Today on Blogcritics
Home » Obama’s Race Problem

Obama’s Race Problem

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Following the two primary races yesterday in Indiana and North Carolina, it's clearly the beginning of the end for Clinton's "comeback kid" primary run. She needed both states. The "solidly in the tank for Obama" media covered the races yesterday with the irrational exuberance that we've all come to expect of them.

CNN reported on their front page today that "Obama sweeps N.C.; Clinton ekes out Indiana," when in reality the percentage difference between the two races was five percentage points (Indiana: 51% to 49%, North Carolina: 56% to 42%). Considering that Obama won primarily because of upscale and black voters in NC, while Clinton dominated in the rural areas, taking 42% of the total vote, it's hard to understand how CNN could use the term "sweep." Add to that the expectation that he would potentially win both states (Indiana by his own reckoning, was the tie-breaker), and was originally supposed to win by double digit percentage in North Carolina, a lead that wound up actually only being 6%, this is hardly the showing that his campaign really expected, and well short of a sweep. That said, regardless of how the win was colored by the media, barring any additional drama, Obama is now well on his way to face McCain in the General.

It's On!While the race with Clinton is all but over at this point, it's left the Democratic party with a candidate who is badly beaten and bruised. Many Democrats are questioning the wisdom of the vote results. Many feel that while Obama has rallied Democratic primary voters, he's also irreparably damaged his candidacy in the general.  Moreover, it's the divisive way that Obama won that generates concern among general election voters.

Obama, the trans-racial and post-partisan candidate, took fully 91% of the African American vote in North Carolina. His only chance of winning Indiana was by sweeping Gary, a heavily African American city. Pro-Obama pundits (are there any other kind?) were quick to explain away this clear voting along racial lines, suggesting that blacks did vote for Clinton until she offended them with a string of possibly racial comments made by her husband, as well as with some of the negative attacks made by her campaign. Back here in reality land, the true story is quite the opposite. Blacks didn't respect Obama, didn't think he could win. In fact, they even questioned his "blackness." Once the media got the word out that whites could take Obama seriously, that he could win the primary, and after getting a taste of Obamamania, African Americans all got in line behind him and started voting.

Think I am a racist for suggesting that? Fine with me. But whether or not this author is racist (a charge I'd reject; being honest about race doesn't equal being racist), doesn't change the racial nature of the votes in virtually every recent primary state. Sure, whites also voted for Obama, but the point is, how many blacks voted for Clinton? As a result of voting solidly along racial lines in the last several primary races, the black vote, in conjunction with the Wright controversy and comments made by Obama's wife, have solidified Obama in the minds of many Americans as the "Black Candidate."

In terms of primary politics, this is all fine and good. Polls suggest that at least some Democrats who supported Hillary could not bring themselves to vote for her competitor. I'm willing to take these polls with several grains of salt. I think Democrats, regardless of who they supported in the primary, will vote for the Democratic candidate mainly because they can't and won't bring themselves to vote for a so-called George Bush Republican (a label that is absurd and misapplied in McCain's case). The problem Obama has is with middle of the road swing voters.

For voters who are not registered Democrats, especially independent voters who are still undecided, watching this voting along racial lines is a major turnoff. Seeing the gyrations of the media, trying to explain away any indication of racial divide, trying to sweep any hint of controversy under the rug, stinks to high heaven. Independents are independent for a reason – they don't view themselves as part of a political faction, don't vote along racial lines, and don't drink the Obama Kool-Aid that the media is offering.

If we lay all three candidates out on a flat plane relative to their political position, McCain is on the right, but fairly close to the center. Clinton is on the left, but also fairly close to the center. Obama is on the extreme left, carrying baggage of racial division to boot. Independents who supported Clinton may indeed find more in common with McCain on many issues. Then, add in this racial dimension, his wife's comments, the Wright issue, his various "typical" and "bitter" comments about whites, and you have a formula that turns off many voters who aren't already fully invested in Obama.

Many will chastise the premise of this article, or claim that it's proof of a racist populace (or at least author). I think the truth is much more boring. I suspect that many voters, like me, simply don't care about race. So when an election becomes driven (at least in part) by race, it feels pedantic. It certainly doesn't make one feel like this is a different kind of politics. Independents, at least some of them, may just decide that they don't want any part of what has become a mob mentality in support of Obama.

Obama may still become the next President of the United States. Should McCain stumble badly, or prove to be a lackluster candidate against Obama's message for hope, it's very possible that the GOP will be in the wilderness for at least four years. However, McCain isn't someone to be underestimated. Lackluster isn't a term that usually describes him. And given the current misleading attempts to color McCain as a mere continuation of the Bush Administration, a claim easily disprovable, one wonders what the real strategy of the Left in the General is. If this is the strategy, it's not a good one.

While conventional wisdom states that McCain would prefer to run against Clinton than Obama, I have a feeling that McCain is eager to match wits with the Illinois Senator. Thanks to the damage that's been wrought as a result of this messy and divisive Democratic primary process, I like the GOP's chances.

Powered by

About The Obnoxious American

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    OA, your math is a little creative – to what end, I’m not clear on.

    A 5% difference between the winning percentages in the two races is utterly meaningless considering they were, well, two separate races and had different winners.

    More egregiously, the victory margin for Obama in NC was not 6%, it was 14%.

    Finally, Clinton showing strongly in rural areas doesn’t mean squat if the majority of the electorate is urban.

  • The Obnoxious American

    Doc,

    The point is, it’s a slim majority. Not a sweep by any stretch. Agreed that the difference in their vote counts was 14%, but I think you get my point in terms of the way each race was characterized side by side. The difference seperating each winner was 5%, yet one race was an “eke by,” the other a sweep. Not so much…

  • http://www.maskedmoviesnobs.com El Bicho

    how did NC go from 14% to 6% for Obama? and I am not sure what channels you watch, but all I heard and read was that Hillary was supposed to win IN

  • ProgressiveNotLiberal

    Equal time demands that you give the same irrational interpretations to women and racists voting for Hillary. It is only fair now isn’t it?

  • Doug Hunter

    PNL,

    When whites are racist enough to vote 90+% on skin color then we can devote equal time to exposing that.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Obnox, in terms of elections, especially two-way races, 51-49 is a squeak. It’s roughly the margin by which Bush beat Kerry.

    56-42 is a thumping win by any standards. Transposed (for the sake of argument) to a presidential race, it would give the winner a landslide victory.

    Now, it remains to be seen whether the white cohort that backed Hillary more strongly will be persuaded to vote for Obama in the general. I think most of them will. After all, remember all those right-wing Republicans (including, notably, Arch Conservative on this site) who a couple of months ago were swearing in their own blood that they’d never vote for McCain in a million years if he won the nomination… and have now shuffled meekly into line, grumbling to themselves?

    But that really isn’t – or shouldn’t be – Obama’s major worry. His biggest concern, now that the primary season is (thank goodness!) almost over, is that most of the states he won usually lean Republican. If he can win over a few of those to the blue team, he’ll be OK in November, but it won’t be at all easy.

    BTW, not sure what happened to the other 2% of the vote in NC. Presumably it went to write-ins, minor candidates or withdrawees whose names were still on the ballot. But it does point up another interesting statistic: Clinton performed 9 percentage points more poorly in NC than in IN, whereas Obama was only down 7 points in IN vs. NC. Make of that what you will.

  • Lee Richards

    I am not currently a huge fan of Obama but here are some observations and opinions:

    Republicans didn’t learn anything from nominating Bob Dole because “it was his turn.” A number of Republicans told me at the time it was a dumb way to try to win elections. McCain is Dole all over again.

    In Virginia, the Democrats are energized, the Republicans are slogging on. Unless there’s a big upset, red state VA will have 2 Democratic senators in January, and could go D for the president.

    Bush-Cheney have turned off many independents I talk to. Rightly or not, they perceive the Bush Republicans as having an “I got mine, screw you” attitude, and as shills for the religious right.

    A Democrat wins by running against Bush’s economy, Bush’s war, and Bush’s foreign policy blunders and domestic failures.

