BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The Race for the White House 2008

 
  

Page: 12(3)45678

 
 
PatrickMM
01:04 / 29.02.08
So Obama will have a Democratic Congress and Senate that are more progressive than they've been in ages, and he'll have a revitalized party as a source of a new generation of Democratic politicians.

But, this is the same Democratic congress that's just rolled over and did whatever Bush wanted them to do. They were elected to stop the war in Iraq and we wound up sending more troops in there. My fear is that even if they do have a majority and Obama is elected, he'll try to 'compromise,' and wind up making too many concessions. And, I don't think any Democrat is going to pull out of Iraq very quickly, not wanting to be the one to 'lose the war.'

Of course, a smart candidate would make the point it was never a war to begin with, and we don't even know what the hell 'victory' is now. But, as long as Republicans control the dialogue, that won't happen. That said, Obama telling McCain that the only reason Al Qaida is in Iraq is because he put them there was pretty sweet.
 
 
Peach Pie
16:41 / 02.03.08
That's true, but Edwards, thankfully, is never going to be president

You mean to suggest there's something about Mr Edwards that you find... less than delightful?
 
 
wicker woman
09:38 / 03.03.08
Of course, it's entirely possible Clinton holds those states.

That may not matter so much. Current wisdom says Clinton may hold Ohio, but if she does win Texas, it's not going to be by any more than a squeaker. The problem being, it would only be a 'victory' in the sense that she got more votes. But delegates in Texas are awarded by district, and right now Obama apparently has a pretty sizable lead in those districts that have the most delegates to give away.
 
 
Anna de Logardiere
13:53 / 07.03.08
So a little follow up: what do you count as a squeaker icicle?
 
 
Tsuga
19:07 / 07.03.08
After all the news of Hilary Clinton's big win, it looks as though Obama may have won the delegate count. This race dragging on is not very good for the democratic party in the broader race.
 
 
Anna de Logardiere
21:42 / 07.03.08
Even the delegate counting process is stupid in the US. If only this was a little surprising.
 
 
grant
17:42 / 19.03.08
Jesus... Huckabee... Huckabee is defending Obama in the pastor kerfluffle.

And that speech that Obama gave that, for the first time I can remember, had a politician making, like grown up points about race and society in it? Wrote it himself. I wish that wasn't a big deal.
 
 
Dead Megatron
18:36 / 19.03.08
I thought it was an amazing speech, specially it he wrote himself (which I'm hearing for the first time now), one to make Abraham Lincoln proud. Since I first saw him in the 2004 Democrat Party Convention, i have admired Obama as a genious public speaker,and this proved it beyond any doubts. Pundits are already referring to the speech as "historical", and I happen to agree. Or, as Jon Stuart said last night: "Did a politician just talked to the American public on race issues as though they were adults?
 
 
Mug Chum
20:40 / 19.03.08
Indeed. But it was pretty sweet to have it voiced by someone on that type of spotlight to be spread around, even if it "shouldn't" be needed by now. I'm not sure yet on what points the media is giving emphasis (I read on Kos that Blitzer totally missed the point right after). On local news here, it was pretty much showed as no-nuance basic 1st grade "racism is bad mm'kay" stuff -- which really just says "then Obama played the race card during 40 minutes out of nowhere when his minister was proven to be a black maniac". A shame really, since we're still surrounded by people that says affirmative action is a racist take-over that's screwing over innocent super-hardworking competent white angels, people that get hot and bothered that they can't wear "white power" t-shirts when black people "get to racistly wear 'black power'", and think that the only reason black people constitutes most of poor people and only 1,3% of college students and that the reason most of prisoners are black is because "you know... they, you know, they... kinda are... you know... lazy criminal racists".

I'd suspect Huckabee is defending him just in case people go after his own sermons. And also his connections that don't necessarily say much about him (but that could be made something of a fuzz on the media -- although I think in his case it is a bit telling due to past statements and his overall stance).

I still don't understand the cable news fuzz. I mean, a key McCain ally (his "spiritual guide") is a man who called for the fucking destruction of the "false religion" of Islam (which seems more than telling of the overall U.S. foreign policy's tools and genocidal undertones). McCain spoke at Jerry Fawell's university when he started to become Bush's weird S&M lapdog to become 'presidential'. Most of right-wing connections and religious leaders are just unbelievably hate-spewing assholes to any normal person. It seemed to me at the time Republicans would want to stay the hell away from smearing on the basis of religion on this race since the house's glass was pretty thin and weak.

