US and I will look forward to scrutinizing both candidates on the issues before making a final preference (despite the fact I cannot vote!)
Comment 3 (1153) by SBFL on 2008-02-12 at 23:46:44:
Speaking of the demographics, in last Friday’s NZ Herald, I thought it interesting to see the types of voters for each candidate:
“Barack Obama: African-Americans, white men, wealthy people, university educated people, young voters, independents, even some centrist Republicans.
Hillary Clinton: White women, older people, blue collar workers, non-tertiary educated people, Hispanics, core Democrats.”
Comment 4 (1155) by OJB on 2008-02-13 at 10:03:35:
You don't have much choice but to support a Christian in the US election because an atheist would have no hope of winning. That's why everyone at least needs to pretend he is one. As I said above, I don't get the impression Obama is a particularly "serious" Christian and maybe he isn't one at all.
The consensus I was talking about was from several political commentators over the last few days. Maybe that wasn't exactly the word I should have used by I just got the impression that he is now seen as the most likely winner. I'm not counting chickens though!
Hey this is pretty cool, SBFL and OJB agree on something! We both support the same candidate!
Comment 5 (1196) by SBFL on 2008-02-29 at 00:54:13:
Well people who call themselves atheists don't make up a huge proportion of the population, so choices are going to be Christians or lapsed Christians for the most part, esp in the US. I wouldn't hold that against them though, Christians are pretty decent people apparently.
I don't know where you think Obama isn't a serious Christian though. I believe he is at least a regular churchgoer, though that doesn't necessarily mean serious. Might pay to do more research.
Yes, well Obama has been charging on since your comment. The tide has turned and I cannot see Ohio and Texas doing enough for Hillary to regain that frontrunner status. Very exciting contest, that Dem primary nomination, and without a doubt will be the US election I pay most attention to.
Comment 6 (1211) by OJB on 2008-02-29 at 17:44:41:
Yes, its bizarre isn't it? People seem to have a need to believe in the supernatural even when its clearly nonsense. I think (but can't prove) that a large proportion of religious people are really just nominally religious and from a practical perspective are really atheists (or agnostic because they don't care). Certainly I know many people who put "Christian" on the census form but are no more religious than me - well maybe a little bit more!
Did you listen to the speech? I just got the feeling from that he didn't take it too seriously. Just some of the comments he made. And his religious background is open to considerable interpretation. Have a look at the entry in Wikipedia.
It is an interesting competition and, as I said earlier, Obama does now seem to be the frontrunner. Sure beats the "contest" in the upcoming NZ election!
Comment 7 (1213) by SBFL on 2008-02-29 at 21:07:47:
Hmmm, I'll ignore your first paragraph as a desperate attempt to boost your numbers. As if numbers account for anything anyway, you shouldn't have to rely on them to qualify your own beliefs (athiest or religious). Your believe what you believe, even if you are the only person on the planet who thinks that way.
Nope, not sure what speech you mean.
Are you admitting the left are out of govt later this year? Well at least you are a realist!
Comment 8 (1215) by OJB on 2008-02-29 at 21:52:54:
Do you deny that a significant number of people are Christians in name only? Surely you must be aware of this phenomenon.
Obama made a speech specifically about religion. I should have made a note of the URL but a bit of Googling should find it.
Its unusual for a government in NZ to last more than 2 or 3 terms so whoever was in would probably be out now irrespective of their performance.
Comment 9 (1237) by SBFL on 2008-03-05 at 22:28:44:
My first paragraph in the my last comment still stands. I choose not to judge how others perceive their own spirituality, or lack thereof. Like any large organisation, there will be varying degrees.
Ok.
Fair point. Even John Howards govt (4 terms) lost out recently despite a high-performing economy.
Comment 10 (1239) by OJB on 2008-03-06 at 08:42:16:
Right, so I think we've resolved all of those issues. Just one comment though (isn't there always :) I never strive to be in the majority. I'm a Mac user. I use a superior but minority platform. I'm an atheist and atheists seem to be far less numerous than believers. As Mark Twain said "When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform."
Comment 11 (1346) by SBFL on 2008-03-30 at 22:11:09:
"Just one comment though (isn't there always :)..." - Haha, too true.
So what happens if Mac did overtake Microsoft as dominant player in software industry? In the real world software industry has only been important in last 25 years, of which MS have been dominant. Short time really. Apple could capitalise on their gains with iPod and iPhone and make more inroads with software. Afterall I see the computer world changing again, esp with digital technology becoming more and more integrated, PC's are already on the decline. Who knows where MS and Mac wil be in 10-20 years.
Surely you won't leave the Mac team for a new minority player, just for the sake of following the Mark Twain rule? (Quite a bit of truth in that quote though, I like it).
Comment 12 (1367) by OJB on 2008-04-01 at 11:49:36:
Its notoriously difficult to predict the future, especially in a fast moving technology area like computers. I wouldn't write off PCs yet. There is a significant more to laptops from desktops but other devices, like phones, really can't replace real computers.
