*flatline* lol


SEC, I don't get it....Juan Williams is conservative.... isn't he expected to say it sucked?

I think he did what he had to do, and he did it extraordinarily well. And that was to make it clear he does not agree with Wright's comments to create a separation to appease the majority of voters while also not abandoning his church and risking the support of many who at one time thought he was "not black enough".

On a personal level, I will admit it all rang a bit hollow for me however. I am just tired and weary of race being such an issue in this campaign- just as I am a bit weary of race being dragged out so often at every perceived injustice. I accept and understand racism against African-Americans is still very real, but I also understand that much of the leadership in that community has very self-oriented viewpoints and have no trouble using the race card in a very imbalanced way to promote goals that are largely politically and economically based.

In Obama's defense, it was the media that started the race business and not him. This nation is ready to elect a qualified President without taking race into account, and the media is where the guilt trip started whereby anyone who questioned him would be criticized on the grounds it was racially based. It is the same thing as when the media made a big scene about Joe Lieberman and whether the country was ready for a Jewish Vice President. And it is unfortunate since it puts such candidates at an automatic disadvantage when people of other races get automatically defensive about the assumption that their lack of support means they are potentially "racist".

This is not fair for Obama, but each candidate has things to overcome and they need- by expressing their own personal vision in a practical manner- to do that effectively.

Hillary has done a great job of establishing herself in her own right even though the media wants to play up the Bill Clinton factor.

John McCain has done a decent job of getting past the fact that early in the campaign he spoke at Bob Jones University- which is just as bad as what Obama is mired in right now and the reason I thought McCain was dead in the water early on.

Obama needs to get beyond this in a very clear break- and it is unfortunate that many of the allies he needs most will not let him do this. His speech today was a tremendous effort in that direction, but it was an impossible task to begin with.

I would not vote for Obama on lack of substance and on disagreement with him on his general stances which I think will lead to a more socialist form of government- but I do find him and his wife both to be very eloquent and intelligent people.

In fact his high level of intelligence makes me question all the more why he tied himself so closely to that church to begin with. Maybe the answer is that he had to get over the "not black enough" issue and this was how to do it.

Either way, my earlier posts were intended to be cold analysis of the facts as I see them- and not reflect any personal feeling about Obama as I have never met him and so don't have anything to offer.

As for the "moron" comment- that has been a long time in coming and it was well-earned. Someone talking about my Mom needs no reply- it speaks for itself.

Haaaaaaaaa you so replied :p

Not everyone agrees that racism still exists today.

Even still, it is kind of annoying that Obama's speech has everyone in such an awe as if he's introducing some really new concepts or even accurately addressing the relevant concepts.

I take his speech for what it is: a response to his association with his pastor. I'm not high-fiving Obama for bringing issues of race to the forefront and bringing better awareness. This is just another passing fad.

I agree with you--amazingly... And it is sadly so... :(

So..you accept and understand...but what are you doing about it?

This is a fair point and gets to perhaps another common disconnect between racial groups.

Maybe it is the media's doing- but I and many others who are white get the sense that the CBC and a handful of leaders like Sharpton and Jackson frame the national discussion on African-American issues.

In real life and in person I know it does not work like that (I have yet to meet one African-American who I have known well enough to talk politics who had anything nice to say about Jesse Jackson), but there is definitely a sense that there is a leadership there which will make all judgement calls about how a person is to be treated based on their political orientation and not by some objective moral criteria- using the race card when in fact it is politics and not race that is in question.

But again, maybe the media is creating that to stir people up. I have to admit I do not know the answer.

It wasn't just a response to his pastor...it also put to the forefront of what people have been tiptoeing on eggshells ever since this thing started...which you just said...it's about bringing the issues of race or any kind of -ism to the forefront and start having frank discussions on what we can do to fix our own house before we go traipsing into another selling 'democracy'.

To hell with this "brand new race talk." America isn't going to address race any differently after this damn speech or if Obama is elected.

