|
14 Mar 08 - 09:23 PM (#2288754) Subject: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest You can see the videos of Obama's main man, the clearly bigoted Rev Wright (from whom he borrowed the title of his now bestselling book, "Audacity of Hope") all over the web today. It does beg the question: if Obama finds so many of his pastor's messages to the flock of conservative, middle class blacks the church serves, why is he just now deciding to "distance himself" from the man? And then there are Ferraro's comments, resignation, and unrepetant stubborness over her inflammatory comments. Like we don't know this was the mission all along. But what bothers me more, honestly, is this biz w/the preacher. As unapologetically homophobic and bigoted as the worst of the right, WHY would Obama stand by his man like he has? It is obvious the candidates are in the trenches of an increasingly ugly race vs gender war for the presidency, using surrogates to say what the candidates themselves cannot. So, who has been harmed more this week by their surrogates? Obama or Clinton? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 09:41 PM (#2288764) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Riginslinger I think Ferraro thinks her comments reflect a reality that she thinks a lot of people see but won't talk about. I think Wright's comments reflect a world the way he would like it to be, but isn't. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 09:44 PM (#2288765) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace I think that racists are assholes. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 09:52 PM (#2288772) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And your opinion on sexists? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 09:53 PM (#2288775) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Sorcha They're assholes too. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 09:54 PM (#2288776) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Riginslinger That's a good point, GG. There are folks who will go to great lengths to rail against racists, but when the topic is sexism, the seem to develop amnesia. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:01 PM (#2288784) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Indeed. Which is why I posited, accurately I believe, the straw man argument currently engulfing the Democratic party. Is there parity in victimhood between the black man and the white woman? And where does the black woman and the Asian man fall in? And finally, when is the last time anyone can recall the horse race being debated by surrogates denounced by candidates. And based on this past week, I believe both camps have PLENTY of surrogates lined up to be denounced by their candidates. It is their clever neo strategy du jour, their clever idea of how to keep themselves in the public eye, smearing one another with mud facials. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:03 PM (#2288786) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Sexists, both male and female, are assholes, too. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:03 PM (#2288788) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace And your opinion on sexists is? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:11 PM (#2288793) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Gigi- The story of Obama's pastor has been waiting in the wings for months. You're certainly not surprised, or shouldn't be. Obama has had a close relationship with this pastor for over 20 years but now he certainly appears to be a loose cannon by any definition. Obama is distancing himself and it's probably better that he does so now than later. At some level, this is an interesting exercise to watch. At another level it's quite painful. We've all had mentors who've gone off the deep end (well, maybe not all of us but I certainly have). Rev. Wright is right out there now for all to see. The Republicans will rake this video up in their fall ads,you can bet. Charley Noble |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:12 PM (#2288795) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace So will Hillary's crew. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:20 PM (#2288799) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Oh, so women are sexist? I'm guessing that is like that 'blacks are racist too' thing? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:21 PM (#2288800) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Some women aren't sexist? Fawk . . . . |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:28 PM (#2288802) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest So, what you are apparently suggesting is, women are to sexism what blacks are to racism? Is that it? Because to me, that sort of logic is used to negate the facts of both sexism and racism. Is that your intention, Peace? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:29 PM (#2288803) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Not at all. Are you intentionally going out of your way to be offensive? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:31 PM (#2288807) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Sorry Charley! But the MSM has long had the chance to expose the truth about Obama's religion and at whose feet he worships. They've clearly taken a pass, just like they have the cozy relationship between his neighbor & fundraising friend (and quite a friend at that as Obama admitted today!). Can you imagine how the MSM would be crawling all over similar associations--LONG time associations and relationships in Obama's case--if linked to Hilary Clinton? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:34 PM (#2288809) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest No, I'm not. You are the one making the claims. I'm just trying to suss out what you are going on about like that for, because that kind of hyperbole is usually a tactic people use to derail conversations and throw people off topic. Maybe the subject of sexism vs racism is too difficult for you? I mean, considering you are neither a man of color or a woman. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:36 PM (#2288810) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Nearly every Friday night, I watch Shields and Brooks on the PBS Newshour. Tonight, both of them agreed that Obama being black was giving him a slight advantage among voters. However, they didn't say whether Clinton being a woman was also a 'slight advantage' among voters. Hmmmm.... |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:37 PM (#2288812) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Well, I'd suggest that if you tried manners instead of rudeness you might accomplish more. You are not a man of colour, so YOUR arguments to do with race have NO validity, right? And since you chose to get personal in your usual arrogant manner, I shall return the favour. You spend too much time being angry with everyone. You must have terrible blood pressure. Please watch that. You'll blow an artery. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:40 PM (#2288813) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest I haven't been rude though. Nor am I angry. Because you choose to respond in those terms is pretty typical of your posts here. I have noticed that. You seem angry with a lot of posters here, a lot of the time. In fact, you seem like a pretty angry, bullying kind of guy. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:43 PM (#2288817) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest BTW Peace, just why did you start participating in this thread? To call people assholes? Was that what you intended your contribution to be? Because coming into the thread and calling people assholes doesn't seem like a very good way to introduce yourself to a polite conversation. I'm just sayin'. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:45 PM (#2288818) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: MarkS Given what is going on internally with the Democrats, can you imagine the din when the Democratic winner opposes the Republicans? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:46 PM (#2288820) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Good point, Mark. Who do you think the Republicans would rather run against? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:49 PM (#2288822) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Oh, settle down. The race issue has reared its head all through Obama's campaign. Hillary, while being a woman is still WHITE. There are as many women in the US as there are men. There are substantially fewer Black people in the US compared to non-Black people. You have been rude. Saying you haven't doesn't make it so. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:49 PM (#2288823) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace And BTW, you seem like a very bullying woman. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:50 PM (#2288825) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace And a last thing: My friend Sorcha has called sexists assholes. Address her, too. Or does that not fit YOUR agenda? |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:52 PM (#2288827) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: MarkS Actually, Peace, I believe there are a few percent more women than men in the US. And Guest, I'm sorry to say that my political cyrstal ball is completely blank this time around. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:53 PM (#2288828) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest I think we're done conversing now, Peace. I'd like to get back to the discussion at hand. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 10:54 PM (#2288830) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace OK. What exactly IS the discussion at hand, because it wasn't explained very well in the opening post. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:03 PM (#2288833) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Big Mick There is a fair amount of baiting going on. Let's just try and keep to the discussion, eh folks? I don't see where Obama is getting a pass, anymore than Clinton got a pass on Ferraro's comments. Quite frankly, I see those who try to raise these issues as trying to subvert the system for their own agendas. Mick |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:05 PM (#2288835) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Mine is pretty clouded as well. However, I note today Rush Limbaugh was running a pretty strong campaign against Obama. IMO, it would be far easier for Repubs to smear Obama than Clinton. Not because he is the worse of the two, but because of stuff that is surfacing now as his official vetting is taking place in the public eye. It would be pretty tough for the Republicans to come up with something against Clinton at this stage. Or so one would think. I'll never say never about the Repub bag of dirty tricks. But that You Tube video of Obama's preacher is pretty damning stuff. And then the guilt by association game, which the Repubs are so masterful at--you know, the Repub ads will all use Louis Farrakahn as the Willie Horton of '08. What will the Repubs use that will be as effective against Clinton surrogates? That Geri Ferraro has bad fashion sense? That was a brilliant move by the Clinton campaign, to have Ferraro make the comments--then have Hillary apologize to blacks for Ferraro's statements...and Hurricane Katrina??? And then have an unrepenting Ferraro "resign" very publicly, but still keep playing her tune--which is what so many white voters are thinking but weren't willing to say. Which is, of course, an inherently racist strategy. But then, considering the Obama quagmire with Wright, I just read this from the NYT: "Mr. Wright is no longer on Mr. Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee, though Mr. Obama's aides would not elaborate on the circumstance of his departure, and Mr. Wright did not answer a message left on his cellphone requesting an interview." Compare that to how the Clinton campaign was practically out front of the Ferraro story practically before it broke. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:08 PM (#2288837) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace "So, who has been harmed more this week by their surrogates? Obama or Clinton?" If that was the point of the editorial, they have both been harmed. But whether that translates to people diggin' in deeper or voting 'outside' their Party when the Dems have one and the Reps have one is an issue that will only be quantifiable after the votes have been cast in the presidential race. The people who are hurting Obama, Clinton and McCain (it seems to be hurting him less. Maybe folks just expect that of Republicans) may not see that what they do is contraindicated in terms of voters' perceptions. Right now it's a fight inside the Dem Party. ONE of the two will win the nomination race, so it might be seen by their managers as a "let's do as much damage as we can to the other candidate because we have nothing to lose in THIS race". Whether that translate to long-term problems may be someting no one's looking at yet. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:12 PM (#2288839) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest The same NYT article says: "One of the statements that have been most replayed this week comes from the sermon Mr. Wright delivered following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards," he said. "America's chickens are coming home to roost." Don't forget--Ward Churchill, a tenured University of Colorado professor, was recently fired by the Board of Regents for saying the same damn thing as Wright, nearly word for word--the chickens coming home to roost thing. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:18 PM (#2288840) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Q (Frank Staplin) Women were finally declared persons in Canada in 1948, if I remember correctly; a most unfortunate occurrence---- oops, here comes my wife--- unfortuate circumstance for women to find themselves in at that late date..... I had to go back to the grocery today to get some items I had forgotten, and read that National Enquirer at the check-out counter. Among other things it concerned Obama's sexual adventures and shouting matches with his wife- my reaction was that she seemed to be a very strong person, and would more likely have pounded the miscreant into the ground. All nonsense, I'm sure, but it reminded me of the old cartoons about the war between men and women- somewhere I've got a book of them. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:21 PM (#2288841) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace "Here is Senator Obama's response: The pastor of my church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring, has touched off a firestorm over the last few days. He's drawn attention as the result of some inflammatory and appalling remarks he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents. Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue. Because these particular statements by Rev. Wright are so contrary to my own life and beliefs, a number of people have legitimately raised questions about the nature of my relationship with Rev. Wright and my membership in the church. Let me therefore provide some context. As I have written about in my books, I first joined Trinity United Church of Christ nearly twenty years ago. I knew Rev. Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago. He also led a diverse congregation that was and still is a pillar of the South Side and the entire city of Chicago. It's a congregation that does not merely preach social justice but acts it out each day, through ministries ranging from housing the homeless to reaching out to those with HIV/AIDS. Most importantly, Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, he has never been my political advisor; he's been my pastor. And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn. The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church. Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country. With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States." |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:23 PM (#2288842) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Well, the other reason why Obama will be easier to run against for the Repubs is the now volumes of You Tube videos of Obama saying his race doesn't matter (ie, he isn't as black as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton), while his surrogates keep playing the race card against the Clinton campaign. Which they have done brilliantly and to great effect too. But the Obama camp is clearly reeling this week from attacks coming from many corners, not just the Clinton camp. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:27 PM (#2288845) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest I really want to be able to give Obama the benefit of the doubt on this one, because I think he is genuinely feeling torn about this. But when I read that response today, my immediate reaction was "hell, that one ain't gonna fly in Peoria." |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:28 PM (#2288847) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace THAT is true. I expect in many ways that Obama must be looking at the words of King and Abernathy back in the 1950s when they were feeling the deepest of despair. One of the things that kinda turned me off both O and H was neither of them speaking up for Kucinich when he was being omitted from debates. It let me know back then that 'fairness' didn't enter the morality of either. Talk about yer 'chickens coming home to roost'. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:38 PM (#2288850) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: M.Ted I wonder what ever happened to the idea of "Freedom of Speech"? When people are punished when what they say runs counter to the conventional wisdom of the day, a free exchange of ideas is pretty much impossible. And the thing is that these civil rights are not being eroded by fascist warmongers, or the religious right--it's the Liberals and the Progressives who claim to champion Civil and Human Rights who are the worst offenders. |
|
14 Mar 08 - 11:48 PM (#2288854) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest The problem stems from candidates being so controlled, and elections being about anything but the free exchange of ideas. It is all about marketing, branding, staying on message. Obama has been criticized by the media that cover him for being almost as guarded as Bush, ie that he only gives speeches, not press conferences, where the press can grill him. As if. I notice there have been more 'in the back of the plane' photo ops of Obama lately, showing him chatting up the media whores. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 11:06 AM (#2289071) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest AP is running an article on this, which is where my idea of the thread came from: Democrats struggling to transcend divisions on race, the sexes in Obama-Clinton contest By CALVIN WOODWARD , Associated Press WASHINGTON - Something happened to the feel-good, way-cool Democratic presidential contest in the months since a woman and a black man began their path-breaking race for the White House. By the millions, black voters voted for the black candidate and women voted for the woman. White men seemed torn, by the millions. Sen. Barack Obama has broken historic barriers, especially among the young, as the first black candidate with a serious chance at the presidency. Voters who might ordinarily balk at a female president have backed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in her pioneering effort. Those gains have not been enough to erase divisions by race, a task perhaps beyond any mortal and any one election, nor lesser ones between the sexes. And when the campaign moves beyond Democrats, the party of diversity, and into the general election, it's questionable how much room is left for such progress. A significant minority of voters in Democratic contests have considered the race or sex of the candidates important — about one in five in each case. That's according to surveys of voters in about two dozen states across the country on and since Super Tuesday. Whether clumsy, coarse or calculating, remarks by party stalwarts or hangers-on have brought race repeatedly into the discomfort zone, which is easy to do, suggesting a post-racial political consciousness is for a more distant future. Weeks before Geraldine Ferraro argued that the color of Obama's skin gave him an edge, fellow Clinton supporter Ed Rendell appeared to argue the opposite. The Pennsylvania governor, an important figure in the big April 22 primary, said "there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American." On the defensive about that, he added Clinton "has the same handicap" because some voters won't vote for a woman. By that accounting, backed by evidence in exit polls, polarized politics is still ingrained, taking bites out of "Yes we can" unity. Clinton was an early crossover figure in one sense — blacks preferred her over Obama last year, while Obama was the pick of upper income whites. But that changed after the Illinois senator scored a big win in mostly-white Iowa, and his movement was born. In the South Carolina primary and beyond, blacks have powered his victories in states where they live in large numbers, joined by the young of any race — and by white men in varying degrees. Women are credited with reviving Clinton's campaign in New Hampshire and helping to drive her wins in Texas and Ohio. David Bositis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a black think tank, says Clinton probably lost more black support than she gained among whites when supporters such as her husband began dropping subtle race cards into the debate. "It has shifted the black vote entirely into Obama's camp," he said, and so far without costing him equivalent white support. He estimated Clinton could have held on to a third of black votes absent tactics that he said drove them away. As it is, he's beaten her 83-15 percent among black voters, according to exit polls for The Associated Press. That's not to say most of her supporters necessarily have a problem with a black candidate, he said. "White women are supporting Hillary because she's a woman," he said. "It's not because Obama is black." She's held a 59-36 percent advantage among white women. Racial divisions have been most evident in the South, although not exclusive to it. A quarter of white voters in Mississippi's Democratic primary said race was important in their choices Tuesday, and they voted heavily for Clinton. Thirty-seven percent of blacks said race was important, and nearly all voted for Obama. In Ohio, 18 percent of white voters said race was important to their vote. Among them, 76 percent backed Clinton. She won by 16 points among women in Ohio and 29 points among whites. In all, Clinton is winning the majority of white votes in Democratic primaries in which both candidates competed. Obama has performed best among whites in liberal Vermont and his home state of Illinois, although he has also edged Clinton in the white vote in Wisconsin, Virginia, Utah and New Mexico. All told, voter surveys suggest that Clinton ends up with more votes because she's a woman than Obama nets because he's black. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 11:43 AM (#2289089) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest So, what this says to me is Obama is winning nearly all the black vote, Clinton is winning the majority of the white vote, but apparently only white women are keeping Clinton's campaign alive. Which is about what I would expect. The nation is still very racially polarized along black/white lines (but far less so concerning other races, who are voting for both candidates), and only white women seem to hold it together to make a significant voting bloc, as women of color are dividing their votes. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 12:24 PM (#2289107) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Gigi- So I'm judging from Obama's statement above, as posted by Peace, that he's being forthright in explaining his reaction to the speeches, and the long relationship between himself and his pastor. I certainly do not see the media given "this story a pass" and the Republicans will certainly repeat and augment the story if Obama wins the nomination. Obama recognizes that likelihood in his statement. Is there something more you think Obama should be saying at this point? I think it's entirely sufficient for explaining to current supporters, and even potential supporters. The rest of the voters I'm less interested in. Let them stew in their own juice. When I heard about this story three months ago via Ronald Kessler I thought it would be damaging. I'm only surprised that it's taken three months to surface in the national media. I'm curious, what you think of the timing? Charley Noble |
|
15 Mar 08 - 12:58 PM (#2289126) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: mg How could he not have known this would be a deal breaker for many people? He should have addressed it mildly way months or years ago..I love this guy but he rants and raves but somehow I am able to stand to listen to his awful voice and disregard the message and bring my young daughters to listen to this nonsense, if indeed he does....good grief. I still like Obama, and think he has done right denouncing the message without cutting off the personal relationship..and we all have people in our lives whose views we don't share.. I ramble..I personally would walk out of my local church and not come back because of the Nazi salute thing I have mentioned many times...but there is not another one I could attend... I guess what gets me is how could anyone listen to that man screaming week after week without going stark raving mad...and they say his sermons go on for an hour...mg |
|
15 Mar 08 - 01:03 PM (#2289128) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: pdq Jeremiah Wright's sermons are free and worth every penny. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 01:29 PM (#2289150) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bee Isn't it entirely plausible that, like many people, the candidates have friends and colleagues whose views they haven't previously examined closely over years of familiarity? I know long term acquaintances and even friends of mine who, after years, have shocked me by exposing deep seated racism or sexism or homophobia. I've ditched a couple long term friends over certain issues that surfaced and then could not be ignored. Sometimes it is possible to overlook such things because the friend is otherwise a good person whose mind might change. But, for example, I can't maintain normal social relations with a person who's likely to spew hate slogans or throw punches at the gay friends attending my kitchen party. And I think powerful people, on some levels are not very perceptive; do not delve very deeply into the personalities that surround them. There is something (in my possibly paranoid opinion) a little (or a lot) sociopathic in many of the people who pursue great power, even if they handle it well. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 01:34 PM (#2289155) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest When I said the media have given Obama a pass, I mean about this sort of thing that has been floating around since he declared last year, but the media never investigated. The ONLY reason it is on the front page now is because the right wingers waited for a lull in the primary election news cycle to kick it out on You Tube and get the echo chamber running. So there is the timing thing. They weren't going to waste something they (the right wingers) perceive as very damaging to Obama on news cycles when there are bigger stories, like who won which primary, etc etc and when the Dems are pretty much in control of the news. Now, I myself don't feel the Rev Wright's sermons are the least bit shocking, because I've heard all this stuff a bazillion times before. I like their pro-Palestinian stand, but know that Obama won't support that in a million years, because no one can get elected president of the US right now being pro-Palestinian, regardless of who they are. But these videos of Wright will shock and/or dismay many general election voters, and that is why Obama may be seriously hurt by this. They are working it to the best of the ability to contain the damage, but I have to agree w/mg here. Why the hell did the Obama campaign wait to get 'attacked' with this, rather than controlling the story w/a spin about how Obama went through soul searching and decided he could no longer support his pastor, despite their long family relationship. Because now, he can't possibly put enough distance between him and the Rev, no matter what he says. To claim ignorance, which he seems to be trying to do by saying he wasn't present in church on the days these sermons made ain't gonna cut it with church goers. Everyone in a church community knows what the pastor's tilt is, what their issues are, etc etc. So, Obama has always had the choice to find another church that was more suitable for a politically amibitious guy like himself. Also this week, more trouble with Tony, and "after the fact" disclosures. That is going to hurt him on the integrity front. And finally, there is a deal that went down involving his wife & her job at the hospital in Chicago getting what amounts to kickbacks, in terms of public perception. I'm not saying they were, in a legal sense, kickbacks. It is all about appearances at this point. So, now that the right wingers know they have McCain to run at Obama, the Republican machine is getting to work. And I've gotta say, they are playing it brilliantly. They have a LONG time to keep putting this sort of shit out on Obama between now and July in Denver. They were brilliant to hold onto this stuff until it looked like Obama had an excellent chance to take the nomination. They've always wanted to run against Obama, because they knew they had the goods on him. Clinton they don't. The Democrats fell into the trap AGAIN, IMO. The Clinton campaign probably should have put this stuff on Obama out there months ago. You bet they've been sitting on it as long as the Repubs have. Because then the Clinton campaign could have controlled the timing of the release. I say probably because the Clinton campaign would have to take a huge risk to do it, because the cries of racism would have been the response to it coming from the Clinton camp. Since there is a good chance the Dems will give the nom to Obama because they will have to based on his popular support in the primaries, it is almost like, after this week, the Republicans have the general election already won. They can paint Obama as way too black, too radical (which he isn't, but it won't matter now with the Rev Wright videos), anti-Israel, anti-American, lacking integrity in business and political donations, with the Rezco mess (and don't forget, Rezco is Syrian), and now the wife's hospital stuff. So the Dems, if they actually do hand the nom to Obama, are looking more and more like they may have the worst of the two candidates to run in November, and can do nothing about it because of his popularity, which will now begin to shrink. He peaked coming out of Super Tuesday. As did Jesse Jackson, and his campaign is looking more and more like Jesse's all the time--Ferraro is right about that--there is nothing historic about Obama's campaign. