Obama '08?

roger wrote:

teenyboone wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
teeny, Lowry and Lewis, 2 great men stuck in the middle of this nonsense. MLK is being badly used. "I believe both Clintons want to win, by any means." I believe that too.

You know, I really like her, but these statements send a bad message. Like everyone else, I loved the Clintons. No matter the set-up scandals and innuendos, lobbed at both of them, the 8 years, they graced the White House, Clinton, is the only President of memory who had a surplus, rather than a deficit.

In walks a dyslexic, paranoid schizophrenic, draft dodging, drug snorting, "mama's boy", with his greedy, mean, alter-ego, Cheney and Condi Rice, with all her brilliance, settles to be the professional "go-pher, cheerleading, butt-kissing", ?girlfriend? to this blundering idiot, with "schitt", for brains!

Flattery will get you, everywhere! Thanks!

You have a very dry sense of humor, teenyboone. I like that.

0 Replies

Here's a more complete reporting of Michelle's speech in Atlanta.

Michelle Obama reaches out to blacks at Trumpet Awards
By ERRIN HAINES, The Associated Press
2008-01-14 01:04:21.0

ATLANTA -
Michelle Obama told the audience at an event celebrating black achievement that her husband is the person America needs in the White House right now, not in four or eight years.

Barack Obama's other half spoke briefly at the opening of the Trumpet Awards on Sunday night and was greeted with a standing ovation when she took the stage. In her address, she was critical of those whom she said would "dismiss this moment as an illusion, a fairy tale" - a response to comments made by the spouse of her husband's rival, Bill Clinton, who said the Illinois senator was telling a "fairy tale" about his opposition to the Iraq war.

"We are more ready and prepared than we can ever know," Michelle Obama said. "The idea that I could be a part of history...is still an improbable notion to many, but to me it's an amazing idea."

Former President Clinton has appeared on several black radio programs recently to clarify that he was using the phrase "fairy tale" in reference to Obama's record on the Iraq war, not his historic bid to become the nation's first black president.

Michelle Obama said that Barack Obama is the right candidate "not because of the color of his skin, but because of the quality and consistency of his character." And while she said she was thankful for the concern of those who would want to protect her family from disappointment should Barack Obama not win, postponing his efforts was not an option.

"I know about the sense of doubt and fear about what the future holds, that keeps us hoping and waiting for a turn that will never come," Michelle Obama said. "There are a lot of doubters and naysayers out there talking about, 'I'm not sure America is ready for a black president.'"

Among that group, she included blacks, who might be skeptical about whether or not Barack Obama was electable. But she pointed to his showing in Iowa and New Hampshire and was optimistic about his chances in the upcoming South Carolina Democratic primary - when the black vote will first factor into the election.

"We had a miraculous victory in Iowa," Michelle Obama said. "Ain't no black people in Iowa! Something big, something new is happening. Let's build the future we all know is possible. Let's show our kids that America is ready for Barack Obama right now."

Michelle Obama's remarks were also peppered with references to Coretta Scott King and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., whose 79th birthday is Tuesday. She said that should Barack Obama win in November, "America will look at itself differently and the world will look at America differently."

She launched into her remarks recalling a meeting with Coretta Scott King, who died two years ago this month. She called the meeting "an extraordinary moment."

"That's a woman who knows what it means to overcome," Michelle Obama said to applause, and also mentioned Rosa Parks as another example. "These are women who cast aside the voices of doubt and fear, who said 'Wait. It's not your turn.' I know that my life is only possible because of their courage and sacrifice."

After the awards ceremony, she headed to the Wild Hog Supper, an annual dinner that has for decades been the prelude to the start of the Georgia legislative session.

Outside the event, held at a converted rail depot in the shadow of the State Capitol, backers held up signs that read: "We love you First Lady." Inside the depot, she was surrounded by legislators, lobbyists and state officials who mobbed Obama as she moved through the crowd.

"We need you," she told one lawmaker who was supporting another candidate. "Do we have this together? Do we have this together?" she asked a local NAACP official.

As she navigated food-filled tables - the dinner featured pork products of all kinds, from ribs to rinds - Obama offered a brief explanation of why she decided to attend.