Out of all the fuzz in the campaign, Wright seemed the least of a controverse someone could throw against Obama on the type of material MSM likes to run on nowadays ("anti-american"? Is this 9-12-2001?), to the point I couldn't really figure out why (or even how) the brouhaha came to be in the first place (except for the likes of O'Reilly and Sean "white-resentment-turned-to-full-blown-bigotry" Hannity) -- seemed more absurd than even the flag pin debacle. Isn't what Wright said basically some of the same things MLK said? Isn't the "goddamn America" an updated version of Luke's "Woe to..."? And did he really said whites should be hung from trees? Or was that the typical William Kristol method of "lie loud and inject, correct and apologize quietly or not at all"?

It's really depressing that you can be worse-than-medieval and intolerant all you want, say the country is depraved and going to hell because of (insert nasty bigotry -- so really not much different from 'damn America'), bash gays (damn, even catholics came back as fair game now from the bottom of KKK's past), hold the most misogynist views, print out Clinton C.-.N.T. t-shirts, and even call for a fucking genocide all you want. Just don't do it in a 'black-ish scary' manner in a black church (which OF COURSE means that it's a segregated/separatist racist black supremacy church), and don't do it in a way that's actually more in key with the actual things that Christ says.

What am I saying? Of course Albino Christ ran around mounted on a dinosaur in Kansas (born and raised) whipping gay folks and using a katana on the many heads of Satan-Built-Out-of-All-Muslims and Jews. And occasionally 'liking' the inferior treacherous Jews so they'd be strategic allies against Islamic-Satan to set the ground for his future landing, and kinda trying to save the bastards Jews before he lands back and exterminate all the non-converted with lightsaber-crosses. And he liked torture so fucking much he begged to do it to him (and he took it like a man for years, and came back as an American warrior-leader that never surrenders).

(sorry, I had to vent on this one. Had an odious conversation last night about this where the other person said it's a racist church, since "it shouldn't have 'black' nor 'white' in it" and we should all be colorblind, "judge on the content of their character" and all other sterilized and conveniently safe talking-points. I hope to God he's a minority)

PS: I'm pretty sure we'll be seeing Frank Miller putting "I'm the goddamn America!" in one of his future works.
 
 
*
21:28 / 19.03.08
I wish he wouldn't have to use the "black anger" tactic that is usually used to dismiss discussion of racial injustice as irrational overemotionalism about (admittedly very bad, but let's be reasonable here, it was a long time ago) slavery. Especially when nowhere does he say "white anger" to refer to white hysteria about Them People Taking Our Jobs; it's "resentment." Anger can come out of nowhere, but resentment happens when someone does something you resent. Is it true, in the world that this speech came out of, that Black People Steal Jobs?

I mean, it was a very moving speech. I especially liked the part about recognizing that discrimination does not just exist in the imaginations of people of color. But that was kind of undermined by all the "black anger" and "it's in the past" and "America has changed" stuff.
 
 
grant
23:40 / 19.03.08
Wow - I had a nearly opposite reading of that. I took that as him very cleverly catching the grenade tossed by the right ("Oh, MLK won, now we have Affirmative Action, all that struggle is over because now everybody's equal and it's [expletive deleted] gone mad!") and deftly tossing it back.

I interpret this speech as saying: Yeah, the "civil rights era" is over. It was a time of struggle, and that struggle left a lot of people bitter and angry. That's what you hear in the barbershops, that's what you see in the pulpits, and that's why America still needs to talk about this race stuff.

However, I say that knowing I'm not really the intended audience here.


What interests me about Huckabee's response is that I think it shows he's not the intended audience either, in that (possibly through the virtue (heh) of being a Baptist minister) he already knows something about Wright's style of oratory AND something about the motives behind it. (Although, more cynically, Huckabee's response could also show that he's painfully aware of how pissed off a huge segment of churchgoing America became with Falwell, Robertson & Co saying America deserved 9-11 because of the perverts and God-haters.)
 
 
grant
15:40 / 21.03.08
Full video of Wright's sermon.

Haven't watched it yet.
 
