Cross-Cultural Blog

My comments revolve around the image of a changing america. In fact the colors of Obama's website really stand out and is very appealing to the viewers. But what should really be underlined is the motivation and dedication behind Obama's campaigns, he is really offering America new hope, new ideas and most of all a change. His slogans really speak for them selves and are very inspiring physically and of course mentally in the fact that the american citizens need a new leader with different ideas that could be beneficial; not only to the americans but for the entire world. This candidate really stands out as his website, the bright colors do in fact create this feeling of change and calmness. For the middle eastern situation, he does in fact mention a few points that concern his plans for the near future but as discussed in your blog, as middle Easter's we do in fact feel discoursed and left out in some topics that could affect our political status or any other factor that could lead to the disfunction of a nation.

Now after Obama actually won the election, I can say I agree with what Borhan just said. And I guess that Obama winning after all this shows that his plan for his campaign was actually very beneficial. With the slogan "Yes we can", giving the audience the feeling that we're all one community is what made him appear to his audience as being one of them. The blue color in his website seemed to assure the people who voted that it’s going to be a time where peace is surrounding the United States. With Obama winning this election, it shows how successful he was in this persona he took as being the savior of the united states, and how he and only him can save America from the economic and political crisis its suffering at the moment.

I think your analysis about the colors used by Obama's website is somewhat misguided. It's more likely that his website is blue because it is the token color of the Democratic party, and not because he aimed to have a "calming" effect on voters. While I don't think it's inappropriate that he used his party's color, I do think it represents that he did have to be much more political rather than bipartisan. In the end, this was an election that came down to impressing voters and rallying the Democratic base was a huge part of that.

Concerning the issue of his lack of discussion about Muslims and Middle Eastern ethnicities, I think this once again comes down to pure politics. He aimed to gain the support of independents and even some moderate Republicans, and appearing to be too "soft" or sympathetic on Middle Eastern issues may not be conducive to this effort. Similarly, he almost has to mention Jewish Americans: Israel is one of the top three recipients of U.S. foreign aid (along with Jordan and Egypt), and I don't think this is just the result of the Jewish population's contributions to the economy. Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by being disappointed that as Middle Easterns, you are "not part of the conversation." I'm sure there is a discussion of Middle Eastern affairs under a different tab (there must be something about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, etc.) such as "terrorism" or even as broad as "foreign affairs." As inspiring a candidate as Barack Obama has been, he too had to keep political concerns as his top priority and that includes targeting American voting citizens much more acutely than the foreign populations on whom the United States has an impact (which arguably could include just about all populations of this world.)

I find your comments about Obama's specific inclusion of Jews and not Muslims very interesting. Though I think that you might be right when you say that this inclusion has something to do with their economic contributions, I think the real reason is that America's relationship with Israel is very political in the United States, and consequently, there are a lot of Pro-Israel groups that have a lot of political influence, and a lot of money to give via campaign contributions. For instance, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the United States, and for many groups like it, support of Israel is a political priority. For this reason, Obama's reference to Jews specifically is likely just pandering to a very politically influential religious group.