And following it.

And following….

We walked all the way down a long hallway and turned, only to walk a long way down the next hallway.  At the end of that we ended up in an old warehouse-feeling part of the building and the line just kept going.

Here’s some pictures.

It was a great civic moment, or hour actually.  People of all races and socio-economic classes.  Gay couples and straight.  Moms with babies and single men who had never voted before.

When we finally got to the end of the line we arrived at the room with about 30 voting machines.  I popped in my electronic card and used the (silly) touchscreen voting machine.  My vote went off into the ether.  I sure hope it was counted because I don’t have any proof that it was made.

But I’ll remember that line forever.  Yes it should be shorter and easier to vote.  But, who knows, maybe one day I’ll tell my grandchildren about the day when I helped elect a remarkable leader, a true patriot, a paradigm-changing figure, the first black President of the United States.

I wonder.

I wonder if Michelle Bachmann, R Minn, really does think a significant portion of the US congress is “anti-American.”

I wonder if McCain regrets the tenor of his recent rallies.

I wonder why Palin is so narrow in her definition of true Americans.

I wonder if McCain/Palin would rather win at all costs, or have every American aware of Obama’s Christian faith and patriotism.

I wonder why “spreading the wealth” is socialist if that’s what all taxes do in the first place.

I wonder why we’re so scared of socialists.

I wonder what America would look like if we had more patriots like Colin Powell who served two Bush presidents and said,

Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That’s not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I wonder if we can blame things on “silly season” in politics, or if this season just brings out what we already think but usually don’t say.

I wonder why we don’t have more insightful discussions of church and politics like Jan Edminston’s.

I wonder who benefits the US more: a school teacher on the prairie or another DC lawyer.

I wonder if it might just be more patriotic to plant vegetables in our front yards than buy chicken raised in California shipped to China for packaging then shipped back to California to be sent to grocery stores on the east coast.

I wonder how many us will vote.

I wonder.

image by salingpusa

I’m happy to give my perspective (though I don’t explain my eschatology claims as fully as here), but such conversations never lead to much substantive discussion of policies. Similarly, today’s Times article noted folks around the world knew specific policies only when they were of particular interest–Israel’s for Clinton, apparently, Mexico likes Obama, India wants anybody but Bush.

I wouldn’t expect citizens of other countries to be up on the particular policy proposals of US presidential candidates, but I wonder, does the average American know much more?

Most of the American media coverage I see from here presents a very fluid picture of the race. There needs to be something to fill the 24/7 news space, so not particularly meaningful things hit the news and make the headlines–another Bill jab, what Huckabee is eating these days, whether Romney is wearing a tie–and real policies and positions are lost in the fuss.

For example, the candidates have presented their policy positions on same-sex marriage and same-sex unions. These positions were made clear years ago, and the candidates would be crazy to change them now. But an important issue, since it’s static, rarely makes the headlines. Static positions don’t sell newspapers, or get web hits, or television viewers.

Perhaps this is just the way of the primaries, and the general election will present us with a more substantive debate. Somehow, though, I’m a bit skeptical about that. For now, I’ll sit back and watch the world’s coverage, yearning for a discussion of static policy rather than fluid fluff.

Photo by Gabriel Pico.

Updated Jan, 27 after lunchtime in Scotland:

In an endorsement of Obama today in the NY Times, Caroline Kennedy writes,

Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.

Check out her larger article here. I guess Kennedy is right, Clinton and Obama’s overall goals are similar. However, Obama’s non-policy goals of changing the way in which we do politics, giving a new generation hope in our country, and embodying a testament to how far our nation has come since Selma, shows how essential other matters are. Is “hope” a policy matter? I guess not, but it sure affects policy.

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.453369&w=425&h=350&fv=videoId%3D147326] from www.thedailyshow.com posted with vodpod