    I voted in a city council election yesterday and one of the election officials was talking loudly to one of his friends(that he greeted and called by name.) He wanted to talk about the Nov. elections and told his friend–and everyone else in hearing: “McCain’s the only one running. I sure ain’t voting for the Muslim”. He repeated this several times, laughing every time he said, “the Muslim.”

    The most interesting part is that his friend stopped talking to him and walked away, and another man said out loud, “Well, there’s a nice bit of lying and prejudice for you.”

    I think racism as a tactic will convince some who want to be convinced, but ultimately backfire because it makes a lot of decent people on all sides of the political spectrum sick.

  • Zedd

    Obnoxious

    I agree with you on the notion that Blacks were not sure about Obama, much like all of Americans. When he started to look more like a sure thing, Blacks supported him.

    However, I would venture to guess that the only thing that Hillary has got going for her right now is that she is White. If she were a Black women (same stump speeches and “experience”), the race would have been over a long time ago and we would be looking at a certain McCain Presidency.

    The Black vote is because Obama is the person who seems to be most capable of understanding the issues that affect Blacks in America. Go figure.

    Your math is off. You article would have been fine without the quibble about the margin. The numbers reflect what has been stated. Leave it alone.

  • Tom

    Obama will be the weaker candidate in the general election because of the swing states and independents. They are not impressed with Obamamania and will vote accordingly. Remember, this is a primary, and the prize is in November. If the superdelegates don’t nominate Hillary and the DNC doesn’t allow Florida and Michigan delegates to vote at the covention, the Repuplicans will win. Republican crossover voting is a Trojan horse and Wall Street money in Obama’s pocket will make it so. Wake up Dems, your being taken for a ride, again.

  • Doug Hunter

    “I think racism as a tactic will convince some who want to be convinced, but ultimately backfire because it makes a lot of decent people on all sides of the political spectrum sick.”

    I don’t know about that. It seems to work well, 91% of the black population can’t be wrong. I somehow doubt that sort of race bias makes you sick, perhaps you’re just one of the ones ‘who want to be convinced’. We’ll see if it backfires on Obama in November.

    As for the original article, unfortunately Obama can’t be the postracial candidate since by definition labelling him that means his race is still a factor. Ironically, if he weren’t the ‘postracial candidate’ he’d be more likely to be the postracial candidate. It will be an interesting election in any case. There are several racial factors at play. I can think of three off the top of my head.

    1) Black racial view and victim groupthink. This one has resulted in the 90+ percent wins amongst the black population for Obama. Unfortunately, blacks must think of themselves as black first and individuals second. The problem is that the black vote in the general election was never in question so this effect has already been factored into politics. It’s a question of turnout how much this will matter.

    2)White racism. There is a percentage of the white population who, in the private confines of the voting booth, will not vote their ideology and will instead vote their race. Racism is alive and well and although it is a relatively small percentage of the electorate it will factor quite a bit into the election. The reason for it’s importance is that it has not been accounted for before because we’ve never had a black candidate before. A swing vote if I ever heard one.

    3) White guilt. This is why people feel the need to preface a statement remotely related to racial issues with their black friend connection (I fall victim as well and have sunk to mentioning my Puerto Rican wife before to prove my postracial merit) Colleges and corporations are where this runs rampant. A corporation can’t have a ‘black friend’ per se, but it can have a diversity program or office, the same goes for colleges. The news media is the corporate world and they desperately want Obama to be their ‘black friend’ to prove how they aren’t tainted by slavery and racism of the past. Colleges have done their job and years of diversity programs, orientations, and mandatory courses to promote white guilt have worked, adding more educated folks into Obama’s count. This effect is the big question mark awaiting us in November and I have no idea how it will play out.

    Overall, I think white guilt couple with high homogenous black turnout will trump white racism as far as the racial component goes. The question becomes whether or not the positive race effects for Obama can overcome his far left policy positions as opposed to a centrist like McCain. When you throw in the Trump card, Bush’s failures, I think we will end up having our first black president. Exactly 2,345,891 thinks could change between now and election though.

  • Zedd

    Doug,

    Perhaps I am off base on this one. I don’t think that people would hit a button in a private booth because of White guilt. I think that Obama is good. His message and manner resonnates. He is different and there is no time in history than now that we’ve needed different more.

  • Arch Conservative

    “Perhaps I am off base on this one. I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with people who would hit a button in a private booth because of White guilt. I think that Obama is god. Resistance is futile.”

    Gee Zedd..where to begin.

    You like the other Obama cultists seemed to have gotten lost amidst the audacity of bullshit and empty rhetoric. The general isn’t destined to be the Obama lovefest that the Dem primaries were where Barry got a pass on everything and was not called out on the carpet over his generalities and empty, meaningless, platitudes.

    It’s a new game. In the harsh, pale, light of day, Obama’s candidacy, like Bill Clinton’s penis in the presence of Hillary, is going to wilt to the point of complete impotency.

  • Zedd

    Arch,

    Oh geez, I wasn’t talking to people like you. Sorry. I miss-communicated. I don’t think you are capable of understanding what I was saying. I was actually talking to the reasonable (or reasoning) among us.

  • Robert L

    There is something very concerning about this election. It is great that the country in some regards has moved forward, allowing for a white women and a black man the opportunity to run for the highest office in the country. The concerning issue is that gender and race are the center of every ones mind. In a perfect world Obama would not be a viable candidate because he is racist. Oh, God how dear a white man call a black man a racist. Black liberation theology and KKK only have one difference and that is the color of the race running the organization, but ideologically they teach the superiority of one race over others. Obama is guilty of racism as a member of this religious following, even though twenty years later he denounces this pastor, very opportunistically, he still participated in that racist theology. White people are still racist because know one is calling him out on this fact. White guilt continues to plague the white community giving this man the opportunity to become president. But hopefully it is becoming apparent that whites may need to stick together. If whites voted in a block of 90% would that be ok. Hell no, it should not be.This is scary. Now it is apparent that whites are not the only racists out there, blacks have proven to be as racist as white. Thanks for your example.

  • Doug Hunter

    Zedd,

    True, it’s hard to say how people will react in the booth. I don’t attribute the entry of race into the contest to Obama, it’s more a reflection of the voting populace. Anyway, I won’t be voting for him because I disagree with his politics.

    People’s view on wealth redistribution depends greatly on whether they believe they’ll be the distributee or the distributor. I know where I’ll be…looking harder for loopholes.

  • Arch Conservative

    “Perhaps I am off base on this one. I don’t think that people would hit a button in a private booth because of White guilt. I think that Obama is good. His message and manner resonnates. He is different and there is no time in history than now that we’ve needed different more.”

    C’mon Zedd. His message resonates? Yeah it resonates with people who agree with him just like any other politician’s message resonates with those who agree with them. his message wasn’t handed down from god himself on stone tablets.

    He is diferent? So says you. There are millions of Americans who have not bought into the whole Saint Barry hoopla and view him (rightly so based on his Senate record) as nothing but a run of the mill leftist liberal who offers nothing but empty platitudes on the campaign trail and ultimately leftist ideology if elected. When you Obama cultists talk about Obama representing all Americans and bringing us all together what you’re really saying is the cult of Obama is the only thing that matters and everyone else can go to hell.

    Why don’t you just come out and say it insetad of trying to couch it in hollow, bullshit notions of unity? I’d respect you a lot more if you did. It’s what I do. I have no qualms about saying I don’t want to be “unified” with those who don’t share my views and that anyone whose views differ significantly from my own can drop dead for all I care.

    So can you and the other Barry Hussein cultists do us all a favor and cult the fucking bullshit? Obama is not a uniter. He is no savior. He’s nothing special. He’s just another guy that the left half of the country finds acceptable and the right half does not. The same goes for Mccain. He’s the flip side of the coin and I don’t even like him that much myself.

    In the end there probably will be some people in this nation who vote against Obama for no other reason than his race. There will also be people that vote FOR him for no other reason than his race.

    I will be voting against him because he is a leftist and his positions on the issues are generally the polar opposite of my own. As far as I’m concerned anything that keeps him out of the White House is fine with me.

