<p>Did you ever actually read Obama’s statement about the “typical white person,” who was his own grandmother, by the way. It didn’t need explanation, because it was so obviously true.</p>
<p>Yes I listened to it carefully several times. He slipped and revealed a bias against “white people.” I suppose no one has asked him to explain it, because there is no way to explain it. If you think it is “obviously true,” you have the same bias. I don’t know if it’s racism, but it certainly is bigotry.</p>
<p>Yeah, he’s biased against his grandma. I just have to shake my head at the desperate efforts to mine Obama’s words for whatever gaffe can be trumped up. I guess it comes from a cynical belief that everybody is lying about what they really think, and that true understanding only comes from little Freudian slips they make. Just remember that what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and therefore it’s fair to say that McCain wants our soldiers to be in Iraq for 100 years (for example).</p>
<p>Mudder’s_Mudder: “Frankly, I’m pretty horrified by a lot of the rhetoric coming out of some of the churches white America apparently considers mainstream, judging by the lack of outcry by whites (compared to the overwhelmingly white outcry against Wright).”</p>
<p>Please provide examples with quotes from “mainstream” churches, from the mouths of those who occupy the pulpit in the weekly service of GOP top leaders. If those leaders sat through the same type of hate speech, my answer would be identical: They don’t beloing in public office. </p>
<p>Please recall that when people like President Bush consulted with even respected Christian leaders, THERE WAS AN OUTCRY. His choice of spiritual advisors has been the fodder of left wing ridicule for 8 years. It’s hard, isn’t it, when what goes around comes around? </p>
<p>But this issue with Obama is enormously more troubling then consulting God in your decision making (for those athiests and agnostics out there who might be troubled by Bush’s propensity to seek spiritual guidance).</p>
<p>The issue, by the way, is not Reverand Wright and his racist remarks, but that a man who can very well become the next president of the United States chose to sit and listen to that garbage weekly for years in his precious free time, and had the guy as his spiritual guide and mentor. </p>
<p>SCARY!!!</p>
<p>Well, McCain has been sitting in the U.S. Senate all that time, listening to even worse garbage. That may have affected him negatively as well.</p>
<p>Let me also add that “scary” will be the codeword that you will hear about Obama, again and again and again.</p>
<p>HUNT: “Just remember that what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and therefore it’s fair to say that McCain wants our soldiers to be in Iraq for 100 years (for example).”</p>
<p>Well, that has been made an issue for the left for some time now. And Obama’s remark about his grandma was not just a slip - he was, if I remember correctly, responding to criticism about sitting in on hate speech for his Sunday service for years. But then in his explanation, he reinforced the original concern.</p>
<p>I get it, though. Obama is a very exciting candidate for the left, and people really want to spin his flaws if they are a fan of his.</p>
<p>HUNT: “Well, McCain has been sitting in the U.S. Senate all that time, listening to even worse garbage”</p>
<p>Oh my.</p>
<p>“listening to even worse garbage”</p>
<p>It seems to me that you have to agree with this, whichever side of the aisle you are on.</p>
<p>Is that all you got, ilsa?----that Obama spoke of his grandmother as “typically white” in some fashion? What was the context of this statement? I read a post by a student on one of the forums here, whereby he referred to himself as, “a typical white boy”. I doubt he was being self-derisive. He seemed to be saying that he embodied a lot of normative thinking and behavior for a teen in our day and time. To the degree that there might exist an amorphous and generally accepted concept of the “typical White American male teen”, I assume he was claiming to number among that lot. But of course, there really isn’t any “typical” anything. In the same manner, there are concepts (just as murkily amorphous and yet, somehow accepted in many quarters) of “the typical red-blooded American”, “the typical toddler”, “the typical gang-banger”, “the typical black man or woman”, “the typical white person”, and on and on. </p>
