'Dream ticket' of Democrats
15th May 2008
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/05/15/letter-039dream-ticket039-democrats.html
This is the year of the Democrats thanks to Bush and they will have to work really hard to lose the White House.
Voters in North Carolina voted overwhelmingly for Obama and he almost defeated Hillary in Indiana. Voters did vote on biases: race or gender. Ninety percent black voters voted for Obama while 60 percent of whites voted for Hillary.
Women voters also voted for Clinton in a big way. But in democracy, "lobbies" are ever present. Whites, blacks, Jews, Hispanics, and they often vote on a parochial basis.
Obama will surely be nominated. His party would not dare alienate black voters who are excited about Obama becoming the first black president.
Super delegates recognize him as the front-runner, impressed with his handling of a crisis created by Rev. Wright. But Obama will have to strive hard to be recognized as "everybody's candidate".
But nomination is only half the battle won. He has to win in November. If Hillary accepts to be his running mate, it will be a "dream ticket". This would also avoid more bad blood in remaining primaries. But are both big enough to reach such a compromise?
Let's hope Obama wins in November and becomes the first black president of U.S. and completes his two terms. Whether Obama can do it depends on his politics and policies not his race, because as per a CNN poll, more than 75 percent of Americans are willing to accept a black president.
Obama has a 100 percent perfect record of voting for the common man in the senate. And he is not a politician who would make unprincipled compromises under the disguise of "bringing people together".
But when I look at the divisive role played by Obama's former pastor Rev. Wright, I remember the old saying: Your worst enemies come from within.
K. B. KALE, Jakarta
Wednesday, 15 June 2011
Obama victory
Obama victory
6th Nov. 2008
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/06/letter-obama-victory.html
With a resounding victory in the 2008 presidential election, it would seem Barack Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois, has taken the U.S. into adulthood.
By electing an African American as president, it is clear that the basic issue that led to the American civil war in the sixties of the last century and almost split the country into Union and Confederate following the abolition of slavery by president Lincoln, is behind them.
And what a coincidence that this first African American president should come from Illinois, the very state of Abraham Lincoln, who came to White House in 1860 to make it possible for a black American to contest and win at the White House, by abolishing slavery.
Throughout this campaign, president-elect Obama confronted issues boldly instead of evading them or skirting around them. The best example of this was his historic speech in Philadelphia in response to the irresponsible utterances of Reverend Wright. His response to the economic crisis was quick and practical.
He seems to be pro-poor and has promised to reduce the difference between the ultra-rich and abject poor. Most of the time, he spoke with his personal convictions, not bothering whether his comment would bring or lose votes for him. And I think in the end, this streak of honesty won him the presidency.
After a long time, a record number of voters voted in the political process to elect the president and a bulk of the credit for this goes to Obama.
Obama always reminded me of JFK and I admire him (Obama) as much as I admired JFK. And I fervently hope that unlike JFK, Obama remains in the White House for 8 years.
Obama has a special place in the hearts of Indonesians and people like me who have been in Indonesia for a long time. I hope the Indonesian Government converts the Jakarta house where he lived for a few years as a child into a national heritage site. It is an honor for Indonesia to be a country that taught Obama a thing or two in his formative years!
Little surprise that people of Kenya, where his father came from, are celebrating his victory as enthusiastically as the Americans are doing!
I hope Obama has a special soft corner for Indonesia and builds strong relations with the country where he spent his childhood.
K. B. KALE, Jakarta
==========================================
Post Comments | Comments (2)
Zizwand, Bali, | Fri, 07/11/2008 - 13:11pm
real power must be taken, real power not be given ...that i read in film pamphlet many year ago in media indonesia..Obama proved that. Democracy mechanism offer many opportunity to change the status quo. I think that will be inspire young man take it. But don't be in hurry, Obama just not make dream. He start with reputation, proven that he could manage and been excellent social worker. So, hay young man....wake up...this country need real change.....
