Obama is doing a great job w/his speech

Parent Cafe
161

<p>I don’t see why we should differentiate between a politician who sits at a church which makes controversial statements and a politician who seeks endorsements from those same characters.</p>

<p>Neither do I think McCain would gain controversy if he said Robertson or Fallwell was his mentor. </p>

<p>Although I do not agree with all of the statements that the Rev. Wright made I don’t think he should have to apologize for any of them. He grew up in a time where to be black meant that you were a second or third class citizen. He has a right to “damn America” frankly. And although the USA did not infect the black community with HIV, we did inject African-Americans with syphillis (see Tuskegee).</p>

162

<p>I’ve wondered to myself lately whether Oprah hinted as much to Obama and now is having to bite her tongue to avoid the “I told you sos.”</p>

163

<p>If the speech “doomed” Obama then I can only conclude that we as a country are a bunch of naive deluded self-satisfied ignorant boobs. Could it really be that people are actually shocked, shocked that many African Americans are angry? How dare they! Don’t they know this is the land of liberty, justice and opportunity? How… ungrateful… how un-American!</p>

164

<p>Unfortunately some whites think because The Cosby Show was on television for a few years, this means that all African-Americans should get over Jim Crow, Tuskegee, etc. And neither should they be angry at a party (guess which) that used the fear of African-Americans to gain the White Southern vote. Google Nixon’s and Reagan’s Southern Strategy. It may shock you.</p>

165

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with that statement. I think that this speech essentially put things back to where they were before all of this pastor nonsense even came up. Some people are going to listen with closed minds because they don’t WANT to understand. But the people who Obama needed to reach, those who were troubled and thinking, i think this will strike the chord that erases this from their list of fears. </p>

<p>When he compares his pastor to his grandma i think that’s something that everyone can relate to. If anything, this becomes a positive for Obama because both the attacks on his pastor and on his race are now invalidated and seem ridiculous and “un-classy”. </p>

<p>Think about it, when you watch the youtube video or read the transcript and then see the comments of anti-obama people below saying how he should have rejected the pastor as a person and how he’s apparently untrustworthy because he attends a black church that has 8,000 members in south side Chicago alone, you can’t help but think that maybe these people are being a little silly…</p>

166

<p>Kmom: </p>

<p>In a perfect world, voters would print out and read over Obama’s race speech, maybe watch it again in its entirety and spend an afternoon or evening pondering what he said and their own relationships with people of different races. But get real. The average American barely has time to read the notices that come home from their kid’s school, much less a newspaper or a full speech. Most people will come to their conclusions based on the sound bites and the ad snippets that come flying at them when the general election campaign moves with full force to the television screen. </p>

<p>Obama has handed his opponents some powerful ammunition and imo, it’s not the fault of the public that he did not give them much time to get to know him — to have an understanding of who he is based on years in the public eye rather than on what he says we should know about him — before this ammo gets pointed in their direction. </p>

<p>If he’s the nominee, he’s going to have to work incredibly hard to overcome this negative. His campaign will have to register and turn out unprecedented numbers of supporters, and it may be just be possible to win (if McCain’s gaffes keep coming), but it will be an uphill climb for this historic candidate and I don’t think it’s the public that’s entirely to blame.</p>

167

<p>I watched the speech and thought “I want this guy to be my President”. I’ve never felt that way before.</p>

<p>I’m a middle aged economically advantaged white guy.</p>

168

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry, sir. According to Hillary and Bill you don’t really need a president working on your behalf and don’t count.</p>

169

<p>OK I’ll state the obvious since I haven’t seen much of it here.</p>

<p>The Dems are in a terrible bind here. They have to nominate Obama since he’s going to have the most delegates after the last primary in early June. If they don’t nominate him, there will be all out war in the Party. Some of it probably pretty ugly.</p>

<p>Yet if they do nominate him, they’re doomed. There is no way he can win the national election. No way. Those here who think that he’s the greatest thing since sliced bread may be right, but have no sense of what the rest of America thinks. He’s over.</p>