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 01:47 PM (#2289161) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,HiLo I find it very hard to believe that Obama has been close to this man for many years and was never aware of his extremist views.I also find it difficult to accept that no one else, especially rhe media was unaware of them either. Perhaps people were so convinced of Obamas perfection that they chose not to face the fact that he was associated with this nutter. In any case it is all very disappointing but not surprising..unfortunately. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 02:04 PM (#2289171) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest The big problem w/the Rev story isn't that Obama was once close to him. The big problem is he didn't denounce him soon enough, and now is being forced to denounce him defensively. And that there are so many issues the Repubs can use from the Rev Wright's very public record, to sow doubt in the minds of general election voters. People should understand, the Republicans are now betting that Obama is the presumptive nominee for the Democrats. They wouldn't have pulled this stuff out of the closet yet, unless their polling numbers and focus groups told them Obama has the nomination in his pocket. They waited until the Obama bombs would do the most damage and divide the Dem party down the middle (which it already is along the race and gender lines). This 'news' has the potential to splinter the Dem party enough where they will be in disarray for the general election. Also, I believe the Republicans behind this smearing going on now aren't McCain's people. This has the stuff of the Republican National Committee written all over it, and the relations between McCain and a lot of the Repub establishment is still kind of shaky. Now McCain probably knew they were gonna drop these Obama bombs. But I really doubt the dirt came from inside his camp. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 04:14 PM (#2289221) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos YEah -- he's wily enough to be able to bless the bombs while keeping his hands clean from behind the lines. How upstanding. A |
|
15 Mar 08 - 04:17 PM (#2289222) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Q (Frank Staplin) Interesting statistic, based on states that have held their primary/caucusvotes: Democratic vote by Gender 30 states- more females voted than males 0 states- more males voted than females 11 states- No data on CNN counts. Republican vote by Gender 26 stares- more males voted than females 2 states- more females voted than males 16- No data on CNN counts www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/ Perhaps to be expected with a woman running on the Democrat side. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 04:31 PM (#2289231) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert First of all, this thread was flawed in the very first post... Yes, the Rebuops would love nothin' more than to portray Obama's minsiter as Obama's "main man"... If we accept that as a given then the rest of the Swiftboating can stick... Kinda like primer... I challenge GG to provide a source where Obama says that the miniter is his "main man"... Without that source then the rest of the story doesn't work and is nothing more than pure Swiftboating... And that, my friends, is the way it is... B~ |
|
15 Mar 08 - 04:34 PM (#2289236) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,mg I disagree with thinking the timing is especially good for the republicans. Why not wait until he gets the nomination and then bring it out? Sean Hannity is really going to town with this. I guess I still am not as shocked about content of the sermons, although I do want their IRS status revoked as of right now..and same same for any church allows any politicians to take the pulpit as many have..have the politicians worship in church, get their pictures taken, solo with the choir, provide ham for the picnic (if that is allowed in their church/mosque/synogauge and is not held on Friday) and meet the congreation in a separate building after for coffee and political stuff. And read Rush Limbaugh (I know some people actually don't like him but he can be quite astute)about how this harms the young people..constantly filling them with hate instead of saying here is the pathway to at least a modest life..stay off drugs, get a trade or profession, which can be even done at a good (or merely adequate..and if you can't do this in high school it is not an adequate school and should be taken over and run by the state)..high school, and do not get involved in a pregnancy before marriage...Instead they are filled with hateful, doomfilled messages, live in a sewer of doom, and the young men especially all too often..one is too many..end up in jail. It is all related. I hope Obama pulls out of this..I think he can use it as a teachable moment or whatever..but I can not get the sound..not what he is saying, just the awful awful sound...of that man's voice out of my head. Same with other preachers but this one has been on TV nonstop. Parsley is equally awful sounding. Oh where is Father Mulligan when we need him? mg |
|
15 Mar 08 - 04:44 PM (#2289242) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Happy to provide the sources--they come straight from Obama himself, Bobert. And they are all over the web today, so you could actually seek the information for yourself. But since you insist upon being a lazy goat... The title of his book "Audacity of Hope" is taken from a sermon by his pastor. He did an 80 minute interview at the Chicago Sun Times this weekend, in which he denounces the comments, but not the man. Do you want me to quote his book? Do you want me to cut and paste from the Chicago Sun Times interview? The New York Times articles? Or better yet, the Fox News interview? Try googling "God Damn America" Bobert, and see what is popping up. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 05:20 PM (#2289262) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Now if you can provide a source where Obama says the guy is his "main man" then your arguments are valid... Yes, I want you to provide the "main man" quote... Por favor, if that ain't askin' too much... |
|
15 Mar 08 - 05:22 PM (#2289264) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Why Can't We Be Friends Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? I seen you 'round for a long long time I really 'membered you when you drink my wine Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? I seen you walkin' down in Chinatown I called you but you could not look around Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? I bring my money to the welfare line I see you standing in it every time Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? The color of your skin don't matter to me As long as we can live in harmony Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? I'd kinda like to be the President so I can show you how your money's spent Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Sometimes I don't speak too bright but yet I know what I'm talking about Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? I know you're working for the CIA they wouldn't have you in the Mafia Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? |
|
15 Mar 08 - 05:45 PM (#2289277) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest "main man" were my very own original words, Bobert. I was using a colloquial style, defined in Websters thus: 1: of or relating to conversation : conversational2 a: used in or characteristic of familiar and informal conversation; also : unacceptably informal b: using conversational style You yourself do this sort of thing all the time, Bobert. So why do you have a problem when someone else does it too? Listen Bobert, I'm saying the guy is being swiftboated by the Republicans here. Do you fundamentally disagree with that assertion? Now, if you think this won't hurt him in the general election, then by all means, jump in and argue your case. But don't shoot me for bringing up the topic, just because it confirms your worst fears. Surely, you knew about his church & pastor & their cozy "old uncle" familial relationship before you leapt on his bandwagon? As other posters here have pointed out, this hasn't exactly been a huge secret, and the video from which the You Tube clip was taken was for sale on the church's website. I agree w/Obama--his church is being unfairly demonized. But the reality is, this guy is a homophobic bigot, and he leads one of Chicago's biggest Afrocentric megachurches. And Obama's refusal to cut ties to him will cost him in the general election if he gets the nomination in July. How much more could the Repubs ask for than a pastor Obama has linked himself closely to over the years, than a "God Damn America" speech? A speech that has him selling Obama from the pulpit, and damning Clinton for not being black, with the statement "Hilary has never been called nigger..."? He holds homophobic views, as I believe Obama and his wife do too, even though his "official" position claims he is pro-GLBT. The church's magazine naming Louis Farrakhan man of the year? Hell, this is bad for Clinton too. The Repubs have the footage of Clinton saying what an honor it is to sit next to Obama, blah blah blah. This could even be used to smear Clinton w/the guilt by association w/Obama! Here is hoping Obama has a plan for fighting all this back. But that could be really hard because he also dumped the info about not having disclosed all the political donations from Rezko this week (smart move, and hope no one notices because they are all looking at the You Tube video--but you can bet Clinton and McCain are going to use it). And then Obama's record on what the Repubs are going to call a million dollar 'kickback' to the Chicago hospital where his wife works, from an earmark Obama put in the basket after arriving in Washington. It is a bad week for Obama. Not so bad for Clinton, by comparison, but still not a great week for her either. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 06:07 PM (#2289293) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: McGrath of Harlow I don't think there are very many mosques or synagogues where they go in for ham at picnics, mg. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 06:23 PM (#2289299) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Yeah, GG, Obama is being Swiftboated by not only Rebubs but Clinton and much of the media... That's kinda why I called you on the "main man" thing... Part of Swiftboating is like in geometry where you have therums (sp)... Once the therum is established then one builds on it... Next thing ya' know ya' have stuff that makes sense to alot of people... The main defense against Swiftboating is not allowing therums to be established in the first place... That means being very vigilant about allowing "main mans" to gain traction... It's imparative to do this sooner thanm later... Obama has done a fairly good job of doing this but there willo be one wave after another... SWhould he become president he will tough as nails from taking on the "main mans" and subsequent Swiftboating... B~ |
|
15 Mar 08 - 06:44 PM (#2289320) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest The problem is, there is a whole lot of history out there of Obama saying one thing, yet doing another. Take, for example, him & his pastor, on the gay rights issue. OTOH, Obama and Wright both talk the talk, saying there is too much sexism and homophobia in the African American community, and everyone should get on board w/Obama's letter to the gay community, signed by African American religious leaders, on homophobia. BUT! This letter became necessary to save Obama's ass w/the GLBT community AFTER Obama invited an African American pastor, Donnie McClurkin, who is virulently spewing hate about GLBT people, to appear on the campaign trail with him in South Carolina. Now, more than a few people raised their eyebrows about Obama claiming he was trying to bring the homophobes of the African American community together w/the gay community (which is nearly always invisible in Obama campaign stops in the conservative African American community) "in unity". Most GLBT organizations were pretty astonished at his rationale. See, it is that kind of sleazy "having it both ways" that isn't going to fly w/Rev Wright. It is one thing for Obama to diss the GLBT community by bringing out an openly bigoted, anti-gay black pastor on the stage to rally the conservative Southern Baptist black vote in South Carolina, while on the other hand proclaiming you are pro-GLBT rights, and are only calling upon Brother Donnie to bring "unity" to the two communities. Frankly, I think that is pure bullshit. He is, with his statements this weekend, trying to pull the same shit, by evoking Bobby Kennedy. Like I said, his pastor's "God Damn America" speech ain't gonna play in Peoria, and Obama's comments so far aren't very reassuring to that voting bloc. Considering how much Obama has publicly identified this Pastor Wright as his father figure/mentor, invokes him as family, praises his spirituality, etc. and uses his sermon title as the title of his bestselling memoir--no, no, no...Homey don't play dat tune. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 06:59 PM (#2289339) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Ya' know what, GG... There's not a person living over 40 years old who has been out there mixin' it up in life who couldn't be Swiftboated to the moon... The challenge is in how folks go about defending themselves while perserving their visions for the future... This is where Obama shines... I mean, just look at McAngry... The Swiftboatin' hasn't even begun with him but this guy has a very short fuse... I mean, a 527 could portray him as a guy who would get US into a nuclear war in his first week in office... Face it, the guy has a serious anger managemnt problem... Hillary??? Dhe coule be Swiftboated into an affair with a guy who later killed himself... I mean, all this stuff is out there... Who cares??? Waht I care about is how folks go about handling the Swiftboaters and Obama seems to have a knack for turning chicken crap into chicken salad... The others haven't been tested to that extent in this campaign... B~ |