  • zingzing

    archie: “the general isn’t destined to be the obama lovefest that the dem primaries were where barry got a pass on everything…”

    i dunno what primaries you have been watching… the dem primaries were bad enough for obama that even i, the liberal leftist (with the white guilt that apparently comes with it), have begun to doubt if i will vote for obama. i was surely in his corner when this thing started, but i’m not so much anymore.

    his lack of experience (he reminds me of edwards, whose “experience” seems to all be in campaigning,) does bother me. his decision to run his campaign just like any other political campaign (“politics of hope” my ass) has been a major turnoff.

    that said, the jeremiah wright thing has maybe gotten me back in his corner. he’s had to say some things because of it (the race speech, the fact that he was reluctant to give up on his friend even though it was damaging his political career,) that i found to show honesty and loyalty, two things you don’t often see in a real politician.

    the dem primaries have been rough on obama. all the dirty laundry has been out. it’s mccain who’s got some hell to go through yet.

  • Franco

    Why are white Americans afraid to speak truth to black Americans?

    Years of black Amreican scapegoating and charges of racism have intimidated whites to the point that they no longer speak out on issues concerning race and morality. The fear of publicly being labeled “racist” causes many whites to hold their tongues when they see things run amuck in the black community (yet black liberals are given virtual carte blanche to publicly spew all manner of invective at whites and/or black conservatives). This racial intimidation by black Americans prevents Americans from engaging in honest dialogue about race and serves the self-interests of self-appointed black “leaders” as the expense of the greater black American communities.

    Whenever there’s a racial issue in this country Jackson or Sharpton are on the airwaves to “blame whitey.”

    Whites should no longer fall prey to such black American psychological bullying”.

    White Americans need to stand up for truth with strength and patience. If we can find white people with courage, we can change this country

    What is courage? Well, I can tell you what courage is not: 1) Courage is not resenting blacks and complaining to your white friends behind closed doors. 2) It’s not tolerating black misconduct, and 3) Courage is not adopting the divisive, politically correct term “African American.”

    As for black Americans, they need to repudiate their “leaders” and let go of past grievances, lest they self-destruct.

    It will take decent whites and blacks to come together to live out the promise of Dr. King’s dream. Then, America will finally become the land of the free and the home of the brave!

  • Cindy D

    “Obama is on the extreme left…”

    If Obama is on the extreme left we would never know it. Nothing he does or says associates him with the extreme left. I would know about that, since I am on the extreme left.

  • Arch Conservative

    From your lips to god’s ears franco.

    Thanks for the shot of commopn sense.

    Obama recently got 91% of the black vote in NC and no one began screaming racism. You can bet that if any white candidate had gotten 91% of the white vote running against Obama in any state there would be screams of racism from every left wing loon and his mother. We ALL know this is true and we ALL know it’s a double standard. According to the left’s playbook, as a white person in America, you are not allowed to have an opinion on race relations or matters pertaining to race unless it is the formulated regurgitated standrad leftist view and anyone who dares deviate from this view is of course a hate mongering racist with a white robe hanging in their closet.

    “the dem primaries have been rough on obama. all the dirty laundry has been out. it’s mccain who’s got some hell to go through yet.”

    Don’t be so sure zing. If you think this Wright thing is going away or that if it’s brought up again but with no effect you’d better think again.

    If you think that people are not going to care in November that Barry’s wife said she never had a reason to be proud of this nation until her hubby became a contender for the white house then you’re mistaken.

    If you think people aren’t going to do their research and realize that Obama has a history of ducking votes or voting present more often than actually taking a stance on the issue or that when he actually does take a stance it’s the uber left stance then you need to wake up.

    The fact is that until the past few weeks Barry HAS been given a free pass. Once he wins the nomination the gloves are going to come off and he doesn’t seem like he’s the tye of guy that can take a real punch and keep on going.

  • Bennett

    Arch – White candidates garnered 100% of the white vote since George Washington was elected.

    Proves nothing.

  • Franco

    Cindy D,

    Is Rev Wright on the extreem left in “your book” of extreemists?

  • zingzing

    “The fact is that until the past few weeks Barry HAS been given a free pass. Once he wins the nomination the gloves are going to come off and he doesn’t seem like he’s the tye of guy that can take a real punch and keep on going.”

    i’m sure there will be the usual backstabbing and mudslinging. and maybe obama will crumble under the pressure.

    at the same time, mccain is going to have to get his temper under control. and the guy has had a much longer political career, making enemies on both the left and the right. and he’s got all the charm of a rotten log. and he’s got bush hanging on his neck. he’s also gotten lazy with all his down-time following his early victory.

    inconsequential remarks from mrs. obama and the crazed ramblings of a preacher don’t mean much to me. as i said, however, the lack of experience is bothersome.

  • Cindy D

    Franco,

    Our country is indeed still structured to the disadvantage of certain people–blacks being among these. Those who had the power, and therefore those who structured this country, did so with great bias toward protecting members of the elite group to which they belonged. They happened to be land-owners, wealthy, white and male.

    It is no secret that we have been struggling in our country to overturn the effects of this–emancipation of slaves, suffrage, etc., etc. These things are to our credit.

    To believe that we have corrected all the effects of the initial structuring is wrong. There has been, and is, a built in bias against certain members of our society (blacks included). There still is and will be, until the imbalance in opportunity and wealth is changed.

    That will take some doing, since the system is bias toward. It has nothing to do with guilt and everything to do with solidarity. Could you conceive of such a notion? Whites who actually identify with blacks? Try to stretch your mind around that idea instead of immediately attacking it.

  • Lee Richards

    When you look at the “experience” that’s been in power, the lack of it among candidates doesn’t bother me at all.

    We will be better off without that kind of experience at the helm. At this point, we could use originality and innovation rather than more business-as-usual.

    None of the candidates has any experience at being POTUS. I value intelligence, character, integrity, honesty, and philosophy of government more than some nebulous and questionable experience on a candidate’s resume.

  • Franco

    #24 — Cindy D

    Our country is indeed still structured to the disadvantage of certain people–blacks being among these. Those who had the power, and therefore those who structured this country, did so with great bias toward protecting members of the elite group to which they belonged. They happened to be land-owners, wealthy, white and male.

    Legal barriers are gone Cindy D, and blacks committed to success do succeed. The biggest barrier for black Americans is no longer the law, white Americans, or black leaders. It is black Americans themselves.

    Black Americans must take responsibly for their own character and solve the problems in their own community. Seventy percent of black children born out of wedlock is unacceptable. Celebration of drugs and perverse sex in rap music must be rejected. Black American participation in the labor force is roughly one-third less than that of Latinos and Asians. Black Americans have by far the lowest rate of two-parent families in Southern California. Black Americans account for less than 10 percent of Los Angeles County’s children, but fully half its foster children. Black American women are three times as likely to be dependent on welfare than Latinos or Asians and nearly two times as likely to give birth to drug-addicted babies.

    These are alaming accounts and it is horrably sad and it needs to change, and until black American outward blame is arrested and a courageous inward awakening takes its place, blacks will not take responsibly for it that that will continue to create more victims, and the weaker they became, the more they look for scapegoats (i.e., the “evil white man”) to explain away their failures. It is a destructive downward spiral that castrates empowerment.

    The easy path of hatred – whether it be through adherence to the liberal Democratic Party that enables excuses for the lack of black character, celebration of anti-American and racist assaults like Kwanzaa, or blaming their own failings on whites – must end, because at the end of the day, only their own lack of character will condemn them.

    Black Americans need black leaders that pull no punches in calling on the black community (especially the men) to provide the impetus in reversing the trend toward social dysfunction and tough prescription for overcoming the “victimhood” that permeates the mindset of blacks today.

    There is hope and a drive in many blacks to take control of their lives and do right by their families and thus communities. This is evident in the clear rejection in recent years of Jesse Jackson and others who exist only because of black weakness and anger.

    “There can be no doubt that racial paternalism and its unintended consequences can be as poisonous and pernicious as any other form of discrimination. So-called “benign” discrimination teaches many that because of chronic and apparently immutable handicaps, minorities cannot compete with them without their patronizing indulgence.

