I will never forget where I was the night Obama was elected President. It seemed like the day would never come, after almost two full years of intense campaigning. In that week leading up to the election, it was inconceivable that this whole ordeal would be coming to an end in a few short days. At the same time, however, the campaign felt like it was at it's end. No new points were being made. The candidates were making their closing arguments. The election was in the hands of the voters.
Everyone at Guilford College was optimistic. People were saying things like "when he wins..." I was more cautious. Having seen the 2004 Ohio election where Kerry lost the election, I wasn't as confident that Obama could do it.
After what seemed like an deathly long day, election night finally arrived. I worked in the Library until 6:00 so my night could be free. I joined a packed common room filled with students and faculty alike. Tonight, everyone was waiting. Waiting for history.
The room got focused as the election results began to come in. Every time a state went to Obama, the crowd erupted. When McCain won a state, the room was largely silent. I was impressed with the surprising politeness of the crowd. They weren't being negative towards McCain, it was pro-Obama.
When McCain lost Pennsylvania, I became overjoyed. McCain needed to win Pennsylvania. He was banking on it. But he lost big, which meant that in swing states, maybe undecideds weren't McCain supporters faking it after all. When Obama won Ohio, I went nuts. At that point, it was impossible for McCain to win. He wouldn't win California, Oregon, and Washington. Yet at the same time, it was hard to believe. Was the United States REALLY about to elect a man, a black man named Barack Hussein Obama no less, to the highest office in the land? It was so wonderful, so utterly monumental that some part of me refused to believe it.
The Crowd counted down until the West Coast states closed. 10..9..8..7..6..5..4..3..2...1. They cheered, laughing becuause it was like New Years. When CNN projected that Obama was the next President, the crowd erupted. Jubilation filled the air as the room deafened as people screamed. We were hugging, crying. It was unlike anything I have ever experienced. The sheer joy of everyone, white, black, young, old was such a powerful testament to the power of our country.
After hugging everyone there (I was shaking at this point), I joined an impromptu crowd that was quickly gathering at the President's House. The crowd became a mob, and we began to go through the campus. We traveled to Bryan, where we congregated in the courtyard. The crowd quickly grew as people came out onto their balconies, and joined the crowd. I brought my American flag, and people began grabbing on. It was a beautiful movement. People were proud of their country, proud to hold the Stars and Stripes.
The crowd grew in size as we left Bryan and marched down the campus towards the entrance. I remember people screaming, cheering, all so happy at the results of the election. Photographers for The Guilfordian were taking pictures of my flag, and the surrounding faces. By the time we crossed West Friendly Ave. the crowd had grown to over 300 in size. We marched through the Hess station and down Guilford College Rd. People were honking and cheering out of their windows. Try as they might, people couldn't be kept out of the street.
We headed towards Harris Teeter. I think people wanted to celebrate with everyone possible. There was no destructive feeling to the crowd, although we did knock down an old wooden fence. When we got to Harris Teeter, some people tried to march through, but the vast majority of the crowd turned back towards Friendly Avenue. The crowd re-congregated at the Guilford Sign on the corner. An impromptu rally was held there. People got on top of the sign and started cheering. I handed my flag up to them, and they waved it around. There was so much pride for the nation, for the restored faith in the electoral process, and how people's voices counted.
After the rally at the sign started to break up, we towards the Old Apartments, via Miner. We paused in Milner to hear Barack Obama give his acceptance speech. Tears welled up in my eyes as I heard him speak. After so long, we had accomplished our goal. The crowd in Grant Park was electric. It was a victory speech not only for Obama and the Democratic Party, but also for equality. Obama was only the fifth African-American Senator ever elected. In four short years, he had been elected to the highest office in the country.
At the same time, I feel as though I can't possibly describe the true magnitude of the election. Although I've lived my whole life in a racially diverse area, I'm white. I can't comprehend the trouble that African-American's went through. In addition, my generation has grown up in a society that for the most part treats everyone equally. My generation has never known a time when people couldn't vote simply because of who they are or what color skin they have. This, however, could be an explanation for why the young vote was so vocal for Obama. We saw a leader who had that unique American optimism even in times of trouble. We didn't see the color of his skin, the "non-traditional" name. We all have unique backgrounds, and Obama's didn't seem so outrageous.
