A Call to Do Anything You Can

Hi all,

I just felt compelled to write a brief note to encourage anyone out there to do what you can with this election. Since i'm posting this email on my blog too, i have to say that folks supporting McCain have just as tall of an order to actually support him through sound arguments, volunteering, etc., as certainly that's what democracy is about--basic citizen-to-citizen discussion of what our country needs, how those needs can be met, and by whom.

So with that said, i'd just urge those on the side of Obama particularly to realize that the issues are not going to change for the better unless we vote him in, and no one can say they know it will happen; so, in thinking about doing something, anything in these last days (whether you're in a battleground state or not, you can still talk to battleground voters), i'd just say that it's important to remember what i had come back to mind this morning--all of those issues that NEED to change in our country, if it's to be fair, equitable, and a sensible force in the world, really hang in the balance with this election (in my opinion).

The issues that i think of most are as follows--may they help put a jump in your step, as they do for me, in making something happen with this election (and i list some ideas farther down of how), opposed to just hoping something will. Here's a quick list of things that matter and are pushing me to push as much as i can these last few days:

-the basic idea that the 35 million or so Americans who can't afford health insurance should be able to through a fair, balanced system that covers exactly what should be covered, health--whether it's pre-existing problems with health or not, those problems need addressing no less; and simply put, i don't think McCain's plan is well thought out or the thorough reform that we need;
-the fact that Iraq was a huge mistake that McCain supported and Obama, as recalled (and expanded upon) in speeches like this one, showed such judgement in opposing;
-that McCain's single most-trumpeted strength in foreign policy is undercut not only by his misjudgement on our invasion of Iraq, but by his jokes about bombing Iran, his bellicose perspectives on Russia, the numerous times he mistakingly said the central group in this so-called war on terrorism (al Qaeda) was in Iran, and his overall proclivity towards war;
-and of course on top of all of that, the economy's in shambles and McCain will continue to favor the wealthiest at the expense of the most vulnerable, and will likely circle back to the deregulation that played such a hand in the economic problems we've now run into;
-lastly, in a too-short list of the very real reasons we need a different country, Obama will have a healing effect for us in so many ways, whether in the ways hinted at in his speech on racism, or the drive he plans for national civic engagement through expanded volunteering opportunities for people of all ages.

It's hard to know how our country could get much more unfair or bent towards injustice without reaching some tipping point, quite honestly. So those are the reasons that immediately come to mind for me in why everyone should push these last days to make something happen, and they're also the main reasons i bring up when talking to voters.

SO, the thrust of this note is that i hope anyone out there will deliberately plan to talk to voters in one way or another. If you're not in a battleground state, then go to Obama's website and you can call people who are (check here and here on his website, and you can likely find groups getting together to call in your area). You can go door-to-door in important areas, and if you're not in one you can drive to battleground locations too (info here on his site for both), as some of us are doing this afternoon at 3 and tomorrow at 3 if anyone in the area's interested (we're meeting at Murky Coffee in Arlington to drive to some more Republican-leaning parts of Northern VA). And i'll tell you, you may be reticent about talking to people because you don't think you have what it takes to be that frank with people, but if you can agree to issues like the above, then you do. All you have to do is talk from your perspective, and what you'll find, in my honest opinion, is that the issues are on our side. Many, understandably, are open to considering the fact that many simply can't afford health care, or that this Iraq war was a disaster, or that the economic approaches of the Republicans is at fault for much of what has happened, and is tilted towards the wealthy at the expense of the lower/middle class.

As a last push here, i'll tell you that some people just need someone to talk to about this decision. I've talked to, just to name a few:

