The Tide Is Turning

I have no idea who Roger Waters is supporting in this thing (and I hasten to note that this video was created without his permission), but when I heard Senator Obama's historic Philadelphia address last week, this song, "The Tide Is Turning," from Waters' underrated 1987 album Radio KAOS kept running on a loop in my head.

The song and the speech compelled me to take a break from the snark to assemble this mash-up as a tribute to everyone who has endured this seven-year-long dark ride; and to everyone who hopes that America can and will change for the better.

Until recently, I honestly didn't think it was possible. And even though it's only the beginning, Senator Obama's campaign is clearly our best shot to, at the very least, turn the tide against this seemingly interminable darkness.

Bob Cesca's Goddamn Awesome Blog! GO!

Comments

[SeagirlX]

BRAVO! I'm speechless and deeply moved. Thank you. The tide IS turning and we can not deny that and we must not ignore it. We must move forward.

[BruceWY]

The biggest problem in the way of change (and fair elections) is the superdelegates, who should never have been given power.

The answer to the superdelegate question is easy, simple, and fair. Simply add half of the superdelegate vote to each candidate's total. This neutralizes them and lets the votes of the other delegates (the people) decide the race. It also ends the race sooner, probably far ahead of the convention, and lets the winner (the people's winner) get on with fighting McCain. If the Democrats don't adopt this plan they are wasting time, effort, money, and the good will of American voters. If you like this plan please post it anywhere you can think of and try to convince the party to get out of this mess of its own making. And of course dump the superdelegates first thing when they hit Denver.

[ItsAlessandro]

The biggest problem is all the focus on the super delegates while no attention is paid to the mini-delegates that were selected in the caucus states. It takes 88% less voters to select a mini-delegate in a caucus state yet the Obama supporters demand that these mini-delegates actually dictate how the super delegates vote.

States that hold actual primaries have so far required 11,009 voters per delegate selected. States that hold caucuses require only 1,304 voters per delegate selected. Hillary leads in both total delegates and electoral college even without Florida and Michigan when we evaluate both candidates based on the voting standards that will be in place in November.

[BrooklynLager]

In other words, in a contest against McCain, she'll lose Illinois, but win Arizona, John McCain's home state.

The Democratic Party has proportional delegates for a reason - to keep people from drawing nutty conclusions like that.

[muktukcanuck]

That was very well done. I'm glad you played it out, and didn't just let the loop run in your head. Much better to share your inspiration. It just might be contagious.

[moderationsmuse]

No it's not.

[leftoflennon]

I have tears in my eyes now.

The Tide IS turning...

[ariadne1]

god... that was GREAT!!!!!!!! i sent it to my entire family and friends some of whom are leaning toward clinton. the title of my email was 'why i feel the way that i do.'

[RoseMerry]

Okay, this hardy seems fair! The power of this song can not be ignored. It was the first optimistic song, Roger Water ever wrote and he wrote after Live Aid.

I pray that it will apply to the current sitaution. It has become so much worse than we have ever imagined.

Great video.

[dperis]

Great use of a classic song with moving imagery...

I am the editor of JamsBio.com, which allows people to post their memories of songs. I've highlighted your thoughts and video here:

http://www.jamsbio.com/user/david/let_the_tide_turn/

Thank you

[VicksieDo]

Thanks Bob, I needed that :-)

[nazgul]

"But the most common thing that people say to me ... is 'Don't give up, keep going. We're with you.' And I feel really good about that because that's what I intend to do," X told reporters on Tuesday.

Is X George Bush listening to his inner circle about Iraq, or Hillary listening to hers about her campaign? Similarity in self-indulgent management styles is striking.

[certainot]

FYI from your local right wing talk radio station to all you Obamans

limbaugh just said photos of a recent obama rally show obama supporters aren't smiling any more- they look like "group prison mug shot" then quickly corrected it to "group mug shot" before a quick break.....­.--- obama was probably talking about the limbaugh economy that was so good a little while ago....

[standforpeace]

God I hope that the tide is indeed turning at long last. I believe that we are doing more than choosing our next president. It feels like we are on the brink of an important decision about who we are going to be as a nation, and I am afraid that we are going to choose incorrectly, that we'll once again choose business as usual. However, unlike 2004, I also believe that we have a good chance to win this time -- not with cheap tricks or voter fraud and not with fear and scandal but by calling forth the best of who we Americans are.

[briefer]

Bingo.

[McSurgent]

The Obamans are beating the fundie Christians to the 2nd Coming and Rapture. Sorry Jesus, we already have Obama!!! LOL

[loucheish]

First of all, I'm a fan of Bob Cesca -- the snarky Bob Cesca -- so this is not aimed at him.