"I don't know," she shrugged. "It's the food."

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

Let's show our kids that America is ready for Barack Obama right now.

This is extremely powerful and cannot be repeated often enough. It reminds of his rant at the DNC that reached out and grabbed everyone in the house...

Quote:

I'm not talking about blind optimism here -- the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don't think about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about something more substantial. It's the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker's son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.

I know I've posted this before, but if anyone missed that awesome speech; you can see, hear, and/or read it by clicking here.

0 Replies

I want everyone to please read this piece by Clarence Jones. He is a 77 year old black man who advised and wrote speechs for his good friend, Dr ML King. Here's an excerpt, but please check out the link...

The challenge confronting me and others, who worked with Dr. King, is how to set the record straight without appearing to third parties, especially the media, to be playing the so-called "race card". The absence of such raced based politics is what may be part of the unexpected broad appeal of the Obama candidacy.

I would like to remind all the candidates that this is the week of Dr. King's 79th birthday. Distorted application or misappropriation of his legacy for self serving political purposes by any candidate besmirches this legacy. Less there be some question about the roles of Martin Luther King and President Lyndon Johnson, let me "make it plain": the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was not principally because of President Lyndon B. Johnson.

It was because of Martin Luther King, Jr. LBJ was only responding to what Martin often said, quoting Victor Hugo in Les Miserables, that "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world and that is an idea whose time has come." The passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was "an idea whose time had come"; a direct result of those hundreds of thousands of people marching in the streets across our country under Dr. King's leadership and not because "it. took a president to get it done."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clarence-b-jones/clinton-vs-obama-lest-w_b_81667.html

0 Replies

It's a tough and complex question, snood. My personal political 'awakening' came as a result of watching the civil rights movement on the nightly news when I was an adolescent. All those notions of justice and equality and freedom and community identity and the role of the courts etc etc were put into high relief for me in this battle fought at that time.

The same confused, or perhaps co-operative is a better word, picture arose in South Africa.

The real physical bravery was overwhelmiingly borne by blacks in both cases. The huge preponderance of dedication and effort too was borne by blacks. I don't know how anyone might suggest anything else.

But the other side of the equation has to be noted as well if we are to get the history of it right. All of which I realize you know as well as I.

0 Replies

New Hampshire's Primary vote recount is supposed to start today. An account of the unfolding story of the New Hampshire Primary
election recount and a link to help Kucinich with the $69,000 fee that must be prepaid before the count can begin can be found here:

http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/5344

They are recounting both democrat and republican votes so this is of interest to all of us and should be of interest to the FEC and every state.

0 Replies

I keep thinking there was a chance to respond to the MLK comment in a way that would make the right point. What if Obama had said something like "thanks to the work of MLK and LBJ we no longer have to choose between an inspirational leader and a president -- MLK couldn't run for president, but I can." Her comment was meant to draw a parallel with Obama as MLK and her as LBJ, but that was a different time. Couldn't MLK have done just as much if not more if he was president?

0 Replies

That would've been good.

This was a really tough place for Obama. To extend my "equivalency" point from last page, it's being portrayed as roughly equal "sniping", "war of words," etc., but Obama didn't say anything about it until Sunday, after Hillary's weird one-hour Meet the Press appearance (and part of what he said then was "hello, this is the first time I've said something about it!"), and then by the following afternoon he'd said "OK, enough of this, let's start focusing on issues."

Pretty narrow window. I think he hit the high points but yeah, that would've been a good slam-dunk.

Clinton seems to have been really hurt by this whole thing in terms of black support, but of course black support isn't everything.

0 Replies

I agree about the way it's being portrayed and the trickiness of the situation. I think he did fine. True, black support isn't everything... except in South Carolina. And the conventional wisdom is that where SC goes, Georgia and other southern states will follow. What do I know, though.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I want everyone to please read this piece by Clarence Jones. He is a 77 year old black man who advised and wrote speechs for his good friend, Dr ML King. Here's an excerpt, but please check out the link...

The challenge confronting me and others, who worked with Dr. King, is how to set the record straight without appearing to third parties, especially the media, to be playing the so-called "race card". The absence of such raced based politics is what may be part of the unexpected broad appeal of the Obama candidacy.

