Geeks Support Obama

If you weren't already convinced that Obama is the candidate of choice for geeks, there's now an entire website dedicated to preaching his tech merits to nerds everywhere. Yeah, essentially Tech for Obama is a bunch of techie talking heads—the CEOs of Craigslist and Real Networks, Googlers, former Wired editors, among others—explaining why you should vote Obama. (Which we already did.) It supposedly tracks Obama tech news and events, but it does a pretty crappy job at it, even though there's a ton of stuff to cover, which would go to their whole point—no mention of the Dems' digital billboard at the Palin rally, the fact that the $3 million dollar projector he supported is sweetass, or most surprisingly, the Obama iPhone app. They don't talk about the fact that Joe Biden sucks on tech stuff, either, but that's kind of expected. He's, like, old and stuff. Update: Here's Wired's take on both candidates. [Tech for Obama] P.S. Please keep all flaming to a low smolder, thanks.

DISCUSSION

ninjagin
ninjagin

For my part (as a lifelong Dem), I'm just surprised at the tone of this race, and the amount of suspicious invective being directed at my party under the aegis of "anti-communism" and "anti-socialism". I've been called a "marxist", a "traitor to the nation", a "terrorist sympathizer", and a whole lot of other awful stuff. I'm secure enough in my leanings to not let it get to me, but I'm still in awe of it.

Some of that got muted when the DNC came to my hometown, but now it's back. I kind of wish that our own American Socialist and Communist parties got enough air/print time to help draw the distinctions between the Democratic party and these others we've been identified with... the differences are quite stark. "Liberal", for example, does not mean "Communist", and it's somehow replaced my preferred term of "Progressive", but now there are no progressives, only "communist liberals".

There are always going to be the regular arguments about Dems being "for higher taxes" and "more big government spending", and I think that's more from generalized historical associations left over from the New Deal and the Great Society. There are similar misappropriations of "conservative" as meaning small government and low taxes, but that hasn't been borne out of the last fifty years, either.

I read "Conservatives Without Conscience" by John Dean, awhile back, and he really takes these identifications apart from an almost sterile, academic perspective. (great read, btw.) I remember telling friends in the 80s that I was a "Goldwater Democrat", but to identify that way in these times might very well get you dismissed by either party.

Maybe the old labels don't fit anymore, and in the search for something new and relevant, we've fallen back on easier, more pointed, more vitreolic nomenclature that makes us feel more decisive. I don't like it. It seems, well, ironic.