2008 Presidential Race

[adhara]

Hillary is pretty much willing to let America go through misery for the next 4 years just so she can prove whatever the heck she is out to prove... that makes me really, really sad.

[adhara]

Apr 29, 2008 14:02:35 GMT -5 @disarray said:

I think his "friend", Reverand "Wright" has destroyed Obama's chances. Oh well, at least now the good reverand can still say America is racist and that is why Obama lost.

Would you say that Reverend Wright did that? Or is this the result of the media taking soundclips and placing them out of context, running them over and over again until all we believe about Reverend Wright is that he hates America? That his military service to this country and work to aid to the poor mean nothing? And we're to believe that he's just a crazy angry black man without understanding history and how what he might have lived through has shaped his view of the world?

I disagreed with a lot of what Wright has said (especially the HIV thing which exacerbates a lot of the distrust that blacks have for the health/scientific community). I wish Wright didn't have to feel the need to defend himself. It's sad that the media has destroyed Wright's character while it has said nothing at all about the many regions in America that won't consider Obama just because of his skin color. Obama rightly distanced himself from Wright -- the two seem generations apart in how they approach the problems that plague America.

I also don't understand this whole guilt by association thing. Ok so Obama's supposed to be racist and anti-American just because his former pastor supposedly is. Does that mean that McCain is young just because his wife is? Or that Hillary is immoral just because her husband had extramarital affairs?

I don't think Obama's chances are destroyed...he'll get over this, just like how he's gotten over every other controversy thrown his way.

[disarray]

Apr 29, 2008 14:40:17 GMT -5 adhara said:

Apr 29, 2008 14:02:35 GMT -5 @disarray said:

I think his "friend", Reverand "Wright" has destroyed Obama's chances. Oh well, at least now the good reverand can still say America is racist and that is why Obama lost.

Would you say that Reverend Wright did that? Or is this the result of the media taking soundclips and placing them out of context, running them over and over again until all we believe about Reverend Wright is that he hates America? That his military service to this country and work to aid to the poor mean nothing? And we're to believe that he's just a crazy angry black man without understanding history and how what he might have lived through has shaped his view of the world?

I disagreed with a lot of what Wright has said (especially the HIV thing which exacerbates a lot of the distrust that blacks have for the health/scientific community). I wish Wright didn't have to feel the need to defend himself. It's sad that the media has destroyed Wright's character while it has said nothing at all about the many regions in America that won't consider Obama just because of his skin color. Obama rightly distanced himself from Wright -- the two seem generations apart in how they approach the problems that plague America.

I also don't understand this whole guilt by association thing. Ok so Obama's supposed to be racist and anti-American just because his former pastor supposedly is. Does that mean that McCain is young just because his wife is? Or that Hillary is immoral just because her husband had extramarital affairs?

I don't think Obama's chances are destroyed...he'll get over this, just like how he's gotten over every other controversy thrown his way.

I don't want to get way deep into this, but Wright has not been taken out of context. When you listen to the totality of what he says, it's even worse than the sound bytes. He is a dispicable race baiter.

When you are in church saying GOD DAMN AMERICA and that the US government created AIDS to kill black people, you're a freaking lunatic.

He is arrogant and loving this spotlight shining on him. He doesn't give a crap about Barack Obama. Obama seems to have figured that out because today he completely obliberated Wright and disowned him -- as he SHOULD HAVE from the get go.

I don't think it's as big a shock to Obama as he claims it is that Wright is a fruit loop, but I don't think he believes what the good "reverand" does either. I'd be pretty pissed off if I were him. I'm glad he's fighting back.

[adhara]

While I agree that Wright seems to be taking advantage of the spotlight on him, I don't think Wright should be labeled as a lunatic. The HIV conspiracy theory is extremely harmful to HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment, but I can understand why it's there. A lot of it probably comes from past events such as the Tuskegee syphilis study in which the government withheld treatment from black men for 40 years so they could study the course of the disease. I think a quarter of blacks (mostly the older generations) actually believe that AIDS was produced in a government laboratory.

I usually don't like CNN, but here's an interesting article on the media's framing of racial issues...

Race in the Race for the Presidency: How Media Pundits Gloss Over Race and Feed Racism
Posted: 02:13 PM ET

Tim Wise
Friend of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright
Author of ‘White Like Me: Reflections on Race From a Privileged Son’
www.timwise.org

Much has been said about the role that racism may play in the outcome of the 2008 Presidential election.

But what has been largely ignored is the way that media pundits, by virtue of the language they use, the questions they ask, and the way they frame issues, often reinforce racial division, and make it harder for us to examine race issues honestly.