-a woman who works at a local jail in Staunton, VA who had a pre-existing condition that wasn't covered by her last employer and wanted to know the basics of Obama's health care plan (which you can quickly few here);
-a Chinese-American in Arlington, VA who was voting Republican simply because her family would hold it against her if she didn't, in her own words; but particularly since she said she though Obama was right in so many ways, i put an argument to her about the issues at stake, and believe she may have been moved by it;
-a woman who was voting for McCain in Manassas, VA simply because of abortion, so i was able to talk to her for 20 minutes or so about the other issues, particularly emphasizing the fact that SO many other issues out there having to do with "life" are neglected by the Republicans--the loss of life of Americans, Iraqis and Afghans because of war; the way in which basic health in life is compromised by the lack of health care for many (or through unfair health insurance practices); the lack of basic necessities in life because our economic and tax systems are tilted towards the wealthy; etc.
-a young 20-something middle school teacher in Manassas, VA who was undecided and thinking most specifically about national security in his vote; i talked to him about the things mentioned above and why a sensible, informed, and judicious approach to foreign policy is a lot safer and more humane than McCain's impulsive decision-making, inhumane joking of bombing a country, and insistence on winning wars in a world where stabilizing countries should be more of the focus.

Those are just a handful of those i've talked to, but so many of those i talked to are similar, bringing up this or that point that they heard along the way, with a real willingness to hear someone speak with conviction about the overall picture of the issues out there--especially in these, the last few days before the election, where people feel compelled to honestly think about things (on a whole). We're all capable of sharing our opinion of why we're supporting someone, and that's what i always emphasize. I basically say to people, just to give any uncertain folks out there a sense of what exactly can be said (in person or via phone, though they also provide scripts if people want to go by those):

"Hi, i'm Brendan O'Connor, a local volunteer with the Obama campaign. We're going around talking to potential voters, seeing if they have any questions about Obama, if they're definitely planning to vote on Nov. 4th, and if they've made up their mind between McCain and Obama."

Usually they interject here and answer one or more of those questions. If they don't, then i usually ask more forthrightly if they've decided between one of the candidates; then, if you sense they're undecided, i usually ask "Is there a particular issue you want to look into that will likely determine your vote, or a couple of issues?" Of course you dialogue with them about what any of those issues might be, and go from there (honestly admitting if you don't know much about one). If you sense they want to hear more, or if they don't name any particular issues, i usually go into: "Well i know it's helpful for me to hear an individual's perspective on why they're supporting one candidate or another, so for me there are a few particular issues." Then i usually talk about three things: health care, foreign policy, and the above point about how Obama can be a healing force in our country through his ethics and expansion of things like national service. But those are just a few reasons that i support Obama, the punch comes when someone talks about things that matter most to them, as those are the issues anyone can usually talk more passionately and honestly about. But it can be helpful to think ahead of three reasons you support him before talking to voters, and then even practice a few times going over what you'd say--just be open to making your three reasons a quick list or slightly more in-depth if the person seems willing to hear a little more detail.

All that said, i think it's just about what i heard Joe Biden mentioning on the radio the other day--and no, i don't drink the kool-aid and hear or believe everything these guys say, but this was good; he said, basically, that what allows us to help people is the basic reality that we can make change happen if the current set up of things is not allowing for things to work as they should or could. So here's hoping that this note on my personal perspectives offers some encouragement to go push for affordable health care, fair taxes, sensible, rational foreign policy, and overall, a deliberately more humane, ethical, and reason-based approach to governance and life in general.

All the best,

Brendan

PS--If anyone wants to see some fun pictures of VA election activities around my way, and get a sense of election stuff in VA, check out these shots i have up on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=44600&l=01ec9&id=642878169

Update: I couldn't make up a better example than this video of someone making something happen for Obama:



Update 2: Handy video pushing the same points about VA, while showing people getting out all over the state:

Obama Meets the Shenandoah Valley

"I am so grateful to be in this gorgeous Shenandoah Valley. I am so grateful to be with all the people of Harrisonburg and the Valley as a whole, and here at JMU."

-Barack Obama, addressing 8,000-person crowd at JMU

So yeah, that's definitely a shot of Obama's plane at the Shenandoah Valley Regional Airport on Tuesday, in none other than Weyers Cave, VA (a wee little town 15 minutes from where I grew up, with an airport just as small); and yeah, those are also our boo-yow Blue Ridge Mountains in the background--aren't they beautiful? Obama was coming in for a rally at JMU, in Harrisonburg, VA, but he was, believe it or not (for you fellow Stauntonians out there), planning a stop in Staunton before that!! Unfortunately he got in late, as this piece in our Staunton paper talks about (fun piece by the way, gives a good sense of the hubbub of having a candidate in the area). The Daily News Leader there in Staunton also has a good collection of online pics they took of the whole episode of Obama landing, the security folks running all over the place, etc. You can also see some of the dichotomy of folks in the area with the comments they left on the paper's website for the various articles they did on the visit (like this one here).

