I find the recent narrative regarding South Carolina ridiculous, because nearly a year ago, in their February 1, 2007 issue, Time magazine asked, Is Obama black enough?
[When Senator Biden called] Obama the “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” the implication was that the black people who are regularly seen by whites — or at least those who aspire to the highest office in the land — are none of these things.
“Obama’s mother is of white U.S. stock. His father is a black Kenyan,” Stanley Crouch recently sniffed in a New York Daily News column entitled “What Obama Isn’t: Black Like Me.” “Black, in our political and social vocabulary, means those descended from West African slaves,” wrote Debra Dickerson on the liberal website Salon. Writers like TIME and New Republic columnist Peter Beinart have argued that Obama is seen as a “good black,” and thus has less of following among black people. …
The black-on-black argument seemed to be bolstered by recent polls showing Obama significantly trailing Hillary Clinton among black voters. But reading into poll numbers that way is a clever device, hatched by mainstream (primarily white) journalists who are shocked — shocked! — to discover that black people aren’t as dumbstruck by Obama as they are.
What they fail to understand is that African-Americans meet other intelligent, articulate African-Americans all the time. In almost every cycle since 1984, at least one of these brave chaps has run for President. Forgive us if we don’t automatically pledge our votes to Obama and instead make judgments based on things besides skin color — like, heaven forbid, issues.
Here’s what Debra Dickerson had to say in that Salon article mentioned by Time:
Not descended from West African slaves brought to America, he steps into the benefits of black progress (like Harvard Law School) without having borne any of the burden, and he gives the white folks plausible deniability of their unwillingness to embrace blacks in public life. None of Obama’s doing, of course, but nonetheless a niggling sort of freebie for which he’ll have to do some groveling.
Which brings me to the main reason I delayed writing about Obama. For me, it was a trick question in a game I refused to play. Since the issue was always framed as a battle between gender and race (read: non-whiteness — the question is moot when all the players are white), I didn’t have the heart (or the stomach) to point out the obvious: Obama isn’t black.
“Black,” in our political and social reality, means those descended from West African slaves. Voluntary immigrants of African descent (even those descended from West Indian slaves) are just that, voluntary immigrants of African descent with markedly different outlooks on the role of race in their lives and in politics. At a minimum, it can’t be assumed that a Nigerian cabdriver and a third-generation Harlemite have more in common than the fact a cop won’t bother to make the distinction. They’re both “black” as a matter of skin color and DNA, but only the Harlemite, for better or worse, is politically and culturally black, as we use the term.
While I personally find Dickerson’s comments bizzare, they were representative of a segment of the writing population at that point in time.
Then came Iowa. And Iowa changed everything, as Bill Schneider at CNN pointed out:
Barack Obama just won a state whose population is less than 4 percent African-American. On January 26, he will be on the ballot in a state with a considerably higher percentage of African-Americans: South Carolina, where that demographic makes up nearly 50 percent of Democratic primary voters there.
African-Americans have been intensely loyal to the Clintons, and continue to support Hillary Clinton over Obama in the Palmetto State. But that gap has significantly narrowed in recent weeks — and with this key win tonight, it’s unlikely they will stand in his way there.
I present these quotes to show that for months, Obama was at a disadvantage amnog black voters. They didn’t think he was black enough, didn’t share their history. They were “intensely loyal” to the Clinton machine. They had doubts that Obama could win anywhere BUT the south.
What the pundits aren’t mentioning today is that for the last several months of last year, the polls in South Carolina had Clinton up, often by 10 points or more, over Obama. It wasn’t until his Iowa victory that, as Schneider predicted, South Carolinians started giving Obama a second look.
But don’t miss the point here. Until Obama won a nearly all-white state, his victory in South Carolina was far from assured.
As a white woman voter, I had to wait to see if Obama could win in Iowa too. That mattered to me. I needed to know how far beyond race issues our country was willing to move. Iowans spoke up loud and clear, and told us race doesn’t matter. I didn’t want to support yet another candidate who didn’t have a chance of winning. I’ve been down that route too many times. I know the roadside stops by heart. Neither did a lot of people in South Carolina.