I would like to remind all the candidates that this is the week of Dr. King's 79th birthday. Distorted application or misappropriation of his legacy for self serving political purposes by any candidate besmirches this legacy. Less there be some question about the roles of Martin Luther King and President Lyndon Johnson, let me "make it plain": the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was not principally because of President Lyndon B. Johnson.

It was because of Martin Luther King, Jr. LBJ was only responding to what Martin often said, quoting Victor Hugo in Les Miserables, that "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world and that is an idea whose time has come." The passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act was "an idea whose time had come"; a direct result of those hundreds of thousands of people marching in the streets across our country under Dr. King's leadership and not because "it. took a president to get it done."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clarence-b-jones/clinton-vs-obama-lest-w_b_81667.html

Mr Jone's defense of the prominent role of Dr King, a man whose movement he served, is entirely understandable and appropriate. However the transformation that occurred in the mid 20th century in America with respect to organized segregation was either an idea whose time had come, or it was the work of individual people, perhaps many in number. You can't have it both ways.

Moreover the transformation had several vital elements, of which the Civil Rights Act was merely one.

Another, perhaps even more fundamental element was the erosion of the moral foundation of segregation -- a process that had been ongoing for decades, but which was rather suddenly accelerated and made vivid to nearly all Americans by the Montgomery Alabama. bus boycott, led by Martin Luther King. That set an accelerating process in motion which King continued to lead and facilitate by his actions and rhetoric.

It would be equally wrong to deny the similar decisive effect of LBJ's very active role in organizing the political support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It happened in the wake of the Kennedy assassination and in the face of a still well-organized "Solid South" wing of the Democrat Congress - a wing that dominated nearly all of the key Committee chairmanships of both House and Senate. LBJ, a seasoned practicioner of the arts of manipulating legislation and legislators, devoted his political capital and many skills to the task and succeeded.

King meanwhile continued to prick the consciences of most Americans, a process that continued to shape events. There were many other actors in this drama as well, and they came from all quarters of the country.

Icons are important and necessary. However, it is important to remember that they are just men and women. Martin Luther King was a great leader who emerged at a key moment, and who wisely and courageously shaped great events in this country, events that benefitted us all. He was also a human being. It is neither necessary nor beneficial to his memory to paint him as the exclusive architect of the age or to deliberately ignore other contributors to the process. What he really did is quite enough to make him remembered and revered for a long time.

0 Replies

New Reuters/ Zogby poll:

Quote:

Clinton, a former first lady who would be the first woman U.S. president, held a 21-point edge over Obama in October. He cut that to 8 points by last month, and the new survey gave her a 39 percent to 38 percent edge.

Her 1-point lead was well within the poll's margin of error of 4.7 percentage points.

Obama, who would be the first black U.S. president, and Clinton were essentially deadlocked among a variety of groups, including men, women, Democrats and independents. Obama led substantially, 65 percent to 15 percent, among black voters.

Obama barely led among voters under age 24, a substantial drop in support from last month, but led Clinton among voters aged 55 to 69, normally one of her strengths.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1554681020080116

Weird info in last paragraph! Opposite of what you'd expect.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I agree about the way it's being portrayed and the trickiness of the situation. I think he did fine. True, black support isn't everything... except in South Carolina. And the conventional wisdom is that where SC goes, Georgia and other southern states will follow. What do I know, though.

Did you have a chance to read this post of mine on the polls etc thread? It's about the SC polls and how they break down among black and white voters - and particularly, about what seems like it might be a development of voting preferences among white voters.

I thought about cross-posting it here, but the next post there is still on the same point too, and the two together would be a long copy/paste to bring here.

I was kind of disturbed by the numbers...

0 Replies

Thanks, nimh, hadn't seen it. Will look now.

0 Replies

Ok, so what's your take? You think maybe Hillary makes Obama look like he's playing the race card which dents his white support?

0 Replies

That's my take. I'm interested in seeing what polls show after Obama's truce-calling, though. The latest poll in nimh's post is from 1/13 (when things were gnarliest). Obama's truce press conference was the afternoon of the 14th.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Ok, so what's your take? You think maybe Hillary makes Obama look like he's playing the race card which dents his white support?