Instead I pose these questions to all the Obama adorers out there: I understand that you are "moved" by him, and find him "inspirational" and all that -- but why do you think it is that he can't even move and inspire enough Democrats to lock up the nomination? What do you see that we're missing? ("We" being the rest of us Democrats who either support Clinton, or are disappointed and frustrated with both of them.) Maybe it would be better to ask it the other way: put yourself in our shoes - why do you think we're not responding to his rhetoric?

Furthermore, given that he can't lock up the nomination, why on earth do you believe that he can win the general election? I view your reverie with wistful envy. I would like to share your optimism, but the numbers - both polls and the election results to date - just give me a sinking feeling.

[AOGutierrez]

Could it be that you are heavily invested in your current point of view and will be until it becomes moot? At that point will you still be a Democrat or will you vote to continue the current stalemate by voting for a man who has promised to continue the war and has stated that he's not really up to speed on tricky economic issues? You can make the polls wrong. Support your candidate but take a hard look at the options if she doesn't prevail.

[Sabreen60]

You know some of us are not following along blindly. I dare say a good many of us are not following along blindly. A pretty good percentage of Obama supporters are college educated and I think many of us are capable of critical thinking. If I were you, I wouldn't believe the hype. We don't think Obama is the "second coming". He's just a man. But IMO, he's special. When is the last time this nation has been inspired by anybody?

[loucheish]

My current point of view, in case it was not clear - is that I dearly want a Democrat to win the White House in November. However, I don't believe either Clinton or Obama can accomplish that. (By the way, of the two, I prefer Obama; Clinton is certainly NOT my candidate.­)

I have to ask- when what becomes moot? Obama's nomination? Without super delegates, neither one of them can reach the magic number to clinch it. Besides, my state's primary has already passed - so all I can do is watch the stalemate in frustration.

[ceu]

You think he can't win in the fall? Seriously? When he'll be going against a man who wants to continue the policies of a president with an approval rating below 30%? Even if people don't vote FOR Obama, they will vote AGAINST the Republicans on the issues - Iraq, Gitmo, Katrina, the politicization of the Justice Dep't, recession, 47 million people without healthcare, the rape of the Constitution,- the list goes on and on. People are sick of it and will vote those in power out even if they aren't enamored of Democratic candidate.
A Quinnipiac Univ. poll out today of CT voters shows Obama beating McCain 52% to 35%. Granted I'm citing only CT, but I'm thinking that voters here are not the only ones who are fed up with the current administration and eager for a change. Remember, too, that the "locking up of the nomination" involves two Democrats with policies that are fairly close to each other.
The question for Clinton supporters is: are you willing to vote for change & being led by a person who inspires us to be better than we have been? Or do you want to continue on the course we've been on for the last 7 years out of pique because your candidate didn't win the nomination? How many more people are you willing to let die due to the occupation of Iraq, collapsing infrastructure, lack of health care, etc. just because the candidate you're supporting now isn't on the ticket

[loucheish]

I think you fail to notice that many- if not most voters separate policies from the person running. In fact, when it comes down to it, many- if not most voters don't particularly care about policy. This is frustrating to me, but I've seen the results of too many elections in this country to pretend that this time it's going to be different. On the subject of Iraq policy, though - I think many people disapproved of the current administration's management of the war but would be receptive to McCain's 'let's win it' rhetoric. The "surge is working" narrative has taken hold in large swaths of the country.

Winning the general election means winning the electoral college. And yes- there are huge differences between Connecticut and Georgia, Idaho, Texas, etc.

[rosal]

Keep repeating: "both pools and election results to date" over and over again. Ignore reality. It worked for Bush supporters. They kept repeating the talking points, and became delusional. Its better to live in a world of fantasy, than face reality, and acknowledge that Hellary is toasted.

[loucheish]

Huh? Forgive me, but I can't tell whether the post is sarcastic, or if it is, where that sarcasm might end. I'm not sure to which reality or fantasy you refer.

If by "Hellary is toasted" you mean that Clinton is stuck in a position where she can't win the nomination without the aid of superdelegates - and has been so damaged by the process that her chances to win the general election are roughly nonexistent - then I totally agree. I wish her supporters - or better yet Clinton herself - would wake up to that reality.

That said, I wish the Obama contingent out there would realize that their wunderkind is in exactly the same position. True, he won a string of primaries and created the appearance that he was going to run away with the nomination. But then it failed to actually happen.

[c1ee]

Because you are talking about a paradigm shift. Big money lobbyists are no longer as important, they are the political past. Now, it has become clear a mass of small donors is just as effective, if not more effective than the past way of raising money. There is so much of the status quo, entrenched interests that will fight till the last bunker is taken. These dinosaurs will not willingly give up their power till the bitter end.

Regardless of whether Obama wins or not, the campaign textbook has been rewritten by him and his team.

[planetmango]

THANK YOU!!!! THANK YOU!!!