It’s not just because he’s black. Yes, he’s black enough. But that was never the full story, and we need to hold the media’s feet to the fire to remind them that being “black” has never qualified Obama for instant support. Being a winner, with a strong message, is what caused the upswing of support for Obama in South Carolina.
Good post. Recommended.
I hope he finds some clever way to say something to the effect of: “Iowa showed I’m white enough. South Carolina showed I’m black enough. Now can we stop this nonsense repeated every ten minutes in the media about my race?” …somehow implying that Americans are above this and that the Washington media is who doesn’t get it and maybe it’s them who are afraid of change.
I am sure he’s got good advisers. I hope they have a good comeback from the media narrative that could kill them. Hillary did it with tears. What’s Obama gonna do?
whatever he does, let’s hope he does it with humor. That’s a weapon he wields better than the others in this race! 😉
More along these lines:
I confess that race plays into my considerations here, but not in the way you might expect. I’m a middle class white male Southerner, a liberal, and a religious minority. Obviously, I haven’t had to consider the question of a viable presidential candidate’s race before. I’m still a little leery of Obama because of his shortage of definite policy proposals — though that complaint can legitimately be leveled equally well against Edwards and Clinton — but I am increasingly inclined to vote for him, and a small but significant part of that increasing inclination is precisely because he is black.
Recall that I mentioned that I’m pretty much a typical Southern white male — except for the liberal and religious minority part — and allow me to let you in to a secret about Southern white supremacists: white people who are abusive to black people are also abusive to practically everyone else. White people who hate black people invariably also hate women, Jews, agnostics, liberals, artists, and anyone else who doesn’t fit into their reactionary white male protestant clique.
Almost twenty years ago, on New Year’s Eve, I had my ass thoroughly kicked by a group of Nazi skinheads because they objected to my (fairly mild) anti-government bumper stickers. I already had a pretty strong loathing for racists, but as I was lying there in the parking lot drenched in my own blood, I realized clearly that bigots, despite their tendency to have preferred targets, ultimately hate everyone who does not conform one hundred percent to their standard of perfection — a standard that is usually a narcissistic self-reflection. If a blue-eyed, blond, 6’6″ white male like me had just gotten stomped on by a bunch of Aryan master race psychos, it was hard to avoid the conclusion that their ostensibly racial hatred was much broader and deeper than it seemed, and any bigot of any kind was ultimately a threat to all of us, even if you happened to be practically a poster child — as I am — for the group they purported to worship.
So as I look forward to the primaries in my state, Barack Obama’s race is certainly not my main concern, but I do think about those skinheads and the countless other morons like them who will howl with impotent rage if Obama is elected, and I like the idea a lot. And if “black voters are a bit suspicious of a black presidential candidate who seems to have such cachet with white folks”, they might want to consider that white racists prey on a lot more than just black people, and that I’m probably not the only white guy who has personal reasons for wanting to go to the polls and cast a vote for Obama that will, in part, be a more profound punch in the face to those racist assholes than I could deliver in person.
That’s an interesting take on it, and I’m sorry re your past experiences.
I didn’t experience anything near as threatening, but today, I wore my Obama shirt to the place where I get my oil changed, and the guy couldn’t service me – made an appointment to come back next week. But he said, as he was about to walk away, “Next time, wear a different shirt.”
That really pissed me off. I don’t know if he’s a Republican, a racist, or a fan of another candidate. But that was wholly inappropriate.
On a more positive note, I got all kinds of positive comments from people today who said “I like your shirt.” It’s always nice to hear that, especially from good-looking men who would normally have nothing to say to me! 😉
Cancel your appointment and send a terse letter to the oil change chain’s corporate office explaining what happened and that you will never patronize their business again. Be sure to include the store number (e.g. Valvoline Instant Oil Change Store #12345 or Pennzoil 10-Minute Oil Change Store #54321) and the employee’s name if you can get it.