==========================================
uday patankar, | Thu, 06/11/2008 - 13:11pm
At the outset I congratulate Mr.Obama through this message. I am also happy to note that Mr.K B Kale who is an Indian Person has written this letter. Here I would like to say that Mr.Obama must the first President by whose election 3 different continents are happy and proud. 1) Kenya from Africa, 2) Indonesia from Asia and the USA itself will be happy.
==========================================
6th Nov. 2008
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/06/letter-obama-victory.html
With a resounding victory in the 2008 presidential election, it would seem Barack Obama, the first-term senator from Illinois, has taken the U.S. into adulthood.
By electing an African American as president, it is clear that the basic issue that led to the American civil war in the sixties of the last century and almost split the country into Union and Confederate following the abolition of slavery by president Lincoln, is behind them.
And what a coincidence that this first African American president should come from Illinois, the very state of Abraham Lincoln, who came to White House in 1860 to make it possible for a black American to contest and win at the White House, by abolishing slavery.
Throughout this campaign, president-elect Obama confronted issues boldly instead of evading them or skirting around them. The best example of this was his historic speech in Philadelphia in response to the irresponsible utterances of Reverend Wright. His response to the economic crisis was quick and practical.
He seems to be pro-poor and has promised to reduce the difference between the ultra-rich and abject poor. Most of the time, he spoke with his personal convictions, not bothering whether his comment would bring or lose votes for him. And I think in the end, this streak of honesty won him the presidency.
After a long time, a record number of voters voted in the political process to elect the president and a bulk of the credit for this goes to Obama.
Obama always reminded me of JFK and I admire him (Obama) as much as I admired JFK. And I fervently hope that unlike JFK, Obama remains in the White House for 8 years.
Obama has a special place in the hearts of Indonesians and people like me who have been in Indonesia for a long time. I hope the Indonesian Government converts the Jakarta house where he lived for a few years as a child into a national heritage site. It is an honor for Indonesia to be a country that taught Obama a thing or two in his formative years!
Little surprise that people of Kenya, where his father came from, are celebrating his victory as enthusiastically as the Americans are doing!
I hope Obama has a special soft corner for Indonesia and builds strong relations with the country where he spent his childhood.
K. B. KALE, Jakarta
==========================================
Post Comments | Comments (2)
Zizwand, Bali, | Fri, 07/11/2008 - 13:11pm
real power must be taken, real power not be given ...that i read in film pamphlet many year ago in media indonesia..Obama proved that. Democracy mechanism offer many opportunity to change the status quo. I think that will be inspire young man take it. But don't be in hurry, Obama just not make dream. He start with reputation, proven that he could manage and been excellent social worker. So, hay young man....wake up...this country need real change.....
==========================================
uday patankar, | Thu, 06/11/2008 - 13:11pm
At the outset I congratulate Mr.Obama through this message. I am also happy to note that Mr.K B Kale who is an Indian Person has written this letter. Here I would like to say that Mr.Obama must the first President by whose election 3 different continents are happy and proud. 1) Kenya from Africa, 2) Indonesia from Asia and the USA itself will be happy.
==========================================
Obama's victory is historic
Obama's victory is historic
28th Jan. 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/01/28/obama039s-victory-historic.html
An obscure community organizer in the Chicago area till 1996, he is a living example of what one can achieve by sheer "audacity of hope".
As he took the presidential oath, all eyes were on him and all were praying for his success.
His inaugural speech was enthusiastic, reassuring and down-to-earth and indicated the new directions he planned to go in. There is no doubt that the "change" he promised has come to America, when he said that enormous military power alone cannot protect the US and also that this power does not entitle it to do as it pleases.
With such profound thoughts, President Obama is destined to bring a new stature to his country within the community of nations. In his inaugural speech, he appeared to be a man who means business and who speaks straight and clearly.
His pledge of helping poor countries by working alongside them to bring them prosperity and his promise to the Muslim world that he sought a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect could not have been more timely and more reassuring!
He warned the corrupt dictators, who remain in power by using all sorts of foul means, that they were on the wrong side of history, but, he added, he would still extend a hand if these tyrants are "willing to unclench their fist".