Obviously the Mark Twain quote is interesting and it is boring being in the majority. But it would be silly to make a decision based on that alone. If Apple ever became the dominant company in computing I would weigh up the consequences of that and decide what to do. I was a mainframe programmer, then a PC programmer, now a Mac programmer, so I can change if I need to.
I am an iPod user and that is by far the dominant MP3 player so I haven't really taken any notice of the "majority rule" there. The iPod is just so much nicer to use than anything else that I chose it over the alternatives.
Comment 13 (1375) by SBFL on 2008-04-01 at 21:57:07:
"I was a mainframe programmer" Ohhh, hope I didn't upset you by saying the 'software industry has only been important in last 25 years' ;-)
Well there are many issues in life, and being in the majority on some of them is no crime. Means you are right sometimes ;-) again.
Bought a 40GB iPod in 2004. Very keen on the new 32GB iTouch - is it as good as it looks? Time to upgrade? My entire collection comes to 20GB, so the GB is not a deciding factor. Functionality is (and looking cool haha).
Comment 14 (1384) by OJB on 2008-04-02 at 12:14:39:
I'm proud of my collection of ancient input media from old programming projects! I have a stack of punch cards from my first program for a Burroughs B6700 which was the classic lunar lander game. The game player would punch a card with the "burn" in it and submit it for overnight processing. he would then observe the new position of the lander and punch a new burn for the next day. After a few weeks he might land the lander. Not quite as interactive as games are today!
I bought a Nano because I think the Touch is just an iPhone without the phone. I'll probably get an iPhone later this year. The Nano is only 8G but I have this on it: 3 full length movies, 2 episodes of the Simpsons, some excerpts from Top Gear, various other small videos, 200 podcasts (some up to an hour long), a 10 hour audiobook, 200 music tracks, 1150 photos, my calendar for the last few years, my address book. An I still have almost 1G free!
I know 200 tracks isn't much music. I change the 200 tracks by choosing from my main iTunes music library occasionally. The Nano is so small and light and has great battery life for audio (not so good for video). Its a thing of beauty. In fact I think I blogged about it under that title!
Comment 15 (1397) by SBFL on 2008-04-13 at 22:55:28:
Do they have that game out for the XBOX360? It makes Chess look like "Dead or Alive 4".
Nano is no good for me simply because it is too small and I don't have the patience of swapping files back and forward on it. The benefit of these digital media players with hard drives or memory sticks is that you can put everything on them. No more working our which CDs to take with you etc.
Also very disappointed with iTunes. A later version I installed doesn't allow you to decide where you want to put your 'My Music' folder. if it's not under My Documents, it doesn't remember where your library is.
Comment 16 (1403) by OJB on 2008-04-14 at 10:25:32:
No Xbox version of the game I'm afraid. Might be an opportunity there for some developer with skills in cutting edge games eh?
Yes, I agree with your point regarding having your whole music library with you. I take my laptop with me everywhere so I always have everything there. Every technology design is a compromise - you just choose the compromises which suit you best.
iTunes is a Mac program ported to PC. Now you know what its like using software designed for another platform. We have to put up with Word! On the Mac you can hold down option (alt) at launch to specify a new library location. You could try that on the PC.
Comment 17 (1409) by SBFL on 2008-04-16 at 00:20:00:
Re iTunes, different platform. Well maybe you are right. Then I certasinly won't be installing Safari. Especially after Apple have started to behave like Microsoft of old: Mozilla Boss takes a bite out of Apple over Safari
Comment 18 (1416) by OJB on 2008-04-16 at 14:24:56:
I know some people have made a fuss about this, and I agree that its not a good idea to install extra software this way, but really its not such a big deal. There's no harm in having Safari installed. You don't have to use it, and it is quite a nice browser which is far more compatible with emerging standards than other browsers. And do you think maybe the boss of Mozilla might have had a small interest in the issue?
Comment 19 (1424) by SBFL on 2008-04-17 at 23:26:16:
Of course he does, but that doesn't mean he's not right. Of course I don't want SPAM software installed - it just clogs up my system: OS and HDD. My preference is for a lean mean machine with only the programs I use installed. If someone wants to install their programs by stealth then I will stay away from them. Hardly an endearing way to approach customers and potential customers is it?
Comment 20 (1429) by OJB on 2008-04-18 at 13:33:01:
I agree that they shouldn't have done it but I don't think its as big an issue as many people believe. Maybe its just connected with the paranoia PC users have with extra stuff being installed on their systems. In Mac land we have no viruses and a lot less software conflicts so its no big deal to us.
Comment 21 (2919) by OJB on 2011-08-04 at 16:09:11:
Looking back at this blog entry (it's now August 2011) it is depressing to see how right I was regarding Obama's good intentions being destroyed by political reality. How disappointing his lack of progress on anything worthwhile has been. I guess America really is doomed then...
Thanks for reading this blog post. Please leave a message below.
You can leave comments about this entry using this form.
To add a comment: enter a name and email (optional), type the number shown, enter a comment, click Add. Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry. The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.
BLOG PAGE