No, not that. I'm not sure what exactly. If something did indeed go on there rather than the jedi mind tricks of statistical noise, then I think it's more something like.. hm.

Obama is a candidate who has been singularly successful in transcending race in his appeal, or even making people 'forget' about it. Sure, there is the excitement about a possible first black President, and that's an excitement that can only make those supporting him feel good about themselves. But otherwise he has been fairly careful about being a post-racial candidate of sorts, if that is the right wording.

In short, there's a lot of people out there supporting him because they like him, they like his message, and they dont think much about that he's black. It just doesnt come up kinda. Now if the race question is explicitly pushed onto the table, in whatever form, that suddenly pulls that part of the equation to the forefront of people's minds. Puts it right there at the forefront of the associations people have, the things that first comes to mind and invoke thoughts - or feelings (conscious or subconscious).

This sounds silly, but it's like some people would suddenly go, oh yeah hey he is black. Not that it was a secret or anything Razz

. Just that it's hard to underestimate the amount of thought that yer average voter puts into his preference, especially at this point in time. Obama is both black and a good guy and a good politician, of course. But if the first instinctive thing people think when they hear "Obama" becomes "the black guy" instead of "the nice guy" or "the smart guy", that hurts him. Partly because it lessens instinctive identification with the guy, and partly because a lot of people still harbor instinctive negative responses, even just subconcsiously, on race; the legacy of racism (which in SC might be heavier than outside the South).

Like Scheiber writes again today,

Quote:

For the last week, you could sense the campaign obsessives becoming increasingly pessimistic about Obama's chances. This happened for two reasons. First, an extensive discussion of race seemed to force Obama into the role of "black candidate." Second, Hillary's questions about the steadfastness of Obama's war opposition made him look like a typical equivocating politician. The thinking was that Hillary would win if the race became a competition between a "white candidate" and a "black candidate," or a race between two conventional candidates.

(He goes on to say that Obama may have neutralised this stuff during the debate last night.)

I dunno. It's just a theory, but a disturbing one..

0 Replies

I think that's consistent with "the race card," though.

Transcendent vs. black candidate.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I think that's consistent with "the race card," though.

Well, the distinction I was going for was that people didnt necessarily feel that Obama was playing the race card in any way (which is what FreeDuck suggested it might look like). He could not have responded at all, or responded in the most perfect way possible (and I think he did already handle it very well), and you might still have seen this effect. Just as a function of the issue of race coming to the forefront of discussion (and people's minds) per se.

That's the theory I was fretting about, anyhow. Like, if that's all it takes - just for anyone, Obama's opponent in the primary, or his prospective Republican opponent in the generals if he makes it through, to trigger the race issue onto the front page and hopp, some share of white voters is scared off from "the black candidate", that would be pretty depressing. And there'd be relatively little he could do about it, except keep trying to push it off the table.

0 Replies

OK, I see the distinction.

I have the impression that people are reacting to it as if he played the race card. That's what the coverage is, overwhelmingly. That Clinton and Obama were equally going at it, back and forth, trading barbs, etc. It's not portrayed as Clinton directing it at Obama, or even as neutral third parties (Brazile, Clyburn) bringing it up and both reacting to the fallout.

So, part of why I'm interested in polls post-truce.

Although even then there is the problem I pointed out about it being portrayed as something roughly equal -- THEY called a truce, rather than Obama doing it and Hillary hastily following suit. Hopefully people will see through it though.

0 Replies

Also -- from Hillary's debate performance, from blogosphere chatter, from polls, etc. -- I think this was a really dangerous interval, and one that will be avoided by Hillary from now on (if she can help it) and likely Republican candidates, too, especially white male ones (as in, all the possibilities). If this ends up being a net positive for Obama -- if it really shifts the black vote (and I've seen a lot of comments about/ from black people who were incensed by the way this was handled by the Clintons), plus Obama is able to reassure the white vote that he's not just a black candidate, possibly even helped by the John Lewises and Charles Rangels defending Hillary in the way they did -- then I think this tactic (and I do think it was at least a little tactical) won't be used again.

OK, that was an ugly-ass paragraph, sorry, hope you can extract meaning from it (if not let me know and I'll try to explain better).

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know