The Shotgun Blog
« Book review: Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg | Main | Canadian unborn victims of violent crime bill passes second reading »
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Obama will change the world! Glory, glory, hallelujah.
The Obama fans are beginning to creep closer to the Ron Paul fans in their ardour and willingness to, uhm, put together music videos for their hero. In the most recent celebrity-filled video, Ryan Gosling tells us he wants a better world for our children, and some other celebs tell us that we can be "hopeful" and that America can be admired again, and that all Americans need to do is to vote for Obama.
Gosh, he's so dreamy.
Let's do a comparison of the latest vids for Obama and Ron Paul. Here's Obama's (h/t Reason TV):
And here's the latest for Ron Paul, courtesy of Aimee Allen who, I guess, is a famous singer:
Vote for your favourite in the comments.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on March 5, 2008 in WStv | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22305/26824516
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Obama will change the world! Glory, glory, hallelujah.:
Comments
Jaws,
"The Obama fans are beginning to creep closer to the Ron Paul fans in their ardour and willingness to, uhm, put together music videos for their hero."
Shouldn't you just say, "Obama fans are beginning to get as creepy as Ron Paul fans"? :-)
Terrence
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 5-Mar-08 4:00:04 PM
Yeah, it's terrible to actually be excited about a candidate isn't it? We should all nonchalantly cast our votes for the lesser of evils instead of voting for someone we really believe in. I'm no fan of Obama but to criticize people for being excited by a candidate is just stupid.
As for criticizing Ron Paul and his fans, who are you to judge? How much do you know about monetary policy? How much do you know about foreign policy? You're obviously going to vote for one of the clown status quo candidates that are going to continue more of the same brilliant policies we've seen for the last 8 years. You're in no position to judge anybody.
Posted by: WhoTheHellAreYouToJudge | 5-Mar-08 4:39:25 PM
Who,
Anyone (and there are many) who gets excited and even delirious about a f**king politician is creepy.
You must have been around long enough to know what the word 'politician' means. It means lying bastard.
No decent people go into that profession which explains why so many of them are lawyers.
Unfortunately they are a necessary evil since every nation requires 'leaders'. But they our digestive systems need disgusting little creatures known as bacteria to digest our food.
Too bad we can't find another way to run our affairs sans the vermin.
Posted by: John West | 5-Mar-08 4:48:58 PM
The one for Obama reminded me of the Nuremburg rally of 1936...the chanting, the adulation, the faceless hero. Watch "Triumph of the Will." Deeply creepy.
Posted by: BillBC | 5-Mar-08 4:52:55 PM
Whothehellareyoutojudge (WTHAYTJ)
"How much do you know about monetary policy? How much do you know about foreign policy? "
Is that a requirement to vote?
"You're in no position to judge anybody."
I am. I can vote.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 5-Mar-08 5:04:57 PM
>"How much do you know about monetary policy? How much do you know about foreign policy? You're obviously going to vote for one of the clown status quo candidates that are going to continue more of the same brilliant policies we've seen for the last 8 years. You're in no position to judge anybody."
WhoTheHellAreYouToJudge | 5-Mar-08 4:39:25 PM
I know enough about gold to say that it is a finite resource, that you cannot eat gold or burn it for fuel or built a shelter from it.
Gold has limited intrinsic value.
Gold is therefore "fiat" money as much as paper or coin made from base metals.
The value or buying power of a dollar reflects the productivity of the people of the nation represented by the currency and the confidence that people have in the government.
It is good that people trust a candidate and are excited by the potential of the candidate.
However, trust and the estimation of potential should be founded upon accomplishments and an observable record not self-induced ecstasy or illusion on the part of Mr. Obama's supporters.
Senator Obama is being referred to as the "stealth" candidate all over the WWW because he has revealed so little of himself, his policy stand on issues, and has a very short track record.
Posted by: Speller | 5-Mar-08 5:06:36 PM
The Obama vid is better. It'll suck in more voters.