    Inevitably, such programs engender attitudes of superiority or, alternatively, provoke resentment among those who believe that they have been wronged by the government’s use of race. These programs stamp minorities with a badge of inferiority and may cause them to develop dependencies or to adopt an attitude that they are “entitled” to preferences.”
    Justice Clarence Thomas

    You say………“It has nothing to do with guilt and everything to do with solidarity. Could you conceive of such a notion? Whites who actually identify with blacks? Try to stretch your mind around that idea instead of immediately attacking it.

    I say……Responsibility not excuses. Character, not hatred. That is the Dr. King dream. My mind has been stretch around this dream all my life. I only wish and hope you will join me.

  • Arch Conservative

    “inconsequential remarks from mrs. obama”

    So a potential first lady saying she has never in her life been proud of her nation is inconsequential to you?

    I can assure you that there are millions who will not find this “inconsequential” this fall.

  • Doug Hunter

    “White candidates garnered 100% of the white vote since George Washington was elected. Proves nothing.” – Bennett

    Are you really that blind? The 91% of the vote Obama is getting from blacks, especially when his policy positions are so similiar, mean that demographic is voting on skin color.

    Liberals seem to have some cognitive dissonance on this. When pressed with the FACTS about racist voting among democrats you bring up past injustices which undermines your entire point. I share nothing with slaveholders from the 1700’s and 1800’s in America other than skin color. If you want to hold me responsible for their actions then you’re the one with the problem as it regards to race.

  • Arch Conservative

    Appreciate the common sense Doug. That virtue seems to be lacking amongst our leftist counterparts around here.

    Can you imagine the screams of racism from the left if 91% of all whites were to vote for Mccain this fall?

    It’s no great secret but libs will do anything to deny a double standard exists.

  • Franco

    “I share nothing with slaveholders from the 1700’s and 1800’s in America other than skin color. If you want to hold me responsible for their actions then you’re the one with the problem as it regards to race.”

    Spoken for truth!

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I don’t think Bennett was talking about past injustices, just pointing out the well-known logical caution that correlation does not equal causation. 100% of whites have voted for white candidates in the past because those have been the only available candidates.

    That said, it’s probably true that Obama got 91% of the black vote because of his skin color. However, I would venture to remark that this was in North Carolina. In a state where the African-American population has very valid historical reasons for not trusting a white candidate further than he/she can be thrown, a viable black candidate for president is going to look a lot more attractive.

    And Arch, 91% of whites aren’t going to vote for McCain, so that’s a moot point. I bet he gets over 50% of the white vote though. And Obama won’t get anything like 91% of the black vote nationally, though I bet it’ll be more than 50%.

  • Franco

    For white Americans or any Americans, most come from ancestors who weren’t even in this country at the time of slavery.

    America has granted every wish of black Americans. It has made government the head of the black family; it has integrated the schools and neighborhoods; it has given blacks welfare and affirmative action; it has even apologized through Bill Clinton. There is simply nothing else that America can or should do. Blacks should feel fortunate to be citizens of this country. They are blessed, not enslaved, and those who say otherwise are enslaved only by their own hatred.

    IMO, and in the opinion of many black Americans, this victimhood, anger, and rage mentality does not help black Americans respect themselves as a people, it dose not help them respect others, and it dose not help others respect them. What I mean by respect is obvious, what I mean by help is self-help and empowerment, education, employment, and entrepreneurial development and all of these combined as fundamental energies devoted in their own communities as well as other ethnic and main stream economic communities. Dr. Kings “Dream”.

    The things that will make a positive difference for black Americans is when black Americans arrest this outwardly projected victimhood, anger, and rage mentality, and find the courage to look inwardly and become responsible and fully engage in their own communities and the mixed culture of the USA. There is nothing in any government agency that can do that for them.

  • The Obnoxious American

    First I want to say that I am very pleased with the tenor of the discussion here. Thanks to all for not retreating to ad hominem attacks (so far).

    I just wanted to remark about the margins that people were talking about earlier on in this discussion.

    I want to make the point behind what I was saying very clear – it’s not funny math, and I am not claiming Obama didn’t win decisivewly in NC, he did.

    My point is all about how the media portrayed the two races. Clinton won IN with 51% of the vote. Obama won NC with 56% of the vote. CNN characterized Clinton as an “eke by” but Obama, who got merely 5 more percentage points in his win, somehow “swept” the state.

    Doesn’t a sweep mean he would have had most or all of the vote? Or at least all congressional districts? But he didn’t. It’s hardly a landslide. It’s just a good showing. The term sweep was misapplied, and is yet just another example of media hype over their chosen favorite.

    Notice that when Hillary won Pennsylvania with 55% of the vote (to Obama’s 45%), no one trotted out the term “sweep.”

    I’m sure some will suggest that this type of bias in the media doesn’t matter. But it does. Most people don’t read the details. And anyone glancing at the front page of CNN yesterday would have had a much different picture of the race than what actually happened. A picture that not coincidentally helps Obama look like he can win. Aren’t there federal election laws to stop stuff like this?

    In the rush to show that the media’s favorite is past the Wright and other controversies, I suppose the good folks at CNN felt some embelleshment was in order. But it won’t stop this obnoxious American from pointing it out.

  • zingzing

    Archie: “So a potential first lady saying she has never in her life been proud of her nation is inconsequential to you?”

    yep. it’s the first lady, who has no real power. she can have her opinions. i’m rarely “proud” of this nation either. i don’t revel in our accomplishments too often, i guess. i am rather proud of our cultural/scientific achievements, but those achievements are rarely in the name of the good ol’ usa. i get misty-eyed whenever they show the 1980 olympic hockey finals. i’m really struggling to remember something to be proud of that was accomplished on a national level, rather than as an individual or for the better good of the world.

    if obama had said it, that might be a different story. but he didn’t say it, and in fact, she never said it either:

    “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country,” is what she said. it’s qualified by “in my adult lifetime” and “really.” it’s not the same thing as saying “i’ve never been proud of my country.”

  • Arch Conservative

    “And Arch, 91% of whites aren’t going to vote for McCain, so that’s a moot point. I bet he gets over 50% of the white vote though. And Obama won’t get anything like 91% of the black vote nationally, though I bet it’ll be more than 50%.”

    I could actually care less about the motivations of others voters. My point was that there is a double standard with regard to behavior based on one’s skin color.

    Too often when a black person screws up where are forced to accept “oh well you don’t know what that person has had to deal with in their life,” as an excuse for their behavior. The is an invalid bullshit excuse and I refuse to accept it.

    If what we are all seeking is a society where we are all truly equal none of us must allow one’s skin color to excuse their behavior. We must stop using past injustices as excuses for eggregious behavior. If we want to make things better going foward why would we want to live in the past? Of course we must acknolwwdge our black marks and never forget that they happened so that we may learn from them but indoing this we must not obsess upon them and claim they are all that matters.

    We have come along way and I for one am sick of the bitching and moaning about our past sins and the complete refusal to acknowleedge the progress that we have made.

  • Franco

    “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country,” is what she said. it’s qualified by “in my adult lifetime” and “really.” it’s not the same thing as saying “i’ve never been proud of my country.”

    Point taken, BUT what exactly dose she meam with what she said? What has made her proud of her country for the fist time in her life, and just as importantly, what made her unproud of it most of her life.

  • The Obnoxious American

    Zing,

    It’s clear to me why her comments don’t matter to you. You said it: “i’m rarely “proud” of this nation either.”

    For those of us who are proud of this great nation, in fact the greatest nation mankind has ever created, hearing about a potential presidential candidates wife suggest that she was only proud of this country (with whatever qualifications) only when her husband was being considered president.

    To suggest she has no power proves that you must be a man. Only a man would think his wife’s opinions are truly irrelevant. In reality land, a wifes opinions, pillow talk, all influence her husband. The “Rock” as the media has referred to Mrs. Obama, the old saying, behind every great man is a good woman comes to mind.

    Moreover, I’m sure we all know at least one or two guys whose wives rule their every move. Who is to say that Obama isn’t one of them?

    I like my presidential candidates, and their wives , and their preachers, to all have a healthy respect for the country they live in. Do they have to be blind patriots? No, we all disagree with policies. But at the very least, a plain old patriot would be nice.

