<p>The deed is done.</p>
<p>No, I won’t accept. So you won’t have me to kick around anymore. … Old freelance writers named Hindoo don’t die… they just fade away. … Ask not what you … oh, never mind.</p>
<p>OMG, 281 posts and my issue is not here yet!!!</p>
<p>Don’t keep us in suspense, Kelowna. What is your issue???</p>
<p>Just got my hard copy today. I am shocked. Poor taste at least if not worse.</p>
<p>I think poor taste primarily. If we stop pandering the stupid people in society maybe we’ll get there. Anyone half-way informed knew what it meant…it was, like the Iraq war, poorly executed.</p>
<p>Hey Drossel (and anyone else who wonders how it’s done…I had to ask myself a few weeks ago) - When you use quotes from others on the board it makes the post much more readable if they are highlighted with the
quote box. You can achieve this by putting {quote}whatever you want to quote{/quote} except you use instead of {} and it puts the handy box in. Just trying to help!</p>
<p>“How could anyone possibly think that Obama’s a granny-hating, anti-American racist?”</p>
<p>I don’t think he is necessarily anti-American. But I am not sure what a grandmother being a “typical white woman” (Obama’s words) is, anymore than I could categorize or disown a “typical black woman,” or a typical Asian woman," or a “typical Hispanic woman”, etc. Because there are not “typical” any woman, by race or otherwise. </p>
<p>This to me is all rascist, as in all of the statements above, starting with Obama’s “typical white woman” statement. If he is going to govern by “typical groups,” then I will continue to have an objection. As to his policies, they change so often, that it is hard to tell what he stands for. Besides change. As far as I can see, I will be speaking Spanish and paying more taxes to support more social programs that have not worked in the past. </p>
<p>I started out open-minded about these candidates. None of my choices, Democrat or Republican, are in the running as of now. I do not like much of what Obama has said. Does that make me biased? Yes, in that I will not be voting for him, but not for racial reasons on my part. It is because of Obama’s waffling and character issues. He had an opportunity to convince me and didn’t, and I suspect that there are many voters who think as I do, from all the political parties.</p>
<h1>208 Spideygirl:</h1>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is similar to someone who engages in subtle racism and then counters that they have black friends. That’s disingenuous!</p>
<p>
That’s not politically correct, we’re going to have to inform the Galactic PC police about this post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like Obama is making assumptions or generalizations about white people as a group when he says “typical white woman”.</p>
<p>That is racism, pure and simple.</p>
<p>(Now don’t say, “Takes one to know one”! 
).</p>
<p>What is “typical” in relation to race anyway??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If one does not wish to vote for Obama, it is fine, but I think one should at least be charitable regarding Obama’s intentions. I think the man is no more a racist than anyone else. Surely he spoke in generalizations because when one speaks on broad issues to broad audiences, generalizations tend to be a helpful, albeit inaccurate means to refer to discernable trends in populations. There are always exceptions, but he was trying to say to a broad section of Americans that he understood their predicament and that he does not think it rises to the level of the sort of brutal racism that would cause him to disown anyone, least of all his friends and family members.</p>
<p>Now, though his generalizations about white women are not racist, they are prejudicial. Admittedly he is technically projecting a certain disposition on all white women, a disposition that does not necessarily apply to all white women. But c’mon. Were I to browse these forums I would find this sort of thing by the tens of thousands, many no doubt uttered by the very same people here who complain against Obama. And its fine, because while I think there are generalizations that are hurtful, either deliberately or cavalierly, and are therefore not helpful, I also think there are many that are useful. “Blacks need to stop being thugs” is a generalization that hurts because it assaults blacks who are not thugs. “Asians are good at school” is useful because it encourages all Asians, even those who are not particularly good at school. “White women fear black men they do not know” can be useful or harmful, depending on its context. In the way Obama employed it, it was useful. It is clear to me that he was not trying to be hurtful here because, after all, the speech itself was given in part to attract the very people to which the generalization applied. He was trying to say he understood their predicament. There was no malice here, certainly nothing that should provoke anyone to claim the man was being racist.</p>
<p>I once had an incident with a white woman who I knew felt uncomfortable around me. I am pretty tall (six-six), in good shape, and I think I have a calm appearance and demeanor. But still, when you are a little white woman, and there is this huge black guy walking behind you with no one else around, you just don’t have a lot of time and ability to check out nuances in the guy’s appearance. I was even wearing a suit, I think. Didn’t matter. I could feel the woman’s fear via the hurried way in which she walked and through the movements of her head. She was trying to track me, but without appearing to do so.</p>
<p>Was the woman being racist or sexist? No. Was she being prejudicial? You bet, and I understood it. I think I switched sides of the street to help give her some relief, but it only seemed to make things worse because I was now behind her and also to the side, which evidently made tracking me a bit harder due to the shadows created by the awnings and other structures of the shops along the sidewalk. I thought to just stop and let her go on her way, but I did not want to just allow the psychological mess to linger when in truth I had no ill intent at all. The woman’s movements became even more frantic, and just as those little legs were starting to blurr, I called out to tell her I was not hostile and that she was safe. That seemed to do the job.</p>
