Anyway, with reference to the original question.
Being mixed-race and not coming from one of the established political dynasties in the US he, at least, provides a sense of hope for [most] Americans. Perhaps his biggest advantage is that he isn't George Bush.
There again, Thatcher and Blair were both 'beacons of hope' on their appointment. I rather think Obama will fail as they both did. Not necessarily because of personal weaknesses but, in my view, countries and presidents/politicians are becoming increasingly irrelevant in a globalized economy.
And we live in a society of 'I see, I want, I get'- although that bubble may have just burst. How we get back to the days where it was [or had to be] 'I see, I want, I save, I get', is the big question. Maybe this recession will force people to behave differently??
On one specific point I was disappointed to hear him approve billions for embryonic stem cell research, because:
human stem cell research is well advanced and has already created cures for a long list of illnesses/genetic defects. The money would have been better spent supporting further research in this area.
E.S.C.R. hasn't had a single success and it could be upto 20 years, and many more $billions before they do.
The E.S.C.R lobby tried to counter the criticism of using human embryos by changing to Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (therapeutic therapy) which [some legislatures fell for].
The reality is that SCNT uses embryos in the same was as ESCR. It is no more than a play on words.
Strangely [or not?

] while it is possible to use, manipulate and destroy human eggs in the U.S. guess what happens if you steal the egg of a bird like, say, the Golden Eagle?
It's an odd country where the eggs of a bird are considered more important than the eggs of a human!