As far as the JMU rally though, my mom, one of my little sisters, my grandmother, and some family friends started standing in line at 1:45 or so Tuesday to see Obama, and got in about two hours later--that's cause there were 20,000 people who showed up. Only 8,000 got in, with the other 12 left apparently hanging outside. Here's a pic to the right that our family friend took of Obama inside, though hopefully there are some more I can post in an update later. I'll also post some other shots from the area and a video of some parts of the speech a little farther down.

But I'll tell you, my grandmother is a rock star, making the trek down from DC to see him speak. She's also a real pragmatist though, and so I was surprised to hear her mention how she found herself stirred when she heard Obama in person talk about the idea of motivating people by hope instead of fear (and believe me, she's a politico to the heart, living in DC most of her life, so she's heard tons of his speeches, read about him throughout the year-and-a-half of the campaign, etc.). I know I've told people who have shirked at the idea of Obama's hope-talk that hope can mean everything or it can mean nothing, depending on whether there is any substance behind it.

In my view there is with Obama. In talking to my grandmother tonight about the rally, it made me think about the seemingly-eternal comparison presidential candidates will have to our goliath US presidents, such as FDR. Some would say Roosevelt did some bad, but many say he did much more good (I actually watched an interesting news piece tonight on PBS' NewsHour about FDR's handling of the economy in a financial crisis, with a comparison to today's economic situation; for anyone interested you can listen to the audio here). But if a presidential candidate were to ever reproduce some of the successes of FDR, and/or the related public approval that won him four terms in office, then it would most certainly be through bold propositions of what might be, not by scaring people into what's "safe." Obama is comfortable in the realm of what might be, but, as with anything new, it takes an openness to change, an energy to work towards what might be (which many would call "hope"), and, as my grandmother pointed out, an innovative spirit.

FDR is known for having said "It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something" (emphasis added). I have no fear that Obama would try things--but I at the same time think he will balance innovation with the methodical approach he's become known for. In that respect, he may even, if I can dare to say it, surpass FDR in ways; for FDR, according to the above piece I watched tonight, would aribtrarily raise and lower the price of gold to see what happened (though they noted that most else he did was much more pointed and purposeful). Perhaps the ever-increasing respect and related ubiquity of science and research will also allow an Obama administration the opportunity to do some precision governing that wasn't as possible during FDR's time (to certain extents; though I'm sad to say that Bush doesn't appear to have that same excuse for some things).

Enough said in that respect though, now for some random Shenandoah Valley-related stuff--here's a few front page shots from newspapers in Harrisonburg (at left) and Staunton (which again, is where I grew up, half-an-hour South of Harrisonburg, where Obama spoke; you can click on the pictures to enlarge, where you'll see a 78-year old woman in tears in the Harrisonburg paper as she listens to Obama speak; you can also read about how "Daily swim keeps man fit"--I love it):























Check it out though, we even got a piece on a New York Times blog post about the huge event it was to have a presidential candidate come to the Valley--after all, as Obama points out in his speech, "the last time a Democratic presidential nominee visited the city was 148 years ago when Stephen Douglas, another Illinois senator...came through en route to losing the election to Abraham Lincoln."

Lastly, here's some video clips from the JMU rally that the Daily News Leader put together:



Photo credit of plane above: The Daily News Leader

The Value, and Values, of Barack: Why He Gave That Speech On Race

As a part of PBS' Frontline piece "The Choice 2008" (which I hear is a good look at the candidates), they interviewed Obama's chief campaign strategist, David Axelrod. At one point they asked him: "When the Rev. [Jeremiah] Wright comments came out and the whole hubbub happened, what were your thoughts? How did you decide to deal with it?" This is how he responded, and it blows me away to see the depth of value in Obama that it reflects:

"The Rev. Wright episode was one of those episodes in which I began to see a president in real stark terms, because the stories broke; it was a feeding frenzy in the media. He was in Washington voting until 1:00 in the morning. We had set up some editorial board interviews the next day in Chicago on a different, also challenging subject. So he flew back into the city in the middle of the day on Friday, and he issued a statement on Rev. Wright -- we had written one; he rewrote it. Went off to his editorial boards for three hours, went on television, sat for three or four different interviews on Rev. Wright, and then said that night, 'I want to do a speech on race; I want to put this in context.'

