A black politician talking about black issues!? Stop the presses, this is almost like a Christian politician talking about Christian issues!
A black politician talking about black issues!? Stop the presses, this is almost like a Christian politician talking about Christian issues!
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
I thought your point was that BHO injects race into politics any chance he gets?
I thought your point was not that there is a double standard between white politicians and black polititians.
Not surprisingly you are all over the map PJ. Care to clarify? or do you just want to hang some qoutes out there?
No I think I understood quite clearly.
He said that black legislator's would be more likely to be elected if they built a base of blacks, latinos, and progressive whites, rather than catering to a single group. He also said that black legislators tend to word as individuals rather than pushing a unified agenda.
HE is also stating that strategically the best way for minorities to gain power would not to be to take seats from other minorities. In other words, run latino/black candidates in districts that have have forward thinking whites who won't immediately vote for the other guy because of his skin color. That strikes me as political common sense.
You know what sucks about Obama's position ? IF he talks about race, he is playing the race card. If he doesn't talk about race, people would ask...why doesn't he talk about race? Frankly I'm glad he doesn't have trouble articulating his views on the matter.
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
I posted the quotes in response to those who say that Obama does not go around injecting race into campaign.
It is obvious that as a legislator for a black district in Chicago that Obama had no problem injecting race into nearly everything. He essentially used race as a way to get what he wanted, the quote about the black caucus is a perfect example of this.
Now he runs around and suggests that anyone who is against him must be doing it because he has a funny name or looks different.
Except that his budget proposals have been exposed as a complete fantasy, doesn't that bother you? (and remind you of Bush?) McCain is flat out lying to you when he describes how he's going to 'balance the budget'. He knows it's a lie too, he's not stupid.
Also, about Nebor... he's said similar things in the past. I remember he said that he supported finding a way to keep GWB in office by 'any means necessary'. Creepy.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
I think you are wrong PJ and Carmen813 does a good job of explaining why.
there is a difference between using the "race card" and everything that is implied with that term.
And talking about race.
It is possible to discuss race and race issues without using race as leverage. Do I think BHO used the race issue as the "race card?" its possible. He is a politician.
Do I think he is injecting race into this campaign? again it's possible, he is a politician.
Is he running on the fact that he is black? no he isn't. Does he have to address the matter of race? yes he does. Did he start the race-baiting? who the fvck cares...and no he didn't.
Is race going to be an issue? HELL YES IT WILL. PJ, what do you expect the BHO campaign to say when it comes to race? that people are OK to not like him because he is black? How does BHO address race without it coming across as some "preemptive race card?"
AND, just what is a "preemptive race card" exactly? Everyone knows that in reality, America has a race problem. Now if BHO tells us that some might vote against him because he looks different...if that registers in your head as some sort of "preemptive" race card or race-baiting...what I'd like to know from YOU is...just how does BHO address this issue of race factoring into an election?
He is damned either way.
This represents some very dirty politics.
Yes, and McCains plan to balance the budget in 4 years is realistic. IT woulda been if he planned on resending bush tax cuts, but since that is apparently off the table his plan has even less hope of working.
At least Obama isn't bullshitting about being able to balance the budget in 4 years.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
In MHO, the elections of 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006 somewhat hinged on the entire trust issue.
In 2000, somehow GWB convinced people that he was a uniter and not a divider. Although Gore won the popular vote, Gore was hardly charismatic, and Florida and the general events there swung the election to GWB. By August of 01, it was apparent that GWB had no real policies and his popularity was flagging. Then 911 hit and America had little choice than to rally around its President, as a war on terror began. And because America tends to trust Republicans regarding a strong military, the GOP was able to make gains in the 2002 election. By 11/2004, the hey day flush of 90% approval rating GWB had when he invaded Iraq was gone and it was quite apparent that both Afghanistan and Iraq were well on their way to becoming quagmires. Sadly the dems went with a not very charismatic John Kerry who tried to sell the country on the idea he was a smarter military version of GWB and that he, Kerry, could win the Iraqi occupation while GWB could not. And with flip flops and swiftboating, it ended up being Kerry never achieved any trust level or achieved any ability to attack GWB on the economy or other issues. And in MHO, the American people voted for the devil they knew rather than the devil they did not know.