 
Tsuga
10:41 / 22.03.08
Thanks grant. I did watch it, though I don't know if it was the full sermon. He is, like many preachers of large congregations, an engaging and charismatic speaker. I felt kind of like id.entity about it, though I'd have to say European settlers slaughtering or displacing aboriginals, enslaving blacks, and consistently enforcing oppression here was a very different kind of terrorism (kind of an apples/oranges of atrocity, if you will), and while the US will at times reap what it has sown like anyone, it has sown both good and bad. I mean, it really sows a lot, if you think about it. Makes for a very complicated harvest. I'm not at all justifying US injustice, but I think Obama was right when he said that Wright was over simplifying (from what I can tell so far). As for the statements of the Reverend Doctor Wright, I'd actually like to see more of his comments put back into context as in the above video.
It will be so interesting to see just where US policies would change and resources would be shifted if the democrats win. I'm more confident that Obama would move things farther away from the status quo than Clinton.
id., when you said:
I wish he wouldn't have to use the "black anger" tactic that is usually used to dismiss discussion of racial injustice as irrational overemotionalism about (admittedly very bad, but let's be reasonable here, it was a long time ago) slavery, I have to say I think it was addressed by Obama very well in his speech (transcript here), in statements such as:
"But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races."
I thought it was a great speech, and a real balancing act.
 
 
*
23:34 / 24.03.08
Roland Martin, writing at AndersonCooper360, gives a very basic synopsis of Wright's speech, which he's read in full. I followed Martin (whom I've never heard of before) to his blog, and found this link to Tim Wise (who I'm told deserves the title of white anti-racist activist if anyone does), saying:

The history of this nation for folks of color, was for generations, nothing less than an intergenerational hate crime, one in which 9/11s were woven into the fabric of everyday life... No, to some, the horror of 9/11 was not new. To some it was not on that day that "everything changed." To some, everything changed four hundred years ago, when that first ship landed at what would become Jamestown. To some, everything changed when their ancestors were forced into the hulls of slave ships at Goree Island and brought to a strange land as chattel. To some, everything changed when they were run out of Northern Mexico, only to watch it become the Southwest United States, thanks to a war of annihilation initiated by the U.S. government. To some, being on the receiving end of terrorism has been a way of life. Until recently it was absolutely normal in fact.

But white folks have a hard time hearing these simple truths... Indeed, what seems to bother white people more than anything, whether in the recent episode, or at any other time, is being confronted with the recognition that black people do not, by and large, see the world like we do; that black people, by and large, do not view America as white people view it. We are, in fact, shocked that this should be so, having come to believe, apparently, that the falsehoods to which we cling like a kidney patient clings to a dialysis machine, are equally shared by our darker-skinned compatriots.

This is what James Baldwin was talking about in his classic 1972 work, No Name in the Street, wherein he noted:

"White children, in the main, and whether they are rich or poor, grow up with a grasp of reality so feeble that they can very accurately be described as deluded--about themselves and the world they live in. White people have managed to get through their entire lifetimes in this euphoric state, but black people have not been so lucky: a black man who sees the world the way John Wayne, for example, sees it would not be an eccentric patriot, but a raving maniac."

And so we were shocked in 1987, when Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall declined to celebrate the bicentennial of the Constitution, because, as he noted, most of that history had been one of overt racism and injustice, and to his way of thinking, the only history worth celebrating had been that of the past three or four decades.

We were shocked to learn that black people actually believed that a white cop who was a documented racist might frame a black man; and we're shocked to learn that lots of black folks still perceive the U.S. as a racist nation--we're literally stunned that people who say they experience discrimination regularly (and who have the social science research to back them up) actually think that those experiences and that data might actually say something about the nation in which they reside. Imagine.

Whites are easily shocked by what we see and hear from Pastor Wright and Trinity Church, because what we see and hear so thoroughly challenges our understanding of who we are as a nation...

Whites refuse to remember (or perhaps have never learned) that which black folks cannot afford to forget.


So, yeah, I regret that it is politically necessary for Senator Obama to distance himself from Wright's comments even this much. I wish he would own them (except the AIDS conspiracy stuff) and make people sit up and take them seriously. Not the first black candidate for president with a serious shot at winning, perhaps; maybe the second or third.

Both these things are worth reading, if you have the time.
 
 
grant
14:39 / 28.03.08
Hillary can't catch a break.

Her own pastor has come out in support of Rev. Wright.

The Rev. Dean Snyder wrote, "The Rev. Jeremiah Wright is an outstanding church leader whom I have heard speak a number of times. He has served for decades as a profound voice for justice and inclusion in our society. He has been a vocal critic of the racism, sexism, and homophobia which still tarnish the American dream.