|
15 Mar 08 - 07:25 PM (#2289348) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Besides -- how's he going to present a unification platform if he doesn't thread together these "unforgiving" radically opposed groups? :D A |
|
15 Mar 08 - 07:28 PM (#2289350) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,mg That is what I meant. They wouldn't have the ham. The Catholics still might not eat it on Friday. Others might have no restrictions and could therefore have ham any day of the week whatsoever. mg |
|
15 Mar 08 - 08:31 PM (#2289372) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Jim Lad Just this one point. If my priest of twenty years, who performed our wedding ceremony, baptised my children and counselled me on my faith, gave just one hate filled rant in that time and the whole church responded with arms waving and loud "Amens", I'm pretty sure I'd know about it. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 08:49 PM (#2289380) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Define "hate filled"... Yeah, fir white folks, who have always had the stack rigged in their favor, for a black person to say that the "deck is stacked against us" to say that is "hate filled" is about beyond reason... Those thoughts, in themselves, are as racist as any KKK'r burnin' crosses in folks front yards... Yeah, lotta white folks are as clueless as clueless can be here... I done some time in black churches in the South and lerant up my lessons well... Lotta white folk ain't got one bit of a clue what is like to be black in America... I don't either bvut I have at least been in the trenches and it ain't purdy... It's downright disgustrin'... If there is one thing that I wished upon white America is that each and every one of us would have to spend a month as black... If tghat were to happen then we'd have a lot less absoluite insensitiveity here... Like I said, I been in black churches... I understand... Civil rights came outta black churches... It happened because clergy took stands... I remember the 60's and the minister of the church I grew up in took a stance against the Vietnam War and he was history within a month... Split the church down the middle... Gay rights have split churches... Churches ahve been institutions of social change... For Obama's minister to follow in that tradition is not a sin... B~ |
|
15 Mar 08 - 09:16 PM (#2289401) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Well Bobert, I disagree w/your "Obama can commit no sins" spinning here. I think he talks the talk and doesn't walk the walk. And I've been following him since he announced last year while I was visiting relatives in Chicago. But then, I also researched his record pretty thoroughly before I made up my mind. My Chicago relatives, at the time, didn't think he stood a chance at the nomination. Why? Rezko, Rezko, Rezko & Wright, Wright, Wright. Don't forget the old adage--all politics is local. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 09:41 PM (#2289409) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And Bobert, spare us your 'brother' act. It is patronizing. You gonna put yourselves in the shoes of my two elementary students whose mother threw their twin brothers off a bridge and jumped in after them? Mama was a Five Percenter, and now she is doing time for murdering one, and attempted murder of the other...and still talking in hip hop rhymes no one can comprehend. Stop trying to pull rank on people here, claiming you know and seen it all as a child of the 60s. |
|
15 Mar 08 - 10:48 PM (#2289443) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Gigi- So far I only agree with you that the attack is in earnest and that Rev. Wright makes a very good focus for raising questions about Obama's judgment. I'd much rather have him answer these questions now than later in the campaign. It's still early in the campaign and I think his explanation will satisfy most of his supporters, but we'll soon find out if I'm wrong. We'll see if Obama gets bogged down in this attack. I doubt very much if he's been blindsided. Clinton would still be the Republicans favorite candidate to continue to demonize, and there is lots for them to work on there. It almost sounds as if you'd prefer her as a candidate. Charley Noble |
|
15 Mar 08 - 11:04 PM (#2289451) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest But it isn't his supporters he needs to convince anymore Charley. My guess is most will accept what he says at face value, as they are here in Mudcat. Some will have their faith in him eroded, and will just be less likely to accept what he says at face value. But it is the general election voters Obama supporters and campaign gurus should be concerned about. You know Charley, I've said repeatedly I don't have a stake in this beyond spouting my opinions like everyone else. I've made it clear I'll either not vote for president (because I can't stand any of the mainstream party candidates left in the race), or possibly vote for Nader, if he gets on the ballot. Now, as to it sounds as if I prefer Clinton. I've made it quite clear, I hope, that I believe if the Dems really want to win, Clinton is by far the tougher candidate for the Repubs to beat come the general election. I believe what we are seeing going on with Obama right now--which as most have pointed out isn't new information--ain't nothin' compared to what will come at him as the Dem prez nominee. And I found out everything I know about Obama w/in a couple weeks time, easily, online after he announced a year ago. I mean, you can learn a tremendous amount about him just by reading the Chicago papers online! No national news organizations are covering him better than they are. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 10:00 AM (#2289671) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Ain't pullin' rank, GG... We are all a sum total of our experiences and My life's experiences had me workin' as a communtiy organizer for a CAP program, a jail house teacher, a social worker and a drug rehab couselor for the first 20 years of my working life... All these experiences were in inner city Richmond, Va. and almost exlusively working with and living with black people... Does this make me a better person than anyone else here??? No, but it does provide me with a perspective that some folks are now overlooking... We have long avioded an all imporatnt discussion about race... BIll Clinton tried to get it going back 'round '96 and ther push back was fast and furious... The reason we don't have this discussion is becuase the "white power structure" would rather rather keep it buried because it may end end a discussion about "repair"ations and that scares the crud outta the "white power structure"... That ain't patronizing... It's my observations... Yeah, a balck man stand up and tell a white woman that she don't know nuthin' about being black ain't patronizing... It's the truth... And for Bill Clinton to suggest that he was the first black president??? NHow that is patronizing... I mean, lets get friggin' real here... We've had decades of hate speech spewed from the pulpits of white churches demonizing pro-choicers, gays, liberals, anti-war folks and just about any other group of people who don't fit into the Suzie Creamcheeze mold and guess what, GG??? Where's the outrage... Yeah, we've had parisheners go out and burn black churches and kill doctors because of this hate filled crap blown down on them by right winged redneck preachers... So, I say "Get over it" whene a black preacher makes an observation that Hillary Clinton doesn't know what iot is l;ike to be black... That ain't hate filled... It's reality... As for "Obabma's sins"??? That, like the sins of all of us, is between him and God... If he sins aginst you then you have a beef but, frankly, I don't see where Obama has sinned aginst anyobne... He lives his life, IMO, as a man of Faith and as a good Chruistain... B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 10:17 AM (#2289682) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest But it is just fine when Obama brings hate monger preachers like Donnie McClurkin onstage to win over the conservative, homophobic Southern Baptist black community in South Carolina? Nice little double standard thing you've got going there, Bobert. It is fine for Obama and his camp to spew hate, as long as it is white women and the GLBT community you throw under the bus? Great. Now that's unity, and rising above the divisiveness the Afrocentric way. Which is exactly what Obama is all about. And exactly why I oppose him. He talks a wealthy elite white people talk, but when it comes right down to it, he doesn't walk the walk. He sticks by the Afrocentric black nationalist politics of the past. Some of us who live and work in communities that are still stuck in that past know it when we see it, Bobert. And with the Obamas, it is plain as day. Just wait until somebody edits Rev Wright to Michelle Obama, saying "for the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of America..." Yeah, the Obamas, they've had it tough. Princeton and Harvard educations. Fancy law practice and cushy six figure income hospital administrator gigs. Book deals, shady neighbors who cut you real estate deals... Uh huh. The US has been REALLY bad to the Obamas, hasn't it? No reason to proud that you live in a country that puts you through college at Princeton and Harvard, right? The Obamas are just as phony as the Clintons. So let's break out the Sister Souljah video now, and see who can win more delegates with that baby. And then, lets rip on McCain's spiritual advisor who says let's go kill all the Muslims. This is politics as usual. The Obamas are Clintons in House Negro clothes. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 10:30 AM (#2289692) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Riginslinger I think Hillary has a point about the media and Obama. If a supporter of Hillary's had said anything like what Wright said, we'd be hearing about it for weeks. It seems like the media has pretty much moved on from the Wright comments. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 10:43 AM (#2289703) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest No, if someone as close to Hillary, whom she had held up as her spiritual mentor, quoted directly from in the title to her memoirs, had said what Wright said, Clinton would have been forced from the race. Period. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 10:59 AM (#2289715) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Q (Frank Staplin) One can only hope that all the candidates are trying hypocritically for the votes of the large group that listen to the evangelical sky pilots. If I thought that the candidates really believed any of that religious nonsense, I would find it impossible to support any of them. This goes for McCain as well as Obama. Clinton who espouses more mainstream religion, but, as a secularist, I don't like that either. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 11:22 AM (#2289731) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Gigi- I think you're overstating the case against Obama, not to mention the Clintons (who never have been my favorites), but it's the switch voters who will validate that conclusion at election time. You certainly have studied Obama in greater depth than most people here at Mudcat, and having ready access to Chicago papers and friends must give you greater perspective. However, I remain impressed that Obama did very well in school, got a chance to go to elite colleges, and graduated with high honors. I consider that a validation of his merit, rather than the relic of family privilege. "No reason to proud that you live in a country that puts you through college at Princeton and Harvard, right?" I'm mulling this one over, wondering if you think Obama is some kind of "traitor." And I'm puzzling over how Obama can be both "too mainstream" and a "traitor" at the same time, which is another criticism I believe that you have raised in the past. If I'm wrong, feel free to snap back at me. Maybe one reason I never entered politics is that I once had my own political mentor who would not have survived much media scrutiny. I wonder how old Bill is doing these days in his anarchist's attic? Cheerily, Charley Noble |
|
16 Mar 08 - 11:28 AM (#2289734) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert One thing is quite evident here and that is alot of folks here ain't been in many black churches... I ain't never seen nothing like what happens in black churches ever happen in white churches... It's an entirely different experience... I've never heard a black preacher who didn't get "fired up"... I mean, slam fired up!!! I've listened to the clips of Rev. Wright and don't really find fault wuith anything he says... Yeah, okay, it's hard to wrap one's head arounf "God damned America" but given the context of what he was saying, I agree with him... I personally cannot bring myself to say "God damned" but I understand what he was saying which was that God was damning some of the actions of our country... I'm sure that alot of the stuff we have done, including the the killing of upwards of a million Iraqis was God purdy steamed as US... Okay, I understand the politics of this and most white folks would feel uncomfy in the middle of such a sermon and Obama understands this as well so he has put distance between those clips and himself... That's politics... But it doesn't make Rev, Wright any less correct... Now as for associations... Politicans are busy people... They are dependent on lots of folks to organize events and to draw crowds and all that political stuff... Now if we are going to fight this campaign on inbvestigating and holding every person who a candidate has ever associated him or herself with then we're going to destroy any chance of having this election decided by anything other than a mud-fest... I have and won't attack McCain for his personal associations unless it is obvious that the association will effect "public policy"... This thread began with false information and inflamatory code words intended to paint Obama in anegative light... When I challenged GG to provide a source GG could not yet GG continues to attack, attack, attack me with "buzz words" and attack Obama with "code words" in an effort to cover GG's butt... Hey, that's fine... That's what folks do in debates... I have not used any "buzz" or "code" words here... Those words are subtle hate words... This is what seperates those of us who are trying to change the culture od discussion from the old schoolers... And no, I am not being self righteous (another buzz word) here... I am just calling this stuff the way I see it... Square business... B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 11:38 AM (#2289741) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,HiLo I do not agree that the reverends words are harmless. They are not harmless in any "context". They are hateful and infmmatory. I do not think that the views of this man were unknown to the Senator. Weather he was influenced by these viws in another matter. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 11:55 AM (#2289754) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Yeah, but his congragation didn't leave church thinking it was their God goven duty to burn white churches or kill doctors... Yeah, lotta of the Klan were church going people, too... For a black man to stand up and be angry about discrimination is a far cry from what is going on in a lotta white churches these days... Far cry... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 12:20 PM (#2289771) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Obama has stated unambiguously that the statements which Wright made around which this somewhat arbitrary controversy was built up (presumably by those who have a vested interest in controversy) were never heard by him in Rev Wright's church. Furthermore, while, for example, it is incredibly impolitic to say "God damn AMerica", if you examine the rhetorical device in the context of the protest against Murrica's many sins, and contrasting it with the clichŽd placebo, "God Bless America", you can see the sense of it in the context in which he spoke it. I do not think we should use Wright's texts, which Obama did not subscribe to, participate in or even hear directly, as a sort of violation of the COnstitution, which states "but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." A |