Therein lies part of the problem...the media and most of it white run, when they want a comment on race issues, go straight to them first, as if Jesse and Al are the voice for us all when tere are so many others out there that just as versed if not better versed on issues in the Black communities....when is the last time has white media called on folks like Tavis Smiley, Cornell West or many others to speak on certain issues?

If they left those same two alone, maybe they wouldn't have the general public hating them so much...

All I can do it live it- in my hiring decisions and in who I do business with.

I learned very early in life that results matter. And I hire and promote people based on results, period. I am very comfortable stating that and standing by it.

In a broader sense, it is harder because there is so much vitriol out there to contend with when one goes public.

When I meet someone, they have the same "chance" with me as everyone else in the context of the developing relationship- be it personal or professional.

But as much as I despise the "Bob Jones" mentality, I also despise the "Reverend Wright" mentality because I see them as one in the same.

Yet it is hard to be up front about that since you never know if someone will be the same or let personal biases influence their relative views. And maybe to an extent I have my own biases I don't even recognize.

I have worked with people who told me to my face they hate blacks, Mexicans, Asians etc. But I have also worked with minorities who I have seen use their racial status and legal favor of their status to force themselves into being treated specially beyond what they deserved.

And this is where people get defensive and scared. And whether you get defensive or scared depends on what your views are, the views of the other person and where the power is in that relationship (ie who works for who etc.)

On a national scale- the answer is that the media needs to stop promoting racial tension to achieve TV ratings. There is a fine line between exposing hidden injustice and talking up non-issues, but I think that line has been crossed.

How you do that is hard to say. The media does this to make money- and in a capitalist society, any society really, the goal is to make a good living for one's self.

So all you can do is your part to keep your little piece of the earth as it should be.

Yes, it was.

Pardon me for stopping the parade but I'd rather listen to Sam Cooke's "A Change is Gon' Come" than hear anymore rhetoric and the resulting cheerleading squad rants. People need to stop blowing smoke up his ass and making him the savior. Let him run his campaign and save the "state of the racist union" for a presidential acceptance speech. If he is elected.

I'll agree to that in general and at the present time, but I think what we can hope for is different conversations 15 to 20 years from now when grade school kids have grown up with an african american or a woman in the White House and that's what they've known. Their attitudes might be different and thus their conversations will hopefully change. People learn what they live, supposedly, so if they live with a not-a-white-male leader of the country, that's what they'll learn.

Well, having met Jesse Jackson in person a few times and a close friend of mine having gone to Howard with his son, the reality is everyone and he probably capitalized on the fact that when MLK was assassinated, he was right there with him and know all his intimate details of his "dream"... The reality is he doesn't, but he leveraged that throughout his pursuit of greater good.

He is a great motivator for young people. Kids who are unsure on themselves and what they can do. His leadership ability is absent. Which is different from Obama.

Obama is NOT part of "the establishment" or the Bourgie class. The AfAms you probably interact with are "MAYBE" a part of that... Nowadays, everything is all different from when I grew up, so I don't know, it depends.

I am part of the post-Civil Right's babies... Grew up during Affrimative Action
Days but still suffered under bigotry and racist attitudes by authoritative figures--like doctors, teachers and yes, sometimes police. The humiliation from those encounters are seared into my memory. But, I have worked to forgive people to. My hope and goal is to "judge someone by the content of his or her character".

that reminds me....how often this year as opposed to other election years has it been emphasized as to the breakdown of what race is voting for who?

That sickens me...and it insults my intelligence....

Drinking a glass of wine with that song too?

No.

heh

It is a new thing in the general media with this election. Ann Coulter likes to bring up race and voting blocks all the time, but in the past this has not been a staple of general media reporting, or even among many advocates/pundits.

I share your sense of being sick and feeling my intelligence has been insulted.

At the end of the day, this is how I see the Obama situation with regards to Reverend Wright,

1. Obama made a strategic decision early in the race to focus on a very high level approach to campaigning. This avoided specifics and a degree of substance, but also kept him free to avoid getting mired in details over specific comments that in the modern media can come back to bite you. A good example is McCain and the 100 years in Iraq comment.