Posted by: dewp | 5-Mar-08 5:46:11 PM
What credentials are you looking for? Can Ijudge if I have, say, two Master's degrees? Or if I've worked at three public policy institutes in three different countries? No? Don't we all have to judge if we're going to vote, or do you think picking a candidate requires no judgment?
As for me, if I were an American I would have gladly voted for Paul. My criticism was one of emphasis primarily. Paul needs to cool it with the gold standard stuff. And, yes, I do have some familiarity with monetary policy.
Finally, it's not about "excitement," it's about adoration bordering on worship. That's what I have a problem with. Be excited. Just don't think that your candidate will solve all the world's problems.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 5-Mar-08 6:36:07 PM
What credentials are you looking for? Can Ijudge if I have, say, two Master's degrees? Or if I've worked at three public policy institutes in three different countries? No? Don't we all have to judge if we're going to vote, or do you think picking a candidate requires no judgment?
As for me, if I were an American I would have gladly voted for Paul. My criticism was one of emphasis primarily. Paul needs to cool it with the gold standard stuff. And, yes, I do have some familiarity with monetary policy.
Finally, it's not about "excitement," it's about adoration bordering on worship. That's what I have a problem with. Be excited. Just don't think that your candidate will solve all the world's problems.
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 5-Mar-08 6:38:26 PM
'As for criticizing Ron Paul and his fans, who are you to judge?'
Everyone has a right to judge. It's called a democracy. Just as you have every right to be delusional about Ron Paul.
Posted by: Terry Gain | 5-Mar-08 6:38:47 PM
Peter Jaworski! You can't criticize Ron Paul (peace be upon him) unless a) you have AT LEAST a doctorate in economics OR b) you have read Atlas Shrugged at least THREE times.
You are obviously a whim-worshiping mystic who enjoys denying that existence exists.
If I were Howard Roark, I'd blow up your house, you Kant-loving, gold-hating COMMUNIST!
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 5-Mar-08 8:00:39 PM
By the way, the Obama ad was posted by an individual user for free, and shared with 650,738 people over the past six days. That's one Obama "volunteer" campaigning to the equivalent of population of St. Albert twice a day. Multiply that by the number of other volunteers who posted the video to their own YouTube page or social network page or blog or to pages like this one and then ask Speller if this might be a good way to extend the tight campaign resources of small parties. One person giving 108,000 one-on-one stump speeches for their candidate, every single day. Even IF 90% of that were foreign viewers, overlap, and repeat visits, that's a huge return on an investment of zero dollars from your campaign budget.
Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 5-Mar-08 9:32:32 PM
"Paul needs to cool it with the gold standard stuff. And, yes, I do have some familiarity with monetary policy."
Yeah. How important is it anyway to constrain government spending with sound money? This issue is like so 1971.
And the difference between Paul supporters and Obama supporters is that Paul supporters believe liberty will save the world while Obama supporters think Obama will save the world. One is a movement driven by an ideology; the other is a based on what Weber called charismatic authority.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 5-Mar-08 9:59:27 PM
This is going to be difficult for you to understand, PR, but a whole lot of feel-goodery isn't going to change the world.
I know, I've been to Church on a few Sundays.
The Obama video, as slick as it was, with as many Left Wing Hollywood stars as it contained, merely showcased the hopes of the Obama supporters and the belief that Senator Obama will fulfill those hopes.
The video contained nothing of substance.
No indication of what Senator Obama's position on any issue or by what mechanism he proposes to bring about the "change" or why he is qualified to bring about change when others before him couldn't.
Such a video could never appeal to people who need concrete answers to clearly identified problems.
Conservatives don't act on blind faith.
Liberals trade in emotions, need no reason, and seem almost uncomfortable with reason or logic.
Liberals just say, "I need to get from HERE to THERE", without any bridge, and expect to arrive by magic.
Thus, the more magical and feelgood the experience, the more they believe they have found a way across the chasm without building the bridge.
When they come down from that high, that charismatic cocktail, the ground is harder than the ever remembered or thought possible.
