Politics 2008:The Caucuses and The Dem/Rep Conventions

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Neither are some (if not, many) of Obama's supporters. The crazy and the silly go both ways. I just want people on both sides to breathe easy.

There are plenty of straws to go around without having to grasp for them.

I understand the bounty of straws.

But how do you explain the over exhilaration and exuberance upon learning of President Obama's win?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I understand the bounty of straws.

But how do you explain the over exhilaration and exuberance upon learning of President Obama's win?

On the part of Obama supporters? People are happy for a few reasons.

That doesn't mean that all the happy people are operating with a full deck. It doesn't mean that all the unhappy people aren't operating with a full deck. There are crazy and silly people and rhetoric on both ends. I judge it based on what all of these people say and not based on the dichotomy of supporter/nonsupporter.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

On the part of Obama supporters? People are happy for a few reasons.

That doesn't mean that all the happy people are operating with a full deck. It doesn't mean that all the unhappy people aren't operating with a full deck. There are crazy and silly people and rhetoric on both ends. I judge it based on what all of these people say and not based on the dichotomy of supporter/nonsupporter.

Even folks in other countries who inherently cannot vote in this one were excited. I doubt they were "bona fide Obama supporters"--more like anybody but Bush--or who ever their leader was that told them to support... So much for a free society!

Whether decks are full or not, they are stacked, nonetheless... And what they say is not a reflection of support or lack there of IMHO. It's more a matter of ignorance and closed-mindedness...

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

Interestingly enough, I just heard Graham's 2 grandsons on NPR this morning, they've just released a book about Graham's ministry. You can listen to the interview here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=96778336

During the interview, his grandsons describe him as a "50-year-old in a 90-year-old's body". He's apparently sharp as a tack, but his body is failing. This article gives insight into just how unwell he's been/is (and that he does very much want to meet and pray with Obama): http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...RFsIAD94ALAGO0

Graham is known for breaking down racial barriers and refusing to preach to segregated crowds in the south starting back in the 50s: http://www.vop.com/previous_broadcas...jan/99034.html

He's also a registered Democrat, though he's ministered Republican Presidents as well as Democrats. I have no doubt that Billy Graham is celebrating the election of the nation's first African American President with most of the rest of the country and would have been on a plane to see him if it were physically possible for him.

I tire rather quickly of people spouting off info about Graham's history concerning civil rights. All of that is pretty much negated by the fact that, as I mentioned previously, he was willing to maintain membership in a country club that prided itself on segregation. Rather hypocritical of someone to refuse to preach to a segregated crowd, but go play tennis on a segregated court.

I just can't muster up the same warm, fuzzy feelings that so many others seem to have for him. I don't think people really see him for who he is. Just because he's a minister means nothing. There are many ministers that preach fiery sermons, leave the pulpit, and go put on a hood and a robe. And there were many ministers who were active in civil rights issues, but still didn't believe that we were equal to them...let alone that one of us should be president.


And I'm well aware that he's a Democrat. That really has nothing to do with anything.

As for him wanting to pray with Obama...he had his chance. He chose not to when Obama asked to meet with him. Obama shouldn't even bother with it at this point. I think it may be a blessing in disguise that this is happening, but I just don't like the reasoning behind it.

[SummerChild]

DrPhil,

My comment re POSITIVITY is the thread directed to what President-Elect Obama should do first when he gets into office. Why don't you go over there instead of just nitpicking things in this thread?

I think that most folk don't want to contribute to anything re POSITIVITY.

ETA: Why don't ya'll ALL go over to my thread about CHANGE and POSITIVITY instead of nitpicking with DrPhil about this. Some energy is better spent ignoring some folk and taking an active approach for change. This argument is like the one in which women get together and commesurate about how there are no good men. Some will never believe otherwise and yet, you are spending the time that you could be going out and finding a mate (if it means that much too you, big whup) or you can spend your time disputing this issue with the women that are convinced and want to believe what they want to believe and are happier just nitpicking everything.

Threads on this message board go on for pages and pages about whether Michelle's dress was not attractive, how it's hard to find a man, and other tons of silly, petty and/or negative crap - take your pick. Positive threads hardly get any traction at all. This is one of the only substantive positive threads that has gotten any traction. Let's keep it that way and lend our energy to others like it. Focus on positivity. The other stuff is just draining and useless.

Now get over to my other thread!!

SC

Originally Posted by DrPhil

So, in different ways, preciousjeni, HoneyKiss, and I believe the suspicion is unfounded. Agree or disagree, it's all just speculation that shouldn't be taken seriously.

But this isn't just about Billy Graham which is why I want us to "get over ourselves" and think "good grief, people" a lot of times when I hear (usually, black) people talk about the Obama presidency.

If an Obama presidency is going to spark this type of unfounded paranoia and unfounded speculation then this is going to be a tiring presidency. There's nothing POSITIVE about conspiracy theorizing if POSITIVITY is what people are going for. There's a difference in tone when addressing the realities or possibilities (which is what discussions of race and racism are really about) versus being suspicious or expecting the worst. Unfounded paranoia and unfounded suspicion of intents and motives (i.e. Billy Graham's) is silly whether it's coming from disappointed McCain supporters or Obama supporters. Period.

Obama isn't going to be told "yes" everytime a decision needs to be made during this presidency. If that's going to be interpreted in a racially charged manner more often than not, even in the absence of some type of evidence, then we have a long and bumpy road ahead of us.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by SummerChild

Why don't you go over there instead of just nitpicking things in this thread?

Originally Posted by SummerChild

Some energy is better spent ignoring some folk and taking an active approach for change.

But you didn't ignore me.

Some people get the point of this discussion and don't view it as a negative. I consider it to be an active approach for change for a number of reasons. You don't have to so you do what you consider to be an active approach for change. Dialogue isn't one-sided and you can't govern others' participation in discussions on or off the internet. Those of you who don't see the point of this topic and think it's nitpicky can govern yourselves by typing about whatever else you want to type about. Pretty basic message board guidelines.