2. This strategy served him very well early on- and still is really. However, he came into this situation with Wright as the candidate a lot of people did not really have a good handle on. This is in part due to the fact that he deliberately took a very high level message approach in his speeches, and also due to the fact the other 2 major candidates have very long and well known public records.

3. At a certain point, he made it very clear that his church and his pastor were a major force in his life.

4. Then the Wright stuff comes out- a perfect media story full of hate and sensationalism. And then a LOT of people who don't personally identify with Obama or understand where he is coming from are going to automatically, and unfairly, associate him negatively with Rev. Wright.

I think that is the bottom line here. Race pervades this in a sense, but it is not the fundamental issue. The media making it an issue- and bringing out pundits who defend Wright in part- just makes it harder on Obama.

I have to admit this made me laugh- now that I have calmed down a bit.

Somehow I get the feeling we would get along a lot better in person.

Al Gore never seemed Presidential to me..... :eek:

This is what makes the media money...not boring old issues but who is sleeping wth wh, who is a hater and so forth...like him or not, Obama says what he has to say and moves on. It's not stuff that has to linger on and on...I know what he would probably like just like a lot of us would like....rather than concentrate on what he did in Jakarta or who he fellowshipped with in Chicago or at what time he took a dump, ASK HIM about what he plans to do...

I get tired of people who keep claiming well they don't know what Obama is about...stop asking the wrong questions...stop wasting air time and money going on witch hunts...simply ask him what is his platform and we won't need a 40 minute speech addressing some BS that supposedly the US has moved past.

This whole dispute is partisan.

If you think the speech was less than brilliant and didn't do an adequate job explaining away his connections to a fearmonger, then you're an idiot conservative.

If you're falling all over yourself about how this is the most revolutionary speech every, you're a braindead and lovestruck liberal.

The fact is, it was fairly interesting and somewhat daring. It doesn't get the same acclaim (perhaps receiving negative backlash instead) if a white politician gives it, but that doesn't mean it didn't contain some valuable substance.

That said, I could care less what Obama says about race. I'm scared of what he'd do to the country, and lets not forget, this is about political posturing, not about some altruistic move to heal a racial divide (except insofar as that brings more delegates). I don't think he's evil, and I don't think he's racist. I simply disagree with the idea that he is good for America, and some liberals (not necessarily on this board) don't understand that. There seems to be a mindset that if just fixes this one thing, we'll all come around. Not quite.

I so wanted to get in on this thread yesterday, but my dumb computer was acting up. Anyway, since then, I've been able to give a lot of thought to the matter, and this is what I've come up with so far:

1) The speech was brave and courageous, and things that needed to be said were said in regard to race and the path this country should take to heal old wounds.

2) In all honesty, Wright's comments didn't get under my skin. They shocked me, of course. They angered me for a flicker, but then I realized that I didn't have the full context of what his message was that day. I went to seminary and loved the study of liberation theology and social justice... I know that themes of both are frequently interwoven into messages into black churches. His message could have been along those lines, but the incendiary comments are the "sound bytes" we're stuck with.

3) I applaud Obama for not completely breaking ties with his pastor. What is that saying... oh yes, Hate the sin, but love the sinner. Obama is living his faith. It would be so easy and convenient for him to condemn the man, just as many others have done, but, even with the possibility of political suicide, Obama is remaining loyal to a man who has done so much for him. Back in the day (biblical day, that is), tax collectors were the Jeremiah Wrights of the day. They were despised and reviled because they were crooked and just the worst of human scum. Yet I remember a story of a great man who decided to eat with one. He turned the public spectrum on its head. I don't want to seem like I'm making Obama the savior or anything, but I think that part of his charm in the media is that the media has never really seen a candidate like Obama, who, in most personal cases in his life, has stood up to do the right thing.

