The Bedrock of Americanism and the Notion of Change

The New Rupublic consistently churns out poignant articles on the political atmosphere, and this one by John B. Judis offers a refreshing new variation on Obama and the phenomenon of change.

Judis cleverly lays out an America whose history is laced with a continuous appetite for not-being-the-same. He calls on the intellectual pimps of our past populace, summoning the echoes of change that have reverberated over and over in our brief but colorful history: "Change is the law of life," he quotes JFK. "And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future."

Our nation is ingrained in the nature of Adam, he states- that is, the biblical Adam, who is said to have lived unburdened by what came before him. He goes on soliciting words from Ralph Waldo Emerson, describing politics as a clash between "the party of Conservatism and that of Innovation, " and that "Conservatism stands on man's confessed limitations; reform on his indisputable infinitude." It is our nation's inevitable tendency to gravitate towards change, along with Obama's diverse cultural background and deviant political pedigree, that have compelled our country's voters to yield widespread support to our beloved Obama.

Here in Shanghai, the air of political enthusiasm is as exciting as a basket of stale fries. We aren't pounded by the scandalous ho-hum folks back home get pulverized by on a daily basis. Between the Great FireWall of China, the crappy ass internet connection, and the in-and-out status of my jacked CNN, I've managed to scrap together bits and pieces together from the internet ether to compose my voter identity. Youtube takes up a chunk of the information pie, along with TNR and the nytimes, while rogue bloggers and fellow expatriate shangmongers gobble up the remaining slices. While news outlets continue to shape my political attitude, its interesting how I too have been swept up by the recent Obamania rage.

I was going to vote for the Hills. Really, I was. She possesses an armory of political preparedness that will blast any obstacle out the way quickly and swiftly. She's the one to "go in and get the job done," and has the resume that screams "I am ready." She is THE pragmatic solution. But, what's the use of pragmatism if the shoe don't fit? The question really is, who's going to take home the cake against Them? By historical standards, I still live in a misogynistic world. Yay-sayers of our Bill of Rights gave suffrage to the Black Man with the 13th before they thought about passing it to their own White women some 55 years later. And, as Thucydides would likely point out, history tends to repeat itself, with Obama more likely to get a break before Hills. Another point to make is how Hillary's candidacy seems to be driven almost entirely on pure ambition- the woman spent her whole life prepping herself for the role of commander-in-chief. And though her merits and accomplishments roll off her brag sheet with flying colors, there's something to be said about blind ambition vs. recognizing the need for change.

So, I made the switcheroo. Last minute, might I add. Ultimately, I'm just glad the choices for the Democratic candidacy are thank-god-fully promising and exciting, and I have this creepy premonition that the elusive freak-of-nature called Hope looms somewhere close. I wish I could support my decision with the same illustrious skills that Judis pounded out, but alas I'm just a statistic for another fickle voter. So what's the final kicker that confirms my bid for Obama? Homeskillet follows me on twitter.