blatham wrote:spendius wrote:We love a good American riot Bernie. It's dead tame here.
Ever been in one? I was once, in Vancouver, after a parade for a big football game scheduled the following day. Interesting experience but too dangerous to be 'fun' (flying bottles, crushing crowds, police carnivore dogs, etc.)
Objection to "carnivore dogs"!
Besides - a riot is exactly what is expected in Denver if Mrs. Clinton becomes her party's presidential nominee: that's why she, hubby, Howard Dean et al picked the highest-altitude city in the nation for their convention: it's harder to start a fire the higher up you go - duh!
woiyo wrote:blatham wrote:The real danger of Obama is what black people will do if he doesn't win. They'll do this because they are dangerous people. Not far, really, from the trees.
Quote:On his Fox News radio show, Tom Sullivan predicted that African-Americans would be rioting in the streets similar to what happened after the O.J. trial in the 1990s.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/
So you think all black people are dangerous?
I'm pretty sure you missed his sarcasm. This, of course, is the story that will be pushed by many in the right-wing.
Cycloptichorn
Foxfyre wrote:Roxxxanne wrote:Foxfyre wrote:
But I think we will never be truly equal and racism will never be defeated until we are allowed to see and treat each other as equals instead of black people, white people, etc. who must be seen as different and/or accommodately differently because of their history or whatever.
Maybe you can twang your magic twanger and reverse four hundred years of oppression. Gosh, where the f*** do you come up with such nonsense?
I come up with such 'nonsense' because I do not use my own sometimes quite unpleasant past, nor my heritage nor the environment I grew up in to dictate or excuse the choices and attitudes that I hold today. Without going into detail about it, my own history should entitle me to be hate filled, violent, chemically dependent, fearful, defeated, paranoid, suicidal, etc. etc. etc. There was a lot of it that wasn't pretty.
We do not have to be prisoners of our past nor slaves to our histories. I think when we are, we never allow ourselves to move beyond it and become better. Know and understand and learn from it yes. Be bound to it as inevitable. No.
Oh you poor victim you. We are not talking about individuals, we are talking about an entire group of people all sharing the same heritage of oppression. You just don't get it and you never will. Your prejudice drips from every word. Like when you outrageously charged Obama with refusing to release his passport records! A charge triggered only by your own pathetic racist mind. I think you need professional help, quite frankly.
BTW interesting choice of words "slaves to our histories" So here is a black man trying to get by all that and all you can do is try to keep the debate mired in the racial gutter. Really. Get some help.
"move beyond it and become better' Yup, YOU need to heed your own advice.
woiyo wrote:blatham wrote:The real danger of Obama is what black people will do if he doesn't win. They'll do this because they are dangerous people. Not far, really, from the trees.
Quote:On his Fox News radio show, Tom Sullivan predicted that African-Americans would be rioting in the streets similar to what happened after the O.J. trial in the 1990s.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/
So you think all black people are dangerous?
No, only the thugs that have been encouraged by the gangsta culture.
btw this would include both black and white youth who think that violence is cool and that others (especially women) are legitimate victims of wrath if they get in the way of what we want.
Obama misses a golden opportunity to speak up against this seduction of America's youth, especially black youth.
Bill Cosby has done a much better job of articulating the problems black youth face in today's culture.
'Present' Obama can't seem to make the 'tough decision' to confront the destroyers of young blacks.
After all, rich hip hop music execs and 'artists' (con artists would be a better description) might be persuaded to donate to his campaign, so he can ill afford to tick them off.
For blatham.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/mayhem-at-fox-news-ancho_n_92743.html
I'm at work and can't watch the clips, but the story gives me a dash of hope.
Thanks dollface! Boy, that's encouraging. Maybe, just maybe some of those folks over there actually have some sense of civic responsibility after all.
I dont know if this has been brought up, so if it has I apologize.
As much as I liked Obama's speech, I think he turned around and shot himself in the foot.
His remark on that Philly radio station about "typical white people" was a huge mistake, IMHO.
He didnt need to say that, and when taken in context, him talking about his grandmother, I think it was a huge mistake.