SC, I understand what you're saying about "loving the sinner." However, if I ever use that phrase with any consistency for my pastor, I don't think I'll be staying in that church. Clergymen are fallible like all of us, but I'm not interested in seeking guidance and spiritual counsel from people who don't even strive to meet the standards I set for my own life.

I can understand that. Parishioners *know* their clergy people are fallible, but I believe they *desire* or *hope* that they live a little better than the average person, meaning they have less sin or something. They are seen as the "experts" in all spiritual matters. And for that reason, your post makes sense.

I have a different view, I suppose, because I am extremely close to my pastor. He, of course, says things at regular intervals that piss me off and I think are wrong. I confront him on it, and we have dialogue. I think we both come away with understanding where the other one stands. He hasn't said anything that could be fodder for news crews, mind you, but in my mind, they're offensive to my sensibilities. Of course, I could never turn my back on him, because he married my husband and me and baptized our children... and he's my dad. ;) Perhaps that is why I can understand Obama's stance more than the average person.

SC, your situation sounds a little unique, though I guess not too much so.

I don't want a pastor who is really my friend. Don't get me wrong, I love having a friend-like relationship with my pastor, but he's a spiritual leader for me, someone more concerned with my relationship w/ the Lord then anything else. Perhaps that is the definition of the best kind of friend, but I know at some point Wright would have ceased to be any sort of spiritual leader for me, and we would only be left with friendship. It is one thing for somebody to fall, it is another for that person to attempt to lead others while making no apparent attempt to remedy or cease their mistakes.

That said, this isn't a huge issue to me. I do find it questionable, but I don't think it shows that Obama is a racist. I think it shows that he struggled to stand up for what he thought was right when it required him to object to his own community. He seems willing to do that now, but that doesn't necessarily mean overly much to me, and I think other people have reacted similarly.

I am unclear what you mean by partisan. I only saw the dems responding to it. The repubs could care less... If that isn't what you mean, help me understand?

As far as what Obama will do to the country--that I am not scared of, from my perspective it is already bad and I can only go up from this lowly point I reside now... Aside from the fact will ANYTHING get done? Really? :rolleyes:

And I agree with you, this is ALL about politics and posturing. He is NOT going to fix a racial divide created long before there was an America, but I also am not cynical to think this will NEVER be good for America. Someday we have to heal. When will that be? After a mushroom cloud and 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit? Just asking?

Huckabee's Response...
 

Interesting that Huckabee say this...

On MSNBC

AKA, I meant partisan in that people are taking sides on here based on their political ideology. Perhaps not the best wording, but I hope that clarifies. I think people on here who are die hard GOPers won't have anything good to say about it, while people on the left see no fault in Barack. Sure, this is a generalization, but that is often the tone on this site.

I don't think things can only go up from here. I think we can abandon Iraq and leave it to fester. Combine that with a President I think would be weak on terror, and we have a disaster. Also, you could have a weakened form of capitalism in the United States, another decade preaching reliance on the government, and judges appointed which agree with those views.

I hope we do heal. I think Obama probably wants that, but this speech doesn't happen unless the people in his life are exposed through conservative media outlets. I'm sure the speech is at least somewhat authentic, I just don't think his motives are to be applauded as though this came from nowhere. This is a classic situation of a politician (yes, Obama is one) trying to turn something bad into something more palatable.

Yes, the new Oreos with the chocolate filling are DA BIDNESS!

(See that slang? I'mblackedyblackI'mblack, ya'll!!!!)

I am so gonna shoot you for the reference. lol

I prefer the golden oreos. I guess that makes me a colorist.

You're SOOOOOO a colorist.

Do you knoooooowwww where you're going to? Do you like the things Obama is show-ing you?

Just quickly chiming in on the two points above...

