Obama '08?

Foxfyre wrote:

I happen to be a fan of Dr. Steele though and I haven't seen anybody else who has done as much research or in depth analysis of Barack Obama as he has. And Steele is an acknowledged expert and authority on race in America.

Quote:

[as] I read his essay, I found myself thinking that Steele was trapped in a time warp, that his knowledge of the currents of thought and attitude among black people stopped sometime around 1990. Less charitably, I found myself thinking that the egregious Al Sharpton is not the only one with an investment in a static view of American race relations....It apparently never occurs to Steele that for a man a generation younger than himself the terms of blackness might be different, that the "totalitarian" demands he [Steele] encountered in the '60s might no longer prevail, that Barack Obama's mixed-race experience might actually be different than Shelby Steele's.

Source: Book review by Don Wycliff

By emotional investment, I mean in the objectionable points of view expressed by pastor Wright. It is the same issue of whether you would be a heavy participant and contributor to an organization if you didn't agree with the primary emphasis/purpose of that organization.

Building on what I posted to Vietnamnurse, I think it is unfortunate that a black man is not allowed to identify himself as conservative or hold a differing or unusual point of view without being accused of being a sellout or traitor to his race or it being a negative. Another member once referred to Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell, Steele et al as 'hanky heads'.

And I think it is unfortunate if Steele and Sowell et al are correct that Obama, with his speech, made himself a 'black candidate' as opposed to an American running for the Presidency. So long as voters and constituents and candidates are divided up by race in the public mind, race will be the primary issue rather than advancement of ideals that should be important to everybody.

Foxfyre wrote:

By emotional investment, I mean in the objectionable points of view expressed by pastor Wright. It is the same issue of whether you would be a heavy participant and contributor to an organization if you didn't agree with the primary emphasis/purpose of that organization.

Building on what I posted to Vietnamnurse, I think it is unfortunate that a black man is not allowed to identify himself as conservative or hold a differing or unusual point of view without being accused of being a sellout or traitor to his race or it being a negative. Another member once referred to Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, Thomas Sowell, Steele et al as 'hanky heads'.

And I think it is unfortunate if Steele and Sowell et al are correct that Obama, with his speech, made himself a 'black candidate' as opposed to an American running for the Presidency. So long as voters and constituents and candidates are divided up by race in the public mind, race will be the primary issue rather than advancement of ideals that should be important to everybody.

But, you should admit that the primary purpose and emphasis of the church in question is to spread the word of God and to help folk; not to demonize and make divisive statements. Obama would have been wrong to reject the church and the community based upon a few statements, under that logic.

I think that you and other Conservatives WANT him to be the Black candidate. Otherwise, you wouldn't be repeating it so much. People who don't seek to spread memes don't really do that, yaknow?

Cycloptichorn

I think that you and other Conservatives WANT him to be the Black candidate.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I think that you and other Conservatives WANT him to be the Black candidate.

The color of his skin is not important to our decisions concerning his run for the presidency. Of concern, is his seeming inability to ever speak the truth.

Moreover, does he really think any American Jew will vote for him, when he's a dues paying ( $20,000/yr) member of an anti-semitic congregation headed by an antisemitic Pastor, such as Mr. Wright?

Obama has answered the charges or critics as it were and people will either accept it or they won't. From what I can tell so far; most people accept what he had to say but it did have the affect of narrowing his lead over Hillary.

Now we are in for a Hillary ride with the release of all her papers; I hope it is enough to let this Obama stuff die down for a while and by the time the general election comes around it might be old news only kept alive with the likes of Fox News, drudge report.. and the like with their parroting supporters.

Yes, FoxFire, I would be impressed with arguments against Obama...my wonderful brother and my mother who support Hillary and I do not denigrate them.

I take Shelby Steele as a rather interesting but negative author. I am interested in people and the way they think...part of being a nurse. Also, I come from a very strong background of optimists.

I watched his speech last night on this, and it made me totally comfortable with his position on this situation. I especially related to the part where he said he could no more disown this man than his own grandmother. I can understand that, because I have people in my own family who have spouted very racist and bigoted garbage throughout my whole life. But disowning someone who has been an integral part of your life and/or family is just about impossible. Yet it doesn't mean I feel the same as they do. And I believe Obama when he says he rejects these ideas that Pastor Wright has.

And Miller, if you really feel that Obama hasn't been as truthful as Hillary, then every word that you say is nothing but a turd falling from your lopsided head, as far as I'm concerned.

blatham wrote:

Um...why? Not meaning to be too facetious but are you worried about your hubcaps, Israel, liberals generally or the 'charisma' thing?

Well maybe you did not mean to be facetious, but you sure came across that way. I'll forgive you this time. (Old ladies DO forgive easily )

Anyhow, bottom line, he talks about bringing people together, yet he definitely puts the working and middle class on one side, and business on the other, for one thing. I don't know where he thinks that the jobs for all these workers come from, but put the screws into business, and many more people will be out of work.

I think that the war in Iraq was not carried out well, but pulling out now will make our position untenable.

I have two major concerns, terrorism and the economy. I think that he is wrongheaded on both subjects.....................And I haven't checked my hubcaps recently! :wink:

But I think Steele's analysis is probably right. Up to the time of that speech, Obama was not the 'black candidate'. He was everybody's candidate. What Steele, Sowell, and others are now saying is that the speech brought race to the forefront and Obama is more likely to now be seen as 'the black candidate' in a way that was not the case before.

Miller wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I think that you and other Conservatives WANT him to be the Black candidate.

The color of his skin is not important to our decisions concerning his run for the presidency. Of concern, is his seeming inability to ever speak the truth.

Moreover, does he really think any American Jew will vote for him, when he's a dues paying ( $20,000/yr) member of an anti-semitic congregation headed by an antisemitic Pastor, such as Mr. Wright?

No, you're lying. You want him to be seen as the Black candidate, because it will allow you to use the politics of racial division to attack him. It's a part of the Republican strategy this fall.

Cycloptichorn