He had mentioned the desire to make a speech like this before, but this seemed like the right time. And he said, 'And I want to do it on Monday or Tuesday.' He said, 'But I have to write it.'

So he went off campaigning on Saturday and came home. At 9:30 Saturday night he dictated an outline to one of his speechwriters, who shot it back to him on Sunday. Sunday night at 10:00, he started working on it again, and worked until 3:00 in the morning. We took off at 8:00 in the morning the next day, on Monday. The speech was Tuesday. Campaigned all day in Pennsylvania, and then from 9:30 till 2:00 in the morning on Monday, he finished the speech.

Knowing his habits, I just went to sleep, thinking I'd wake up in the middle of the night because the speech would be there in the middle of the night. And that's what happened. And I read that speech, and I just e-mailed him back and said, "This is why you should be president," because it was so filled with wisdom and so profound in many ways that it just blew me away that a guy in the midst of all this chaos, with no sleep and in the middle of the night, could produce that kind of thought and that kind of work." (emphasis added)

Take a look at the speech he came up with, below, that offers a glimpse of the hopeful--yes hopeful--perspective that Obama has to offer our country on this issue (in addition to the undoubtedly important approaches he has to foreign policy, energy, civic engagement, health care, etc., etc.). By the way, I wrote a piece on this speech when he gave it back in March that highlights some of the parts that struck me the most. Here's the speech (with 5,056,568 views on You Tube so far, and that's only for this version of it):

Woe is McCain: Impulsive Decision Maker

Bush's reckless comments and decisions are world-renown. Indeed, he was voted into office in part because he seemed more like a guy you could have a beer with than someone who had the care and thoughtfulness to make decisions about war and diplomacy, energy use and economics, etc. McCain and his VP choice, Sarah Palin, appear to be following suit (see Palin's comment about how she "didn't hesitate" and didn't "blink" when asked to be McCain's VP, and what looked like a rushed vetting process of her by McCain). The problem has come into full view with the most recent economic crisis and McCain's helter-skelter decisions surrounding it, including the melodramatic suspension of his campaign. Check out this well-put article on the subject (it's brief), where the writer points out the following:

"The solution was to try to make it look as if McCain were leading the heroic effort to save the American way of life. To do this, he had to portray the negotiations over [an economic] rescue plan -- which had been making orderly progress -- as stalled and in shambles...McCain succeeded in focusing attention on himself, but not necessarily in a good way. Voters may see this not as an illustration of brave leadership but as another example of McCain's 'ready, fire, aim' approach to dealing with any crisis. Putting himself at the center of events -- making any situation all about him -- is more than a political tactic for McCain."

This Washington Post article, by conservative columnist George Will, analyzes some more of McCain's erratic approach to the economic crisis. But for a more in-depth look at McCain's decision-making process (or lack of process), take a look at this PBS close-up video of him, done a few weeks ago. Then, for comparison, take a look at the piece done on Obama, where they asked the same question of how he makes his decisions. It's part of a larger series they are doing on how the candidates would lead, how they handle disappointment, and so on, that I'll be interested to watch some more of.

But the question of how one makes decisions is an important one. Are there usually lots of sides to an issue, and lots of research to be done before choosing A over B? What about when you get into presidential-level decisions? Do we want someone who, in the case of McCain always "goes with his gut" and, as the PBS piece points out, tries to make the quickest decision possible at times? The PBS piece quotes McCain saying, "I don't torture myself over decisions. I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often, my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint."

To be sure, this is not a black and white argument, as "gut-level" decisions can result in good, honest stances, as has been the case at times with McCain; but, trusting one's judgment--which is often what is meant by "gut-level" decision-making--does not mean one can't follow a careful, researched process in approaching a decision. The process can provide all of the information on the possible positions, allowing the most accurate judgment call to be made; at that point, after all of the relevant points have been thoroughly considered, a decision "from the gut" could be fair and even preferable--but McCain is not known for gathering those important outside perspectives prior to making a decision. That's even supported by those on the right, such as Norman Ornstein from the conservative American Enterprise Institute, who, in an interview for the above PBS piece, explained McCain's decision-making process in the following way:

"John McCain is a fighter pilot. A lot of his persona comes from being a fighter pilot.