#1 As a Chicago native who is very familiar with Trinity United Church of Christ (this church has been a pillar in the community for many many years), I am positive that the general position and tone of Pastor Wright are not what people have assumed them to be based upon these few clips. Sunday services focus on spiritual issues and spiritual issues alone for what I would say is nearly 95% of the time. People have assumed that nearly every other sermon are fire and brimstone race lectures, which is simply not the case. For the most part the pastor does a wonderful job of educating his members on how to walk in the footsteps of Christ. I think that it is very possible for someone to attend his church and still feel that it is the best place to make your spiritual home, even if you were turned off by a political sermon that is given once a year (and I would say that is a high number). I have visited the church several times over the 25 years that I have lived in the city, and I have never heard him talk politics from the pulpit.

#2 What people tend to forget is that all of the racial wounds, which mar our country's history are not that long ago. There are people alive today who knew slaves ( I just recently had a conversation with an elderly gentleman who's grandmother was a slave). There are people alive today who grew up in the Jim Crow south, struggled for equal rights, fought for integration, and have seen the many injustices that our nation tend to want to believe were oh so long ago. I'm saying that b/c many ppl in the black community (Rev. Wright included) have heard these individuals stories (or lived them), and still feel all of the pain and emotion that you can imagine must be attached. Many of us see the effects of these injustices, which we are still living with today. That's not to say that Rev. Wright's comments weren't inappropriate (esp. in the Pulpit), but to say that he was expressing a frustration and inner turmoil that many African American's feel. I don't know that many of us were, in fact, appalled, but rather eager for 'the other half' to acknowledge these deep wounds so that we can finally discuss ways to make things better. Instead ppl seem to prefer living in a world where no one truly talks about these hurts, but rather continue to ignore and pretend that everyone has moved along.

What is mostly interesting to me is that ppl do not realize just how different Obama is from many members of the African American community. He didn't grow up in a Black household, and he wasn't really raised with much of that deep hurt (and general awareness of race issues) with which many Blacks were raised. If there is anyone who I could believe disagrees w/Rev. Wright's comment, then it would be him b/c his upbringing and experiences are very different.

Passportgate
 

Obama's Passport was breached...

Wow!!! :eek:

Is this identity theft?

nope simply someone being too damned nosey

Obama is a fool, playing to the black racists he associates with, his "spiritual advisors" Wright and Farrakhan. My grandmother said, "The Devil comes dressed as a gentleman." I don't trust this guy; personally, I think he's evil. He is a member of a "church" that preaches hate and racism and is the pawn of several black supremacists. His self-absorbed wife maybe now has a second " to finally be proud of her country". In Iowa, he said, "When America gets a cold, Black America gets pneumonia". He's like Oprah, they have a no interest beyond their own race. They all betray their self-serving agenda of bigotry.

This. I have access to people's Medicaid files. If I did something similar particularly for someone "high-profile" (less likely in Medicaid but certainly not impossible) just to see what came up, I'd get in trouble too.

So someone acknowledging that a minority group that has greater poverty and a long history of discrimination against them has it worse in tough times is only caring about the minority group? Wow, please go move to whichever homogenous ethnic country fits you the best.

If we cannot TALK about race, racism, discrimination, etc. then we will never ever change them. Honestly why is Wright any different than Pat Robertson and his "9/11 happened because of the gays and women working outside the home" line? (And you're just making shit up with Farrakhan).

Oh noes the black guy will be president and he will make us all slaves! It's true I read it on a website! EVERYBODY PANIC.

/ahhhh that's better.

Farrakhan offered his endorsement and Obama turned it down immediately. At that time, everyone that was uneducated on his background or willing to believe was accusing him of being Muslim (as if that were something negative). So obviously he's not Obama's spiritual advisor. Obama's a CHRISTIAN.

As far as Obama's "Black Agenda" let me tell you that I personally haven't noticed any. He's too busy catering to the needs of those whom he needs to get elected (and they don't look like me). Apparently the majority of black people are voting for him, but I have yet to hear him say anything relevant or concrete pledging to address serious issues affecting the black community or women. I honestly am not holding my breath to hear anything from him regarding that. I guess on one hand I understand, but on the other that bothers me to no end because it's possibly just a waste of their interest.

(People just love making things up! Next week, they'll just be saying that he's Muslim again...)