170

<p>^ I share your views and I am a democrat. Even without this Wright mess, he didn’t have the demographics to win. His delegate lead is like a back door entry. Bunch of it from small, republican dominated circus states.</p>

171

<p>So… is race an issue in this country, or is it not?</p>

<h1>1. If it is NOT an issue, then we should just stop talking about it. Neither should any group attempt to further causes based specifically on race (reparations, Affirmative Action, race quotas in hiring, NAACP, BET, “Black” Chamber of Commerce" - anything like that. Sorry, but I can’t think of any Asian or Hispanic advocay groups right now). We should all just be “Americans” (no hyphens!), united by the things that we have in common, not divided by our differences.</h1>

<h1>2. If it IS an issue, then it needs to be resolved. How do we do that? There are probably vast differences in the ideas about how resolution can be achieved. How will the African-American community (or American Indian Community, or Asian Community, Hispanic, etc.) ever get over being “angry” about what happened in the past? We, as a country, could never adequately atone to every individual in their own way. The ONLY way we are going to get past the race issue in this country is to continue to strive to reach #1 above.</h1>

<p>Given that our nation/government has already tried in so many ways to bring satisfaction & resolution to the issue (Social Programs, War on Poverty, Great Society Initiatives, Integration, AA, etc.) and apparently we are not much closer to resolution than some years ago, perhaps the onus is now on the other side of the issue. </p>

<p>Perhaps it has everything to do with forgiveness. </p>

<p>Nothing we, as a country, can do will ever change the past or “fix” the problem (even if we acquiesed to every one of the demands of the NBPP!). Now is the time for every one to grow up, put the past issues of “race” behind us, and move on. No more “blaming”, no more “excuses”, no more discussion about “white man keeping you down”. Yes, I know many minorities have been victimized, but our society has also done quite a lot to show our minorities that they are accepted and welcomed and even loved as fellow Americans, but yet, there is still so much unhappiness? That shows me that the only way to find peace is to forgive, just forgive. I know it’s hard, I’ve struggled with it myself in my own life, but staying angry & waiting for an apology accomplishes nothing! </p>

<p>But to truly achieve #1 above, there can’t be any more “sermons” or rants like Rev. Wright’s. Leaders must give encouragement, promote self-determination, and most of all, preach about “Forgiveness”. THAT’S what Jesus was all about - and it’s the only way to rise above “race” and move on - together!</p>

172

<p>The small states issue is a legitimate one. </p>

<p>The Dems need Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, et al to win in November and Obama has far less of a chance of delivering the bigger States than Hillary does.</p>

<p>This is a problem for Howard Dean and friends.</p>

173

<p>Re: #169-170</p>

<p>The problem is, whoever thought he’d get this far in the first place? HRC was supposed to have this thing put away by now, right? The fact that he is even in a position to win means he’s already overcome some pretty tough odds. I’m not writing him off so easily.</p>

174

<p>

</p>

<p>Obama has won 11 blue states.
(Clinton has won 6 blue states (New Hampshire, New York, California, New Jersey, Mass. , Ohio)</p>

<p>Oh, but the next resposne is oh she won the big states that matter. Small blue states don’t count of course. The only problem there is let’s look at the 10 biggest states in the Union. The numbers that are next to the states are how well Clinton and Obama do against McCain in the SUSA 50 state match up. First of all I’d like to point Obama fared better and won with more Electoral Votes.</p>

<p>1.) California: O +9, C +10
2.) Texas: O -1, O -7
3.) New York: O +14, C +18
4.) Florida: O -2, C +9
5.) Illinois: O +29, C +11
6.) Pennsylvania: O -5, C +1
7.) Ohio: O +10, C +10
8.) Michigan: O +1, C-even
9.) Georgia: O -13, C -21
10.) North Carolina: O -2, C -8</p>

<p>Let’s throw out Californi, New York.llinois, and Ohio for being irrelevant because are going to be solidly Democratic no matter who runs.</p>

<p>The two are essentially even in Michigan, while neither is currently competitive in Georgia.</p>

