What change really means

After Nov. 4, the majority of voters in America are breathing a sigh of relief and hope. We rallied around a simple theme: change. Change can mean so many different things, but for us, the change we were looking for means so much more than a simple turning away from the policies of the Cheney/Bush years.

Change means no longer looking at the world from the standpoint of “You’re on your own.” Rather, it is an affirmation that “I am my brother’s keeper.”

Change means looking at the races of the world and no longer simply glossing over differences, but appreciating and celebrating them.

Change means no longer shutting the doors of democracy to groups of people, but opening them and finding new ways to listen to other voices.

Change means reaching out and coming together, unifying our nation—if not in terms of ideology, at least in creating a nation that we are all proud to be a part of.

There are many, many of you out there who are upset. Perhaps you are afraid. Perhaps you believe that we have taken a wrong turn. I want to invite you to stand with us, with those of us who believe in this change. You are invited to take part, to open your minds and hearts, and to possibly see the reasons that so many of us voted for change. Who knows—you just might change yourself.

— Josh Batenhorst
Canton

SHARE
About Webmaster
Mountain Xpress Webmaster Follow me @MXWebTeam

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

20 thoughts on “What change really means

  1. Matt Mercy

    Change means creating a civilian national security force answerable to Obama…in the tradition of the SA.

    This guy is really dangerous. No one really knows who he is, but his policies sound just like Bush’s, only Obama has left cover. Now, all the “progressives” will get behind endless wars, torture, and warrantless wiretapping.

  2. travelah

    Change? My disposable household income is up. Interest rates are as low as I have ever seen. My debt load is lower now than it was eight years ago. A tyrant was disposed of and a fledgling democracy born in the middle east (however tenuous). A dangerous international terrorist organization is on the run and mostly neutralized. My tax rates are lower than they were under the Clinton administration. My firearms cabinet is full. My kitchen is well stocked. My firewood is dry and I still have a case of 2003 vintage St. Francis wine. I still determine who my doctor is and each visit costs me $20 out of pocket.

    Now, what am I supposed to embrace for change?

  3. Thomas Marx

    Dream on Josh. Obama is not Mohammed and will not be able to do a socialist “fix” with the wave of a Muslim sword. The change? High taxes, no investment,a recession that will turn intoa depression. Gird your loins. We are all in for a downward “change”.

  4. Ashevegasjoe

    travelah,
    if the last eight years were so great, why does Bush have the lowest approval rating of any President on record? Maybe not everyone has prospered. I think a lot more people are further in debt, but congrats on your personal wealth. Also, I’m glad you have health coverage, but millions of Americans don’t. And, when they go to the E.R. and don’t pay the bill, healthcare costs for everyone go up. We NEED healthcare for everyone NOW.

    Your guns are safe, and so is your wealth. Obama’s reference to a civilians volunteering was just that, a call to make sacrifices and help out the country like we always have in times of war. The people of this nation who don’t have relatives in the armed services have had virtually no change in lifestyle, and that is not right. If we are at war, we are all at war, and a spirit of sacrifice and volunteerism should be embraced. That is what Obama meant, he has re-iterated it a number of times. But, Rush and the fear mongers want you to think he’s organizing a youth movement like Hitler? So is he a fascist, or a Marxist, or is he a Socialist or a terrorist. He is truly amazing if he can advance all of these contradicting principles. Conservatives, step away from your propaganda for a miniute, and do some critical analysis. Unlike Palin, Obama has been properly vetted for almost two years. There are no secrets that McCain, the GOP, and the Clinton-machine have not been unable to uncover. And what they did uncover was pathetic, that’s why a majority of voters didn’t buy it. Four years from now, we will still be the capitalist-socialist hybrid that we have always been. The terrorists will still be under attack in the Middle East, and President Obama will be much more popular than our current leader. But, it doesn’t take a crystal ball to figure that out.

  5. travelah

    ashvegasjoe, it still remains for you to explain what I am supposed to embrace for change.