|
16 Mar 08 - 12:38 PM (#2289783) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Amen, Amos... opps... lol... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 12:57 PM (#2289796) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,HiLo What goes on in other churches is not the point..the point is that is should not go on in any church. However, as I said, I cannot be so gullible as to think Mr. Obama was not aware of thid mans views. If any politician knowingly associates with bigots and extremists, it is not guilt by association, it is guilt be consent. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 01:02 PM (#2289800) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Riginslinger "I've listened to the clips of Rev. Wright and don't really find fault wuith anything he says..." So when Wright says, "The white man invented AIDS to wipe out the black race, you agree with that? |
|
16 Mar 08 - 01:30 PM (#2289822) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Q (Frank Staplin) Obama took membership in that 'church' in order to get the black vote in Chicago when he was planning his run for the Senate. It was a calculated move which helped him at the time, but that move, like the albatross (about my neck was hung) in the "Rime of the Ancient Mariner," may destroy him in the run for the presidency. The religion of his father would have been less damaging. Ah wel-day! what evil looks Had I from old and young; Instead of the Cross the Albatross About my neck was hung. (The Rime of the Ancyent Marinere, 1798) |
|
16 Mar 08 - 01:38 PM (#2289831) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Well, okay, Rigs... I hadn't heard that one and must confess that that is something I don't agree... That one kinda remiunds me of back in '69 or so when the fisr moon landing occured... I was livin' outside Montpelier, Va. way back in the sticks and the next farm over was owned by a black family... My wife and I had beenm invited over fir supper and after supper we were sitting around an outdoor fire talkin' about this and that and the grandfather was going on about how the moon landing was being faked... And everyone was tryin' to convince him that is was real but he truely believed that it was fake... I learned something that night that I've seen many times over the years and that is that many black people just don't believe stuff that the news tells us... Hadn't thought of that old man in years... SWpeakin' of not agreeing with Rev, Wright, I haven't heard the anti-gay stuff either other than reading here that he came down on gays purdy hard... I prolly wouldn't agree with him there either if in fact that is what he has said... What I heard of his "God Damned America" was purdy good stuff, tho... B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:16 PM (#2289865) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Ebbie It seems to me that a good many people either didn't listen and understand or have forgotten how many white pastors and parishioners not so long ago believed whole heartedly that it was God who dictated the separation of the races and condoned or even encouraged the subjugation and ill treatment of Ham's - or is it Seth's? - descendants. I remember it very well, and I suspect the black community does also. By and large, the black community has no particular reason to trust the white community even today. The white record ain't that great. I'm not only prepared for the same kind of rhetoric in return but it doesn't surprise me in the least. It also appears to me that there are people here who would fit into those congregations seamlessly. That's just my opinion, of course. By the way, columnist Susan Estrich – who has endorsed Senator Clinton - has an interesting article at Friendship in the Fourth Estate "A funny thing is about to happen to Barack Obama. No matter how much he thinks he's ready for it, he isn't. No matter how many people warn him, he'll be surprised. And hurt. And angry. His friends in the press are about to turn on him.They may not even know it yet, but they will. "They can't help themselves. They've been caught fawning, made fun of for favoritism, become the subject of their own scrutiny. "Which means they won't be able to resist." |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:30 PM (#2289882) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: McGrath of Harlow So when Wright says, "The white man invented AIDS to wipe out the black race", you agree with that? Did he actually say that? Googling around I've come across quite a number of people denouncing him for saying something like that (never exactly those words), but no actual reference to a time and a place. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:43 PM (#2289894) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Yeah, Eb... Just let Obama get a little closer to havin' the the nomination in hand and it will be "Swiftboats, start your engines" and what we're seein' now will look like a 60's love-in by comparasion... But I believe that Obama is ready for it... Yes, he will be find it hurtfull but it will aslo be an opportunity to *prove* what he has been saying all along about civility... These are tests and if the Repubs think they can show Obama to be weak, should he weather this Swiftboat Storm then he'll come out a stronger candidate... No time for a Ed Muskie meltdown... If I'm Obama I'm thinkin', "Bring it on, baby... Bring it on..." B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:48 PM (#2289902) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Oh. horse-pucky. Your effort to use this slightly bent religionists skewed perspective on reality as a basis for undermining Obama's character is transparent, jejune, meretricious, and without merit. Snipe elsewhere. A |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:48 PM (#2289904) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Ebbie That's what I'm hoping, Bobert. So far he has handled it well. There seems to be a serene clarity in his responses that pleases me and gives me hope. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:49 PM (#2289905) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace Most people don't want facts. They want news. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 02:50 PM (#2289910) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Jejune??? Gol danged, Amos... Yer puttin' a hurt on my dictionary... B;~) |
|
16 Mar 08 - 03:02 PM (#2289920) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos insubstantial: lacking in nutritive value; "the jejune diets of the very poor" adolescent: displaying or suggesting a lack of maturity; "adolescent insecurity"; "jejune responses to our problems"; "their behavior was juvenile"; "puerile jokes" insipid: lacking interest or significance; "an insipid personality"; "jejune novel" wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Other words of similar value in describing all this push-button, hyper-associative, Pavlovian political maunder on Rig's part: aimless, banal, barren, cheap, dead, deadpan, devoid, dishonest, dumb, expressionless, fatuous, flat, frivolous, futile, hollow, idle, ignorant, inane, ineffective, ineffectual, inexpressive, insincere, insipid,, meaningless, nugatory, otiose, paltry, petty, purposeless, senseless, silly, trivial, unintelligent, unreal, unsatisfactory, unsubstantial, vacuous, vain, valueless, vapid, worthless. Also absurd, asinine, birdbrained, daft, ditzy, driveling, empty, fatuous, flat, foolish, frivolous, futile, harebrained*, idiotic, illogical, imbecilic, innocuous, insipid, jejune, jerky, lamebrained, laughable, meaningless, mindless, nerdy, pointless, puerile, ridiculous, sappy*, senseless, silly, trifling, unintelligent, vacant, vacuous, vain, vapid, weak, wishy-washy*, and worthless. Any questions? (My apologies to Rig for my jejune diatribe). :D A |
|
16 Mar 08 - 04:38 PM (#2289993) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Editorial from gaywired.com: Hypocrite of the Week: Barack Obama Op-Ed Article Date: 02/29/2008 By Duane Wells With the critical March 4th Democratic primaries in Texas and Ohio looming near, this week, Barack Obama released an open letter to the gay community in which he writes: "I'm running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all—a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as second-class citizens in this nation." In addition to this magnificently worded missive, Obama also announced plans to run the aforementioned open letter in an ad campaign specifically targeted to the gay community. But my question is: Where was all this love, respect and concern for the gay community back in October, 2007, when the junior Senator from Illinois was actively courting the conservative African-American vote in South Carolina with his pal and supporter, ex-gay minister Donnie McClurkin? The same Donnie McClurkin who performed at the 2004 Republican convention and cozied up to that famous agent of change, George W. Bush. Where were the ads in the local gay press in South Carolina talking about what a friend the Senator was to the LGBT community? South Carolina: An area where such pronouncements might not have been so well received by the stridently homophobic demographic whose support the Obama campaign needed to defeat Hillary Clinton in that state's primary? And in what forum back in South Carolina, when his campaign was struggling, did Obama espouse lofty goals like using "the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws," as he does in this new and timely appeal to the LGBT community? Senator Obama had none of these messages in South Carolina, more than likely because it was not politically expedient for him to write such a letter back then. However now, with the race tight and the stakes high, Obama is now finally extending an olive branch to the very gay community that he quite unashamedly distanced himself from in South Carolina. The fact of the matter is that when the Human Rights Campaign's Joe Solmonese and other gay rights leaders urged Obama to cancel Donnie McClurkin's appearance at one of his Faith and Family Values tour stops, their arguments fell on deaf ears. This despite the suggestion that the endorsement of someone as antagonistic to the gay community as McClurkin could be construed as an effort by his campaign to cultivate the support of black evangelicals at the expense of the campaign's stated commitment to gay and lesbian equality. Boldly ignoring the obvious implications of such a slight, Obama and his staff brushed off the criticism simply citing the Senator's belief that the country needed to broaden its reach of equal rights. In all fairness, the campaign reiterated that Obama did not agree with McClurkin's stance on homosexuality and even reportedly went so far as to distribute memos detailing the candidate's differences with McClurkin on gay and lesbian issues to the media following McClurkin's performance. Sadly, the campaign did not distribute the same memo to the many voting "believers" gathered to hear McClurkin perform and proclaim, "God saved me from homosexuality!". |
|