<p>Of the states that will be competitive, Obama has clear advantages in Texas and North Carolina, while Clinton has clear advantages in Pennsylvania and Florida. In the electoral math, that is 49 EVs for Obama, 48 for Clinton.</p>

<p>Yup, Obama has a one electoral vote advantage from the top 10 “big states” that Clinton can’t stop yammering about.</p>

175

<p>Let us not forget MI and FL. He lost both of them too. </p>

<p>And before every one shouts he was not even on ballot in MI, Let us be honest. It was a tactical move by both Obama and Edwards to remove their names from MI. They could not afford an early loss.</p>

<p>However, after strong showing in polls and winning IA, Obama campaign and supporters worked very hard to urge people to vote un-committed. </p>

<p>And of course he lost FL outright.</p>

176

<p>bz2010 I understand your sentiments and where they are coming from, however naive they may be. I agree that it would make a lot of us feel much better if these people would just shut down all their little support groups and forgive and forget all those nasty little things from the past. You’re right, America has done enough.</p>

177

<p>subsidycorp - I was specifically referencing sermons and leaders in the church setting such as Rev. Wright when I mentioned Jesus. </p>

<p>And in case you can read that well, I said FORGIVENESS is how we move on together, get it?</p>

178

<p>bz2010 was pretty obviously referring to Jesus in the context of sermons like Reverend Wright’s, subsidycorp. I believe he was trying to point out the hypocrisy in deliberately inserting divisive speech in a sermon based on the words of Jesus, who was–whether you’re Christian or not–a nice guy who just wanted everyone to hug.</p>

<p>In any case, this incident will help moderates realize the Obama isn’t the best thing since the wheel, and that he’s just a new guy with no experience and enough rhetorical skill to play with people’s emotions.</p>

<p>Edit: Cross-posted with a bunch of people. This is what I get for getting water in the middle of a post.</p>

179

<p>

</p>

<p>And of course Clinton cares about Michigan and Florida because she is affectionate about all the little people in Michigan and Florida. What a hero of the working people! Of course it isn’t a tactical move because she did well in those states. </p>

<p>But please spare us the blue state/red state myth. He was won more BLUE STATES and I sincerely don’t care that she did better in NY or CALI. They are not competitive states in November.</p>

180

<p>subsidy; the thing about winning little states and big states isn’t the size itself. It’s the blue and red. Let’s go to the extreme here. Obama won Wyoming. Now; even if he won it with 100% to Hillary’s 0%, that would be absolutely nothing. When the dust settles in November, there isn’t any chance at all that Obama would win Wyoming during the general election. It’s just not going to happen. It’s a republican state, and that’s the way it will go in November.</p>

<p>So, the question is; Hillary won New York, New Jersey, California, Texas, Ohio, and probably Penn. Those are not only very big votes from the electoral college, but usually democratic. (Except for texas). The question is; call Hillary or Obama have a better chance at winning states; especially the democratic states; from McCain? That is what matters. If this was the general election and it was Clinton against Obama, then Obama is winning. In a primary, I see Obama as not really winning. He may have a few more votes, but will California. New York, Jersey, etc… follow him? If McCain was to win even 1 or 2 of those traditional Democrat states, it’s totally over.</p>

<p>McCain is a pretty liberal left side republican. He is trying to comfort the conservatives, but they all know he is as close to being a democrat that he can be and still be a republican. Heck; he was even considered to be John Kerry’s running mate in the last election. Shows how left side he is. The elderly, retired, Jewish community, and many other traditional democrats also know this. Because of his strong stance on the military and Israel as an ally, he is a lot more popular that you think. Recent polls have his doing very well. EVEN AMONG DEMOCRATS.</p>

<p>Obama might beat Clinton in delegates, but personally I think the party would do better with clinton. When the dust settles, it’s going to be the traditional hard core, labor union, middle class and elderly democrats who are going to call this one. They tend to support Clinton. Obama has a lot of fans, and a lot of them are young. They rally and support, but they aren’t going to be the deciding factor.</p>