So consider the way the media has been pushing the question, “Can Obama win working class voters?” Or, “Why is Obama having trouble connecting with working class voters?” Both questions ignore that Obama doesn’t have a working class problem—large percentages of the black folks who are turning out to support him at rates of 90% are indeed working class—but rather, a white working class problem.

By implicitly equating “working class” with white, the media reinforces the notion of “hard-working,” average (i.e. normal) folks as white. This then leaves blacks to be viewed either as the decidedly non-working and dreaded “underclass,” or the elitist types that Hillary Clinton wants people to envision when they think of Senator Obama. Either of these images can reinforce racism, either by stoking white fear of the former or resentment toward the latter.

Or consider the way the media has responded to the Jeremiah Wright controversy. Although much attention has been paid to black anger in the wake of Rev. Wright’s largely-taken-out-of-context comments, and although some have tried to explain the place of such righteous indignation within the black church and community, the framing of the issue has reinforced the white perspective as normal, and thus, valid. So we are asked to wonder, “Why are some black people so angry?” rather than, “Why are some white people so complacent?” about racial injustice.

White complacency is seen as normal, while black anger is taken as the pathology to be understood, ultimately making them the problem. Their perspectives are the ones that are strange and in need of explanation, but ours (if we’re white) are perfectly fine and need not be explained or defended to anyone. Such a normalizing of the white perspective only makes it more likely that whites will be hostile to those who think and view the world differently.

Of course, it’s not only this election where the media has normalized whiteness, or made it altogether invisible, so that its consequences can’t even be seen, let alone understood.

Consider the 2004 Presidential race, after which most every talking head noted that President Bush had won the “evangelical vote,” and claimed that the nation was divided between “blue states” and “red states.”

In the first instance, commentators failed to notice that the President most certainly did not win the black evangelical vote, but only the white evangelical vote. Black evangelicals voted against him by at least four to one. Saying that “evangelicals” supported the President, as the media did, marginalized Christians of color, whose sense of religious duty compelled them to vote differently from their white brothers and sisters. Why? Who knows? No one thought to ask.

As for blue states and red states, the notion of a geographic divide in this country is largely mythical. Most whites in the blue states—including New York, California, Illinois, Michigan and Maryland—either voted for Bush, or split 50-50 between Bush and Kerry. Meanwhile, in the red states, people of color voted overwhelmingly against the President. In other words, the real divide was racial, not regional.

By ignoring this truth, the media ducked the hard questions about why whites and folks of color often view our country so differently, and come to such different conclusions about what would be best for the nation politically.

But it is this kind of question we need to confront in order to have a truly productive conversation about race in America. That our respective racial identities often shape the way we view our national past, present and desired future—and therefore, often cause tension because we can’t fathom where “the other guy” is coming from—is the truth that won’t go away.

Only if media helps to uncover that reality, and encourage a real discussion about what it means, for all of us, will we likely make progress on the road to racial equity.

Source

[RunningAway]

i never read this thread cause i'm not into politics...but a week or so back, i was on my way to katelyn's and almost missed my train because of a Obama ralley that covered the street. i completely forgot he was in philly.

but yeah...may cost him a vote... i just wanted to share that.

[gurlnlifemagazine]

All this coverage on Wright is pissing me off because white people can't understand that black churches preach about different things than white churches. Wright isn't races, you just don't get his point.

But this hasn't hurt Obama that much. He's gaining on Hillary in the superdelegate count. This is kept him int he spotlight and people are looking more into him and forgetting about her.

All this really has done is show how much people aren't buying into the media's coverage of all this bullshit. People have not forgotten about the issues in this race and why we're voting.

I think Clinton supporters are so desperate for a reason to not let him win that their clinging on to people he knows, which is not gonna work. Barack is a movement and it's hard to stop a movement. Clinton is trying, but after Barack wins NC and probably Indiana (a very white state) she's not gonna have much of a case because the public doesn't like her.

[gogonutz]

Whether Wright is a racist or a man with distorted beliefs or not, I don't think it's fair to judge Obama on the views that Wright has. I don't care if he knew or not what the beliefs of this man were, I don't think it really matters. Sure, it hurt him politically, but I mean, it shouldn't all be about being so politically attractive as possible. It too often is already. And of course the media portray it dramatically, that's what they do best. Just listen to what Obama says for himself and if you like what you hear, vote for him, if you don't like what you hear, don't vote for him. It's not about the people he knows, it's about the man, his own words and actions, and what he stands for.