"To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church, which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence. Dr. Wright, a member of an integrated denomination, has been an agent of racial reconciliation while proclaiming perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear."


And so on.
 
 
Tsuga
01:24 / 13.04.08
Now it's Obama that can't catch a break. The big news today are some quotes taken from a talk that he made at a dinner last week in San Francisco:
You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or antitrade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
As true as these sentiments may be, they are absolutely not going to go over well with many voters in this country. I think Obama is going to have a really hard time digging his way out of this. Putting religion, guns, and intolerance together in a sentence is not the most artful of political moves.
 
 
Anna de Logardiere
10:25 / 13.04.08
He said that in a talk? Ouch, that's a little arrogant.
 
 
Automatic
10:19 / 15.04.08
It's a shame because he's absolutely right. Poor choice of language though.
 
 
Mug Chum
12:32 / 15.04.08
I'm not so sure those were poor choice of words at all, if even some of CNN's pundits have been saying they weren't polemic at all (remembering CNN is one of the goddawful channels on the loop of these non-issue issues every week: "he is prissy when bowling", he smokes, no flag pin, Wright turning into anchor of news channels, he ordered an orange juice etc). It seemed like a good key for Clinton to pound on with the "he can't win" - as "the elitist" - since Kerry and Gore went down that way on the GE (so somehow she turned into a shot/beer drinking gun lover last weekend, even if she's always seem to be hated by conservatives for representing the "latte-drinking secular anti-gun UN sanfrancisco-type").

And even the folks Hillary gives speeches to gave a loud heckling "No!" at Clinton's attempt of using "bitter" as political hay, basically saying "we are indeed bitter and pissed". So it seems there's nothing there for her on this particular bit. Cable news creating narratives are some strange fuckers.

In other news, Mccain's glorious american ass still farts american bald eagles, Obama said he would immediatly review potential crimes inside the Bush administration, and William Krystol wrote on the New York Times that Barack is Karl Marx.
 
 
Slim
03:08 / 16.04.08
Obama tried to express sympathy for members of the working class who have been left behind by today's economy and instead made a sweeping generalization that likened people from small towns in Pennsylvania to angry, gun-toting bigots. Darrell Rivers/Natalia is exactly right- it was arrogant and Obama deserves to be criticized for his remark.
 
 
grant
18:12 / 16.04.08
Obama: picked by The Boss.
 
 
Mug Chum
20:22 / 16.04.08
2008 Obama: "...bitter..."

1995 Hillary: "Screw 'em!"

Soundbite politics... Maybe she can still go after Billy Joel and John Mellencamp while Obama does the "sleeves pulled up" bit as he talks to folks with Bruce on his side...
 
 
Tsuga
01:54 / 17.04.08
I've been surprised at how little flack Obama has caught from his remarks. I mean, it's been beaten to death a bit, but I've heard many people defending him, many more than I would have expected, anyway. It's really excited the conservatives, Limbaugh is in an orgasmic frenzy of self-satisfaction. But, then again, he always is.


There was a democratic debate tonight, I missed it (with no television service), I'd like to hear what anyone thought of it who saw it. ABC and the Washington Post have a new poll out that shows Obama's numbers rising in many ways; but this was done, I believe, right before the "elitist" story broke earlier this week.
From ABC's website:
Likely Democratic voters, 51-41 percent, say they want Obama to win the nomination — his biggest advantage to date. Obama has also cleared the "electability" hurdle in Democratic minds — 62 percent say he is more likely to win than Clinton.

In more bad news for Clinton, 58 percent of Americans polled said she is not honest and trustworthy. Obama beats her on this attribute by a 23-point margin.
 
 
Tsuga
22:29 / 06.10.08
I suppose it may be a good time to resurrect this thread to discuss broader topics than the Republican ticket.
In the mail today, I received a dvd from "The Clarion Fund"(warning, link to apparent right-wing nutbag site). The dvd was a copy of a movie called Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, impressively a winner of "Best Feature Film" at the 2005 Liberty Festival and Special Jury Award at the Houston Worldfest 2006 International Film Festival. Even the Wikipedia article is kind of offensive, I'm sure there are some edit wars going on there. I wonder if soon after I'll get something in the mail reminding me what Barack Obama's middle name is. God, it's fun living in a swing state.
 
 
grant
02:19 / 07.10.08
Hey, you got one of those?