This is a man who not only constantly questions authority, but is fond of making last-minute, from-the-gut, impulsive, risk-taking decisions, and believing to his bones that there may be a risk here, but it will pay off.

An impulsive decision-making style is fine if you're riding a jet. An impulsive decision-making style is fine if you're piloting a jet in combat [though I, Brendan, would interject that it wasn't fine with the three plane crashes McCain was responsible for as a navy pilot]. It's fine if you're a senator where the consequences are not going to be that long-lasting. It's a real question mark when you move into the presidency."

Decisions about what to eat for dinner, or other basic-level decisions, do not necessarily require or allow for a careful decision-making process--but bombing a country? Dealing with a financial crisis? Choosing a successor? Choosing folks to oversee entire swaths of the country and its governance, such as the Secretary of Commerce, Energy, Defense, or even Supreme Court Justices? Those decisions shouldn't be made on the fly. We've felt the effects of exactly that with the type of decision-making that has occurred under the Bush Administration; I've been surprised to hear about seemingly safe corners of the government falling into disarray or corruption, or both--from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (and that doesn't even go into the areas of more obvious corruption and disarray, such as the selling and subsequent mishandling of the Iraq war, the use of no-bid contracts in Iraq and otherwise, the inhumane torture of US detainees, etc., etc.).

These are at once managerial and ideological issues in my view, as they relate to the individuals Bush appointed to manage these agencies, but also the direction he gave them; in the business sector, we would not question the fact that a CEO is generally where the buck stops in terms of responsibility for the health or weakness of his/her company, so we shouldn't think any less for those responsible for governmental agencies. Thus, for all of these types of high-level decisions, I would insist on someone who is less impulsive (to use former Senator Gary Hart's word for McCain in the PBS clip), who weighs their decisions with the care and research that's required for issues of such importance. Our country and world can't afford much more of our recklessness.

Polling Everyone Out There...

Where stand thou on the issues this election? I’ve put some of the candidates’ self-professed stances below, though please look up more details if you'd like additional info. In the end, the candidates quite willingly admit they have different philosophies about what will be the best for our country and our people. So...

Where do you fall on some of the most important issues this election?

• 
  HEALTH CARE: Provide $2500 tax credit to individuals & $5000 to families to purchase private insurance; & develop federally-supported “Guaranteed Access Plan” for those who can’t get coverage (McCain)


• 
  HEALTH CARE: Subsidies for those who can’t afford coverage; require insurance companies to charge the same for those w/pre-existing conditions; & offer govt health plan for those who want it (Obama)


• 
  TAXES: Continue large Bush tax cuts for wealthiest & offer tax cuts for middle class (significantly lower than Obama’s) (McCain)


• 
  TAXES: End Bush tax cuts for wealthiest; increase taxes for $250,000 plus wage-earners; & offer tax cuts for middle class (significantly higher than McCain’s) (Obama)


• 
  IRAQ: Continue the war & treat Iraq as central front for terrorism (McCain)


• 
  IRAQ: End the war & treat Afghanistan as central front for terrorism (Obama)


• 
  ECONOMY & JOBS: Less regulation of economy in general; across-the-board spending cuts; & create new jobs (green & otherwise) (McCain)


• 
  ECONOMY & JOBS: More regulation of economy in general; targeted spending cuts; & create new jobs (green & otherwise) (Obama)


• 
  ENVIRONMENT: Work to break our dependence on foreign oil, with most emphasis on drilling offshore, though he does discuss alternatives as well (McCain)


• 
  ENVIRONMENT: Work to break our dependence on foreign oil, with more focus on a mix of solutions than on drilling (Obama)

VIEW RESULTS

From Staunton, VA, a Call for More Women's Rights Through Obama

The following was published a few weekends ago in the Staunton News Leader, the paper from my hometown, Staunton, VA, found in the beautiful rolling hills of the Shenandoah Valley. It's called "Voting for Obama with Equality in Mind," and I totally appreciate the focus on women's rights (it lacks some full-on specifics, though there's more on Obama's positions related to women here and here, and on his running mate, Joe Biden's violence-against-women work here):

"Since 1920, women have had the right to vote; the suffrage movement in the United States marked 144 years of oppression by our founding fathers, which disenfranchised women, simply because of their gender. Although the 20th century marked numerous reforms allowing the extension of rights to all people, today women continue to suffer when it comes to wages and earnings. In 2005, women in the U.S. made 79 percent of what their male counterparts (who did the exact same work they did) made.