If it’s not a chain then call the store manager/owner and explain it to him.
Unfortunately, it’s the place where I lease my car, or I would have complained. The guy RUNS the service department, and it’s just not worth the trouble it may cause. If it were anywhere else, I would. I might write the maker, but I’m not looking to get someone specific in trouble. But that was really rude. I couldn’t believe it.
Definitely write the maker, and tell them that you will tell the world how you have been treated by (fill in the blank) Motors.
It as Nissan. Love my car, but not crazy re that kind of service!
Oh, in that case never mind – Nissan might give him a raise…
That’s horrible. Thanks for the link. I wonder which companies have more equitable policies? I still want a Prius, if/when I can afford it. I hope Toyota has been more fair.
Echoing Oscar, that was just horrible! How DARE he tell you what you can wear? Stupid little facist–he should focus on doing his damned job, and keep his stupid opinions to himself.
I wouldn’t have minded at all if he had just said, “I hate your shirt.” But to say, “don’t wear it next week” for my appt to me crossed a big line.
I sincerely hope you’ll wear it again next week.
l’d suggest you take a button and give it to him…be worth it just to see the expression on his face.
lTMF’sA
LOL at both these suggestions.
I like to think he’ll consider Obama more if I DON’T shove his shirt in his face. But in his case, he’s probably a lost cause. 😉
Maybe I’ll just find his car and add a bumper sticker. NO. I won’t!!! But I’m thinking of it!!
I think the heart of it is that if any of us are oppressed, all of us are, one way or another. A lot of people look at the struggle of blacks, women, gays, and other groups as being specific to that group, but ultimately, bigots hate the very notion of the human race, and in that sense, they threaten all of us. Some of us may be more immediately threatened than others, but the threat is always there, and the odds are often worse than they seem.
Hatred of others, to my mind, is nothing but fear; fear of others basically extends to everyone but oneself.
In that sense, no one on earth is any more a target than anyone else, though the specifics are quite subjective.
I think you’d be hard pressed to make that argument to a non-caucasian in America, or a gay person, or even most women.
I took her comment to mean that hatred and haters, know no bounds. Hatred is an equal opportunity emotion. I didn’
t hear her say that historically targeted groups like women, gays, and blacks are no more physically targeted than others.
Maybe she can clarify it better though.
The mantra of the ACLU, one of the few groups that has never backed down from fighting for all of us.
re Debra Dickerson’s observation? What planet is she on?
This essay The Clintons, Black folk and America – A reckoning is interesting from the standpoint of the question of race in the primaries – how Clinton came to lose the black vote.
“* Black folks realize they can have a real first black president. Why settle for a wack substitute
* All folks, not just black, start to publicly dig into the past and challenge the assumptions of Bill’s blackness and his greatness
Here’s what they find.”
go read
Now Obama will make whites uncomfortable by getting to much of the black vote in SC making him seem too black. Give this man a break. Vote according to how Obama stands on the issues.
Then take into account this is a man who can unite us with his soaring rhetoric. Unite us to do what is right. After eight long years we will feel like the good guys again.
He wins!!!!
Sorry – forgot what else I was going to say!
agree.
what has yet to dawn is the fact that Obama is doing great among young white voters.
Incredibly so. I live in rural white Vermont (Republican country areas) and I’m amazed to find so many young whites are going Obama. This way back in time, the early fall. I thought at the time what do they know that I don’t. Still holds today and these rural areas don’t field Democratic Party candidates.
Where in Vermont? I lived in South Burlington while working on Dean’s campaign there, but I got out a little to other areas. Stowe was gorgeous, btw!
east of Stowe, near Jay Peak.
So you must be in about 12 degree weather or so? Yeowch. Stay warm!
Exit polls of Obama’s victory in S.C. has some interesting nuggets:
via The CarpetBagger Report
Now Bill Clinton played an important role. From here on out what will be his role?