To reflect on the election, I hope that Obama fulfills his promises. More than any other candidate in history, he's earned the trust and respect of many people, significantly the future of America. The expectations will be higher than ever before. Obama will have to be honest with the American people, even if it's not good news (and based on the Economy and the War, it probably won't be). But if you ask me, I think he'll handle it correctly. He'll be honest, yet understanding. I hope that he leads the country with the grace and maturity that propelled him to the Presidency.
Congratulations, Sen. Obama. Congratulations, America. We've cleared a hurdle many thought they would never see in their lifetimes. We have a ways to go. But to quote the Obama campaign, "Yes we can." With that optimism and a new outlook on the world, I would bet that America is on it's way to new heights. We're on our way to a society that will lead the world not with an iron fist but with a helping hand.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Why I Hope for the Sake of the Darfuris Obama is Elected
With the economy failing, much of John McCain and Barack Obama’s second debate was spent arguing over what economic policies would best lift us out of crisis. But there was one question in particular, one that seems to have escaped everyone’s minds, that really frightened me.
Moderator Tom Brokaw asked each of the candidates to define their “doctrines.” In a question probably generated after Vice Presidential candidate/beauty queen Sarah Palin was unable to define the now-infamous Bush Doctrine, Senators Obama and McCain were answering what was not only a debate question but an indication on the future of their presidencies.
Obama answered first. “Well, we may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake,” he said. “When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us. And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, or national interests, in intervening where possible.”
Let’s take the example of Darfur just for a moment. Right now there’s a peacekeeping force that has been set up and we have African Union troops in Darfur to stop a genocide that has killed hundreds of thousands of people. We could be providing logistical support, setting up a no-fly zone at relatively little cost to us, but we can only do it if we can help mobilize the international community and lead. And that’s what I intend to do when I’m president.”
This answer is revolutionary in it’s own right. First, he declared the situation in Darfur “genocide.” When doing this, Obama is making it clear: what is going on in Darfur is genocide. We have a moral obligation to stop and prevent genocide. Another significant part of his statements was the link between ethnic cleansing and genocide. Long used as a safe fallback, the term “ethnic cleansing” is often used as a governmental excuse for tough words, but inaction. Obama made clear what was already obvious: The two are one in the same, and they both must be stopped.
McCain, on the other hand, was far different. “The United States of America, Tom, is the greatest force for good, as I said. And we must do whatever we can to prevent genocide, whatever we can to prevent these terrible calamities that we have said never again.” he declared. “But it also has to be tempered with our ability to beneficially affect the situation. That requires a cool hand at the tiller. This requires a person who understands what our – the limits of our capability are.” It gets worse: “You have to temper your decisions with the ability to beneficially affect the situation and realize you’re sending America’s most precious asset, American blood, into harm’s way. And, again, I know those situations.
The security of your young men and women who are serving in the military are my first priority right after our nation’s security.
And I may have to make those tough decisions. But I won’t take them lightly. And I understand that we have to say never again to a Holocaust and never again to Rwanda. But we had also better be darn sure we don’t leave and make the situation worse, thereby exacerbating our reputation and our ability to address crises in other parts of the world.
This answer is disturbing on many levels. First, he didn’t even mention Darfur once, despite practically being prompted by Sen. Obama in his last answer. Worse, he stated plainly that he would continue the government’s disastrous policy of inaction. He attempts to justify his answer by saying “never again.” But he ignores the very definition of these simple words. By avoiding the word “genocide,” McCain avoids the moral responsibility of taking real action. McCain also uses the excuse that ‘we don’t want to make the situation worse.’
This is not a new concept. At a lunch gathering after a speech about the Bosnian genocide in 1993, Elie Wiesel spoke with Peter Tarnoff, the undersecretary for political affairs, begging that the United states liberate some of the concentration camps. Ralph Johnson, the principal deputy assistant secretary for European affairs, stated “We’re afraid that if we did try to liberate them, there would be retaliation and the prisoners inside would be killed.” Wisel said quietly, “Do you realize that that is precisely what the State Department said during World War II?” McCain is continuing the lack of action for fear of reprisal.
As an anti-genocide activist, the choice has never been clearer. Was Obama’s answer perfect? Of course not. He did not, for example, take into account that the African Union Peacekeepers are dangerously understaffed and unequipped. Logistical support would not alone solve the problem. Yet he’s on the right track. He’s bringing it up, and with help, could become the first president to take real action to directly end a genocide. With McCain, however, things do not look good for Darfuris. With his inaction, we would once again be hearing the hollow promise of never again.