  6. dave

    traveleh, Mixin’ too much of popcorn’s shine in your your Kool-Aid, eh?

    Amazing your so prescient that you can criticize an administration that has yet to be formed or take power.

    Oh Yeah!

  7. dave

    C-Anderson,

    Umm, hate to break it to you, but we are already in a downward spiral of a recession. By your logic, wouldnt that be the CURRENT administration’s fault? Or is Obama such a miracle worker in your book that he could effect the economy months before he takes power?

    Your own little Jesus: Bush, has destroyed the American Economy and left us more than 10 billion dollars in debt, in case you dont read the newspapers. You dont get to blame the future administration for the current administration’s failings.

  8. Dionysis

    The first poster makes up nonsense about some kind of internal securty force, not even remotely like what Obama discussed (but parroting the right-wing propagandist organs), and travelah thinks the world is all about him, and as long as he’s in good shape, things are fine.
    Plus another character trying to perpetuate the ridiculous ‘socialist Muslim’ twaddle.

  9. F.A. John Doubleclutch

    Nice job Dave, nailing Thomas Marx as the infamous C. Anderson? Kudos.

    Travelah we don’t need your approval for change nor do we need to re-explain anything to your satisfaction. If you haven’t paid attention because you were busy concentrating on the lies and misinformation of the right wing propaganda machine, that’s your problem.

    Now if Obama turns out to be a lying, snotty, heartless fear and warmonger that superficially panders to the religious right at the direction of his corporate overlords. Just follow the liberals lead and we’ll show you how to deal with these issues properly. Until then sit back quietly and watch your fortunes dwindle as they will for some or disappear all together as they will for others.

    Your side drove the economy like they stole it and now that they’ve wrecked it, isn’t it time for all of you to go to your rooms and think about what you’ve done?

  10. chalkbox

    Things sound good at your house travelah. Is there a room for rent?

  11. Ashevegasjoe

    travelah,
    the change you are supposed to embrace is affordable health care for everyone, energy independence, and the wealthiest 5% paying the same amount of taxes that they paid in the nineties (which was less than during Reagan, and still less than during Bush 1). Also, a change in foreign policy that has been us vs. the world, for the last 8 years.

  12. travelah

    Ashevegasjoe, I am not interested in your welfare nirvana. The health care proposed by the Democrats is not going to be affordable for the people who actually have to pay for it. Energy independence requires a commitment to drilling, exploration, natural gas, coal and nuclear, none of which are on the Democrat agenda. Taxes are still too high for those earning income and paying taxes. The wealthiest 5% are already paying a disproportionate amount of their income in taxes and the country cannot balance the Democrat crash on their backs. I have no interest in placating the world.
    Now, what change am I suppose to embrace that is going to better my position and that of my neighbors?

  13. travelah

    chalkbox, no, I am sorry but I have a full house already. I have neighbors with rental space but you will have to actually pay rent out of your pocket to live there since they have to pay a mortgage out of theirs.

  14. nuvue

    I don’t think we are going into a bigger welfare state than we already have. I would like to see less welfare for the big cats on wall st. and change it to main st.
    Energy Independence means…exploration, Nat. gas, clean coal (an oxymoron if there ever was one) Wind, Solar, Conservation, Nuclear, and Electric cars will maybe help Detroit outta their slump.
    We are not going to drill our way out of trouble, we need to develop alternatives to gas vehicles.

  15. Ashevegasjoe

    travelah,
    Actually, and in my opinion unfortunately, clean coal (oxymoron), nuclear, and natural gas are all part of Obama and the Dems plan to move towards energy independence. The top 5% don’t pay a dispraportionate amount of taxes, through write-offs and tax credits, they get most, if not all of their money back. Personally, I favor a flat tax and doing away with the IRS completely.
    Your question was what change were you going to have to embrace, I listed a few. It’s not presidential-elect travelah, so whether you like the change or not doesn’t matter. The changes I listed are coming, and if you don’t embrace them you will simply be passed by. I didn’t embrace unilateral foreign policy, invading and occupying Iraq, and the conservative agenda de-regulating financial markets, but it happened. Now the shoe is on the other foot, suck it up, this is a Democracy.