To me it sounded like he was throwing her under the bus.
He made the mistake of not policing his every word for bad sound byte potential, but what he was actually saying in context was clearly not meant to be negative towards his grandmother.
I would really hate it if we got to a place where nobody can say what they think, especially politicians, without the fear of it being spliced into harmful sound bytes.
Is thread going to be forever bogged down with the Wright silliness?
FreeDuck wrote:He made the mistake of not policing his every word for bad sound byte potential, but what he was actually saying in context was clearly not meant to be negative towards his grandmother.
I would really hate it if we got to a place where nobody can say what they think, especially politicians, without the fear of it being spliced into harmful sound bytes.
I understand that, and forgive me if it seemed like I implied otherwise.
I just think that those that seriously dont like him are gonna have a field day with that comment.
mysteryman wrote:I dont know if this has been brought up, so if it has I apologize.
As much as I liked Obama's speech, I think he turned around and shot himself in the foot.
His remark on that Philly radio station about "typical white people" was a huge mistake, IMHO.
He didnt need to say that, and when taken in context, him talking about his grandmother, I think it was a huge mistake.
To me it sounded like he was throwing her under the bus.
Yup, that is the new talking point. Gosh, can you ever think on your own?
Yeah, I hear you, mm. My comment was directed more at this grandmother nonsense than at you directly.
Roxxxanne wrote:mysteryman wrote:I dont know if this has been brought up, so if it has I apologize.
As much as I liked Obama's speech, I think he turned around and shot himself in the foot.
His remark on that Philly radio station about "typical white people" was a huge mistake, IMHO.
He didnt need to say that, and when taken in context, him talking about his grandmother, I think it was a huge mistake.
To me it sounded like he was throwing her under the bus.
Yup, that is the new talking point. Gosh, can you ever think on your own?
What the hell are you talking about?
I dont get the "talking point memo's" that you get, so I have no idea what you are talking about.
Yes you did the under the bus talking point has been repeated ad nauseum, on right-wing TV, radio and blogosphere.
Roxxxanne wrote:Yes you did the under the bus talking point has been repeated ad nauseum, on right-wing TV, radio and blogosphere.
Since I have been at work, with no access to tv or a radio, thats news to me.
Chris Wallace to Fox hosts: Two hours of Obama-bashing is enough
David Edwards and Mike Sheehan
Published: Friday March 21, 2008
| StumbleUpon
Print This Email This
Veteran journalist Chris Wallace admonished Fox & Friends over their characterization of a comment in which Obama referred to his grandmother as a "typical white person."
"I love you guys, but I want to take you to task if I may respectfully for a moment," Wallace began. "I have been watching the show..., and it seems to me that two hours of Obama-bashing on this 'typical white person' remark is somewhat excessive, and frankly, I think you're somewhat distorting what Obama had to say."
As the F&F hosts began grinning and shifting around in their seats, Wallace continued, "What he said was, 'The point I was making was not that my [grandmother] harbors any racial animosity--she doesn't--but she is a typical white person...,'" which is where you generally have clipped it."
As co-host Steve Doocy denied the charge, Wallace continued, "But what he went on to say is, '...who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, there's a reaction that's been bred into our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes comes out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society.'"
Added Wallace, "I'm not saying that's the most felicitous remark that anybody ever made, but I think it's a little more complicated than we've been portraying."
Doocy interjected again, saying, "It just seems curious, because Barack Obama said this..., but had Hillary Clinton said something on the other side, had she said, 'Well, that's a typical Irish person, Polish person, Italian person, Swedish person,' whatever, it'd hit the fan!"
Responded Wallace, "I've been watching on and off for a couple of hours and every clip I've seen ends at 'that's a typical white person,' when in fact he's going on to discuss the nature of race in our country, and again, I'm not saying if he had it do over again that he'd necessarily say it that way, but I don't think that he was making a hyper-racial remark."
"I guess I just feel like on a day when he's been endorsed by Bill Richardson, and we have this story about the passports," he added, "I feel like two hours of Obama-bashing may be enough."