I am sure every citizen of the world would wish him all the best and would do whatever they can in the interest of closer relations between the US and the rest of the world.
K. B. Kale, Jakarta
28th Jan. 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/01/28/obama039s-victory-historic.html
An obscure community organizer in the Chicago area till 1996, he is a living example of what one can achieve by sheer "audacity of hope".
As he took the presidential oath, all eyes were on him and all were praying for his success.
His inaugural speech was enthusiastic, reassuring and down-to-earth and indicated the new directions he planned to go in. There is no doubt that the "change" he promised has come to America, when he said that enormous military power alone cannot protect the US and also that this power does not entitle it to do as it pleases.
With such profound thoughts, President Obama is destined to bring a new stature to his country within the community of nations. In his inaugural speech, he appeared to be a man who means business and who speaks straight and clearly.
His pledge of helping poor countries by working alongside them to bring them prosperity and his promise to the Muslim world that he sought a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect could not have been more timely and more reassuring!
He warned the corrupt dictators, who remain in power by using all sorts of foul means, that they were on the wrong side of history, but, he added, he would still extend a hand if these tyrants are "willing to unclench their fist".
I am sure every citizen of the world would wish him all the best and would do whatever they can in the interest of closer relations between the US and the rest of the world.
K. B. Kale, Jakarta
Obama makes Israel uncomfortable
Obama makes Israel uncomfortable
18th June, 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/06/18/letters-obama-makes-israel-uncomfortable.html
The success of a speech can be gauged by how it is attacked and what it leads to. From both these counts, Obama's speech in Cairo seems to be a great success with Muslim audiences all over the world. First, it attracted a preemptive attack from his biggest adversary, al Qaeda, two full days before he gave it ("Obama's bloody messages will not be concealed by polished words!").
And then, last Sunday, the Israeli PM accepted the two-nation principle to create a Palestinian state. Though he added a lot of conditions, these are just pre-loaded stuff for trading at the negotiating table in a subsequent give and take.
So President Obama is worthy of congratulation for this success. He was very balanced and apparently said what he meant and meant what he said. He was forthright to reiterate America's strong bonds with Israel but equally emphatic in promising that America would not turn its back on legitimate Palestinian aspirations, saying the Palestinian people had waited long in refugee camps to lead a life of peace and security in their own homeland.
Obama's body language during his recent meeting with Israeli PM Netanyahu in Washington was different from the coziness one generally sees between heads of state from both countries. Very rarely have I seen any American president expressing his views so forcefully and an Israeli prime minister looking so uncomfortable.
Obama covered many issues, and the other important issue beyond the Arab-Israeli conflict was democracy.
His comments on democracy were very interesting and educational for the young Indonesian democracy. He wanted elected governments to protect fundamental rights, free speech and adult franchise because, according to him, only elected governments were stable, successful and secure, and suppressing ideas never succeeded in making them go away.
He mocked leaders who advocated democracy only when they were out of power, but ruthless in suppressing the rights of others once in power.
Which examples was Obama alluding to? Presidents for life like Iddi Amin? The kings and emirs of the Middle East? Military rulers who come to power by way of coup d'*tats? Or those who usurp power under various excuses like constitutional loopholes, lack of stability, external threats, likely loss of unity of a country?
Or was it Hitler, who never won a clear majority in any of the three elections in 1932, but allowed the Nazi party to "arrange" crowds of thugs to create chaos, violence and even murder to force the elected president Hindenburg into appointing himself a Chancellor and once he thus usurped power, never allowed elections in Germany until her defeat in 1945.
Such silly tactics never succeed and finally people power wins.
But Obama's best sentence was, "Partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't."
The world wishes President Obama success in his pursuit of a path not trodden.
K.B. Kale, Jakarta
18th June, 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/06/18/letters-obama-makes-israel-uncomfortable.html
The success of a speech can be gauged by how it is attacked and what it leads to. From both these counts, Obama's speech in Cairo seems to be a great success with Muslim audiences all over the world. First, it attracted a preemptive attack from his biggest adversary, al Qaeda, two full days before he gave it ("Obama's bloody messages will not be concealed by polished words!").