16 Mar 08 - 04:45 PM (#2290001) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And this from Salon.com: Obama: Don't pander to homophobes In a bid for the black church vote, the candidate is about to tour South Carolina with antigay gospel singer Donnie McClurkin at his side. He doesn't need to. By James Hannaham Donnie McClurkin, left, performs on the final night of the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York, Sept. 2, 2004. Sen. Barack Obama, right, at a church service in New Orleans, Aug. 26, 2007. Oct. 26, 2007 Sen. Barack Obama's decision to tour South Carolina with gospel entertainer Donnie McClurkin, a self-proclaimed "former homosexual" who believes it is his mission to turn gays straight, suggests that Obama can't live without the support of the homophobic contingent of the black community and the black church in particular. But African-American politicians have already proved that black support is not contingent on homophobia. Few people remember that in 2004, the only presidential candidate besides Dennis Kucinich to support gay marriage was the Rev. Al Sharpton -- both a mainstream black leader and a minister. Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Obama have all spoken out in favor of gay rights and against black homophobia. So does including McClurkin on his "Embrace the Change" tour signal a retreat on Obama's part? Can tacking on an appearance by the openly gay Rev. Andy Sidden make up for McClurkin? (And wouldn't you love to be backstage on this tour?) It may be that the realpolitik of the black church operates more subtly than the Obama campaign has yet understood. There has always been a certain degree of "give" between sacred and secular black culture. The overly serious demagogues are almost always cut down to size by larger-than-life fictional counterparts. For every Rev. Willie Wilson, the homophobic Washington, D.C., minister who claimed that lesbianism was "about to take over" the black community, there's a Sherman Hemsley playing hothead Deacon Ernest Frye on the sitcom "Amen," with black viewers laughing along. For every Donnie McClurkin, there's a pop-culture hero like Tyler Perry's drag matriarch Madea. The media tends to use the black church as a barometer of community standards, but I think in real life, black people compartmentalize more than they get credit for, the way many Irish Catholics balance their deep faith with their deep irony. Preachers may denounce gays on Sunday, but on Saturday night, a certain percentage of the congregation rented "Madea's Family Reunion," or danced and drank all night listening to R. Kelly's "Trapped in the Closet." Black culture can accommodate everything from the Winans and McClurkin to Richard Pryor and Prince, who gets away with bawdy liberalism, gender-bending and old-time religion, too. Black American churchgoers may absorb homophobic rhetoric, and preachers may promote fear and misunderstanding, like Wilson, who claimed of lesbianism, "It ain't real." (As if he would know.) But the more general message of the black church seems to be that one should love the sinner and not the sin, and that Jesus can change homosexuals. These mandates may be misguided, but they are thankfully nonviolent, thanks to the legacy of Dr. King. Moreover, few black evangelicals here pounce on the issue with as much intolerance and vitriol as the religious in Nigeria or Jamaica, for example, where the church promotes violence against gays and homo homicide is even celebrated in the campaign songs of political parties. The ersatz black Jerry Falwells and Jesse Helmses, like Wilson, Chicago's Bishop Eddie Long and Los Angeles' Bishop Noel Jones, don't represent mainstream black thought the way those who touched the hem of MLK's garment, like Jesse Jackson, do. Note that the backlash at Sidden's inclusion has not come from black church organizations so much as gay groups criticizing Obama for retaining McClurkin. McClurkin, for his part, hasn't even pulled out in response, though Obama has virtually done somersaults to justify McClurkin's inclusion. On Thursday, as the tour began, Obama supporters from the African-American religious community and LGBT campaign leaders collaborated on a letter to the public that attempted to clarify their candidate's decision to keep McClurkin onboard, stating, "We believe that the only way for these two sides to find common ground is to do so together." Obama's gay advocates obviously support him regardless of this fumble. But his gay critics are right to ask why he thinks getting homosexuals to sit at the same table with antigay and allegedly "ex-gay" Christians represents some kind of balance. Had McClurkin been a Holocaust denier, my money says Obama would be "embracing a change" in his tour's entertainment lineup, lickety-split. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Obama is playing to both sides -- that seems to be what he's best at. He means well, but you know what they say about the highways in hell. However, adding Sidden to the mix without giving McClurkin the shaft was enough of an afterthought to incense the gay community without fixing the problem. Did Obama overestimate the depth of the black community's homophobia and unintentionally solidify the stereotype about him -- that he's the white man's black candidate? Well, if Sharpton refuses to pander to the homophobic faction of the black church, why should anybody else? |
|
16 Mar 08 - 04:51 PM (#2290005) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest AP's summary of some of the aspects of the Rezko case involving Obama: An Obama-Rezko Primer By CHRISTOPHER WILLS – 6 days ago SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has been questioning her rival Sen. Barack Obama's relationship to political donor Tony Rezko, now on trial for fraud — particularly Rezko's involvement in the purchase of Obama's Chicago home. Here's a look at what's going on and what it means: Q: Who is Tony Rezko? A: Antoin "Tony" Rezko is a millionaire Chicago businessman who has long helped young politicians raise money and make connections. Raised in Syria, he moved to Chicago to study engineering but wound up making money in real estate and fast food. He is now on trial in federal court on mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and attempted extortion charges. Q: What is his relationship to Obama? A: He's been friendly with Obama for years, even offering him a job after Obama finished law school. Obama turned down the offer, but a political friendship developed. Rezko and his family donated at least $21,457 to Obama — and helped raise tens of thousands more — for his campaigns in Illinois, though not for his presidential bid. He also advised Obama on the purchase of a new Chicago home and, in his wife's name, purchased a vacant lot next to the new Obama home at the same time. Q: Why is Rezko on trial? A: Prosecutors allege he tried to shake down companies seeking contracts from Illinois regulatory boards for campaign contributions and payoffs. They say he used his influence with Gov. Rod Blagojevich to get people appointed to the boards and then threatened to have them block contracts unless the companies paid millions of dollars in kickbacks. Q: What does that have to do with Obama? A: Nothing. No one has alleged that Obama has anything to do with the charges against Rezko, nor has Obama been charged with any wrongdoing. Obama has donated to charity the money that Rezko donated to his campaigns, as well as money from other Rezko friends and partners, a total of $150,000. Q: Did Rezko help Obama buy his Chicago home? A: Yes and no. Obama says he sought Rezko's advice as a real estate developer and even toured the property with him but got no financial assistance from Rezko. Instead, Obama paid $1.65 million for the house in June 2005 by using money from a book contract and taking out a mortgage. But Rezko's wife did buy the vacant lot next door, which made it easier for Obama to buy the house. Both pieces of property were owned by the same couple and they insisted on selling them at the same time, but Obama couldn't afford both. Rezko's purchase of the empty lot allowed the home sale to go through, although Obama says Rezko wasn't the only person interested in the lot. Q: Did Obama and Rezko coordinate their purchases? A: Obama says they didn't. He says Rezko became interested in the lot while advising him on the house and then bought the land on his own, for $625,000. Q: Where did Rezko get the money to buy the lot? A: That's not clear. Some court documents related to his criminal case show that at the time of the land purchase, creditors were pursuing Rezko for more than $10 million. Rezko argues in the case documents that he is essentially broke now. This raises the question of how he was able to come up with $125,000 and a $500,000 mortgage to buy the property. He later resold the lot at a profit. Q: Did Obama get a special deal on the price of his home? A: The sellers originally asked for $1.95 million but agreed to sell for $1.65 million after rejecting two lower offers from the Obamas. The Obama campaign says it has an e-mail from the sellers stating that this was the best offer they got and that the price for the house had nothing to do with Rezko buying the vacant lot. Q: So Rezko bought the lot next door. Was that the end of his involvement? A: No. Obama later bought one-sixth of that lot so that he would have a bigger side yard. Its value was appraised at $40,500, Obama says, but he paid one-sixth of what Rezko originally paid, or $104,500. Q: What does Obama say about all this? A: Obama says he went out of his way to make sure he violated no laws or ethical guidelines, and that he has never done any favors for Rezko as a result of the arrangement. But he also says he regrets the "boneheaded" move and would not do it again because of the questions it raises about ethics and insiders currying favor with him. Q: Did Obama know Rezko could be an ethical land mine for him? A: He should have. When Obama was buying the house, there were plenty of news stories about a federal investigation of the governor and Rezko's role in the administration, including the fact that Rezko had been subpoenaed. Obama has acknowledged that "things had surfaced" by that time. Q: Why is this an issue in the presidential campaign? A: Clinton cites it as an example of Obama not living up to his promises to move away from old-fashioned insider politics. She also argues it suggests there are other ethical problems that could be uncovered by Republicans if Obama becomes the Democratic nominee. Q: Does Clinton accuse Obama of any specific misconduct? A: No. Her campaign suggests there must be something improper in Rezko's involvement but doesn't say what. "If the relationship was aboveboard, why won't Sen. Obama address basic inquiries about it? What is it that he is hiding?" said a spokesman. Q: Has Obama refused to answer "basic inquiries"? A: No, but he hasn't been completely open either. For instance, he did not disclose until last month that Rezko actually toured the home with him before the purchase. He also has released the e-mail from the home's seller to only one news organization. Obama hasn't provided details of the fundraisers Rezko held for him, nor has he released documents related to the property, such as the appraisal of the strip of land he bought from Rezko. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 04:54 PM (#2290009) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Here is an article from msnbc on this week's revelations from Obama's campaign--which shows his tendency to "underdisclose" shall we say? the full extent of his relationship to Rezko: Obama: Rezko raised up to $250,000 for him Connection to indicted businessman nags at his campaign CHICAGO - Presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday that he got more political money from indicted Chicago businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko than he has previously acknowledged. Rezko helped raise up to $250,000 for his various political races, Obama's campaign said. The campaign had previously put the figure at $150,000 but now says that amount was only for his 2004 Senate race. And in interviews with two Chicago newspapers, the Democrat again said it was a mistake to involve Rezko in his purchase of a new home — not just because Rezko was under federal investigation but because he was a contributor and political activist. Still, Obama said he did nothing unethical. "He never once asked me for any favors, or ever did any favors for me," the Illinois senator said in an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times. "He never gave me any gifts or gave me any indication he was setting me up to ask for any favors in the future." Obama met Friday with the editorial boards of the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times in an effort to resolve nagging questions about his relationship with Rezko, a Chicago businessman and major fundraiser in Illinois politics. Rezko is on trial on charges including mail fraud and attempted extortion. Federal prosecutors say he tried to use his connections to Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to demand kickbacks from companies wanting to do business with state government. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 04:57 PM (#2290011) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And the article quoted from above from the Sun Times: More Rezko dough found ELECTION '08 | Obama tells Sun-Times it's hard to keep track of about $250,000 from tainted donor March 16, 2008 BY TIM NOVAK, CHRIS FUSCO, DAVE MCKINNEY AND CAROL MARIN Staff Reporters For the first time, Sen. Barack Obama put a figure Friday to the amount of campaign contributions that indicted political fund-raiser Tony Rezko raised for the senator's campaigns, and the number -- about $250,000 -- was far more than he previously acknowledged. "We believe we have identified all money that is traceable. ... It's hard for me to know precisely. I don't have the capacity to go back and figure out who did he raise money from. There might be additional dollars,'' Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an 80-minute interview that focused on his 17-year relationship with Rezko, who has become a lingering issue as Obama seeks the Democratic nomination for president. This is the breakdown Obama provided for Rezko's fund-raising: • About $160,000 for Obama's 2004 U.S. Senate election. Obama has given that money to charity. • From $50,000 to $60,000 for Obama's failed attempt to unseat U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush in 2000. • Between $10,000 and $15,000 for Obama's first election, in 1996, to the Illinois Senate. • "Somewhat less than that'' for Obama's re-elections to the Illinois Senate in 1998 and 2002. Obama's estimate exceeded his campaign staff's previous estimates of Rezko's fund-raising during Obama's 12 years in politics. In November 2006, Obama's staff estimated Rezko raised $50,000 to $60,000 over the senator's career. In the last year, Obama's campaign fund has given charities more than $157,600 in donations it linked to Rezko, his family, friends and business associates. Rezko is on trial on corruption charges that accuse him of using his influence with Gov. Blagojevich to coerce kickbacks from firms seeking state pension business. Obama hasn't been accused of wrongdoing, but his name has surfaced in the trial. Prosecutors say Rezko ordered a business associate to use part of a kickback as a contribution to Obama's U.S. Senate campaign. On Friday, Obama engaged in a wide-ranging interview that included his 1990 introduction to the housing projects Rezko's company developed with legal assistance from the law firm where Obama worked, and the 2005 real estate deal in which Obama bought a Kenwood mansion for $1.65 million on the same day Rezko's wife bought the adjacent vacant lot. Rezko's wife later sold the Obamas part of the lot. Obama said he and Rezko used to meet for breakfast or lunch a few times each year, but they might talk daily when Rezko was helping raise money for Obama's campaigns. "Michelle and I probably had two or three dinners with him and his wife during the course of six or seven or eight years,'' Obama said. "Visited their home in Lake Geneva once for the day. And I have to say that, during that entire time, he never asked me for anything.'' Is Rezko still a friend? "Yes,'' Obama said, "with the caveat if it turns out the allegations are true, then he's not who I thought he was, and I'd be very disappointed with that.'' And it's that friendship, Obama said, that probably kept him from realizing it was a mistake to enter into a real estate deal with Rezko. "Probably because I'd known him for a long time, and he'd acted in an aboveboard manner with me," he said. "And I considered him a friend. ... It's further evidence that I'm not perfect.'' |
|
