Obama '08?

mysteryman wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I find the notion that any right-winger has come to this thread attempting to engage in rational and measured discussion about Obama, in any fashion, to be completely hilarious!

Cycloptichorn

So, apparently you havent read all of what has been posted, have you?

Pardon me, MM. You have been rather reasonable as well. But, you call yourself an independent, so I didn't count you.

Cycloptichorn

'Independent' describes political party affiliation. 'Conservative' and 'right-wing' describe political ideology. One can be an independent and be conservative and right-wing. One can also be an independent and be liberal and leftist.

Again, Jeremiah Wright would not be a problem if Obama had not originally presented him as his spiritual mentor and advisor and put him on his campaign. It is a 20-year very close and supportive association with Wright that is Obama's problem and Obama knows it. That's what triggered the speech.

But the speech itself invited a discussion on race. Willing or not, Obama was dragged into that and it is probably going to have to happen now unless something more provocative bumps this off the radar. I'm just saying that if we're going to have a discussion on race, let's have a discussion on race instead of demanding that everybody accept and speak one particular point of view.

I don't like being committed to ANY party, just let me vote!

I'm not even sure why the issue of "sincerity" comes up in politics. Who measures it, and how do we measure it?

dyslexia wrote:

It was linked and this is what it contains;

Quote:

On the other hand, I am sick to death of black people as a group. The truth. That is part of the conversation Obama is asking for, isn't it? I live in an eastern state almost exactly on the fabled Mason-Dixon line. Every day I see young black males wearing tee shirts down to their knees -- and jeans belted just above their knees. I'm an old guy. I want to smack them. All of them. They are egregious stereotypes. It's impossible not to think the unthinkable N-Word when they roll up beside you at a stoplight in their trashed old Hondas with 19-inch spinner wheels and rap recordings that shake the foundations of the buildings. . . .

Here's the dirty secret all of us know and no one will admit to. There ARE niggers. Black people know it. White people know it. And only black people are allowed to notice and pronounce the truth of it. Which would be fine. Except that black people are not a community but a political party. They can squabble with each other in caucus but they absolutely refuse to speak the truth in public. And this is the single biggest obstacle to healing the racial divide in this country.

I'm not proposing the generalized use of the term, just trying to be clear for once, in the wake of Obama's call for us to have a dialogue about race. However much they may scream and protest, black people will know what I mean when I demand they concede that the following people are niggers:

No, it wasn't. That's from a different blogger. The update is available on Instapundit's website if you're interested.

... let me, just this once, defend Glenn Reynolds.

I don't know the people at the Instapunk.com blog, though their retrospective embrace of vigilantism and robbery doesn't recommend them to me. Apparently Glenn has said some nice things about their blog.

But when Reynolds sends an item link to a posting of the Easter poem "Dulce lignem dulce clavo" by InstaPunk contributor "Chain Gang," I don't see where Glenn Greenwald is justified in tying Reynolds to the racist rant posted on the same site by a different contributor, "Old Punk."

Glenn Reynolds sometimes says, and links to, silly and offensive stuff (for example this swipe at Oprah, which Greenwald points to in an update) and I haven't been backward in criticizing him. But he didn't endorse "Old Punk's" diatribe, even by implication, and I thought our side tried to be above guilt-by-association. Has that changed?

Somehow I keep missing these crucial memos.

Desperation, Tico. Resorting to attacking one's associates when there is no attack on their actions which can gain much traction with the electorate. Keep flogging that one, and see how far ya get

I would characterize as hysterical the right-wing smear machine's attempt to make something out of the media driven non-story concerning a preacher's strung together sound bites. Nobody cares except the people who were not going to vote for Obama anyway.

None of us have any doubts that the Republicans on this thread are here for the purpose of trashing Obama. Period. It's odd to find myself saying this, but Foxfyre is the most intellectually honest of the group, currently; I really think that there's fear amongst the rest of them that Obama is going to win this thing. A real fear. Because, odious as their opinions may be, the Republicans who are here are not stupid. They can see how toxic the current environment is to Republicans. They can see how Obama is raising money at a breakneck rate, how he is drawing massive crowds. I can understand their fear! Anything that would d/q him now is something which HAS to be done, b/c if it goes to the general, they are going to get trounced, and they know it.

The only place it'll have traction are the very people who tries very hard to make a mountain out of a molehill, because they don't know how to talke about the real issues concerning Americans; the economy and Iraq.

Kitten with a Whip wrote:

I would characterize as hysterical the right-wing smear machine's attempt to make something out of the media driven non-story concerning a preacher's strung together sound bites. Nobody cares except the people who were not going to vote for Obama anyway.

I think you are being optimistic here, and I think this story will have traction as we head toward the general.

The ones who harp on the Wright thing are just trying to stir racist tension. It is already beyond tiresome.

Stories have to have new information presented in order to have any real staying power in the media. This one doesn't seem to have any new information or room to grow. So how is it going to stay in the media - for months and months?

Sure, Republicans are going to attack him with it. If it wasn't this, it would be the muslim smear. If it wasn't that, then something else. Who cares? It's probably an advantage to Obama, if this story comes out in the primary, and it doesn't significantly hurt him at the time... by the general, it's old news.

Cycloptichorn