Conservatives know it doesn't work in the real world the way Liberals fantasize that it does.
It seems to me that Senator Obama's only qualification is a few millimeters of melanin.
Real political information that has depth takes longer to communicate than a YouTube video can provide.
Real information argues premises and supports conclusions regarding those premises.
Both the premises and supportive articles must be pondered and examined.
Videos don't allow that sort of interaction unless they are documenting a lecture or tailored to provide information.
Posted by: Speller | 5-Mar-08 10:09:07 PM
This is my feel good video tonight.
I give you, The Cactus Cuties:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKCVS57j284
Posted by: Speller | 5-Mar-08 10:19:36 PM
"This is going to be difficult for you to understand, PR, but a whole lot of feel-goodery isn't going to change the world."
Actually I understand fully well that fast-spreading nothing is still nothing. It's still multiplication by zero, BUT, what have I been saying all along Speller? Have I been saying Obama is our man? No, I've been saying YouTube, or more specifically, free socially-distributed media- is a proven tool. There's absolutely nothing stopping anyone with a worthwhile message from emulating this success. Sure they won't have the amplification power of Snoop Dog or Oprah, but a worthy idea doesn't need it if it's worthy and it can resonate with the people.
And yes, plenty of ideas are submitted to the e-connected masses and are a total flop, and that only serves to measure whether the people deem it a worthy idea. When Tom Harris put his video out to the masses, they just didn't follow his reasoning or agree with his message, and so it didn't pass along. Back to the drawing board for Tom. Find a way to say your piece in a style that connects. It's only hard if you're stubborn, lazy, or have a really bad idea in the first place (a video promoting slavery, even if it's Hollywood produced, isn't going to go viral in a positive way).
Obama? That's up to the American voters to decide.
Viral, free, campaigning with geometric growth and no cost? That should be an obvious choice for anyone wanting to campaign fast, loud, and cheap.
Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 6-Mar-08 7:59:59 AM
Ryan Gosling is not in this commercial dumb ass, get your facts straight, It is Ryan Phillipe moron.
Posted by: Jane | 6-Mar-08 9:21:26 AM
Jane said, "Ryan Gosling is not in this commercial dumb ass, get your facts straight, It is Ryan Phillipe moron."
P.S. Speller, at least I give semi-polite, properly punctuated feedback. ;-)
Posted by: Pattern Recognition | 6-Mar-08 9:40:45 AM
The Obama video was like a Gap ad. Just wear an Obama pin like said celebs and you too can be introspective and cool.
My vote is for the Ron Paul video - that chick was pissed off at the state of things in the US and her lyrics had some substance.
Posted by: Laurel | 6-Mar-08 11:53:24 AM
So it was Ryan Phillippe? Too bad. If it had been Ryan Gosling, I might have taken a gander!
Posted by: ebt | 6-Mar-08 2:50:50 PM
That quacks me up.
Posted by: Markalta | 6-Mar-08 2:54:26 PM
I have no interest in either candidate, but here's my vote on the videos.
Oboma's add had no mention of any issues. Were those celebrities? I only recognized one Cosby kid, and the funny looking Mexican from Boogie Nights. The music was almost as excruciatingly horrible as a Diana Krall ballad. It was hero worship.
Paul's add was upbeat, and had a very catchy tune. It dealt with a couple of major issues. It didn't jump from one no name celebrity to another. It had interesting back drops, and a bit of humour. The girl doing the singing represents a well defined group, with similar beliefs.
The winner is the Paul video, hands down.
Posted by: dp | 6-Mar-08 3:26:03 PM
One thing I missed the first time.
The Obama music is not American, it's African. How far do they plan to stretch this theme?
Posted by: dp | 6-Mar-08 3:35:19 PM
The Obama guys seem to be dealing with a reality...The Environment"
The RP guys seem to be dealing with "THE" reality...the complete loss of our liberties.
And that's the one that most immediately concerns me.
Does anyone know what their rights are anymore?
Posted by: JC | 6-Mar-08 7:30:30 PM
Post a comment