BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Riginslinger
Date: 02 Apr 08 - 09:33 PM

"'...who WAS a good president" my answer is: we don't have them in this country.'"

                   We have had good presidents in this country. We just haven't had one since the two parties became so entrenched and preoccupied with power that they don't care about the people anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Genie
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 02:18 AM

Guest, I'm not suggesting that criticising Obama implies support for McCain, but I'd venture to say a lot of the public could see it that way. If there are 3 main candidates left, 2 within the Democratic Party, and Smiley publicly criticizes ONLY Obama, don't you think a lot of those who hear that criticism might think his silence about the other two means either that he'd prefer Clinton to be the Democratic nominee or even that he thinks more of McCain?

I just hope Smiley aims his attacks as much at McCain as he does at Obama - and at Clinton too, unless he actually has no criticizm of her.

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 01:30 PM

I couldn't agree more with GG's opinion that it is time to revamp the constitution... It is so outdated that even with activit Supreme Courts the governemnt is getting less and less democratic...

Take, fir instance the population of Utah and compare it to that of California... Both have 2 senators yet when you look at the fairness in representation 1 Utahian = 77 Califonians... This is just one example where things donm't work...

Jefferson, in his writings, made it clear that he thought that the document was flexible enough so that it could be changed easily to keep it modern... That really hasn't happened... It isn't modern... It does not even have a provison that states that women are equal to men and should therefore be conpenstaed equally for equal work... It has to say purdy much just that because the Supremes couldn't give a tinker's fam about equal pay for women... That is a fact... But look at how difficult, because of interest groups, money and PR, it is just to get asn ammendment that specifically says that women should have equal rights...

Nevermind... Grrrrrrrrrrrrr....

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: GUEST,GUEST
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 03:07 PM

Genie, a couple of things to remember.

1. Because a person is critical of one particular candidate means only that, nothing else.

2. Whom the person being critical supports is no one's business but there own--we have secret balloting in the US for VERY good reasons, and we are witnessing it in this election.

3. It is entirely possible for people to be critical of the candidate they ultimately end up voting for, when the system is rigged to force "lesser of two evils" voting.

So, I don't know who Tavis Smiley is going to vote for, but it is none of my damn business.

As a host of a public affairs program on PBS, I would expect nothing less than him examining the candidates critically--that is his job.

Finally, do you know for a fact that he hasn't made critical observations of the other candidates when doing public speaking gigs, including the one quoted in the opening post of this thread?

Maybe you shouldn't presume so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Genie
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 03:38 PM

"1. Because a person is critical of one particular candidate means only that, nothing else."
Ever hear the saying "Silence implies consent?"

If I very vocally criticize only one candidate, it's very likely to be construed by many others as implying I have less to criticize about their opponents.

"2. Whom the person being critical supports is no one's business but [their] own " -
It is, until one opens one's mouth and blabs it. : D

"3. It is entirely possible for people to be critical of the candidate they ultimately end up voting for, when the system is rigged to force "lesser of two evils" voting."
This is true. But research also shows that negative campaigning tends to suppress voter turnout.   YOU may lambast candidate X and then 'hold your nose and vote for her/him," but your putting that down in public may persuade others not to vote for her/him or just not to vote.

"So, I don't know who Tavis Smiley is going to vote for, but it is none of my damn business."   

We're not talking about whom he's going to vote for, we're talking about what he says from his bully pulpit and how it may influence the electorate.

"As a host of a public affairs program on PBS, I would expect nothing less than him examining the candidates critically--that is his job."
If he does it fairly and even-handedly, I'd say, yes, that is, indeed, his job.

Finally, no, I don't know what else he has or hasn't said about the candidates. Nor did I presume I did. : )

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 08:41 PM

It appeared to me you presumed Smiley was being unfair to Obama, as your first post implied.

Lesser of two evil voting: which one is more palatable, shit on a shingle, or shit on a shingle with a sauerkraut sauce?

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Genie
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 08:55 PM

What some people read into a statement isn't necessarily "implied." : )

What's important here is not only what Tavis Smiley (or anyone else) has said, in toto, it's more what they've said that gets echoed over and over in the mainstream media (including popular talk shows).

Subject: RE: BS: Tavis Smiley on Wrightgate
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Apr 08 - 09:23 PM

Exactly, Genie...

These are all nuggets that have been tested before control groups before put out for public consumption...

The Rev. Wright deal was exactly that.... Take 3 minutes outta man's life and try to define him by thoes three minutes... Hey, I understand it if those three minutes are Lee Harvey Oswald's 3 minutes in Texas, or James Earl Ray's 3 minutes in Memphis but to try to define Rev. Wright by reducing thousands of hours of work into three losy minutes is about a hypocrital as there is...

Heck, I'd hate to have a nation judge me by my most radical 3 minuites... Yeah, okay, back in the 60's I was workin' as a community organizer for the local CAP program and the City of Richmond was getting ready to cut funding for the program so I got up before the the City Council with a packed and loud audience and went into a rant about raising taxes and "puttin' barbed wire around the poor neighborhoods, just like in Nazi Germnany, then white folks wouldn't have to worry about them niggas"...

Yeah, the black folks in the audience, most who I knew well, loved what I said and I got alot of "Amen, brothers" but if I were to run for political office and the tape of that speech were to come into the hands of my opponent I would be toast!!!

Yeah, we gotta be real carefull when we try to generalize... When we take a man's most radical and angry moments and try to define his entire life by them... All people who try to make things better go thru hard times... Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers in the temple... If there had been 30 second clips of that running 24/7 on CNN or Fox then maybe we wouldn't have a New Testament today...

I mean, lets get real here...

B~