  16. dave

    “we need to develop alternatives to gas vehicles.”

    We already have them. They are called bicycles. And legs (feet included!).

  17. travelah

    Ashvegasjoe, Obama made it clear that investing in coal would result in bankrupting those who do. Nuclear option have never been proposed by the Democrats. I would wager that one of the first energy initiatives by the democrats will be to reinstate a ban on most offshore drilling.
    The top five percent , the top 10% and the top 40% do not get back the taxes they pay to finance nearly every expenditure in this country. You clearly are not familiar with the IRS code.
    As for embracing the changes, no thank you. A lot of us will be victims of these changes for a while but the real eyeopener will come when the young naive Obammunist Nation wakes up and realizes that they are going to be footing the lions share of the bill for this fraud, not in taxes for they don’t pay much as it is but they will pay in lost opportunity. That is the truth the foolish among you have not been told or have not comprehended.

    Yes, it is a democracy and suck it up we will. You should have taken the same advice for the past eight years and your words would not seem nearly as hollow. Keep in mind the pendulum will swing back as it always does.

  18. Ashevegasjoe

    Since I am so ignorant of the IRS code, I’ll let thos who know more break it down for you:

    An analysis by the Center for American Progress Action Fund shows that President Bush’s economic policies have “redistributed wealth to the richest Americans and left the majority with stagnating wages and declining household incomes.” Looking at the effects of the first three Bush tax cuts, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that “the percentage by which the effective tax rate was cut for high-income families was nearly twice the rate cut for those in the middle of the income spectrum.” Meanwhile, the administration’s failure to raise the minimum wage coupled with its poor enforcement of federal wage and hour laws, trade agreements, and union rights further undermined the economic security of middle and lower-income Americans. Data prepared by the IRS from tax returns filed during the post-9/11 recovery (2002 to 2006) reveals that household income grew by $863 billion during the period. “The 15,000 families at the top of the income scale saw their annual incomes go from about $15 million a year to nearly $30 million,” accounting for more than 25 percent of all of the growth in income for the entire country. The remaining 1.7 million families in the top 1 percent of households accounted for nearly another 50 percent. But while the “top 10 percent of families accounted for 95.3 percent of the nation’s income growth between 2002 and 2006,” the average real income for families in the bottom 90 percent of households increased by about $300 to a little less than $30,700.”

    The pendulum doesn’t always swing back, in times of extremism it breaks– like the way the conservative movement over the last thirty years has broken this country. Money doesn’t trickle down, and our greatest resource is our people. I would hope that with all the events of the last decade, the “foolish” among you would see that. But, I guess you’re comfortable, so screw everybody else right? WWJD

  19. dave

    travelhahaha,

    so, is obama still a radical socialist now that he has appointed obviously moderate and right-of-center people to his administration?

    My guess is that you would call him a Marxist even if he was sworn in on the body of Ronald Reagan, and appointed your beloved Black de Casa, Thomas Cowell, to Secretary of Treasury.

    Obama is a fiscal moderate (some might even say conservative), and the Right has nothing to fight him with except the same tired, recycled cliches from a bygone era of simplistic dichotomies.

    When will it end with you vocal minority types?

  20. travelah

    dave, the Obammunists depend on the ignorant. You can say you read it here first. Obama is engaging in calculated politics. By moving moderates into place, he is able to have a barometer in place to gauge his ability to push his agenda. Hillary Clinton as SOS? As Rush stated, it was a brilliant calculated move on his part to neutralize the Clintons (or so he believes).
    More importantly, if Obama is as you suggest truly conservative, you should be greatly disappointed that he has kept Gates to stay in Iraq. You should be disappointed at the direction he is taking which on the surface is the polar opposite of his early campaign and political history.

    Welcome to the world of sheeple, Obammunist.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.