Same old, same old.
The Sunday Telegraph, UK – Obama’s big win in South Carolina
Nothing quite like cocky, eh? Like the fix is in.
Should Hillary prevail ( muscle their way ) to become the nominee; she’ll have trouble finding an official VP running mate and if she wins, members of their cabinet.
On basis SC exit polls, (should these polls hold national level) the Clintons will lose the GE.
“after all the talk about race” so what do we take away from Obama’s thumpin’ of the Clintons in South Carolina. Yes, it was two against one.
Does it change anything? A mini-roundup:
Just in case you missed the speech that electrified hard core Republicans, Indies, and Dems.
Stand proud of this American.
It was a decent speech, yes. But honestly, I can’t see what is in it that’s that much different than many other speeches I’ve heard. It’s clear that he’s gifted, with a good, even pleasing, voice, and he’s telegenic for sure. But I’m not feeling it. I’m not a supporter, it’s true. But I’m trying to come at him from a neutral place, and I’m just not impressed. To be honest, despite his talent, all I hear are the same tired exhortations to unity. The same promises to families in need of healthcare, workers in need of jobs, seniors in need of security, and so on. All politicians repeat these same things, endlessly. Where is his defense of women against the chipping away of their reproductive rights? How does he intend to actually end this war, beyond pandering in speeches to the anti-war democratic base? Where was his support for our freedoms when Senator Dodd needed him to vote on Friday? And I really am turned off by references to scripture. His relating of the $3.10 donation w/ scripture included conjured images of televangelists for me.
In Edwards’ case, he’s fatally uninspiring when he speaks. And he’s repetetive. But at least he brings an anti-corporate, pro worker message that appeals to a struggling, working class guy like me. Clinton is even less passionate than Edwards. And despite my general disinterest in her and the ex president, I’d remained more or less opposed to her for her connections to corporate government controllers and her centrist leanings. Something all three represent to me. But her, so much more so. But beyond that, I’m becoming truly sick of what her campaign is doing and for how they’ve attacked Obama with passive, now overt, racism.
So for someone like me, who is generally unattracted to, and disenchanted with democrats as a whole, and the generic uselessness of what I see of these three candidates, what has Obama got to offer me? Where’s the beef? I want to know about what he intends to do, and how he proposes to do it. Not what his hopes are. And when he says “yes we can”, I want to know how we can .
Help me out, because I’m not seeing it. I need more than the fact that he’s more personally appealing and better at speaking than the other two.
Another thing. I think it’s wrong for him to be compared to and referenced alongside such great, proven American political leaders like Dr. King and John and Robert Kennedy. He has done nothing, in my eyes, for anyone, least of all himself, to make those comparisons.
Sorry to kind of lay this all at the foot of your comment, but you are obviously a true believer and I’m honestly trying to understand what the bedrock of that belief is. Because I just might change my mind about sitting this election out if I can find enough to inspire me to give him my vote.
Thanks and Peace
Thank you, super — you articulate my own thoughts precisely; the only word out of place is ‘guy’.
I’d edit it to working stiff if I could. Tough to be politically correct 24/7 :o)
And, you’re welcome. I was/usually am, worried that my thoughts might come across as incoherant. Good to know I’ve managed to limit the incoherancy to the interior of my own skull :o)
I’d edit it to working stiff if I could. Tough to be politically correct 24/7 :o)
And, you’re welcome. I was/usually am, worried that my thoughts might come across as incoherant. Good to know I’ve managed to limit the incoherancy to the interior of my own skull :o)
^
^
^
So much for containment! Lol!
Not to worry — I’m pleased to read what you have to say any time, including the edits.
🙂
Not to worry either about political correctness on my account; I wear my gender loosely.
That was truly funny!
can’t help you out supersoling if you haven’t seen what this speech accomplished. Something is happening here though; when Republicans, Indies and Dems are lauding this speech, it has touched more than just a nerve. It was masterful.