<p>I understand the resistance to the idea that one might be called “typically” white (—or black, or old, or American, for that matter). Nobody likes being homogenized, unless the context is benign or entirely positive. Every human being is unique unto themselves, and yet to be replicated. However, in the absence of context, how is one to assign hostile intent to Obama’s supposed statement? Is there a tape of him having said this? If so, where is it? What was the context of the statement? Was it, “like the typical white person of her time, she enjoyed music by Pat Boone and The Platters”? Or, was it, “like the typical white person of her time, she though black people were inferior to white people”? What do you think he was saying? How can you know?</p>
<p>Meanwhile, have you bothered to view the video Drosselmeirer provided the link to? What do you think Rev. Wright was saying?</p>
<p>HUNT: You are grossly incorrect. I certainly do not have to agree. I have not heard anything even resembling the type of anti-American hate speech that spewed from Rev. Wright’s mouth coming from anyone on the senate floor in recent history, on either side of the aisle. Unless of course there were KKK speakers allowed in. Did I miss that?</p>
<p>ilsa belter: “Yes I listened to it carefully several times. He slipped and revealed a bias against “white people.” I suppose no one has asked him to explain it, because there is no way to explain it. If you think it is “obviously true,” you have the same bias. I don’t know if it’s racism, but it certainly is bigotry”</p>
<p>I really don’t think that Barack Obama has a drop of “bias against white people” in his veins. There are VERY serious things to be concerned about in the prospect of him being president, however. To me, it is more an issue of either his inexperience or permanent naivet</p>
<p>The myth here is that Wright was spewing “garbage” on a regular basis. This does not appear to be true at all. If this were phrased as, “Occasionally over the course of 20 years, Wright made a few extreme statements that weren’t at all like his normal sermons,” this whole thing wouldn’t sound like much. It sounds better, though, to say that he was spewing garbage for 20 years. Even Rush Limbaugh doesn’t spew garbage every day.</p>
<p>poetsheart: "Was it, “like the typical white person of her time, she enjoyed music by Pat Boone and The Platters”? </p>
<p>That’s bad. But extremely funny.</p>
<p>HUNT: “Occasionally over the course of 20 years, Wright made a few extreme statements that weren’t at all like his normal sermons,”</p>
<p>I think David Duke had a lot of good days as well. Come to think of it, if you were to count all the words quoted or written by Adolf Hitler, you’d find that most of what he said was not about exterminating the Jews.</p>
<p>Logic, much?</p>
<p>Keep spinning - something is sure to stick.</p>
<p>poetsheart: Good reasoning above but I’m not sold. The phrase “typical white person” doesn’t work IN ANY CONTEXT, and is biased speech when uttered by a person of any race (including Caucasian).</p>
<p>[RedLasso](<a href=“http://www.redlasso.com/ClipP;ayer.aspx?id=8a521134-e10b-4bfb-8aec-”>http://www.redlasso.com/ClipP;ayer.aspx?id=8a521134-e10b-4bfb-8aec-</a> 690d61794d50)</p>
<p>He is talking about his grandmother being a typical white person in the way she behaves if she “sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know.” In the context of the discussion, which is about his famous previous speech on race, he is referring to seeing a black person.</p>
<p>He is saying that it is typical for white people to react fearfully if they see a black person on the street they don’t know.</p>
<p>I’m curious if there is any negative trait “typical black people” possess that you would be okay with me discussing? Because I think, that in the context of race or ethnicity, any reference to “typical” behaviors is prejudice.</p>
<p>Apparently the link is not connecting. If you plug in “typical white person” in google you can find the link to the audio.</p>
<p>Kluge: “Don’t you suppose that a person’s perception of that comment woul depend on whether or not they’ve ever been poor? What I’m trying to suggest to you is that it’s easy for you to insist that everyone acknowledge the “majestic equality” of American life, and to demand that everyone else do so too. You might feel differently if you had ever been on the sticky end of the “equality” stick - but you never have been.”</p>
<p>That’s a lot of spinning, and even more assuming.</p>
<p>And by the way, no matter what end of the “stick” a person is on, bigotry is unacceptable.</p>