The same thing goes for Hillary. I know there's truth in it, but I'm getting kinda sick of the "if you vote for Hillary, you'll get Bill for free" phrases. She's running, not Bill. And of course he's gonna be influencing her, but she influenced him during his term too. It's about her words, actions and beliefs, not his.

But the longer this is going on, the less I'm liking any of them. For different reasons, but all 3 possible candidates are showing more and more that they might not be really qualified to lead a nation like the US. So I really hope, whoever will be president, will be a fast learner.

[gurlnlifemagazine]

Apr 30, 2008 20:21:14 GMT -5 gogonutz said:

The same thing goes for Hillary. I know there's truth in it, but I'm getting kinda sick of the "if you vote for Hillary, you'll get Bill for free" phrases. She's running, not Bill. And of course he's gonna be influencing her, but she influenced him during his term too. It's about her words, actions and beliefs, not his.

I totally agree with that. Hillary is in this race 100% for herself. She would throw Bill under the bus if he got in her way. One reason why people don't trust her, nore would they vote for her.

[gurlnlifemagazine]

Hum.. I missed this blog by Michael Moore, last week.

www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php

Monday, April 21st, 2008
My Vote's for Obama (if I could vote) ...by Michael Moore


Friends,

I don't get to vote for President this primary season. I live in Michigan. The party leaders (both here and in D.C.) couldn't get their act together, and thus our votes will not be counted.

So, if you live in Pennsylvania, can you do me a favor? Will you please cast my vote -- and yours -- on Tuesday for Senator Barack Obama?

I haven't spoken publicly 'til now as to who I would vote for, primarily for two reasons: 1) Who cares?; and 2) I (and most people I know) don't give a rat's ass whose name is on the ballot in November, as long as there's a picture of JFK and FDR riding a donkey at the top of the ballot, and the word "Democratic" next to the candidate's name.

Seriously, I know so many people who don't care if the name under the Big "D" is Dancer, Prancer, Clinton or Blitzen. It can be Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Barry Obama or the Dalai Lama.

Well, that sounded good last year, but over the past two months, the actions and words of Hillary Clinton have gone from being merely disappointing to downright disgusting. I guess the debate last week was the final straw. I've watched Senator Clinton and her husband play this game of appealing to the worst side of white people, but last Wednesday, when she hurled the name "Farrakhan" out of nowhere, well that's when the silly season came to an early end for me. She said the "F" word to scare white people, pure and simple. Of course, Obama has no connection to Farrakhan. But, according to Senator Clinton, Obama's pastor does -- AND the "church bulletin" once included a Los Angeles Times op-ed from some guy with Hamas! No, not the church bulletin!

This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!

Yes, Senator Clinton, that's how you sounded. Like you were nuts. Like you were a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity. How sad that I would ever have to write those words about you. You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds. And now to throw it all away for an office you can't win unless you smear the black man so much that the superdelegates cry "Uncle (Tom)" and give it all to you.

But that can't happen. You cast your die when you voted to start this bloody war. When you did that you were like Moses who lost it for a moment and, because of that, was prohibited from entering the Promised Land.

How sad for a country that wanted to see the first woman elected to the White House. That day will come -- but it won't be you. We'll have to wait for the current Democratic governor of Kansas to run in 2016 (you read it here first!).

There are those who say Obama isn't ready, or he's voted wrong on this or that. But that's looking at the trees and not the forest. What we are witnessing is not just a candidate but a profound, massive public movement for change. My endorsement is more for Obama The Movement than it is for Obama the candidate.

That is not to take anything away from this exceptional man. But what's going on is bigger than him at this point, and that's a good thing for the country. Because, when he wins in November, that Obama Movement is going to have to stay alert and active. Corporate America is not going to give up their hold on our government just because we say so. President Obama is going to need a nation of millions to stand behind him.

I know some of you will say, 'Mike, what have the Democrats done to deserve our vote?' That's a damn good question. In November of '06, the country loudly sent a message that we wanted the war to end. Yet the Democrats have done nothing. So why should we be so eager to line up happily behind them?

I'll tell you why. Because I can't stand one more friggin' minute of this administration and the permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I'm almost at the point where I don't care if the Democrats don't have a backbone or a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name ain't "Bush" and the word "Republican" is not beside theirs on the ballot, then that's good enough for me.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years. That's why I will join millions of citizens and stagger into the voting booth come November, like a boxer in the 12th round, all bloodied and bruised with one eye swollen shut, looking for the only thing that matters -- that big "D" on the ballot.

Don't get me wrong. I lost my rose-colored glasses a long time ago.

It's foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country. Any endorsement of a Democrat must be done with this acknowledgement and a hope that one day we will have a party that'll represent the people first, and laws that allow that party an equal voice.