Perhaps this may help, just a sample
One cannot expect a candidate to lay out his entire platform in a 30 minute “Thank You” speech. Obama does have specifics. But
Like the man said, “Damn” Republicans are paying attention. They fear this candidate….he has a well run organization surrounded by some of the best minds, including Michelle.
Hillary is an easy walk, piece a cake. She wins we lose.
I guess then, that I have higher expectations, and requirments for delivering my vote to a politician than my contemporaries. I did, btw, see what the speech delivered up. I watched it several times trying to find whatever it is that has so many more or less having open air, multiple orgasms. I’m not ignorant and caught all the subtle rhetoric directed at the Clintons (status quo and well deserved) and the establishment that breeds them. But you see, I’m starting from a belief that he’s also part of that same establishment and i’m looking for a sign that he’s deeper than that.. So, I see what it accomplished. My problem is that speeches, in and of themselves accomplish little that is tangible. They accomplish less when the problems and dangers we and the country are facing are so dire and pressing.
My life, my family’s lives, and our hopes for a safe and prosperous future are in serious danger. We (my family and many close to me) are experiencing profound changes and hardships with little that I see as hopeful on the near horizon. So, when a candidate appeals for my vote and plays upon my fears…and hopes, s/he better have something real to say to me, with real world solutions and a path out of this mess if they want my support. Your response almost leaves me feeling as if I’m asking for too much. My perceptions are my problem. But I’m just getting started in my demands of the next person I trust to lead this country, as I think we can all agree, we’ve been abused, all of us, for a long, long time now. I’m so far past settling for pretty words and lofty intonations that bear no resemblance to the real solutions and leadership that I’m now seeking.
I don’t expect all of my needs and questions to be addresed in a 15 minute speech. But this is how he communicates to me what his values are. What his plans are. And how he intends to implement those plans. The debates have done little as well, to inform me. That is partly the fault of our pathetic media culture, I know, but it’s his responsibility to use that time for my benefit. Not his, or the party’s or his donor’s benefit.
So where do I find the answers I seek? That was more my question to you. You basically said that I missed it. Well, I didn’t blink. If the answers were in there they must have flown by in a nanosecond for me to have missed them.
Peace
He may be all that. My problem is that he’s not yet given me a reason to believe that he’s any less useless than the last crop of useless firebreathers.
Yup. 17 minutes I’d love to have back. Politics as usual, a guy claiming to be the agent of change when his voting record is so close to the people he’s calling status quo that you couldn’t drive a sheet of paper betweent them with a jackhammer.
Yawn.
If this is all it takes to electrify americans, all the more reason to get the hell out.
Obama is pro-choice. He opposed the war from the beginning. He voted against the bankruptcy bill. I’m posting the link to his issues page. See if you can tolerate his views keeping in mind this man is trying to build a left leaning consensus in a very flawed democratic country.
His campaign needs the support of all free thinking American people that care about the society they live in- that would be us, that would be you. Come on Super give him a chance here is the link:
Obama Issues Page
Supersoling, I wanted to point you to my earlier post, Why I’m Supporting Obama, because I’m NOT supporting him because of his oratory skills, but on the basis of his very consistent past record, and his judgment, as shown by his early opposition to the war.
I think his oratory skills are so good that some people think that’s all there is to them, and deride the seeming lemmnigs they perceive following him for nothing other than that.
But there’s a lot of depth below the speeches, in terms of experience. I hope you’ll take a look.
Actually, from what I’ve seen, Obama’s “oratory skills” aren’t all that. I could find a dozen as good or better any Sunday morning just in Houston – and that’s without leaving the pulpits. Let me audition congregations and I’d bet I could get that number up into the hundreds by Sunday dinner.
Anyone who’s familiar with the Black church will recognize instantly that Obama has picked up the cadence and voice from two hundred plus years of black preaching, borrowing heavily in style and presentation from MLK, Bill Lawson, and dozens of others.