  • Arch Conservative

    For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country,” is what she said. it’s qualified by “in my adult lifetime” and “really.” it’s not the same thing as saying “i’ve never been proud of my country.”

    Says you. You’re a voter. I’m a voter. What may matter to you may not matter to me and vice versa. This issue does matter to me and many others because we beleive it is indicatve of an antipathy toward this nation that both Obamas hold and your statement…

    “i’m really struggling to remember something to be proud of that was accomplished on a national level, rather than as an individual or for the better good of the world.”

    really shows that you fall into that category. There are so many things this nation has done to benefit the world that a statement like that shows that you’re willingly ignoring thd good we have done and the things we can be proud of. Listing these things is an extremely easy task…

    Here are just a few….

    The USA has given more money than any other nation on earth to combat the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

    The USA gave more aid and money than anyone else after the asian tsunami a few years back.

    The USA in general gives more in aid and volunteer hours to others than the rest of the world combined.

    The USA has overcome it’s legacy of slavery and oppression of blacks.

    I could go on and on but for someone liek you who is intent on only seeing the bad…what’s the point.

  • The Obnoxious American

    Arch,

    Well said and I agree with all of your points in this thread.

    In terms of accomplishments, let’s forget about aid and international efforts for a second.

    How about the fact that for citizens of this great country, quality of life is higher than anywhere else, and the freedom to truly become anything you want is actually a right.

    I’m sure some will disagree with what I said, I’m sure there is some international data that suggests Norway has the best quality of life. Perhaps within whatever narrow definition it is. But America is the land of freedom, and you can’t have a really great quality of life when you are also missing the second part, the right to pursue happiness.

    Obama is a case in point, which is why it’s all the more upsetting to the rest of us that his wife and preacher (and likely himself) don’t has as high a view of the US.

  • Bennett

    Thanks Dread for the backing, but here’s what I meant but didn’t have time to type:

    Personally, I’d be surprised if the first black American running for president DIDN’T get over 90% of the black vote. But this has nothing to do with racism.

    Rasism, as I understand it, is voting against someone because of skin color or ethnic background. All things being equal (as Arch considers the two dem candidates) why wouldn’t a black American vote for the first black American candidate?!? How could it be otherwise?

    Are you so blind that you can’t see that this is a natural manifestation of ethnic pride?

    You want to paint this as racism, which I see as a pathetic repub red herring.

  • Arch Conservative

    Rasism, as I understand it, is voting against someone because of skin color or ethnic background

    Then if 91% of black people voted against Hillary becasue she is white, that would be, by your definition racism.

    And the point is that if black people express “black pride” it is considered appropriate but if white people were to express “white pride<” they’d be labelled as racists and oppressors by the politically correct left.

    Stop pussyfootin around the truth Bennett.

  • Lee Richards

    If Obama were the Republican candidate, the same people who criticize everything he says, his wife’s comments, his pastor’s rantings, the media coverage, and racial voting patterns, likely would be rationalizing, excusing, justifying, and celebrating it all, if they thought he could win for them.

    For some, it’s always going to be all-partisan, all the time. Even Jesus wouldn’t satisfy the purely partisan among us, if he was seen to be to the left of some or to the right of others.

  • Arch Conservative

    If Obama was the GOP candidate his wife wouldn’t be an angry, bitter, AMerica hating shrew, his pastor wouldn’t be a raving ranting self aggrandizing peice of shit and people in the primaries would be voting for him because he actually had substance and didn’t fulfill some need to be politically correct and assauge any type of white guilt.

    But hey don’t take this conservative, white male republican’s word for it. There are plenty of others who see Obama for what he is.

    Like Bob johnson, the founder of BET who said the only reason Obama has gotten so far in this election is because he’s black.

  • Bennett

    Let’s see if I get this right…

    Black male voting for Obama – Racist and gender bigot vote
    Black female voting for Obama – Racist vote
    White male voting for Obama – Guilt and gender bigot vote
    White female voting for Obama – Guilt and self hating gender bigot vote
    Other ethnic male voting for Obama – Confused brainwashed liberal vote
    Other ethnic female voting for Obama – Confused brainwashed and self hating gender bigot liberal vote
    Black male voting for Clinton – Self hating racist vote obviously pussy whipped into voting for a woman
    Black female voting for Clinton – Self hating racist vote
    White male voting for Clinton – Racist vote obviously pussy whipped whipped into voting for a woman
    White female voting for Clinton – Racist vote
    Other ethnic male voting for Clinton – Confused brainwashed liberal vote obviously pussy whipped whipped into voting for a woman
    Other ethnic female voting for Clinton – Confused brainwashed liberal vote

    Black male voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!
    Black female voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!
    White male voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!
    White female voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!
    Other ethnic male voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!
    Other ethnic female voting for McCain – It’s all about issues and the future of America – God Bless America!

    Did I get it right, Arch?

  • zingzing

    “To suggest she has no power proves that you must be a man. Only a man would think his wife’s opinions are truly irrelevant.”

    well, she’s not my wife. i’m sure she has some influence over him. but i’m also sure he has his own mind. i’m sure she didn’t come to him and ask him if she should say that–obviously not. and i’m sure they both recognize it as a bit of a gaffe.

    and it’s obvious that mrs. obama WANTS to be proud of this country. and she seems like a fairly reasonable person.

    “It’s clear to me why her comments don’t matter to you. You said it: “i’m rarely “proud” of this nation either.” For those of us who are proud of this great nation, in fact the greatest nation mankind has ever created…”

    well, i did qualify that. but i’m not going to say this is the greatest nation on earth. i’ve only lived in two nations, and while i think i prefer this one to the other i’ve lived in, it’s probably just because this is home. it’s kind of like thinking your mom makes the best meatloaf on earth.

    besides, you just like YOUR part of this great nation. you don’t like all the big city folk, the uppity gays and blacks… hell, you recently said that the 50% or so of this nation’s population that you don’t agree with can “go to hell” or something like that.

    “I like my presidential candidates, and their wives , and their preachers, to all have a healthy respect for the country they live in.”

    i’m sure a majority of the people that obama runs with, including his wife, have a “healthy respect” for this country. wanting it to fulfill its great promise, which it certainly isn’t doing today, would be indicative of that.

    as far as his preacher goes, rev. wright is just a whacked-out individual. who cares what his opinions are?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Like Bob johnson, the founder of BET who said the only reason Obama has gotten so far in this election is because he’s black.

    Then perhaps Bob Johnson (or you, Arch) would care to explain how it was that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Carol Moseley-Braun, Alan Keyes and Shirley Chisholm didn’t get the nomination when they ran.

  • Bennett

    “Then if 91% of black people voted against Hillary becasue she is white, that would be, by your definition racism.”

    No, that your SPIN of it.

    Voting FOR someone doesn’t always mean you are voting AGAINST the other candidate (we aren’t all as frothing as you), it simply means you are voting for who you WANT to vote for.

    Is it so strange that 91% of black voters in NC wanted to vote FOR Obama?

    You can’t see that, eh?

  • zingzing

    “This issue does matter to me and many others because we beleive it is indicatve of an antipathy toward this nation that both Obamas hold and your statement…”

    you’re a republican. you wouldn’t vote for a dem anyway.

    “The USA has given more money than any other nation on earth to combat the AIDS epidemic in Africa.”

    but remember we created AIDS in the first place… i kid, i kid. anyway, is that per capita? is that individual or government money?

    “The USA gave more aid and money than anyone else after the asian tsunami a few years back.”

    don’t think that’s true, at least not at a governmental level. they gave $350 million, after some coaxing. but japan (and maybe australia) gave more. those who gave at an individual level did so out of the kindness of THEIR hearts, not because they wanted to stamp “USA” all over it.

    “The USA in general gives more in aid and volunteer hours to others than the rest of the world combined.”

    baloney. i don’t believe it. the sheer numbers involved make that unlikely.

    but you miss the point. my problem is with the government. the people of america are… oh, let’s say 75% good. there’s some stupid people, some backward people, some “bitter” people… but, for the most part, we’re a fine people, if a bit ridiculous and strange.

    i see plenty of good within the confines of our borders. i just don’t wrap up that goodness in the flag.