As a Jew, this is terrifying. Jews know more then anything the dangerous effects of a genocide unstopped. They more than anyone else know the hypocrisy of inaction, the pain of empty promises. In this election, I’m breaking one of the cardinal rules of being an effective lobbyist. I cannot remain neutral with the stakes this high. What is before us are two options. Will we sit idly by while genocide takes place? Or will we rise to the occasion, take a stand, and finally make Never Again active polity, not just empty promises. The choice is ours.
Moderator Tom Brokaw asked each of the candidates to define their “doctrines.” In a question probably generated after Vice Presidential candidate/beauty queen Sarah Palin was unable to define the now-infamous Bush Doctrine, Senators Obama and McCain were answering what was not only a debate question but an indication on the future of their presidencies.
Obama answered first. “Well, we may not always have national security issues at stake, but we have moral issues at stake,” he said. “When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening somewhere around the world and we stand idly by, that diminishes us. And so I do believe that we have to consider it as part of our interests, or national interests, in intervening where possible.”
Let’s take the example of Darfur just for a moment. Right now there’s a peacekeeping force that has been set up and we have African Union troops in Darfur to stop a genocide that has killed hundreds of thousands of people. We could be providing logistical support, setting up a no-fly zone at relatively little cost to us, but we can only do it if we can help mobilize the international community and lead. And that’s what I intend to do when I’m president.”
This answer is revolutionary in it’s own right. First, he declared the situation in Darfur “genocide.” When doing this, Obama is making it clear: what is going on in Darfur is genocide. We have a moral obligation to stop and prevent genocide. Another significant part of his statements was the link between ethnic cleansing and genocide. Long used as a safe fallback, the term “ethnic cleansing” is often used as a governmental excuse for tough words, but inaction. Obama made clear what was already obvious: The two are one in the same, and they both must be stopped.
McCain, on the other hand, was far different. “The United States of America, Tom, is the greatest force for good, as I said. And we must do whatever we can to prevent genocide, whatever we can to prevent these terrible calamities that we have said never again.” he declared. “But it also has to be tempered with our ability to beneficially affect the situation. That requires a cool hand at the tiller. This requires a person who understands what our – the limits of our capability are.” It gets worse: “You have to temper your decisions with the ability to beneficially affect the situation and realize you’re sending America’s most precious asset, American blood, into harm’s way. And, again, I know those situations.
The security of your young men and women who are serving in the military are my first priority right after our nation’s security.
And I may have to make those tough decisions. But I won’t take them lightly. And I understand that we have to say never again to a Holocaust and never again to Rwanda. But we had also better be darn sure we don’t leave and make the situation worse, thereby exacerbating our reputation and our ability to address crises in other parts of the world.
This answer is disturbing on many levels. First, he didn’t even mention Darfur once, despite practically being prompted by Sen. Obama in his last answer. Worse, he stated plainly that he would continue the government’s disastrous policy of inaction. He attempts to justify his answer by saying “never again.” But he ignores the very definition of these simple words. By avoiding the word “genocide,” McCain avoids the moral responsibility of taking real action. McCain also uses the excuse that ‘we don’t want to make the situation worse.’
This is not a new concept. At a lunch gathering after a speech about the Bosnian genocide in 1993, Elie Wiesel spoke with Peter Tarnoff, the undersecretary for political affairs, begging that the United states liberate some of the concentration camps. Ralph Johnson, the principal deputy assistant secretary for European affairs, stated “We’re afraid that if we did try to liberate them, there would be retaliation and the prisoners inside would be killed.” Wisel said quietly, “Do you realize that that is precisely what the State Department said during World War II?” McCain is continuing the lack of action for fear of reprisal.
As an anti-genocide activist, the choice has never been clearer. Was Obama’s answer perfect? Of course not. He did not, for example, take into account that the African Union Peacekeepers are dangerously understaffed and unequipped. Logistical support would not alone solve the problem. Yet he’s on the right track. He’s bringing it up, and with help, could become the first president to take real action to directly end a genocide. With McCain, however, things do not look good for Darfuris. With his inaction, we would once again be hearing the hollow promise of never again.
As a Jew, this is terrifying. Jews know more then anything the dangerous effects of a genocide unstopped. They more than anyone else know the hypocrisy of inaction, the pain of empty promises. In this election, I’m breaking one of the cardinal rules of being an effective lobbyist. I cannot remain neutral with the stakes this high. What is before us are two options. Will we sit idly by while genocide takes place? Or will we rise to the occasion, take a stand, and finally make Never Again active polity, not just empty promises. The choice is ours.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