The weekend after they came out in Virginia, someone squirted pepper spray into a mosque during services.

Odd thing - the only publicly-listed member of the Clarion Fund is an attorney in New York (their "registered agent") who actually made a substantial donation to the Clinton campaign.
 
 
Tsuga
02:41 / 07.10.08
From a cursory search it appears that the creators are linked to a conservative Jewish organization. Maybe very conservative.
Which is whatever, but too bad people have to stake out opposing ends of the same field. This is obviously an attempt to influence the vote through scare-tactics, a tried and true method, and it kind of pisses me off, except I know that some dumbass liberals will do the same thing, and I sympathize with them. Goddammit though, that ignorant shit. "As seen on CNN and Fox News by more than 20 million viewers worldwide"! Well, then. I've got to watch it. I'm sure if any of you want to subject yourself you can find this crap online. Why bother though, honestly?
I'm sorry, I realize that this is not insightful or thoughtful, I'm uncharacteristically drinking on a weeknight, and I've got to go to bed, but I want to say something. Forgive me.
 
 
wicker woman
05:24 / 07.10.08
I tried watching it, and could only get through about the first 25 minutes. It starts off with the standard 'This film isn't about all Muslims, just the bad ones' that seems to have become standard issue for inoculating oneself against probably accurate accusations of xenophobia.

The remainder of it, at least the portion I watched, is a series of video clips of scary, scary people making scary, scary salutes. Not exactly the most in-depth exploration in the world.
 
 
wicker woman
05:58 / 07.10.08
Raphael Shore, the producer of Obsession, when asked by USA Today if it isn't true that suicide bombings in Israel get plenty of media coverage while regular Israeli military excursions into Palestinian refugee camps, resulting in civilian injuries and fatalities and property destruction receive close to none, had this to say:

"There's a common perception that's been promoted by the media that is often referred to as "moral equivalency". That means that people are being asked to relate to victims on either side of the Palestinian - Israeli conflict as equally tragic. While the loss of any life is very tragic, one needs to make a very distinct moral difference between victims of terror and victims of those who are trying to protect against terror. IN other words, if the Palestinians were not engaged in an act of terror war that has resulted in about 18,000 terror attacks in the last 2 1/2 years, then Israel would not have had to respond in defense, and there would be no Palestinian casualties.

link
 
 
grant
11:17 / 08.10.08
So, over the weekend, at a rally in Clearwater (Hello, Scientologists!), Palin was talking up Obama's ties to radical Bill Ayers, when some people in the crowd started shouting, "Kill him!"

Now they're being investigated by the Secret Service.
 
 
mashedcat
19:11 / 08.10.08
any `Nadarites` out there?
 
 
grant
20:46 / 08.10.08
Palm Beach County once again prepares to screw it up for the rest of the U.S.

Tragic on many levels.
 
 
dark horse
22:02 / 08.10.08
what is a nadarite?
 
 
Mr Tricks
22:25 / 08.10.08
someone who voted for Ralph Nader?
According to our pal wikipedia, the novel "Eon" (by Greg Bear)includes a depiction of a future group called the "Naderites" who follow Ralph Nader's humanistic teachings.
 
 
wicker woman
07:30 / 09.10.08
Even if nothing else, Obama's campaign does not miss easy opportunities.

Racist or not (I personally don't think it was, more likely just a stupid off-the-cuff dismissive remark), "that one" is looking increasingly like a huge gaffe for McCain.

Combined with their attempts to make it look like Obama sleeps with Willie... sorry, William Ayers not getting much traction in the press, things aren't looking good in McCain Land.
 
 
FinderWolf
15:04 / 09.10.08
A few Republicans I know who are not Rabid Foaming At The Mouth Convservatives and have a level head about them, are basically saying 'It's over. Unless something shocking happens in the next month that gives McCain an edge, it's over and Obama will be the next President.' Many conservative commentators seem to feel the same. The dire economy and an unpopular, Republican-started war, the fact that McCain is part of the very unpopular incumbent party in the White House, historically point to a Democratic victory (especially given Obama's strong performance in the 2nd debate the other night). Add to that a huge voter registration turnout in young people, almost unprecedented in these numbers. Many people I know have basically said "Obama is the successor to Bill Clinton, and he's just as intelligent and as good of a leader, without [hopefully] the sexual or obsessive hangups... and his time has come."

Here's hoping.
 
  

Page: 12(3)45678

 
  
Add Your Reply