And then, last Sunday, the Israeli PM accepted the two-nation principle to create a Palestinian state. Though he added a lot of conditions, these are just pre-loaded stuff for trading at the negotiating table in a subsequent give and take.
So President Obama is worthy of congratulation for this success. He was very balanced and apparently said what he meant and meant what he said. He was forthright to reiterate America's strong bonds with Israel but equally emphatic in promising that America would not turn its back on legitimate Palestinian aspirations, saying the Palestinian people had waited long in refugee camps to lead a life of peace and security in their own homeland.
Obama's body language during his recent meeting with Israeli PM Netanyahu in Washington was different from the coziness one generally sees between heads of state from both countries. Very rarely have I seen any American president expressing his views so forcefully and an Israeli prime minister looking so uncomfortable.
Obama covered many issues, and the other important issue beyond the Arab-Israeli conflict was democracy.
His comments on democracy were very interesting and educational for the young Indonesian democracy. He wanted elected governments to protect fundamental rights, free speech and adult franchise because, according to him, only elected governments were stable, successful and secure, and suppressing ideas never succeeded in making them go away.
He mocked leaders who advocated democracy only when they were out of power, but ruthless in suppressing the rights of others once in power.
Which examples was Obama alluding to? Presidents for life like Iddi Amin? The kings and emirs of the Middle East? Military rulers who come to power by way of coup d'*tats? Or those who usurp power under various excuses like constitutional loopholes, lack of stability, external threats, likely loss of unity of a country?
Or was it Hitler, who never won a clear majority in any of the three elections in 1932, but allowed the Nazi party to "arrange" crowds of thugs to create chaos, violence and even murder to force the elected president Hindenburg into appointing himself a Chancellor and once he thus usurped power, never allowed elections in Germany until her defeat in 1945.
Such silly tactics never succeed and finally people power wins.
But Obama's best sentence was, "Partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't."
The world wishes President Obama success in his pursuit of a path not trodden.
K.B. Kale, Jakarta
Does Obama stand for change?
Does Obama stand for change?
30th July 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/07/30/letters-does-obama-stand-change.html
All through his exhaustive journey through primaries to date, I have been (and am trying very hard to remain) President Barack Obama's ardent admirer, but it looks like he is bent upon changing my opinion.
Recently I came across his speech in Russia where he said, "The notion that prestige comes from holding these weapons, or that we can protect ourselves by picking and choosing which nations can have these weapons, is an illusion. In the short period since the end of the Cold War, we've already seen India, Pakistan and North Korea conduct nuclear tests."
He thus erroneously equated India with Pakistan and North Korea on the issue of acquisition and proliferation of nuclear weapons. This set me wondering whether Obama really stands for "change" or is he similar to Reagan, Bush-41 and Bush-43. Then the question comes: Who gave nuclear capabilities to Pakistan? Wasn't it the "hawks" in the Reagan and Bush-41 administrations that let Pakistan have this know-how?
Didn't they persuade co-workers to deliberately mislead the US Congress about it to avoid being affected by Pressler and Solarz amendments? (see http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/04/top4.htm published in Karachi's DAWN, dated May 4, 2007). Was it India who clandestinely sold this know-how to Libya, Iran and North Korea? Was it Israel? Who was it?
Bush-43 coined the phrase "Axis of Evil" for these countries, but wasn't it Bush-41 and 43 who created the "Axis of Evil" Club as well as its full current membership? If things go wrong, as they may, will Al-Qaeda get its hands on these weapons? Will they train them on the US as Mustafa Abul-Yazeed told Al Jazeera on June 22?
One must thank Richard Barlow. He blew the whistle to expose the powers-that-be behind the silly decisions made from 1981 to 1992. Today, Rich Barlow, who did just what his job paid him to do, has suffered big including his broken marriage. He presently lives like a pauper in a trailer home in Montana. President Clinton awarded him compensation of US$1 million but this was not passed in time by the labyrinthine procedure in the US government. When Clinton left office, Bush 43 was not in favor of paying.
