<p>
</p>
<p>Do you have some sort of hidden camera in that church that records Wright’s sermons for 20 years? Somehow, I suspect if there were 20 years worth of this diatribe, more than a couple of them would have made it on YouTube.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ve got to be kidding me. If this is true, then what’s all those whites’ excuses who are so behind in a lot of things.</p>
<p>“You’ve got to be kidding me. If this is true, then what’s all those whites’ excuses who are so behind in a lot of things.”</p>
<p>I don’t think those white people are blaming black people for their problems the way the struggling black people blame white people for most of their problems.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hillary addressed the the gun issue today, citing the second amendment and all. How dare Obama dare take away the much loved hobby of hunters, she insinuated. Well, this is a different take on her opinions of guns: </p>
<p>From the New York Times (5/9/99)
Stepping up the Clinton Administration’s campaign against gun violence, Hillary Rodham Clinton used an emotional White House ceremony today to call on Americans to press Congress to ‘‘buck the gun lobby’’ and pass several gun control measures. </p>
<p>Today’s event, pegged to Mother’s Day, which is Sunday, was held in the formal East Room of the White House and featured three parents of children killed or wounded by gunfire. They included Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel was killed last month in the shooting rampage in Littleton, Colo. His story of waiting for word about his son’s fate brought Mrs. Clinton nearly to tears as she took the podium and gravely addressed an audience of other parents who had lost their children in shootings. </p>
<p>The Senate is to begin debate next week on a number of gun control measures, some of which mirror proposals offered recently by President Clinton. ‘‘The senators need to hear from all of us,’’ Mrs. Clinton said. She urged voters ‘‘to give them the encouragement to do what they know is right and to remind them that there are many, many millions of American voters and citizens who will stand behind political leaders who are brave enough to buck the gun lobby, wherever that may take us, so that they will vote for the measures that we know will save lives.’’ </p>
<p>Mrs. Clinton was as careful as her husband has been to say that there are many causes of violence and that parents need to take responsibility for their children’s behavior. But Mrs. Clinton, who is considering running for the Senate from New York, where gun control is popular, has also been more forceful than the President in directly taking on the powerful gun lobby in the aftermath of the Littleton killings.</p>
<p>I think everything Obama said was absolutely true. When cynical politicians and their fellow propagandists use “hot button” themes like homosexuals, abortion, “war on Christmas” and similar phony “issues” to get working men and women to vote them into office - and then turn around and royally shaft the very people who elected them, while they are distracted by the flashy but bogus sound and fury surrounding things which actually pose no threat to the voters - that’s shameful. And people who repeat those themes are the “boots on the ground” who make the strategy possible.</p>
<p>Do any of you “you can’t say that” folks actually think that what Obama said was actually untrue? If you do, defend that. I’m interested to hear what you have to say. Tell me how Republican politicians have improved the life and prospects of working class “rust belt” Americans with the policies they have instituted. Republican rule has worked out well for the Paris Hiltons and Leona Helmsleys of the world. Not so much for “Joe Sixpack.” And Joe Sixpack should be bitter.</p>
<p>My personal feeling is that Senator Obama’s comments were true of some of the population to which he was referring and untrue of others. Like every group, there will be differences of opinion and priority. What I do think, however, (again, my opinion) is that the comments reflected that Senator Obama likely has had very little personal contact with the people to whom he was referring. I work in a law firm with people similarly educated, and I can tell you that these are among the most wonderful people you could ever meet, but they either associate with people like themselves or the poor with whom they volunteer, but outside of their support staff, have almost no contact with the truly middle class. That, I think, is a problem for Senator Obama.</p>
<p>The problem is that no one wants to tell the American people the truth, and even if they did, most people don’t want to hear it. The truth is; we are becoming more and more a global economy. The truth is; not even the president of the united states is going to be able to reopen the vast majority of any of these closed plants and factories. The truth is; once they’ve closed them, they will remain closed. The truth is; if you want to find work in your trained profession, then there’s a really good chance that you will have to move. If you want to stay where you are, then get retrained in something else. That’s the way it is. So sorry, so sad, oh well. </p>
<p>It’s not immigration problems and it’s not the problem of the government. For years, we produced for ourselves and we exported to countries that were developing. Now that they are developing, they are producing goods and exporting them. Because they aren’t as developed as we are, their standard of living is much lower. That means much cheaper prices. That means goods will be produced there and sold here. Again, sorry, but that’s the way it is. The president can’t change that. Trying to explain global macro-economics is difficult. Suffice it to say that if you tax or prohibit the importation of certain goods so that we can produce more for to be sold to ourselves, you cause artificial inflation and you open up a lot of trade and political issues. These overseas countries are trying to make a living too. You can’t just stop importing totally.</p>
<p>Anyway, what Obama said was condescending. He implies that because people are bitter and frustrated about losing their jobs, that they turn to stereotypical small town redneck vices such as guns, god, and prejudice. He screwed up, will again, and is going to have to take care of it.</p>
<p>“I can tell you that these are among the most wonderful people you could ever meet, but they either associate with people like themselves or the poor with whom they volunteer, but outside of their support staff, have almost no contact with the truly middle class. That, I think, is a problem for Senator Obama.” zoosermom</p>
<p>Is this not true for all professionals? How many miners or auto makers are Hillary and McCain taking to dinner?</p>
<p>THATS the big attack?</p>
<p>you “just don’t say that”, THATS the offensive? When you have to tell somebody they have to be offended by something you know you’re grasping at straws. </p>