Finally, I want to say a word about the basic decency I have seen in Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton continues to throw the Rev. Wright up in his face as part of her mission to keep stoking the fears of White America. Every time she does this I shout at the TV, "Say it, Obama! Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

But no, Obama won't throw that at her. It wouldn't be right. It wouldn't be decent. She's been through enough hurt. And so he remains silent and takes the mud she throws in his face.

That's why the crowds who come to see him are so large. That's why he'll take us down a more decent path. That's why I would vote for him if Michigan were allowed to have an election.

But the question I keep hearing is... 'can he win? Can he win in November?' In the distance we hear the siren of the death train called the Straight Talk Express. We know it's possible to hear the words "President McCain" on January 20th. We know there are still many Americans who will never vote for a black man. Hillary knows it, too. She's counting on it.

Pennsylvania, the state that gave birth to this great country, has a chance to set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there. In that Constitution, they wrote that a black man or woman was only "three fifths" human. On Tuesday, the good people of Pennsylvania have a chance for redemption.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MichaelMoore.com
[e-mail]

[katelyn]

Apr 30, 2008 23:50:31 GMT -5 gurlnlifemagazine said:

Say that when she and her husband were having marital difficulties regarding Monica Lewinsky, who did she and Bill bring to the White House for 'spiritual counseling?' THE REVEREND JEREMIAH WRIGHT!"

if that's true that's really interesting/hilarious

[disarray]

Apr 30, 2008 20:21:14 GMT -5 gogonutz said:

Whether Wright is a racist or a man with distorted beliefs or not, I don't think it's fair to judge Obama on the views that Wright has. I don't care if he knew or not what the beliefs of this man were, I don't think it really matters. Sure, it hurt him politically, but I mean, it shouldn't all be about being so politically attractive as possible. It too often is already. And of course the media portray it dramatically, that's what they do best. Just listen to what Obama says for himself and if you like what you hear, vote for him, if you don't like what you hear, don't vote for him. It's not about the people he knows, it's about the man, his own words and actions, and what he stands for.

The same thing goes for Hillary. I know there's truth in it, but I'm getting kinda sick of the "if you vote for Hillary, you'll get Bill for free" phrases. She's running, not Bill. And of course he's gonna be influencing her, but she influenced him during his term too. It's about her words, actions and beliefs, not his.

But the longer this is going on, the less I'm liking any of them. For different reasons, but all 3 possible candidates are showing more and more that they might not be really qualified to lead a nation like the US. So I really hope, whoever will be president, will be a fast learner.

I'm not convinced that Obama holds the same beliefs as Wright. I think his wife is very hard core in that ideology, though.

It's not about that. It's about judgement. You are running for the office of President of the United States of America and someone very close to you literally hates this country and is an out and out racist! Most Americans reject that whole heartedly.

Sure, there's about 15% of this country who probably agrees with Wright, but they are not going to win the election for Obama.

All I know is that when I am in church, I don't want to hear about politics or crazy conspiracy theories or how my life sucks and it's all whitey's fault.

Obama was the guy who supposedly could transcend race, and now his whole candidacy is about race and getting the hell away from Wright.

I have not liked any of the 3 candidates and still don't. In the beginning, I had the most favorable opinion of Obama even though I don't agree with him at all politically. Now I see him as just another politician. There's nothing special or new about him at all.

I think McCain is going to win and I'm not going to be happy about that either.

[adhara]

May 1, 2008 11:53:15 GMT -5 @disarray said:

It's not about that. It's about judgement. You are running for the office of President of the United States of America and someone very close to you literally hates this country and is an out and out racist! Most Americans reject that whole heartedly.

Sure, there's about 15% of this country who probably agrees with Wright, but they are not going to win the election for Obama.

All I know is that when I am in church, I don't want to hear about politics or crazy conspiracy theories or how my life sucks and it's all whitey's fault.

Hmm.. would you prefer to see this race discussion reframed in terms of social class or socioeconomic status? That life sucks and it's all rich people's fault (who happen to be predominately white)? Or do you prefer the status quo, that life sucks and it's all the fault of the individual?

I also think that most Americans reject Wright wholeheartedly because they don't believe that racism exists.

[disarray]

May 1, 2008 12:07:04 GMT -5 adhara said:

May 1, 2008 11:53:15 GMT -5 @disarray said:

It's not about that. It's about judgement. You are running for the office of President of the United States of America and someone very close to you literally hates this country and is an out and out racist! Most Americans reject that whole heartedly.

Sure, there's about 15% of this country who probably agrees with Wright, but they are not going to win the election for Obama.