Are the US patriots treated in such partisan manner? Didn't Reagan and Bush-41 make Pakistan a nuclear power well before 1990? Doesn't Obama know that India tested her devices in 1998, and Pokharan-1 in 1974, notwithstanding?
K. B Kale, Jakarta
=================================================
Post Comments | Comments (3)
kbkale, | Fri, 31/07/2009 - 11:07am
"On the Nuclear Edge" is by Seymour M. Hersh KBK
=================================================
kbkale, | Fri, 31/07/2009 - 10:07am
All I can say is: Please read the articles in New Yorker "On the Nuclear Edge" dated March 29, 1993 and by Levy and Scott-Clark in Guardian dated 13 October 2007. There is also a book by Levy and Scott-Clark which I am reading presently. There may also be other material on this! But mine was not meant to be rhetoric at all. K B Kale
=================================================
Tomaso Tettamanti, Lugano, Switzerland 30/07/2009
One could call Mr. Kale the king of the rhetorical question. This is a device for arousing suspicion without really providing supporting evidence. Readers should be wary of this rhetorical trick. Is Mr. Kale to be trusted?
30th July 2009
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/07/30/letters-does-obama-stand-change.html
All through his exhaustive journey through primaries to date, I have been (and am trying very hard to remain) President Barack Obama's ardent admirer, but it looks like he is bent upon changing my opinion.
Recently I came across his speech in Russia where he said, "The notion that prestige comes from holding these weapons, or that we can protect ourselves by picking and choosing which nations can have these weapons, is an illusion. In the short period since the end of the Cold War, we've already seen India, Pakistan and North Korea conduct nuclear tests."
He thus erroneously equated India with Pakistan and North Korea on the issue of acquisition and proliferation of nuclear weapons. This set me wondering whether Obama really stands for "change" or is he similar to Reagan, Bush-41 and Bush-43. Then the question comes: Who gave nuclear capabilities to Pakistan? Wasn't it the "hawks" in the Reagan and Bush-41 administrations that let Pakistan have this know-how?
Didn't they persuade co-workers to deliberately mislead the US Congress about it to avoid being affected by Pressler and Solarz amendments? (see http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/04/top4.htm published in Karachi's DAWN, dated May 4, 2007). Was it India who clandestinely sold this know-how to Libya, Iran and North Korea? Was it Israel? Who was it?
Bush-43 coined the phrase "Axis of Evil" for these countries, but wasn't it Bush-41 and 43 who created the "Axis of Evil" Club as well as its full current membership? If things go wrong, as they may, will Al-Qaeda get its hands on these weapons? Will they train them on the US as Mustafa Abul-Yazeed told Al Jazeera on June 22?
One must thank Richard Barlow. He blew the whistle to expose the powers-that-be behind the silly decisions made from 1981 to 1992. Today, Rich Barlow, who did just what his job paid him to do, has suffered big including his broken marriage. He presently lives like a pauper in a trailer home in Montana. President Clinton awarded him compensation of US$1 million but this was not passed in time by the labyrinthine procedure in the US government. When Clinton left office, Bush 43 was not in favor of paying.
Are the US patriots treated in such partisan manner? Didn't Reagan and Bush-41 make Pakistan a nuclear power well before 1990? Doesn't Obama know that India tested her devices in 1998, and Pokharan-1 in 1974, notwithstanding?
K. B Kale, Jakarta
=================================================
Post Comments | Comments (3)
kbkale, | Fri, 31/07/2009 - 11:07am
"On the Nuclear Edge" is by Seymour M. Hersh KBK
=================================================
kbkale, | Fri, 31/07/2009 - 10:07am
All I can say is: Please read the articles in New Yorker "On the Nuclear Edge" dated March 29, 1993 and by Levy and Scott-Clark in Guardian dated 13 October 2007. There is also a book by Levy and Scott-Clark which I am reading presently. There may also be other material on this! But mine was not meant to be rhetoric at all. K B Kale
=================================================
Tomaso Tettamanti, Lugano, Switzerland 30/07/2009
One could call Mr. Kale the king of the rhetorical question. This is a device for arousing suspicion without really providing supporting evidence. Readers should be wary of this rhetorical trick. Is Mr. Kale to be trusted?
