An Open Letter to the Agents of Change

Dear Agents of Change,

Congratulations on your victories, be they incremental or complete. I was glad Obama when you won the Iowa nomination, like this incremental victory it may be a step towards incremental change. Certainly Hillary Clinton's strategy has shifted, I watched her distress as she lemanted the lack of recognition she recieves for her vision of 'Change'.
I like a lot of what you say, but this thing you said in amidst the revelry concerned me:

Hope-hope-is what led me here today - with a father from Kenya; a mother from Kansas; and a story that could only happen in the United States of America. Hope is the bedrock of this nation; the belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.

The first bit I bolded I can let slide, it prickles me up but still I will assume that what you meant was not that the United States of America has some intrinsic, magical property, or some process by design that allowed you to win the Caucus vote, but more along the lines of the immortally incompetent Colonel Cargill of Catch-22 fame:

Men...You're American officers. The officers of no other country in the world can make that statement. Think about it.

That is what you meant by it was a mere truism. Nowhere else in the world could someone like you win the Iowa caucus, because Iowa is in the United States of America, you have to win it in the United States of America, there simply isn't an Alternative.
But if what you meant was something along what Chomsky insinuated of you:

I mean, what's the elections? You know, two guys, same background, wealth, political influence, went to the same elite university, joined the same secret society where you're trained to be a ruler - they both can run because they're financed by the same corporate institutions. At the Democratic Convention, Barack Obama said, 'only in this country, only in America, could someone like me appear here.' Well, in some other countries, people much poorer than him would not only talk at the convention - they'd be elected president. Take Lula. The president of Brazil is a guy with a peasant background, a union organizer, never went to school, he's the president of the second-biggest country in the hemisphere. Only in America? I mean, there they actually have elections where you can choose somebody from your own ranks. With different policies. That's inconceivable in the United States

But that is kind of petty, to nitpick that only in America could a guy like you succeed. I think a lot of the time I read that America is one of those places where you should recieve special commendation because it is one of the places in the world where it is actually really hard for a guy like you to do what you are doing.
From what I've seen of the surveys, a godless guy like me would have a much harder time of becoming president, particularly while, being fortunate enough to win the lottery of birth over billions of other semen that lived in 'The balls of my father' which doesn't have the ring of your biography, unfortunately a wasn't pushed out of a Vagina in the United States, thus my hope to one day have the opportunities you do would be truly Audatious. If you were to look into my eyes Obama, you would see that I have no hope.
Which is what really concerns me about your emotive speech. It's a bit up the page now so I'll paraphrase:

the belief that our destiny will not be written for us, but by us; by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is; who have the courage to remake the world as it should be.

As a business professional, currently successfully employed as a vagrant, one of the wealthiest vagrants in the world mind you, if you question my credibility. Why I don't have to ask anyone for change, and even have access to the internet. So I guess you would have to call me an elite really, and a seniour, by world standards.
This is vague, and I recalled the snippett I saw on Japanese news as 'together we will, remake this country, together we will remake the world' or something, but I can't find the details and I can't remember most stuff word for word on confusing Japanese TV.
But needless to say, it rubbed me up the wrong way. Who do you mean by 'all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is' do you mean Americans, do you mean me? I certainly am not content to settle for the world as it is, seldom am I content to settle for the weekend as it is.
If you had excluded me, a non citizen of the country, which is an artificial concept used to deliniate a geographical jurisdiction whereby an entity seperate from the geographical concept of a country, called a 'government' administrates policy for its membership, determined by the citizens of the geographical jurisdiction, which in turn is determined artificially by a group of early predecessors who took the land by force, in defiance of their Government and the law of the time. If its on that basis I am excluded, I wouldn't much mind, except all this talk of remaking the world as it should be.
This concerns me because I may have to be living on the world, I cannot as yet live anywhere else and my only other alternative is to be 'not alive' as an atheist if this is the case when you are proposing to remake the world, I don't much care what happens to my remains which unfortunatley, and sorry for the inconvenience, will still be on the world. You have my permission though to jettison them off into space.
Before contemplating the possibility though that I may have to live through this 'remaking of the world' my other problem is, I know a lot of people. Infact most of the people I know in my self same predicament. We all live on the world, and most of us aren't citizens of this concept called 'The United States of America'.
So if what you are saying, is what I felt you were saying when you said 'together we can remake the world as it should be' I feel a little bit slighted, a little bit left out.
It's not a good feeling. Because I don't know what 'the world as it should be' is, its a little vague. Sort of like that Christian concept of Heaven, which in turn is quite vague. When told specifics I am simply told it is 'the best' or when people get really specific 'the best place you can imagine' which is really quite funny, because I can't see my mother enjoying dunking on Kevin Garnett, Hakeem Olajawon, Ben Wallace, Marcus Camby & Bill Russell in a friendly game of me vs. the best shot blockers of all time as much as I could, and that's certainly one of the best places I can imagine being.
So what is 'the world as it should be?' what specifically do you mean by that.
Early signs are encouraging from the same speech -

I'll be a President who finally makes health care affordable and available to every single American the same way I expanded health care in Illinois - by--by bringing Democrats and Republicans together to get the job done.

I'll be a President who ends the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.

I'll be a President who harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientists and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.

And I'll be a President who ends this war in Iraq and finally brings our troops home; who restores our moral standing; who understands that 9/11 is not a way to scare up votes, but a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century; common threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.

I like a lot, except that 'ship our jobs overseas' thing, what do you have against foreigners competing in a collective labor market. I would apluad an effort to reduce the mobility of Capital, so it can't just fuck off to the next poor country whenever they try to put their prices up, because as it turns out, cheap labor is highly immobile. Not a problem for a wealthy vagrant like myself though.
So let's talk about the real implications over who is involved in this remaking of the world. With the aforementioned common threats of the twenty-first century.

common threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.

Terrorism's largest perpetrator remains the wealthy post-modern nations of the world, of which the US is the largest. Today it still supports terrorism in Columbia. Are you saying that this is to stop? It has a history of terrorism in Indochina, South America and the Middle East.
Climate Change again, most of the worlds energy consumption right now is concentrated in the United States, another 6 planets and so forth if everybody lived like the United States does now.
Poverty, America's NAFTA agreement brought about great poverty in Mexico, as do most of its trade agreements, and methods for securing access to the world's scarce resource.
Genocide, does this mean you propose to stop supporting fascist regimes, and state sponsored genocide, like you did against public opinion in East Timor recently?
Disease, well that's easy, you mentioned the health care and building up the scientists and entreprenuers and what not.

So do I audaciously hope, that what you are proposing is that America in rebuilding the world as it should be, is actually mostly going to withdraw all its fingers reaching into the world that thus far have fuelled the American way of life, and thus placed poverty and slavery upon the people of nations outside of America.
I find it hard to believe but there you have more or less committed to it.
If so, I'm on your side, I find I am always on the side of people being able to determine their own course for their life.
If that's so, your first step should be to give all citizens of the world a vote, in the issues that they have interest in. Their own freedom, self determination and comfort.
Then it's all settled.
If we get to vote the representative that is most representative of the world as it should be, you may just be in with a shot. And I'm sure the rest of the current racehorses would drop out.
Maybe you'd find yourself relaxing all kinds of policy, once you start identifying world issues with the people of the world.
Wouldn't that be nice?
And that other Agent of Change, Rudd, well you've won haven't you. I look forward to reading the exit strategy, a climate change policy that addresses the issue, and all that shit.