  • zingzing

    “How about the fact that for citizens of this great country, quality of life is higher than anywhere else…”

    don’t think that’s true.

    “and the freedom to truly become anything you want is actually a right.”

    that’s true of a lot of countries.

    “Obama is a case in point, which is why it’s all the more upsetting to the rest of us that his wife and preacher (and likely himself) don’t has as high a view of the US.”

    he’s not blind to america’s faults, and wants to correct them. to do so would make him happy. but maybe you are right: ignorance is bliss.

  • zingzing

    If Obama was the GOP candidate his wife wouldn’t be an angry, bitter, AMerica hating shrew,”

    nope, she’d be a “cunt,” in his own words.

    “his pastor wouldn’t be a raving ranting self aggrandizing peice of shit”

    nope, but he’d be “proud” to have an anti-Catholic, anti-Jewish and anti-homosexual pastor endorsing him.

    “and people in the primaries would be voting for him because he actually had substance and didn’t fulfill some need to be politically correct and assauge any type of white guilt.”

    nope, they’d be voting for him because he’s a white man. ok–that last one was a bit too easy.

  • Doug Hunter

    “I’m sure there is some international data that suggests Norway has the best quality of life.”

    Yes, the criteria are almost always biased if you dig a little deeper. Alot of those studies showing the US behind in this or that are really political studies rather than objective quality studies. For example, if you read those studies that say the US is way down the list in healthcare, one of the main criteria is usually who pays for healthcare. If the government pays for it you score well, if individuals pay for it you lose points. That’s a fine study but has nothing to do with the quality of healthcare, it has to do with the type of healthcare provided. It’s a measure of the level of socialized medicine, not a measure of the quality of care. Other studies are often biased the same way depending on the persuasion of the studies’ authors. The only way to really know is to live there yourself and even then different people will have different opinions.

  • Lee Richards

    The purely partisan start with the conclusion they want and then reason backwards so they can make all their “facts” fit and support it.

    Instead of openly debating their beliefs with reason and civility, they only want to proclaim their certainties and arbitrarily condemn all contrary opinions, without honest consideration.

    They lash out at any challenge to their orthodoxy with anger, bitterness, frustration, and condemnation.

    Their minds are forever closed to any other perspective; in their own minds they’re just never wrong in their judgements.

  • Zedd

    Doug,

    People’s view on wealth redistribution depends greatly on whether they believe they’ll be the distributee or the distributor.

    That is not true Doug. Some people are motivated by just doing the right thing. I think most people vote on what makes sense to them or what makes them feel good. Also the notion of Republicans being against a socialist system hasn’t proven to be true. Today’s Reps are so by theory only. What they purport exists only in theory. Reps tax and spend more than Dems. We all know that to be a fact, however Rep affiliates swear that fiscal responsibility is the reason for their attachment to that party. When the affiliation is clearly emotional.

  • Arch Conservative

    When it’s all said and done there are going to people voting for and against Obama for no other reason than his race and that is pretty sad.

    There will alsoo be people who vote against Obama because they do not agree with his politics who will be labelled as racists by other small minded people.

    I truly believe at heart that this nation is slightly right of center and that Obama is too far to the left to win it all. He can try tacking to the center as much as he wants during the general but the GOP will not miss oppourtunity to reveal who Barry truly is. It’s like Zell Miller said……….”campaign promises let you know who a candidates wants you to THINK they are, their voting record tells you who they REALLY are.” Amid all the campaign promises from both Barry and John all one really has to do is look at both of their records and much to the chagrin of many conservatives, Mccain is truly more moderate than Obama who is to the far left.

  • Arch Conservative

    To be fair I should have also included the thought….there will be voting for Obama because they agree with his politics that will be labelled as racists by other small minded people.

  • Arch Conservative

    We all get heaping doses of opinion and rhetoric on this site so her’es a little objective red meat…links to on the issues for both Mccain and Obama‘s voting records…

  • mike O

    BLACKS STICK TOGETHER. IF WHITES STUCK TOGETHER OBAMA WOULD NOT BE WHERE HE IS TODAY. CASE CLOSED

  • troll

    ‘noxious et al – as one who advocates the vigilante based eradication of all beliefs and actions that result in differences [intraracial breeding…ethnic pride etc] whose utopia is the amorphous humanoid borgish blob I ask:

    what are the virtues of nationalism – ?

  • Ruvy

    Bing, zing, Dan, not-so-obnoxious, Zedd, Stan, et alia,

    From the looks of things, Obama has got this thing sewn up, so I won’t waste bandwidth on who will be the presumptive Democratic nominee.

    But this business about being proud of one’s country is something I feel I should comment on.

    When I was a snot-nosed kid in Brooklyn many years ago, I was proud of being American – though in all honesty, I was far prouder of being a Brooklyn boy and of being from the biggest city on earth in the richest nation on earth, with the largest Jewish population on the planet. America came in about fourth place. Israel didn’t even figure in my thoughts.

    I got my first real dose of questioning this mind-set when I was in 9th grade and I railed against the American government refusing to bomb Haiphong Harbor. I was very much of a hawk, and wanted to see a government as hawkish as I was.

    As the school year wore on, I realized that the American government was not out to win a war, but only to contain an enemy. Even when I was that young, I understood clearly that containment, unless extremely aggressive, was a failing policy.

    I finally came to the conclusion that the United States was wasting blood and money in Vietnam, the position I held for a decade, until the Americans fled in disarray from Saigon in 1975. I was convinced that the Americans would be defeated, and defeated they were. My views had nothing to do with morality (well, they did, in the sense that it is immoral to waste lives uselessly) or being anti-war or all that garbage. And I never viewed our soldiers there as baby-killers. My friends got sent there ultimately, and it was only G-d’s grace that did not put me in the death lottery to go to Nam. I was slow, stupid and naïve, and Charley would have blown me to bits before I would have been able to say Dien Bien Phu.

    But, watching the Americans invade the Dominican Republic because they did not like the president there, watching as they set up Salvador Allende for death while doing nothing to help a country under existential threat (Israel, May 1967), while they sat on their hands, as Greek colonels destroyed what little democracy the Kingdom of Greece had, gave me a very different view of America.

    I was no longer proud to be an American. After cutting my ties to New York in 1979, I could no longer even be proud to be a Brooklyn boy or a New Yorker.

    Mrs. Obama has within her the built up rage of centuries of oppression, rage just dying to get out, and she will express those views to the man who shares her bed, whether it is a bed in the White House or not. She is not proud to be an American either. She may hate white people or Jews or whomever. Her hatreds are her problem, not mine. But I suspect that under the hatred, she’d love to be proud of her country. For her it’s home, after all.

    By contrast, her husband is a white boy in black skin raised overseas by folks who did not really share the black American experience. Looking at all this objectively, that is Obama’s strongest point in his favor. Barack Hussein Obama, whatever his other views are, does not carry within him the hatred of white people that is centuries old, based on centuries of oppression.

    If it weren’t for the Wahhabi hiding under Islam’s robes, carrying on a crusade against all the kaffir (as Moslems mean the word, not Boers), if it weren’t for America being stuck in the quicksand of Iraq, if it weren’t for the Americans being in the grip of a greedy oil and bank establishment determined to impoverish Americans (as well as the rest of the world) Obama would still be the best candidate for Americans – simply because he has the capability to do something about the cross of racism that has been America’s burden since its slavery days.

    Now bringing all this to where I live now, you all know from my writing, that while I’m damned proud of all that Israel has accomplished in sixty years, I also want to see the regime here strung up by the neck and hung for treason against the Jewish people. In other words, I’m proud of the Jewish entity here and all that we have accomplished – but I have no pride in the State of Israel at all.

    Like Obama’s wife’s attitude towards America, I wish I could be proud of the State – but I can’t be.

    I guess you take what you can in life and learn to live with the cards dealt you. Pride of one’s government does not appear to have been in any of the hands I’ve been dealt.