<p>Avoiding bigotry does not mean that you have to “acknowledge the ‘magestic equality’ of American life”. Dialogues and debates can be had about the real state of the world without generalization about individuals according to race, gender, ethnic group, sexual orientation, and the like. </p>
<p>Let’s not make excuses for saying the wrong thing.</p>
<p>ilsa belter:</p>
<p>You know, I cannot disagree that it was a biased thing to say. One of my problems with Obama is that he panders to the wrong side of things, sometimes. But I am just sharing that what I see of him, in his sum total, and what I know of people in general, leads me to feel strongly that this is not a bigoted man. I will not be voting for him, however.</p>
<p>I feel that the story of Obama, when it is finally written, will include a pass through some people and experiences where he never should have gone. If he does become president, you will see this guy get embraced by more and more of us. He is a work in progress like any candidate for president, and I think in his personal journey there will have been twists and turns which arguably should not have happened. </p>
<p>I hope that when he has more experience, he will see that the economy is not a “zero sum game”, where people being successful must have taken it from someone else. That demotivating the people who create the most jobs with more taxes is not the way to grow the economy. That trying to sell how badly we’re doing is not a good way to win an election. It isn’t good for the country, particularly when it is downright false. That speaking off the cuff about being completely open-minded to meet with any leader, no matter how dangerous, without precondition, is reckless.</p>
<p>Hopefully, if this guy does become president, experience will polish him. Hopefully the ghost of Reagan will visit him in the middle of the night and school him on a few things. I don’t know why it didn’t work for Bush (the non-conservative), but maybe there is hope for Obama. That’s the kind of HOPE I am looking for.</p>
<p>“The myth here is that Wright was spewing “garbage” on a regular basis. This does not appear to be true at all. If this were phrased as, “Occasionally over the course of 20 years, Wright made a few extreme statements that weren’t at all like his normal sermons,” this whole thing wouldn’t sound like much. It sounds better, though, to say that he was spewing garbage for 20 years.”</p>
<p>Read post 33 above. This wasn’t an “occasional” thing and it was the reason Oprah left Trinity UCC, cause she knew it would tank her mainstream ambitions with a national audience. Which is what the US Presidency is, a mainstream ambition with a national audience. </p>
<p>In fact, read the entire Newsweek article. Trinity UCC helped Obama succeed in Black America and Chicago politics. If he didn’t think it might adversely affect his presidential campaign, then why did he disinvite Wright from the formal announcement the night before? That was in Jan. 2007. Probably part of why Wright is so mad at Obama now. This church community helped Obama succeed locally, but it is damaging on a national level, so Obama has had to publicly renounce the association. He’s a political opportunist and used the church as a stepping stone. Just another politician.</p>
<p>that said, I stayed up til 1am last night reading the background on the Contra/crack cocaine connection. I’ve also read the reviews about the Medical Apartheid book, so thanks to those who cited this stuff. I still don’t agree with Wright but I see more where he’s coming from. The New Orleans big shots dynamited the levees in 1927 to prevent flooding the city, destroying St. Bernard Parish in the process, so it is easy to see why some AAs think that someone may have purposely destroyed the floodwalls during Katrina, even tho’ it’s not true. The belief that it might be is not totally w/o a basis.</p>
<p>I’m still waiting for somebody to comment on the Jeremiah Wright video Drosselmeirer linked to—the full and extended context of the “chickens coming home to roost”, sound bite. Come on, people, this isn’t rocket science. It’s only about 7 minutes. </p>
<p>I’m waiting for someone to point out the David Duke/KKK kind of “racism” that our conservative friends so vehemently insist is inherent in this sermon. Heck, I’m waiting for proof of the fulfillment of even the dictionary definition of racism in Wright’s sermon. </p>
<p>Come on, now. Be brave. It really isn’t that difficult:rolleyes:</p>