<p>Honestly, of all the attacks, this has got to be the least substantive of them all. “Gasp, Obama said Santa Claus isn’t real! And children heard him! DREAM CRUSHER!”</p>
<p>Zoosermom:</p>
<p>Obama may not be very familiar with PA residents, but of the three presidential candidates, he must have the closest relations with lower income people (both employed and unemployed), since he was a community organizer.</p>
<p>“Obama may not be very familiar with PA residents, but of the three presidential candidates, he must have the closest relations with lower income people (both employed and unemployed), since he was a community organizer”</p>
<p>Marite, I think that’s very true, but I was really talking about the lower-middle-class white people who aren’t wealthy and educated but aren’t people to whom organizers extend a helping hand. If you’re white and poor, you’re often invisible to some people.</p>
<p><a href=“%5Burl=http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1060186139-post29.html]#29[/url]”>quote</a> Obama may not be very familiar with PA residents, but of the three presidential candidates, **he must have the closest relations with lower income people<a href=“both%20employed%20and%20unemployed”>/b</a>, since he was a community organizer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From [Hillary</a> Clinton’s Biography](<a href=“http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/hc42.html]Hillary”>http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/firstladies/hc42.html):</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am familiar with HRC’s admirable record of advocating for children. But this kind of work does not necessarily involves face-to-face contact with the children and families that are served. For example, ensuring that children are properly immunized has more to do with lobbying adults than giving shots to children. A community organizer, by contrast, cannot organize from behind a desk and a rolodex.</p>
<p>“Marite, I think that’s very true, but I was really talking about the lower-middle-class white people who aren’t wealthy and educated but aren’t people to whom organizers extend a helping hand. If you’re white and poor, you’re often invisible to some people.”</p>
<p>Agree. Most, if not all, of Obama’s work with the poor and underprivileged is with the black community of the south side of Chicago. This is a world away culturally from the working class whites of Pennsylvania and Indiana. And we’re not really talking poor whites, but more lower middle class whites. When you talk about guns with these people we’re talking hunting and Bambi in the back of the pickup.</p>
<p>I read the Huffington post stuff, and I think Obama was just trying to explain the rural class in Pa to his Calif audience. I don’t think he was trying or meant in any way to insult Pa, but they will most likely take it as an insult. Several Pa mayors are complaining already.</p>
<p>fwiw - I live in a huntin/fishin pickup truck kind of town, and this is not a lifestyle born of bitterness, it’s just what people like to do. There are people here who have “camo” weddings where the entire wedding party wears camouflage. Really. I heard someone talking about it in the wedding shop while D1 looked for a formal for a sorority party.</p>
<p>This quote and Reverend Wright gets load of coverage on the tv, but on every other day of the week, the same pinheads say the media is rooting for Obama.</p>
<p>Is this bitterness the reason gun owners won’t vote for Obama? I thought it was his opposition to concealed carry…and semiautomatic weapons…and FFLs within 5 miles of schools or parks…and his support of the DC handgun ban…and…</p>
<p>Is this Obama’s attempt to write off gun owners before the Philadelphia debate? I really don’t understand it. He shouldn’t highlight issues that he has a losing record on and he definitely shouldn’t attack those voters (who aren’t in his camp to begin with) as bitter, whether the economy is the real reason or not. Obama’s campaign should realize that saying voters disagree with Obama on significant issues (religion, immigration, gun ownership) because of their economic status is insulting to many potential voters.</p>
<p>Obama has supported (limited) gun ownership to a greater degree than Clinton(despite her recent claims to having learned to shoot in her childhood). </p>
<p>What his supporters claim he meant was that that frustrated rural voters are being distracted from the real causes of their anger (or bitterness) by focusing on issues such as gun control, immigration, us vs.them, gay marriage and the like, and taking refuge in their faith and their family because they have lost confidence that their economic plight will be addressed by politicians. His comments could certainly be open to very
[Shifting</a> Gears - The Boston Globe](<a href=“http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2008/04/13/shifting_gears/]Shifting”>http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2008/04/13/shifting_gears/)</p>
<p>It does not sound very different from some of the remarks made by Obama.</p>
<p>I agree that the African-Americans from the South Side of Chicago are very different from the lower middle class whites in PA; but my general point that Obama’s work (and lack of wealth) has made him far more familiar with the issues confronting the poor than McCain or Clinton still stands.</p>
<p>Marite, I think you should listen to his original statements on huffintingpost instead of the spin.</p>
<p>I am not suggesting what you should do; to me primary sources are very important not the spin version.</p>
<p>To even suggest that people cling to religion out bitterness due to their economic situation, to me, represents a lack of understanding of religious people. Perhaps, he made these statements because a lot of the people in his church are clinging on to the church out of bitterness. </p>
<p>I think Obama grew up in a much more privilege background than Hillary. He was originally recruited specifically to help organize the people from south side Chicago because the white organizers were not making any progress with this group. He has some experience dealing with poor people, but they were mostly black.</p>
<p>I HAVE listened to his original statements (and please do not tell me what I should or should not do since you do not know what I have done. Thank you). I am discussing interpretations, Clinton’s as well as his supporters. Isn’t this what the whole controversy is about? Interpretation and spin?</p>
<p>Anyway, Talkingpointsmemo has two interesting new entries, one by Theda Skocpol of Harvard University who has written on the origins of the welfare state and has a long history with the Clintons, and a clip from a Charlie Rose interview with Obama from 2004. Read and listen for yourselves.</p>
<p>I just think its funny that people are trying to say that he was “attacking” them as being bitter. Since when is bringing attention to the fact that people are upset with the current administration an insult?</p>