  • Arch Conservative

    “Mrs. Obama has within her the built up rage of centuries of oppression, rage just dying to get out, and she will express those views to the man who shares her bed, whether it is a bed in the White House or not. She is not proud to be an American either. She may hate white people or Jews or whomever. Her hatreds are her problem, not mine. But I suspect that under the hatred, she’d love to be proud of her country. For her it’s home, after all.”

    If that is the case then she is living in the past. She was never a slave. She never lived through the segragation and oppression of the late 19th early 20th century. She is angry about the experiences ofothers not of herself. There’s no doubt that she may have suffered from some of the lingering extent but considering that she’s making over 300k a year and her husband, a black man, is being taken seriously as presidential contender…I’d say the level of her anger and bitterness is way out of proportion.

    In a nutshell she’s just another angry liberal, that happens to be black.

    There are plenty of reasons to be proud of America while still acknowledging our sins. Blind nationalist pride is wrong, national pride tempered with reason is a good thing.

    Angry, bitter, people like Michelle Obaam that are living in the past are not going to help the rest of us solve our problems…at least not through any reasonable and moderate means.

  • Cindy D

    Franco:

    Here are a two excerpts from sermons given by black preachers.

    Now based on these snippets, please decide whom you admire and whom you despise.

    “God didn’t call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . . And we are criminals in that war. We’ve committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I’m going to continue to say it. And we won’t stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place.”

    “Unfortunately, most churches now are ‘status quo.’ And so that, to the extent that they’re not trying to feed the poor, they’re not trying to hook up jobs and people, they’re not concerned about the lowest, the least, the left out. They’re not concerned about the youth, they’re concerned about ‘Let me come here on a Sunday, hear something that tells me I’m ok, and I’m going to back to where I’ve been going. Don’t rock the boat�’… How about the fact that we have pledged to take what we’ve got as black people and put it back into the black community? That’s what I want to ask you�”

    What do you think about a preacher who says that America is arrogant. That it isn’t America’s business to police the world. And that America doesn’t even know god’s name?

    This preacher said those things.

    You cant judge jeremiah wright by reading headlines.

    You cant understand martin luther king by parroting the limited and sanitized mythology your culture finds it “permissible” for you to understand.

    You can’t understand inequality by parroting what your culture tells you is ok to believe.

    “Interestingly, whites often deny the importance of racism in determining the life chances of blacks, even as they give voice to beliefs that are themselves evidence of the very racial prejudice they deny. So, for instance, in one of the more respected opinion surveys from the 1990s, six in ten whites said that discrimination was less important in determining the position of blacks in society, than the “fact” that blacks “just don’t have the motivation or will power to pull themselves up out of poverty.” But if most whites believe that blacks as a group are unmotivated or lazy, that is itself a racial generalization amounting to racism: ascribing a negative characterological trait to blacks as a group. Of course the irony should be apparent to all: on the one hand, whites are saying that blacks are lazy, but on the other they insist that racism–including the kind that holds African Americans in this low regard–would be of very little consequence to their ability to succeed; as if people imbued with that kind of bias would be able to fairly evaluate job applicants or students who were members of the presumed defective group!”

    From: (Proto)Typical White Denial:
    Reflections on Racism and Uncomfortable Realities

    By Tim Wise

    “I share nothing with slaveholders from the 1700’s and 1800’s in America other than skin color.”

    Skin color which imbues the privilege of the dominant culture. A privilege that still exists.

    Do you really think a kid born in a ghetto has the same chances as a kid born in suburbia USA?

    Put down those headlines Franco and pick up some books on what you oppose. You can’t see the whole picture if you never look at it.

  • Cindy D

    Correction: replace “straw man” with “scapegoat,” which is more what I mean. But, I have a feeling there’s a better word that I can’t think of at the moment.

  • Franco

    Cindy D

    I have been taking about black Americans (especially the men) taking control of their lives and doing right by their families and thus communities.

    You’re stuck in a rut in another arena. I never once used the words unmotivated or lazy. I used the words character – responsibility – courage – and – looking inward and engaging their families and communities with these empowering attributes.

    I said victimhood, anger, and rage mentality does not help black Americans respect themselves as a people, it dose not help them respect others, and it dose not help others respect them. Note there are three directions of respect which all have to take place if we are going to solve these conflicts.

    Now, you have tried to culturally discredit me from speaking out on this issue. So please explain to me how my assertions of promoting black American character – responsibility – courage – and looking inward comes to constitute your assigning me to some cultural dysfunction I have that renders me unable or unqualified as a member for participating in one of these three directions of respect.

    Then you say…………Do you really think a kid born in a ghetto has the same chances as a kid born in suburbia USA? As if I thought so.

    The ghettos of the world make it harder to get a decent start anywhere in the world. But what makes it 10 times harder for black American kids, in a land of plenty, is the utter lack of positive character and positive examples to follow. You can not side step the colossal added advantage that these kids would receive form men of character – responsibility – courage – and looking inward. And that is what I am talking about.

    Fight it all you want, side step it all you want, get out of taking about it, what ever, but the black kids born in South Central Los Angeles for example (who know no victimhood, anger or racist rage when they are born), would surly what changes to the following accounts that would other wise have a profoundly negative effect on their lives and their own self respect.

    Black American kids have to depend on black adults for their character development. So if black Americans adults have by far the lowest rate of two-parent families in Southern California and black Americans account for less than 10 percent of Los Angeles County’s children, but fully half its foster children, and if seventy percent of black children are born out of wedlock, that’s not going to help them find character – responsibility – courage – and looking inward. Nor is the celebration of drugs and perverse sex, glorified gangs, gang killings, degrading women, and killing cops that is rampid in rap music.

    If you can’t acknowledge that Cindy D, which you haven’t yet, then how am I to suppose that you even care about them.

    What these kids need are communities build by black men and women of character and starting right now right where they are. This is something you can’t buy with money, the government can’t hand it out to you, and it is not an exclusive right of any racial group in American or the world. Black Americans men and women need to take responsibly for their own character and solve these problems in their own families and communities. That alone would garner so much respect for blacks themsleves and with responsable whites in this country it would boggle the mind.

  • Clavos

    What Franco is saying is almost exactly what Bill Cosby has been preaching to Black audiences for some time now.

    They are both right.

  • bliffle

    One could preach the same thing to ‘white’ audiences.

  • Cindy D

    Franco,

    Did I say you used the words unmotivated or lazy?

    I need to open a “teach right-wingers to read program.”

    By the way, MLK did not say that America didn’t know God’s name. I left that mistake in there to see if you actually look at anything that is outside your own skull.

  • Cindy D

    Oh, BTW the 2nd quote, the one about black people giving back to their community instead of just coming to church to feel good. That quote was from a sermon by Jeremiah Wright.

    If you want to see Jeremiah Wright’s infamous words IN context, you may do that here:

    Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s words: Sound bite vs. sermon excerpt

    I mean, if you are going to attack someone’s character, I would think you would want to rely on more than something someone else told you.

    Franco you say:

    …the black kids born in South Central Los Angeles for example (who know no victimhood, anger or racist rage when they are born)…

    This is a perfect example of how you are ignoring what you claim to believe. First of all…”economic deprivation, social marginalization, and powerlessness exist cheek-by-jowl with extraordinary wealth, privilege, and opportunity. South-Central Los Angeles is a particularly concentrated focus of this crisis…”

    The Crisis of South-Central Los Angeles by Allen J. Scott -Poverty & Race Research Action Council

    The poor of South Central Los Angeles, when able to get work are mostly paid non-living wages, they have little or no healthcare and likely very little belief in their ability to realize any dream some super-rich white folk (their neighbors by the way) try to sell them.

    Now, I ask you–what do you think it might be like as a child to wake up in “gang land.” Do you think you would be watching the Brady Bunch and dreaming about becoming a lawyer (in this land of such great opportunity for all! AMEN!)?

    Children who grow up in poverty and particularly those in a virtual combat zone of gangs, are very focused on their daily survival, they don’t have the luxury of pulling hopeless American dreams out of their asses. You basically, in such an environment, are forced to join a gang for your own protection. And so it goes…generation after generation. This applies whether you are black, white, hispanic, mandarin orange, etc.

    So Franco, what were the circumstances of your birth? Basically, you grew up in a ghetto and your loving white parents had the good character to guide you through hell and out right? That is why you are, no doubt, a wonderful role model for truth, justice, and the American way.