It’s just that this time, the white folks are hearing and feeling it.
Credit where credit’s due, he’s a worthy successor and does it well. Now if only he were saying something new…..
If he were saying something new he’d be drawn and quartered in the press. A Black candidate has to reassure Whites before he can lead them into new territory – he doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt that a White candidate gets. No kvetching here, just pointing out the fact that Obama isn’t at liberty to get innovative yet – he has to win before he can start proposing revolutionary ideas. No if he sweeps in a 60+ member Senate then the sky’s the limit, and with Barack I think this is a distinct possibility, but he won’t get there by proposing untested theories that can be killed with a thousand paper cuts.
First things first – when people buy the dream they’re much more likely to subsequently accept the details…
Very well said.
I think that’s a cop out. Nuts and bolts policy goals and enactment paths are plenty safe to articulate. In fact, I’d bet that the majority of voters and potential voters are starved for that kind of red meat. Anyone can articulate a dream. And unfortunately, too many Americans have gotten used to falling for and settling for empty dreams and false promises. Something that the democrats of the 06 midterms crafted to perfection and made an art out of. They promised all kinds of things. I personally, fell for it one last time because I want the Bush criminals investigated and prosecuted. What’s happened since all thje promises were made, Oscar? An appointed republican, so called independent investigator, Patrick fitzgerald, got a minor conviction on Libby, who’s sentence was commuted or pardoned anyway.
So pardon me for demanding that potential democratic presidents give me something tangible to believe in, other than more empty dreams and promises. This voter is no blind follower and your last line,
“when people buy the dream , they’re much more likely to subsequently (accept) the details”, insults my intelligence as a thinking man able to make good decisions based on real information, not just accepting another politician’s word or dream. Least of all another empt y attempt to see my vote down the river.
I suspect Obama would feel fortunate that you’re not on his pr and public outreach teams.
Supersoling:
It’s the age of the Internet. Obama gets that. His policy positions and specific proposals are posted for all to see.
Most people aren’t interested in specifics, which is why he focuses on the bigger themes in his speeches.
But it’s not like he doesn’t HAVE any.
And he’s got a longer record of legislation written and supported than Clinton.
I don’t care if you or anyone has a different horse you’re pulling for in the race. But to complain that someone doesn’t have positions, when he obviously does, makes me wonder how serious you are about your complaint.
His positions are all there for you to see, if you really are interested.
His issues page is here. Set aside a few hours.
here’s Hillary Clinton’s and John Edwards’.
We both have a responsibility in this. I need to be educated about his positions and his record, and he needs to articulate them to me He’s not really doing it. That’s my complaint. My opinions of him aren’t baseless. And I thought it was clear that I don’t support any of them. But I have payed attention over the last years that he’s been in the senate and I’ve payed attention to the opinions of posters here who are familiar with him from Illinois, like Kahli.
I’ll leave it at that and do some more homework at his page that BooMan links below and at the Us Senate site
I haven’t any links to support my point, but I’ve read that most voters make their decisions based primarily on personality and secondarily on issues. A leader rarely leads as a policy wonk. A leader must capture people’s imaginations before s/he can get them to agree with his/her policies and solutions to problems.
Having said that, I will add that I and most of my extended family are concerned about Obama’s lack of emphasis on policy s but have more serious worries about the two other candidates besides Obama. None of us has made a decision yet, but time’s awasting since we all live in Super Tuesday states. We’re tending towards the position that the country needs inspired leadership foremost. And we are taking a leap of faith that Obama will not let us down on the policy side.
He’s got a solidly liberal record of legislation that expanded healthcare, curtailed lobbyists influence on campaigns, helped protect the innocent from death row, etc.
Most commentators have noted there’s only a hair’s difference, platformwise, between Obama, Edwards, and Clinton. So this time, it really does come down to, who can lead, who can produce the greater turnout, who has the best judgment.
I didn’t mean to imply he hadn’t a credible record. But he isn’t emphasizing his record, so I feel we are lacking in details.