Unfair? Heck yes! Well, there is hope. Recently Lilly Ledbetter, a retired worker for Goodyear Tires, spoke to a crowd of hundreds about her fight that climbed all the way to the Supreme Court to achieve recompense for her company paying her less than male coworkers. Her moving speech was followed by another moving speech by Michelle Obama, (the wife of Barack Obama) who discussed women's rights, particularly the right to deserve equal pay. Folks, the time is now for change, but change cannot occur if you do not vote.

Voter registration for Virginia ends on Oct. 6.

So if you care about equal rights, equal pay and want your government to serve you and not the wealthy minority of this nation, vote. Make your voice heard. If you wonder who will bring about this change, just read the headlines, and you'll find the word Obama synonymous with the word 'change.'

TIM CUNNINGHAM Waynesboro"

As a quick follow-up, a stellar video from Obama recently in Florida--he cut to the center of me with it with some honest remembrances of the hard, HARD work women have done over the years, naming the plight and work women have done in such a refreshing, and again, honest way (I was way tired when I watched, but definitely teared up with it, let me know if it gets anyone else like that):



Oh, and while I'm posting videos, here's a great one on Biden's work on a great bill to seriously fight violence against women:

VA's Repub. Leader Crosses Line, Comparing Obama to Osama

I feel I'm losing grip on reality as I hear some of these comments spewing out of the Republican party--is it real? It feels like an alternate reality, surreal, as I read of the head of Virginia's Republican Party, Jeffrey Frederick, comparing Barack Obama to Osama Bin Laden: "Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon, that is scary," he said last weekend. And who was he saying this too? To volunteers who had come out to knock on doors in Virginia for McCain.

What world does this man live on? What hatred does he so easily let fall from his mouth?! I write that in complete seriousness--it infuriates me that, as Obama has rightly said, all this is making a big election about small things. The words of this Republican leader in VA would likely qualify as hate speech if it were directed at someone else, and this supposed leader--and how it degrades the word to use it for folks who act this way--willingly misleads with it. As I wrote here, these type of comments have been completely disproven, named as "one of the most appalling campaigns" in history, and yet McCain allows it--and not only that, he's continued to support phone calls pushing the same disgusting ideas. His appeasing comments at the last debate about always repudiating out-of-bound remarks just isn't true, with one of the most shameful of all coming out of his running mate's mouth, with not a word of repudiation.

As I've said before, both candidates have misled in ways, but the evidence is hugely stacked against McCain, and leads me to give up on the question of whether he or Palin are measuring their actions with any serious or consistent ethical or moral considerations--a distressing thought for me, as these folks are of course one of two options for not just any leadership positions, but two of the most powerful in our world.

If I have children one day, I can safely say that I would strongly consider living in another country if these guys are elected and things continue in this direction--we need people our nation's children can aspire to, respect, and mimic; and no, I don't believe that's too much to ask from politicians, as it has been done in the past, here and abroad, and there are some politicians leading in that way today.

Here's the full quote from the Time magazine article I quoted above:

"[Virginia GOP Chairman Jeffrey M. Frederick] climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: 'Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon,' he said. 'That is scary.' It is also not exactly true — though that distorted reference to Obama's controversial association with William Ayers, a former 60s radical, was enough to get the volunteers stoked. 'And he won't salute the flag,' one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, 'We don't even know where Senator Obama was really born.' Actually, we do; it's Hawaii..."

These are folks from Gainesville, Virginia talking, and I can understand how they may have been misled, but it only emphasizes the need for anyone out there with a conscience--whether you're for Obama or not--to combat this crap whenever you come across it.

Photo credit: Time magazine.