<p>Now, I think that woman was a typical white woman. And I was not offended at all. Obama was just saying we need to do more work so that this sort of reaction does not take place. I really don’t even think he means that the onus rests all on white women to get this additional work done. When I heard the statement, I posited that guys of all races need to do extra work so that gals don’t have to go through this sort of complete nonsense. And we black guys REALLY have our work cut out for us because the common image of us is not very good at all. Indeed, Fox News, its affiliates, and competitors do a most excellent job of presenting all of us as demons, with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson vying for the title role of Satan his OWN self.</p>
<p>Small women walking alone on a street are likely to be cautious and concerned about any male walking behind them, especially if there is no one else around. It is an appropriate, self protective response. For all we know, that tiny woman may have been the victim of a past assault, or took a class on self protection, and was being overly careful. It was appropriate. It wasn’t predudicial, other than perhaps against all males when walking alone and vulnerable.</p>
<p>This is exactly what I mean! We’ll latch on to a single word–“typical”–and think it tells us all we need to know about Obama’s world view. How fair is that? I could do exactly the same with McCain–extract a word or a sentence from one of his speeches, and use it to somehow “prove” that he’s a bad person. I won’t though. OK, so maybe I will just this once, to make a point.</p>
<p>“Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” --What did that quote say about John McCain? About his respect for women? Nothing particularly good.</p>
<p>^^^ Oh, hindoo. Are you trying to convince us not to draft you for the VP slot?? LOL</p>
<p>I think, IMO, the issue is not one word that bothered some people , but the phrase “typical white woman”. Most likely “typical <<any group=”“>>” is probably a risky turn of a phrase, as it has the potential to be view as disparaging, or with a negative connotation, even when it may not be (eg, typical plumber, typical northern driver, etc). I believe it was an unintentional comment that people grabbed up and ran with, as will happen in political contests.</any></p>
<p>I agree, jym626. The problem I have with people on both sides of the political spectrum, is they (we) so often focus on an unfortunate comment, a risky turn-of-phrase, etc., then use it to brand a candidate as a racist, a hypocrite, or what have you. I’m a white woman; whether I’m “typical” or not, who knows? At any rate, I understood what Obama was trying to say and wasn’t offended in the least, for myself or for his beloved granny. (Is “granny” disparaging? I meant “Grandmother.” Or perhaps, “Grand Matriarch.”) Possibly, Obama’s use of the word “typical” bothered some people, because we’d all like to see ourselves as God’s delightfully unique creatures, not a single one like another.</p>
<p>“I would find this sort of thing by the tens of thousands, many no doubt uttered by the very same people here who complain against Obama.”</p>
<p>But I don’t think most of us are running for President.</p>
<p>There are other reasons that I would not vote for Obama, but really, one of them is that he is inconsistent and doesn’t think through what he says. This speech being referred to was a seminal speech for him on race and politics, and it was to me offensive, especially when written by someone with such a good educational background who is running for president. I do not trust the man in several contexts. I assume that there are many others in the US who feel this way, or else the polls would be more in his favor at this point.</p>
<p>“Possibly, Obama’s use of the word “typical” bothered some people, because we’d all like to see ourselves as God’s delightfully unique creatures, not a single one like another.”</p>
<p>No, it’s because you cannot categorize people. It is offensive to categorize by race, and Obama should know this. It is not our problem, it is his. He is the one running for president.</p>
<p>You’re right, swatparent. Candidates for President should be held to a higher standard than the rest of us mere mortals! … I respect that your visceral reaction to Obama is negative. Sometimes, that’s the best thing we have to go on: our instincts or intuition. Mine tells me something else entirely about Obama–that he’s an extraordinarily bright, inspirational, decent man who wants nothing but the best for the country he loves. How he’ll go about attaining that “best” if elected is a question to be answered. … I’ve heard enough unflattering anecdotal things about McCain (including snippets from speeches) to give me pause, but I honestly don’t believe he’s a senile, right-wing whacko. He’s probably a pretty good guy who is politically to the right of me. Obama may well be a good guy who’s politically to the left of you. Either that, or he’s a racist granny-hater. Take your pick! :)</p>
<p>Of course you can categorize people. What Obama said was true. The fact that some people don’t like it doesn’t make it any less true.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And McCain thought through his “Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran” comment? That wasn’t even close to being funny. Or his Chelsea Clinton joke? I’ll bet if he could put that one back in the can, he would in a heartbeat. And yep, I’ll bet Obama wishes to the Lord that the word “typical” hadn’t come spilling out of his mouth. They ALL pop off from time-to-time with remarks that seem ill-considered or even thoughtless. We’re all atypical, imperfect creatures–even our Presidential candidates.</p>