He’s less of a known quantity than the other two, especially Hillary, and perhaps that’s a good thing. He’s not as locked into past positions. It’s always something of a leap of faith when you vote for someone, because no one, even the candidate, truly knows what they will face and how they will deal with it.
His wife emphasizes his record. If he talks about it, it sounds like bragging, so he doesn’t. But she makes sure people know.
I true believer I’m not. My dodg is not running.
But one needs to recognize there’s a wave here.
Something is happening.
You have Ted Kennedy (D-MA) the “liberal lion” endorsing Obama, to be announced tomorrow and the next day Gov.Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS) the next day.
…Being a winner, with a strong message, is what caused the upswing of support for Obama in South Carolina.
I can’t agree. His “message” must be lost upon me, I have yet to see anything that clearly separates him from centrist Democrats. His win was as much a product of the anti-Hillary backlash as anything that he himself has done.
I will continue to support Edwards until such time as he decides to leave the race. He is the only one that has said anything that resonates, the only one that has made the usual and customary calls for change.
At first, Edwards resonated with us. But every time we hear him, it is the same message, the same details, the same anecdotes, the same phrases. After the last debate, spouse turned and said, “I’m getting tired of hearing this. It’s like a broken record. His responses are the same thing regardless of the question.” Even though Edwards seems more progressive to us, we find no indication of fresh thought when he responds. Don’t mean this as a bash; we admire him. But he isn’t wearing well in our household.
I am really, really, trying to understand why some folks think that Obama is DLC 2.0–especially if they support Billary, but I digress.
I’m at a loss, I really am. I think he’s a fantastic candidate–not a perfect one, but someone I can actually support wholeheartedly.
He can organize. He is bringing tons of people into the party. Why is that discounted? Is it somehow suspect?
Further, Obama can communicate and connect.
Why is that a bad thing?
We have sucked at the narrative for YEARS. He gets it. And he delivers.
But what specifically do people want to hear? “Single payer now?” He is just now changing the political narrative that 80% of Americans have been conditioned to accept on face value. That narrative will not be changed overnight. I think it’s WONDERFUL that he appeals to patriotism by using progressive values. He’s connecting. It’s a start. But you can’t eat the entire cake at one sitting–it starts with a slice.
Does his background not inspire confidence? Do you think he’s insincere?
I’m just trying to understand, I honestly am. Yes, I’m a supporter and a passionate one, but I’m just trying to understand why he’s slandered as being just like Billary–or just like John Edwards (save for his NAFTA stance, which was an easy vote for him because the business types were hurting, too) six years ago.
In one word? Ignorance. Most people just haven’t delved into Obama’s record.
To the few who have and disapprove, you’re welcome to your opinions. But most people hold opinions based on stuff others have said, rather than their own research.
I wasn’t impressed with Obama until I dug in for myself. Then I realized wow, I really can support this guy, and have, ever since.
Nice way to narrow my opinions down to ignorance. It occurs to me that it is the religeous fervor as well as the pidgeon holing of those who find him seriously lacking in substance as “ignorant” that pushes some further away.
If I want an empty messiah I’ll read up on scientology and Hubbard.
But why do you see him as an empty messiah? There’s something about him that’s ringing alarm bells with you, and I’m just trying to understand what they are.
I may not agree with you, but I am trying to understand what it is. It’s like the man is Evan Bayh or something and I don’t get it.
I’m not calling you “ignorant.” But I too was once ignorant of his positions, and therefore pretty unethusiastic about him.
That changed when I learned there was real depth and substance in his background. It might change for you too.
I do believe you can only make an informed decision in the presence, not absence, of information.
Seen the recent Obama endorsement by the Gitmo defense lawyers? Usually endorsements roll off like water on a duck’s back, but this one was impressive, especially the reasoning behind it.
I just read that letter. It’s a damned good one, and truth be told, I didn’t know the degree of his leadership on that issue.