The F&F hosts responded to Wallace with vehement defenses, but Wallace said that after Obama had given major speeches this week on race, Iraq, and the economy, his campaign might suggest that "in terms of deflecting attention away from the issues people really want to hear about, maybe it's the media doing it, not Barack Obama."
Wallace, son of 60 Minutes veteran Mike Wallace and reportedly a registered Democrat, is himself a Fox News host, which underscores his remarkable defense of the embattled Democratic presidential frontrunner.
Sam Graham-Felsen, a media staffer for the Obama campaign, wrote the following in a blog post at Obama's official campaign site:
We appreciate Chris Wallace for doing his job as a tough but fair journalist on a network that has been deeply irresponsible over the last week in its unrelenting and sensationalistic coverage of Senator Obama. Senator Obama gave the speech he did on Tuesday because he believes that Americans are ready for a thoughtful, mature discussion about race, and are hungry to move past media-generated controversies that distract from the struggles they face in their everyday lives. If Fox News wants to play clips of the same offensive sound bites every day from now until November, that's their right, but that type of coverage does a disservice to their viewers and to a nation that is facing serious challenges that merit thoughtful and honest reporting.
Earlier, before Wallace appeared on the show, F&F co-host Brian Kilmeade had temporarily walked off the set after Doocy made a crack at him after heated discussion of the Obama remark.
Yup but, according to several on this thread, Fox News is the devil's playground, never gets anything right, is totally biased, and doesn't give a balanced perspective on anything. So we are not to appreciate anything anybody associated with Fox says or give it any credibility, right?
This article explains a point I tried to make to Nimh yesterday regarding Obama's silence and the harm it causes in his very own church. Even if some don't agree that Obama shares his pastor's views, others will see his inability to confront and rectify as a failure of leadership.
A Nagging Wright Question
There's one thing about the Jeremiah Wright controversy that keeps nagging at me: This crazy shibboleth promoted by Wright that the US government "lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color."
Of all the outrageous statements we've heard from Wright, this one is in a special category. Some of Wright's other outbursts are simply offensive name calling ("US of KKK-A," "God damn America"). Others may shock middle America but are common on the left, and at least arguable (US foreign policy invited the 9/11 attacks, rich racist whites run America, Hiroshima was a moral abomination).
But this AIDS thing is something different. First of all, it is not an opinion: It is a demonstrable falsehood. Not only that, it promotes a wildly conspiratorial wordview, one extremely corrosive to black America. It instills African-Americans with a belief that whites aren't just prejudiced, but trying to eliminate them. I can understand blacks' grievances about, say, the war on drugs. But how could any black kid who thinks the white establishment is propagating genocide want to succeed in (white) American society? How could he ever trust any white person he meets? And what are the consequences of that for both races?
Apart from fostering a terrible sense of victimhood, the AIDS conspiracy also suggests that black Americans can't even trust supposedly empirical scientific fact. Of course, if my people had suffered Tuskegee-like experiments, I would be pretty suspicious myself. But the legitimate existence of such suspicions makes it all the more deplorable to exploit them, in much the same way Obama's wonderful speech this week deplored the way conservatives have whipped up white racial resentments for political gain.
So, it's one thing for Obama to have done nothing to contest Wright's tirades on race and American foreign policy. You can argue that Wright was entitled to those beliefs. But he is not entitled to peddle a ridiculous lie to a captive and reverential audience. And if Obama knew Wright was doing so, shouldn't he have said something? At a minimum, wouldn't he have felt compelled to say something?
The point isn't to score a gotcha on Obama. It's to get a clearer sense of his political style. To have challenged Wright on this claim would have been an act of political leadership--not least because it wouldn't have been easy. Indeed, it would be fine evidence of Obama's credo of telling people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear. Of course, maybe Obama never heard Wright say this at all. I tend to doubt it. But if that's the case, it'd be nice to hear Obama flatly say so.
P.S. No, Wright is not a monster. Here he is leading his congregation in a mass onstage AIDS test to demonstrate its ease and importance. But a right doesn't undo a wrong, either.
Webpage Title