Sunday, 27 December 2009
My comment (#73) in New York Times on Obama's Inaugural Speech
My comment (#73) in New York Times on Obama's Inaugural Speech
Read the whole post by opening the link: http://tinyurl.com/yey77ln OR
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?sort=newest&offset=1
K B Kale, Jakarta
January 22nd, 2009
I am from President Obama's childhood city of Jakarta.
He, an obscure community organizer in Chicago area till 1996, is an excellent example of what one can achieve by "Audacity of hope", as he stood before his fellow citizen to take the Presidential oath.
His inaugural speech was enthusiastic, reassuring and down-to-earth and indicated new directions he planned. There is no doubt that the "change" he promised has come to America.
There is no doubt that President Obama will bring a new stature to his country in the community of nations of the world. He came strongly as man who means business and he spoke straight and clearly. His pledge of helping the poor countries by working alongside them to bring prosperity and his promise to the Muslim world that he sought a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect were timely and reassuring.
He firmly believed that enormous US military power alone cannot protect USA nor does it entitle it to do as it pleases.
His warning to those who are corrupt, deceptive and tyrant and remain in power using these foul means that they are on the wrong side of history, but he added that he would still extend a hand if these tyrants are "willing to unclench their fist".
I wish him all the best and I am ready to do whatever I can in the interest of the closer relations between USA and Asia.
K. B. Kale, Jakarta
Read the whole post by opening the link: http://tinyurl.com/yey77ln OR
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?sort=newest&offset=1
K B Kale, Jakarta
January 22nd, 2009
I am from President Obama's childhood city of Jakarta.
He, an obscure community organizer in Chicago area till 1996, is an excellent example of what one can achieve by "Audacity of hope", as he stood before his fellow citizen to take the Presidential oath.
His inaugural speech was enthusiastic, reassuring and down-to-earth and indicated new directions he planned. There is no doubt that the "change" he promised has come to America.
There is no doubt that President Obama will bring a new stature to his country in the community of nations of the world. He came strongly as man who means business and he spoke straight and clearly. His pledge of helping the poor countries by working alongside them to bring prosperity and his promise to the Muslim world that he sought a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect were timely and reassuring.
He firmly believed that enormous US military power alone cannot protect USA nor does it entitle it to do as it pleases.
His warning to those who are corrupt, deceptive and tyrant and remain in power using these foul means that they are on the wrong side of history, but he added that he would still extend a hand if these tyrants are "willing to unclench their fist".
I wish him all the best and I am ready to do whatever I can in the interest of the closer relations between USA and Asia.
K. B. Kale, Jakarta
My comment on Ellie Hasan's letter in Jakarta Post
Witnessing Obama's speech
Jakarta Post; 7th June 2008 10:54 AM
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/07/letter-witnessing-obama039s-speech.html
Please see Mr Ellie Hasan's letter and comments by other seven readers by opening the link above
Comments (8)
K B Kale (not verified) —
The part of Obama's victory speech that really touched the core of my heart was the images of a weeping Rev. Jesse Jackson who was shedding the tears of joy.
A few years ago, Jesse Jackson had made an attempt to win Democratic party's nomination for President.
His dream came true through Barack Obama a few years later. What a turn of events!
K B Kale
Jakarta Post; 7th June 2008 10:54 AM
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/11/07/letter-witnessing-obama039s-speech.html
Please see Mr Ellie Hasan's letter and comments by other seven readers by opening the link above
Comments (8)
K B Kale (not verified) —
The part of Obama's victory speech that really touched the core of my heart was the images of a weeping Rev. Jesse Jackson who was shedding the tears of joy.
A few years ago, Jesse Jackson had made an attempt to win Democratic party's nomination for President.
His dream came true through Barack Obama a few years later. What a turn of events!
K B Kale
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)