Slashdot Mirror


Obama Announces for President, Boosts Broadband

Arlen writes "As many as 17,000 people (according to police estimates) watched Senator Barack Obama officially announce his candidacy for President in Springfield, Illinois today. He mentioned several things that will interest readers of Slashdot. The Senator said he wanted to free America from 'the tyranny of oil' and went on to promote alternative energy sources such as ethanol — a popular stance in the Midwest where he announced, because of all the corn farmers. He also talked about using science and technology to help those with chronic diseases, which is likely to have been an allusion to his staunch support for stem cell research. Perhaps most of interest to readers here is the following statement halfway through Obama's speech: 'Let's invest in scientific research, and let's lay down broadband lines through the heart of inner cities and rural towns all across America. We can do that.' Like nearly everything in his speech, this was met with robust applause from the crowd. You can watch a video of the entire speech at Obama's website."

6 of 846 comments (clear)

  1. Obama's Social Networking Site by Petey_Alchemist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's also worth noting that, in addition to things like 1 million strong for Barack, his team has set up it's own social networking site where Obama supporters can share photos, messages, groups, fundraising, and events.

    Dean ushered in Internet fundraising in 2004. Could Obama harness social networking?

  2. A new feeling by Terminal+Saint · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I may not agree with his stance on every single issue, but I have to say, I don't think I've ever felt genuinely excited about the prospect of any particular candidate becoming president before this election. Usually I'm just hoping for the guy I mind the least to get in.

    --
    It's sad when choosing an installation directory on your own qualifies you as an "advanced user."
  3. Re:I notice he didn't mention... by king-manic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is pretty much what Bill Clinton did. He didn't run on anything extreamly radicle but hope. It was the enternal optimist that painted every picture as better with him. The same stock numbers as we have today, the same or worse unemployment numbers as today, Most of the same if not worse economic indecators as we have today, But the picture was painted so much brighter when he was president. (note that By worse only represents that levels have grown today as a natural prograsion of events, Not something specificly wrong in eiother adminstration)

    Did you miss the last 4 years. I am a canadian and we noticed in the last 4 years you've changed a lot. You went from a mostly harmless slightly loud giant with too much money to an antogonistic bully who doesn't have the sense not to spend himself into massive debt. I don't think you've been paying much attention.

    --
    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
  4. Re:I notice he didn't mention... by Yaztromo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And where do you get the idea that the gun registry has been so expensive because of the resistance to it? There's no connection, except for the fact that if there weren't such resistance more people would register and the registry would be even more overwhelmed.

    As it's the wee hours of the morning, and I'm hoping to go to bed, I'll have to find a specific reference for you later (assuming I remember to do so, of course), however at one point the gun registry started a programme where they sent registration representatives all across the country, to rural, remote, and Native Canadian community areas to personally register people due to very low compliance levels.

    Hiring, training, and flying hundreds of people around the country to help people fill out forms doesn't come cheap. Now I won't disagree that the overall start-up cost wasn't outrageous, and that there wasn't any waste -- but the same can be said of pretty much anything run by humans. The Government of the day, however, bent over backwards to make sure they weren't making criminals out of gun-owning Canadians. Registration deadlines were pushed back, people were hired to fill in forms for people who should have just picked them up from their local post office or community centre and mailed them in, and all sorts of allowances were made to try to prevent creating criminals out of tens of thousands of citizens. And let's not forget the advertising budget -- the Government didn't sneak this legislation in and then send the cops to peoples doors -- to try to encourage registration complience, they had several major advertising campaigns, including to-the-door pamphlet mailings, 1-800 numbers for asking questions about the registry, etc.

    People seem to think that such services come for free. They don't. The Government could have taken a hard-line stance, and as soon as the original registration deadline came and went start sending the police to peoples homes, but instead they extended deadlines, had further advertising and educational campaigns, and sent staff to peoples homes to fill in the forms for them. Such services weren't budgeted for, as the Government of the day failed to anticipate how much of a backlash they would see from instituting the registry.

    (FWIW, I know a number of gun owners, my father included, who were 100% FOR the registry, and who registered early and on-time).

    As for long guns and crime, it happens way more often than you might think. That police woman killed in Montreal two or three years ago was killed by a long gun. The gunman who went on the rampage at Dawson College in Montreal last September was using a long gun. The gunman who killed 14 women at Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal used a long gun. The Taber, Alberta school shooting was committed with a long gun. These were all very, very high-profile crimes here in Canada, and each and every one of them was committed with a long gun. Long guns play a very significant role in crime. Methinks that all too many long gun owners here in Canada have a very short memory when it comes to the crimes committed here using them.

    Yaz.

    Yaz.

  5. Re:Midwest by tap · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd be interested in seeing what sort of CO2 impact ethanol actually has (how much removed by corn when growing, how much released when the corn is fermented, how much released when the stalks decompose, and how much is released when the alcohol is burned). The net impact would be none. All the carbon in the corn came from CO2. When the process is complete and the ethanol is burned, all the carbon that was in the corn has to end up somewhere. Unless the corn-ethanol process produces millions of tons of carbon rich ash that is buried in the ground, all the carbon that was in the corn ended up back in the atmosphere. Ethanol doesn't remove carbon from the atmosphere (no matter how you make it, even from sugar cane). To do that, you would have to grow the corn and then bury it in the ground.

    Ethanol is supposed to be a more efficient way of using oil. The oil is used to produce corn and refine the corn into ethanol, which produces slightly more energy than just burning the oil directly. The corn captured some energy from the sun that ends up in the ethanol. You can think of ethanol as hybrid oil+solar energy. In the case of corn, it's 90% oil and 10% solar, if that. Sugar cane is much better, but needs to be grown closer to the equator where there is more sunlight. Only Hawaii and the southern parts of Florida, Louisiana and Texas can grow sugar cane in the US.

  6. Re:So... by kevin+lyda · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "the Republican party need to spend a while in "time out" after the total fuck up they've pulled on the country between the corruption, the misrepresentation, and the disregard for the *rest* of the Bill of Rights."

    Amazing how the people you vote for become "them" when the policies you voted for blow up in your face...

    --
    US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!