16 Mar 08 - 05:03 PM (#2290017) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Ebbie Oh, I agree- hang the man. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 05:08 PM (#2290025) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Remember Whitewater??? $40M down a rat hole and in the end, zip... The Repub/McClinton attack machine has it redlined... B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 05:23 PM (#2290041) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert ...an' 100... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 05:27 PM (#2290043) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Greg F. Well, the good Rev's assertion about "the chickens coming home to roost" (paraphrasing Malcom X) is right on point & supported completely by the CIA - what they call "blowback". Check it out. But lets not let facts get in the way of a good tabloid news story... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 05:34 PM (#2290049) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Gawd, what a lot of persiflage and chaff. A |
|
16 Mar 08 - 06:41 PM (#2290094) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And we can say the very same about the crap you cut and paste, all pro-Obama, every day, Amos. Thanks for proving my point. Pointless, isn't it? Bobert says the independent MSM reporting about Obama is "Repub/McClinton attack machine" Amos, the king of pro-Obama cut and pastes says "Gawd, what a lot of persiflage and chaff". So, we should take you guys MORE seriously than the above information because...you say so? Greg F, if you read up a little, I referenced Ward Churchill, a University of Colorado professor who was fired in the last year by the U of CO Board of Regents for his 2001 essay on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, titled "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens". Bill Maher was fired from his TV show for saying the terrorists were not cowards. Now tell me folks, you think your guy's pastor should get a pass for it from the MSM because...? Oh yeah, because you like him. Bobert, the Rezko investigation was underway long before Obama announced his candidacy. You can also go to the Chicago Tribune website and read how much creative license Obama took writing his memoirs. Best shield those starry eyes folks, we wouldn't want you seein' no evil. |
|
16 Mar 08 - 08:03 PM (#2290149) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Screw you, Gigi. Ward Churchill was blamed for what he said. Bill Maher was blamed for what he said. In both cases, it was a shameful intolerance of strongly worded, but strong ideas which deserved consideration. Ordinary decency and a respect for the body politic should have dictated other than the reactionary fate they received. They should have been able to defend what they said, in reasoned discussion, at the very least. From that you extrapolate that Obama should be held to blame for something someone else said that he didn't even hear? This is not your usual impeccable reasoning; to the contrary, it is highly peccable. A |
|
16 Mar 08 - 08:10 PM (#2290155) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Ahhhhhh, Politics 101, GG... If you are elected to anything then there's someone out there investigatin' you and tryin' to find dirt... Goes way back... It's an American tradition... I've been asked several times to run for various things over the years and the reason I don't is that it just plain ain't worth havin' folks nippin' at yer heels... I gotta a business partner in one on my ventures who spent 4 "long" years on town council and by the end was countin' the days before that sentence was up... For that reason, I will say that I have respect for everyone who has ever chosene to run for office, even if I dobn't agree with them on policies... No person should have to go thru that... I was asked recently to run for the Page County Board of Supervisors by a prominent Democrat and told her, "No thanks... Right now I get along with about 99% of the folks in the county and if I ran then over half of them (this being a Repub county) would hate me"... That is a no bariner... I can do more where I amj, thank you... Sure, Obama is a big target right now... You can take it to the "bank" that there are million$ of "fat cat dollars" who don't wnat him as president becuase they are scared that he is gonna shake them down by reversing Bush's tax cuts to thwe wealthy... They could throw a $100M at investigattions and 527's to keep him the heck outta the White House and it would be a bargain compared to what they have to loose... No, maje that a cool Billion $$$$ and still a bargain... Heck, at $50 friggin' billion $$$$$$$$ it would still be a bargain... Like Bruce Springstein sang in "Big Muddy", "Sooner or later, it all comes down to money..." B~ |
|
16 Mar 08 - 08:17 PM (#2290160) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: McGrath of Harlow all pro-Obama, every day But all anti-Obama, every day, that's just fine... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 08:34 PM (#2290177) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Don't matter much, McG... Follow the money... |
|
16 Mar 08 - 09:36 PM (#2290208) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Amos- Gigi's just going off the deep end again. Reminds me of my calico cooncat: all claws just when you think you're getting to know her. I do wish she'd become a member so we could communicate a few times via PM's, but she's her own woman and she's got choices to make. Maybe she'll just move on to another website, handgrenade in hand. She'll probably blast me as a passive-aggressive again before she leaves. Poor me! Cheerily, Charley Noble |
|
16 Mar 08 - 09:52 PM (#2290220) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace BHH |
|
17 Mar 08 - 11:52 AM (#2290604) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Not at all unusual I'm accused of 'going off the deep end' when I show up a few posters' proclivities to hypocrisy. On the one hand, they claim they want their 'proof' from outside sources. You provide legitimate proof, and the reject it. That is a very common practice among posters here in Mudcat. I said a ways back up, I don't have a problem with most of the Rev Wright's sermons--I'm pro-Palestinian, and considering how often I've been in Afrocentric churches (I'm in them as often as I'm . I personally know Ward Churchill, and agreed with much of what he wrote in the essay (he technically wasn't fired for the essay, BTW, they trumped up academic research misconduct charges against him). Bill Maher being fired was an outrage. BUT! This whole thing goes to the point a few of us here have been making, that Obama isn't the best candidate for the Dems, because of these sort vetting issues. Had Obama not been swept away by his own popularity and, ill advisedly I believe, chosen to run for president so quickly, he wouldn't be having these problems. And these problems are going to be substantial ones to overcome in a general election, and could wreck his chances of ever being president, even if he were to lose the nomination this year, or if nominated for the Dems, losing in the general. The man is just a little too ambitious, a little too arrogant, a little too duplicitous, a little too scripted, a little too stubbornly sure of his rightness. His top aide even admitted this weekend they knew they had a problem with Rev Wright from the gitgo. When Obama was planning the launch announcement of his campaign, he had to be convinced NOT to let Wright do a prayer thing (ed comment: since when do presidential candidates do public prayers at the announcement of their candidacies?). So wake up and smell the coffee about your candidate, is all some of us are saying. Take off the rose colored glasses, because if you don't, the Repubs will smash them off your faces. You want to win & beat the Repubs back in the fall? Then get a grip. Realize that this election cycle offers an historic opportunity for the Democrats to win back Congress in numbers large enough to sustain them in power for a generation. Which in the big scheme of things is far more important than just getting the White House back this election. Work on getting rid of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, if you really want to make a difference in your nation's future. Then start thinking in terms of getting rid of corrupt presidencies by reducing the power and influence of the office itself, and making it a figurehead position, like most democracies. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 12:08 PM (#2290617) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Oops! Above flew out the door before I proofed it. Above 'considering how often I've been in Afrocentric churches (I'm in them as often as I'm...' should read: '...(I'm in them as often as I'm in predominantly white churches--don't forget I live & work in the heart of St Paul's African American community), as I said above, I wasn't the least bit shocked by Wright's sermons, as I've heard it all before a million times.' Hope that helps to clarify my point. Which isn't what *I* think. The points I'm making are about what general election voters will think. I am not espousing my personal opinions, beyond that I think many voters (including some here at Mudcat) have been hoodwinked by their hatred of Bush. Many of these voters engage in the very sorts of guilt by association games they accuse the Republicans of engaging in, by smearing ALL Republicans w/the same black brush they use to paint the neo-con machine. But all Republicans haven't been on board with the neo-con machine, and sadly, most of them were ousted from Congress by the hatred of Democrats for Bush. Which is just shooting the nation in the foot. These same Bush haters then turn around, and claim what they are truly all about is the Obama "Yes We Can" cure for what ails our deeply wounded and wronged nation. These same people espouse deep hatred of all Republicans routinely here, but then take on this "Like Obama, I'm all about hope and unity and rising above political divisions" crap. THAT is the sort of hypocrisy I find contemptible, and we see a lot of it around here, as posters like beardedbruce have pointed out of late in the political threads. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:01 PM (#2290656) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace BHH |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:06 PM (#2290660) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Peace (ironic pseudonym for you, isn't it?) I trust you are referring to 'Bustin' Ho's Heads'? |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:08 PM (#2290666) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest And not 'Beverly Hills High'? Homey don't play dat race-baiting tune neither, Peace. And nor should you. Of course, the fact that you are speaks volumes about you, not me. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:10 PM (#2290670) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace You are off the wall with your assumption as to what BHH means. But then that's par for the course. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:12 PM (#2290673) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Bang Head Here. And, no, not ironic; he actually is a seeker of peace, founded on insight and respect. Like all of us he gets a little rasty when someone starts slinging around undifferentiated calumnies and generalizations of a negative sort. But that's the whole idea, isn't it? Get folks kinda stirred up, unsettled, with broad and unspecific claims of badness in all directions? Pity there is not a more mature rhetoric available to you. You are smart enough to really put one to good use. Maybe some day. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:15 PM (#2290681) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Sez you the head hate monger here, Amos? |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:25 PM (#2290696) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace I want to know how to listen to your songs. Never mind. Found it. GG, you have a great voice. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:27 PM (#2290697) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Boo Hoo Hoo. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:37 PM (#2290706) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos PEace: Post a link. Wanna hear this. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 01:39 PM (#2290709) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace I'll send it via message. If GG wants it posted, she can do so. Gimme five. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 02:04 PM (#2290735) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Except I'm not a musician. Getting away from the same ole Peace/Amos character assassination gambit... The surrogate issue. Rev Wright has been functioning as a powerful surrogate for Obama for a long time, through many elections he has been in. Here is what is damning for Obama--he didn't denounce Wright's remarks and take him off the campaign advisory committee until he was forced to do so by events that put him on the defensive last week. Voters will see that plain as day. Also damning for Obama--he didn't denounce the person of Rezko or Wright. He is still saying both are his friends, and he won't denounce them personally. That stubbornness, which is rooted in his own bad judgments, could kill his candidacy. Only time can tell us that. As to Clinton's surrogate problem this week, Ferraro--they played it brilliantly, and I think they may have cynically set the whole thing up to innoculate Clinton from surrogate problems like Obama's. Clinton appeared to be taking the high road, by telling her aides (sic) not to go after the Wright story. Whether she has put the Rezko matter off-limits too will remain to be seen. It is easy for her to break ties w/Ferraro, denounce the surrogate race baiting, and come out smelling like a rose. In the end, nothing that Ferraro said can hurt Clinton in the general, the way that the Wright videos, combined w/videos of Michelle Obama's "for the first time in my adult life..." quotes, and the Rezko case can hurt Obama. He is much more vulnerable going into this week than Clinton is, IMO. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 02:08 PM (#2290739) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace My mistake. Sorry. It had nothing to do with assassinating your character. You do very well at that all by yourself. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 02:10 PM (#2290741) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Peace In fact, I will make an effort to boycott any thread initiated by you in future. You may feel you are a bright light; IMO, you are a very sad individual, and certainly one not worth my time. Best of luck to you. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 02:12 PM (#2290743) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Peace, this is why I said earlier I was done involving you in my parts of the conversation. You constantly try and throw Mudcat conversations off-topic any time you don't like who is 'winning' the argument, according to your skewed perception of reality. Amos, the same thing. So for the last time--I'm here to discuss the topic of the thread. And I'm going to ignore both you and Amos, and your rudeness. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:16 PM (#2290811) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Lemme see...you have made it clear you think of me as stupid, arrogant, and spewing hate. And now you want to ignore my rudeness??? Ya know, I have gopne out of my way not to be rude to you, except in the rare instances where you have directly and overtly said something insulting, because I admire your independent spirit and point of view when you are not being spiteful. But I can be easily persuaded not to extend any more olive branches if you really prefer playing dirtball. As for the point of the thread, you err in identifying Wright as a surrogate. And as for your point about friends, I think it says a lkot about Obama that he is willing to stay in commubnication with people who have tripped up politically, because he knopws perfectly wellt hat the knee-jerk reactions of the media do NOT reflect wither the ground truth or the way most people would actually feel, were they fully aware of the details of the story, about them. Because he demonstrates a personal loyalty independent of his political decisions is no reason to predict cataclysm for him. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:25 PM (#2290829) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Amos, it is impossible to view the Wright video which is an anti-Clinton screed (the "Hillary has never been called a nigger..." video) as anything BUT his acting as an Obama surrogate. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:35 PM (#2290839) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: M.Ted Since Guest,Guest claims an acquaintance with the notorious Mr. Churchill, I thought you all would enjoy the Native American view- Ward Churchill, the white man's burden, which includes tidbits like,"Native peoples found that Churchill's claims to be a tribal person were baseless and informed CU that he was not a citizen of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation or Cherokee Nation. " Just to stir the pot. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:38 PM (#2290842) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest The MSM blogs are interesting reading today. I started with a summary of the blogs at the New York magazine's "Daily Intelligence" page. There, they summarized the New Republic blog of Michael Crowley's thus: "Michael Crowley doesn't think Wright's statements are isolated outbursts, but part of a belief system that Obama must have been aware of. They're reflective of black middle-class alienation still strong enough that even a "post-racial" candidate can't escape from it, he writes. [Stump/New Republic]" So I followed the link to that New Republic blog, and found this, along w/some other interesting stuff: " Obama: Damned if You Do.... It's not a new point to say that Obama probably felt both political and social pressure not to distance himself from Jeremiah Wright's Trinity United Church and the credibility within Chicago's black community it brought him, but this flashback from a Chicago Reader story from this very day in 2000 illustrates the point: Obama's detractors rap him because he didn't grow up on the south side. He points out that he's spent most of his adult life there, his wife is from South Shore, and he's raising his daughter as a south-sider. His enemies also say he's too white and too bright. Part of it--although they won't say it publicly--is that he grew up with a white mother. Part of it is his demeanor. His lanky, Lincoln-esque body is usually stiff and upright, and he speaks in a stentorian baritone that sounds like a TV newscaster's (Lester Holt's, to be specific). But the main reason is that he's associated himself with Harvard and the University of Chicago, two strongholds of white power. "Barack is viewed in part to be the white man in blackface in our community," says Donne Trotter, who detests Obama. "You just have to look at his supporters. Who pushed him to get where he is so fast? It's these individuals in Hyde Park, who don't always have the best interests of the community in mind."... There are whispers that Obama is being funded by a "Hyde Park mafia," a cabal of University of Chicago types, and that there's an "Obama Project" masterminded by whites who want to push him up the political ladder. His campaign disclosure forms show that he's getting money from some of Chicago's most prominent white liberals[.] --Michael Crowley" |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:44 PM (#2290849) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Ooooh! Whispers!! Just what we need. And Hillary is a methamphetamine addict with lesbian conenctions to the Harlem biker community, according to my imaginary friends, also. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:47 PM (#2290854) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest I said I knew him personally, not that I liked him. He is closely (too closely for my tastes) w/Russ Means of the American Indian Movement. But the thing you are referencing is a sad byproduct of what folks familiar with Native history refer to as the racist politics of 'blood quantum'. Look it up, MTed. You'll be educated about yet another aspect of racism in America that most Americans not only know very little about, but also only give a shit about when trying to discredit someone else in Internet forums where discussions of race come up. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 03:49 PM (#2290857) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Speaking of pot stirring. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 07:08 PM (#2291093) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: M.Ted I have no reason to discredit you, GG. You'll have to do it yourself;-) Ward Churchill's story fits into the general discussion about people who are quickly embraced by certain of our institutions in the name of "diversity", and just as quickly abandoned when they express a point of view that is "problematic"-- |
|
17 Mar 08 - 07:34 PM (#2291128) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos Blood Quantum Laws. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 08:00 PM (#2291161) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Well, first of all when it comes to stubborness McWar weems to be in 1st place, McClinto a close second and Obama a distant third... It is obvious to me, GG, that you dislike Obama, maybe even hate Obama... I don't know yer heart but it's one of the two... You come off as this person who says that we should be concerned about Iraq yet you attack, attack and attack Obama who is the only one running who has consistently been against the attack from the jump... Einstien said that a problem cannot be solved by the same conscienousness that created it... On that count I put Obama at the forefront of this 3 dog race... And you also keep trying to float this idea that Obama knew of every danged sermon that Rev. Wright ever gave... Is is possible, seeing that Obama has been in D.C. for a few years now that he wasn't aware, since he has said he didn't hear these sermons, that he wasn't aware that the Swiftboaters were concocting their l;ittle conspiracy to derail him??? I mean, lets get real here.... If we are going to say that every supporter of Obama is a potential serrogate then that becomes the new standard and therefore the same tactics can be used against both McWar and McClinton... Lastly, tomorrow morning Obama is going to do something very presidential... He's going to give a major speech on the subjstc at hand... Lastlty, Part B, GG... Your positions would be better accepted if you didn't fill them up with assumptive, yet unproven, adjectives... But what would I know bein' the resident hillbilly??? B;~) |
|
17 Mar 08 - 09:01 PM (#2291213) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Bobert, I don't dislike Obama any more than I dislike Clinton. I don't trust Obama more or less than I distrust Clinton. You, and everyone else posting here knows that. It is my opinion that Clinton will be the better candidate against McCain in the fall, for a myriad of reasons, one being she knows the guy really well. And of course, now with the Wright controversy, I believe if she doesn't get the nomination, that McCain will win. I will repeat this once again Bobert. It doesn't matter anymore what Obama's supporters, or even the majority of Democrats, believes about Obama and Wright. What matters is what the general election voters, the far more socially conservative group, thinks. And tonight, it doesn't bode well for him. I just finished watching Hardball, where nearly every single person on the program was clearly of the opinion that Obama would win the nomination hands down, and Clinton doesn't stand a chance of beating him. Until the videos got out on You Tube, and the polls came in this morning showing Obama's efforts at damage control over the weekend didn't play in Peoria. Which is why Obama will make the speech about Wright tomorrow. Not to "appear presidential" but, as someone said on Hardball just now, "to begin digging himself out of the hole he finds himself in right now." And you know, this is really sad. Because I believe this circumstance is one of Obama's making, and no one else's. He should have cut this guy loose & changed churches long ago, when he knew he had this blind ambition to become president. That is what we are seeing in Obama, the same way we saw it in Spitzer. Their downfalls, should one occur w/Obama too, will be of their own making. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 09:02 PM (#2291215) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Charley Noble Gang- Obama has known Rev. Wright for at least 20 years. He must have a clue of what his pastor's views are by now and how he phrases them in his sermons. That's a given, not Gigi hyperbola! And he's known that this particular shoe would fall since at least January. What remains to be seen is what Obamma will say this week, and whether it will get him out of the box that some would like to see him pinned in. It's damn hard to be a viable candidate in this country, and this is just one more arduous test. Better now than later. Of course it's not a fair test but when was a political game conducted on the level of chess? I've actually learned quite a lot from what Gigi has posted but as I've said above she's got claws! Maybe Spaw should take some lessons from her; he's gotten kind of mellow. Cheerily, Charley Noble |
|
17 Mar 08 - 09:06 PM (#2291220) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Didn't you hear Charley? Bitch is the new black. ;-) |
|
17 Mar 08 - 09:08 PM (#2291223) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Q (Frank Staplin) It is easy for Obama to say he was against the war from the start when the war was already on when he got his seat in the Senate. Both Obama and Clinton are whistling in the wind on this one, since conditions may be such that continued presence there is necessary. Clinton admitted this much, at least, but we shall see when new Congressional members are sworn in along with a new president. Will the new president (if Democratic) have like-minded support? (You know wily old Bush could force the matter by invading some other place, like the Northern Provinces of Pakistan, or Iran. No, lets not think of that.) |
|
17 Mar 08 - 09:22 PM (#2291240) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Ummmm, GG, we agree that Obama needs to dif himself out of a hole but there are many ways to do that... If I'm in Obama's war room tonight I'm telling him that this is th red phone ringing at 3:00 in the morning... I like to look at problems as opportunities... Obama has a golden opportunity here to kick the Swiftboaters butt... Tomorrow will be a good test of his abilty to defend himself without deeply offending his foe..,. That is something I learned a long time ago in martial arts and it is my hope that he does it well... Can we agree that McWar and McClinton have very little ability to steer the country thru the mine fields of the coming years??? Hey, look... I'm a Green Party guy who is taking this election cycle off if Obama gets the nod... How 'bout you, GG??? Sometimes you sound like a Greenie and sometimes a McCain-ite... I don't mean that to shock or offend but sometimes folks just have to say, "Hey, I can live with __________." Attack is fine but there's a time to know when to lay the cards down on the table, too. Surem Obama has his history... Everyone in this race has vulnerablities... I think we need to get over them... They are old school... The copuntry has serious problems that don't lend themselves to old school politics or policies.. We are down to 3 choices... There ain't no more choices... At some point, if yer gonn hang here, yer gonna have to get beyond attack and make a choice... That is reality... Attacking is easy... Decidin' ain't... B~ |
|
17 Mar 08 - 10:00 PM (#2291267) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: GUEST,Guest Bobert, I've never been a member of the Greens. Or the Democrats. You already know my position. I wouldn't vote for Obama in a million years. Or Clinton. Or McCain. I either don't vote for prez this year, or I vote for Nader. Why in gods name you are so smitten by Obama, I'll never know. But I also never understood why most people I knew at the time didn't see Bill Clinton for the Republican in Democrats clothes that he was either. Honestly Bobert, I don't think you've researched the REAL Obama. I think you are forming opinions based on emotions, and on what you wish Obama was--and I find that dangerous. |
|
17 Mar 08 - 10:36 PM (#2291290) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos I dunno what speech he's going to make tomorrow, but he has already made the speech on Wright. Maybe he'll make it again. As an issue, it is pretty ridickle-dockle though. A |
|
17 Mar 08 - 11:22 PM (#2291308) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Amos You raise some good questions. I think Obama likely will have some good answers, when he speaks for himself. A |
|
18 Mar 08 - 08:52 AM (#2291501) Subject: RE: BS: Prez surrogates & the race/gender war From: Bobert Well, yeah, GG, I couldn't agree with you more about Billl Clinton... He was a "pure" Repub... The old kind of Nixon Repub... And, yeah, I guess that what I like about Obama is that he is likable...The other two aren't remotely likable... And Obama does ooze hope... Those two qualities ain't bad... No matter who is elected the problems are the same... And I'm not all that convinced that there exists a large menu of solutions from which to choose... But hard choices must be made and I don't see McClinton as being able to pull them off because she is too polorizing... I half see McWar being able to pull them off but his main problem is that he is too stubborn on the war and Bush's tax cuts to the wealthy so I see him allowinmg things to deteriorate to a point where many of the solutions on the menu may no longer be viable... I guess this is where Obam fits... He is likable, bipartisan and has this hope that he exudes that gives him the best shot to ***sell*** some hard choices... Let's see how he get's thru today... If he does well then I think he will have shown what many of us who are supporting him feel about his abilities to lead... B~ |