    It’s easy to have all the answers from your comfy middleclass abode. If you were born in South Central Los Angeles the truth is you’d probably be a gang member. Why, because of your flawed character? No–because of your circumstance.

    In fact judging by the way you, hook, line and sinker, swallow all the propaganda and idealized visions of your culture, you would like be a very successful gang member.

  • Cindy D

    Sorry, I forgot the italics on the first sentence, i was quoting Franco.

  • Cindy D

    ooops nevermind, I deleted the sentence

  • Clavos

    One could preach the same thing to ‘white’ audiences.

    True, bliffle. I should have said “American” audiences; American parents are rapidly becoming the worst in the world, abdicating their parental responsibilities to the schools (also some of the worst in the world) and other government agencies.

  • Franco

    #65 — bliffle

    One could preach the same thing to ‘white’ audiences.

    Yes they could, and yes they do. Since you thought it worthy of bringing it up, why don’t you have a crack at it.

  • Zedd

    Franco,

    “The biggest barrier for black Americans is no longer the law, white Americans, or black leaders. It is black Americans themselves. ”

    How do you know this? In what part of your experience in this earth have you tested this?

    Franco, there are situations that we perceive from afar and watch in astonishment as to why people would allow horrors in their societies to take place. You are given a chance to see the horror and act but you remain staunch because of your fear, tininess and greed.

    Every generation in America has had the opportunity to respond with compassion towards African Americans and everyone has failed miserably. Your childish view of the world (by choice out of cowardliness) insulates you and keeps you timidly unengaged in reality, pointing figures at a people who live your worst distorted nightmare. Instead of expressing compassion, you lecture, all that from a position of complete ignorance. Like a child who believes he will be a zillionaire but doesn’t understand what it takes to earn wealth in the real world, you lecture on what the obstacles are for African Americans. You should be embarrassed but you are not because deep down, you believe that whether you are right or wrong, it doesn’t matter because the subject is about Blacks and no one cares. You would never pretend to have such knowledge about any other group on the globe.

    Shame on you.

    “But what makes it 10 times harder for black American kids, in a land of plenty, is the utter lack of positive character and positive examples to follow. You can not side step the colossal added advantage that these kids would receive form men of character – responsibility – courage – and looking inward. And that is what I am talking about.”

    Like a person who doesn’t think, you didn’t process this statement. The child who will come out of this situation will grow if only he receives food. What will make him an example to anyone simply because he grew? Those that you would ask to be examples are those children only older. You however would tisk tisk at them because they dared grow without having the benefit of your experiences.

    You sir don’t know what you are talking about. You lecture from complete ignorance. Your perceptions as to what should be are based on Hollywood, happy endings and nothing that human beings experience. You dare talk about slums in other countries and willfully ignore that history makes us who we are. Why? What are you afraid of? I will tell you. White is beneficial. You get a free ride for being White in America. You are not as hard working as you think you are. Life is easier for you and you being a grown man hates to admit it. You’ve got it easy. Whites have always had it easy compared to everyone else in America. Accept it and quit ducking.

  • Zedd

    Clav,

    re: #64

    There is a difference between judgement and encouragement.

  • Franco

    Cindy

    You basically, in such an environment, are forced to join a gang for your own protection. And so it goes…generation after generation. If you were born in South Central Los Angeles the truth is you’d probably be a gang member. Why, because of your flawed character? No–because of your circumstance.

    I do not discount the seriousness of gangs. But I will not future discount the lives of those young kids in the face of those gangs either. And it’s more then just gangs, but since you are attempting to use gangs to negate and belittle character as having no power in the face of these circumstances, lets talk about gangs.

    Gangs are made up of the hate filled victims of unfulfilled character development, these kids have been dejected, abused, abandoned and they are out of control and reeking havoc on all those who are struggling to fulfill character in their own kids.

    Eight percent of men in prison, of all races, come from single parent homes where the mother was the sole parent and the father either totally abandoned the family or played a minimal dyfuctional part and setting bad examples for the kids. Does this mean that women are not good parents? No!. What it means is how serious the results are when there is no strong loving male character for the child. The child has been cheated and feels cheated. A better word for it is unloved and feels unloved.

    The same is true of gangs. The circumstances being caused by the youth gangs you speak of, in fact exist as result of the overwhelming lack of strong character role models especially from the men.

    All people of all races have issues and problems and suffer from these dysfuctions in character. It is not that it is unique to black communities, what is unique to black comminutes is the numbers stand out disproportionally.

    Black Americans have by far the lowest rate of two-parent families in Southern California. Black Americans account for less than 10 percent of Los Angeles County’s children, but fully half its foster children. Seventy percent of black children are born out of wedlock. Where are the responsible parent role models for all these children? Who is going to have to replace them?

    The window of time to address, introduce, and establish a solid pattern for character in the lives of kids is a small window of time. If there not worth that effort as in the case of your claim due to circumstances, I say you are a coward, scapegoat and enabler of gangs. If those kids are not worth risking everything for, then they well never feel worth anything.

    It’s interesting to note that members of gangs try and exhibit all the attributes of strong character. Courage, providers and protectors of the family, protectors of turf, macho type head of their household, but its all built on faults principles. These are counterfeits, imposters, and lies trying to replace the real thing, which can never be replaced.

    I grew up in Los Angeles and I was a teenager when the 1965 riots broke out. I was also still living and working in Los Angeles when the 1992 riots broke out. When I was in high school I was a member of Young Life a Christian organization and we went to black church services in South Central LA. I have worked in South Central as well.

    Here is the kicker. Everything I have said in this thread in every signal post are the words of black Americans, mostly black Christian men and women, living in the communities of South Central Los Angeles. The words that you read in my posts are not my words, they are theirs. The statistics I site in my posts are theirs, and it is their cultural insights I ascribe. I speak out about it because I know they are right. They are making a difference and they are alarmed at all the kids being abandoned.

    I also know from personal first hand experience, as they do, that strong loving character role models (most importantly from the men, the fathers) has no substitute or equal in life. It takes courage, love, handwork and a deep commitment to see it through and it is a thankless job most of the time. It knows on economic lines, It knows no skin color, it knows no borders.

  • Franco

    #64 Clavos

    “What Franco is saying is almost exactly what Bill Cosby has been preaching to Black audiences for some time now. They are both right”.

    #73 Zedd

    “Clav, re: #64, There is a difference between judgement and encouragement”.

    According to the book of Zedd, when two people are saying the same thing, if one is white its judgment, if one is black its encouragement.

    Zedd, your racism in riveted in all your posts and shows in spades. Sadly it is one of the main reasons in holding back black Americans, which many blacks, and most whites would agree. I am just one white person not afaid to say so and won’t be bullied by black racism into shutting up!

    You are the one who should be ashamed.

    And the sooner the better as all those black children who do not have responsible role models of character in the statistics sighted in my last post to Cindy sure want something to change. You can tell me to go to hell, I don’t care, but stop fighting it for their sakes.

    Zedd, it is obvious to many that you hold such racist views that it locks up our resoning abilities to the point of intellectual dysfunction. It is sad as on commenter noted in another thread just recently, because you have what appears as an intelligent mind, its just not free to reach its potential due to the mental crippling of racism. If your could get over that disabling barrier, you could free your mind for its full potencial and you might just find the world you desperately want to find.

    As for your post #72, I’ll just let it stand as a testiment to what I am saying.

  • Zedd

    Franco,

    I would be in heaven if racism was what you thought it was. Must be nice to live in your world. Aren’t you precious.

  • Franco

    That is a cop out racist answer Zedd. It does not even come close to a rational responce to what I said.

    Here is the kicker. Everything I have said in this thread in every signal post are the words of black Americans, mostly black Christian men and women, living in the communities of South Central Los Angeles. The words that you read in my posts are not my words, they are theirs. The statistics I site in my posts are theirs, and it is their cultural insights I ascribe. I speak out about it because I know they are right. Sorry to see you disagree with them.

    At least you could have seen these words as black American encouragement from blacks to blacks, even though you see them as judgment when posted by a white man.