All I know is that when I am in church, I don't want to hear about politics or crazy conspiracy theories or how my life sucks and it's all whitey's fault.

Hmm.. would you prefer to see this race discussion reframed in terms of social class or socioeconomic status? That life sucks and it's all rich people's fault (who happen to be predominately white)? Or do you prefer to keep the status quo, that life sucks and it's all the fault of the individual?

I also think that most Americans reject Wright wholeheartedly because they don't believe that racism exists.

Yes, I do believe it is within the power of the individual to make it in America. Rev Wright rails about the evils of the rich white people, but where does he build his multi million dollar home? On a golf course in a rich white neighborhood. Hypocrite much?

He's a race baiter. As long as people like him, Jesse jackson and Al Sharpton stay in power and keep the races divided (and believe me, that is their job) things will never change.

When I have misfortuen in my life, I don't look for who is to blame. 9 out of 10 times, it's my own damn fault for making a stupid decision. But even when it's not, sitting around bitching and placing blame serves NO PURPOSE. The only person who can better my life is me, so that is what I strive to do. Waiting on the government or a politician to help you is a guarantee you will never be any further than you are at that moment.

[adhara]

May 1, 2008 12:18:27 GMT -5 @disarray said:

Yes, I do believe it is within the power of the individual to make it in America. Rev Wright rails about the evils of the rich white people, but where does he build his multi million dollar home? On a golf course in a rich white neighborhood. Hypocrite much?

you can be rich and help out the poor. Bill gates is a good example of that.

He's a race baiter. As long as people like him, Jesse jackson and Al Sharpton stay in power and keep the races divided (and believe me, that is their job) things will never change.

There's Chuck Norris too. He thinks its ok to just start shooting Mexicans who try to illegally cross the border:

If these solutions don't stop the tides of illegal flow in and out of our borders, a friend of mine has a Texas-tough alternative and answer to replace the government's virtual fence failure. In fact, he says, we don't need a security fence at all. All we need to do is to post signs and position manned trucks at key points, just like our government does at Area 51, the top secret military airfield in remote central Nevada, around which there are no fences or walls. There is never a breach or unwanted border crossing there, at least that we hear about! And why? Because the boundary sign reads and is never questioned, "Warning: Use of deadly force authorized."

When I have misfortuen in my life, I don't look for who is to blame. 9 out of 10 times, it's my own damn fault for making a stupid decision. But even when it's not, sitting around bitching and placing blame serves NO PURPOSE. The only person who can better my life is me, so that is what I strive to do. Waiting on the government or a politician to help you is a guarantee you will never be any further than you are at that moment.

On the contrary, I think it's really important to place blame, to find the root cause(s) of the problem. Otherwise, how do you know who should be fixing it, or who should be obligated to fix things? Many of these problems are not really individual failures even though most people think they are. One example is drug errors...you often hear in the news about how patients were given the wrong dose of drugs and they died. Whose fault is that? The doctor who wrote the wrong dosage? The hospital can fire all the people they like. Each individual can take charge of being more vigilant. But unless hospitals have a system in place to prevent these things and hospitals start to embrace transparency, drug errors will keep happening over and over again. People will always make mistakes, but how many and to what degree depends on whats going on around them. I like to think of individual responsibility sitting inside the realm of an environment that is conducive for making good choices.

[gurlnlifemagazine]

May 1, 2008 12:18:27 GMT -5 @disarray said:

Yes, I do believe it is within the power of the individual to make it in America. Rev Wright rails about the evils of the rich white people, but where does he build his multi million dollar home? On a golf course in a rich white neighborhood. Hypocrite much?

He's a race baiter. As long as people like him, Jesse jackson and Al Sharpton stay in power and keep the races divided (and believe me, that is their job) things will never change.

When I have misfortuen in my life, I don't look for who is to blame. 9 out of 10 times, it's my own damn fault for making a stupid decision. But even when it's not, sitting around bitching and placing blame serves NO PURPOSE. The only person who can better my life is me, so that is what I strive to do. Waiting on the government or a politician to help you is a guarantee you will never be any further than you are at that moment.

That's a shame that that's the way you think because you couldn't be more wrong. If Wright is racist then 90% of black preachers are too, in your world.

The plain fact is that you will never understand Wright, Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton because you're not black living in America. Black American's have a very different view of this country than whites and that's the way it is. I don't agree with eveything Wright, Jackson or any other black leader says and does, but I know where their coming from and you may never understand. There's a reason why black don't care about the Wright thing and whites do.

I'm really disappointed that the media is turning this into a race thing and so many people are following it