But any analysis of the later results should have scared the hell out of the GOP. America was still deeply divided, the electoral college map was almost unchanged from 2000 to 2004, and it should have been apparent that the GOP had to make some result advances. I still recall the infamous remark of GWB after the election of 04, " I now have political capital, and now its time to spend it." And his next big push was to reform social security, and it became rapidly apparent that not even the GOP trusted GWB to mess around with social security. Thereafter the GOP went off the deep end, and the worse GOP abuses occurred. Delay and congressional corruption became a circus as the the GOP rubber stamp congress became addicted to power.
It is widely considered that the congressional elections of 2006 were a referendum on GWB and the GOP lost those elections badly.
Sadly, I do not think the democrats have been effective in pushing their own agenda and the GOP desperately rear guards the same policies the lost them the election of 2006. Now despite a near doubling of the national debt, the American economy can no longer be artificially pumped up, Iraq looks better but may not by November/08, Afghanistan really looks bad, and the entire message on both sides in the primaries is that the voters want a radical change away from the proven failed policies of the past eight years.
In MHO, McCain won the republican primaries because he was the only candidate on the GOP side who was remotely critical of GWB. On the democratic side,
Hillary doomed herself because she was dumb enough to vote for the Iraq war and her message of change therefore fell on deaf ears with too many democratic voters. That and the fact the Hillary was the victim of 15 years of republican swiftboating her message of trust me, I have experience message did not sell.
Now the main protagonists in the election of 08 are all too clear. It will be the inexperienced Obama against an experienced McCain. Or to put it another way, change vs. McSame.
Right now the election strategy is shaping up to McCain saying nothing about exactly how he will change policy while the entire GOP tries to sell the message that Obama can't be trusted. A position that may wear thin and boring before 11/4/08. But with some three months left until the general election,
McCain and the GOP have to hope like hell that the economy holds up and nothing turns to crud in Afghanistan or Iraq. That and the fact the the rest of the world is very up happy with GWB allows external events to discredit McCain.
Its going to be a difficult sell for the GOP with McCain. And a difficult sell with the democrats with Obama. But in many ways, Obama has both charisma and has all the options open. McCain on the other hand is a captive to GWB and the failed policies of the past. Its Obama's election to lose and not Mccain's election to win. Right now McCain is scoring some points, but look for Obama to start to really bruise McCain as the campaign progresses.
In 2000, somehow GWB convinced people that he was a uniter and not a divider. Although Gore won the popular vote, Gore was hardly charismatic, and Florida and the general events there swung the election to GWB. By August of 01, it was apparent that GWB had no real policies and his popularity was flagging. Then 911 hit and America had little choice than to rally around its President, as a war on terror began. And because America tends to trust Republicans regarding a strong military, the GOP was able to make gains in the 2002 election. By 11/2004, the hey day flush of 90% approval rating GWB had when he invaded Iraq was gone and it was quite apparent that both Afghanistan and Iraq were well on their way to becoming quagmires. Sadly the dems went with a not very charismatic John Kerry who tried to sell the country on the idea he was a smarter military version of GWB and that he, Kerry, could win the Iraqi occupation while GWB could not. And with flip flops and swiftboating, it ended up being Kerry never achieved any trust level or achieved any ability to attack GWB on the economy or other issues. And in MHO, the American people voted for the devil they knew rather than the devil they did not know.
But any analysis of the later results should have scared the hell out of the GOP. America was still deeply divided, the electoral college map was almost unchanged from 2000 to 2004, and it should have been apparent that the GOP had to make some result advances. I still recall the infamous remark of GWB after the election of 04, " I now have political capital, and now its time to spend it." And his next big push was to reform social security, and it became rapidly apparent that not even the GOP trusted GWB to mess around with social security. Thereafter the GOP went off the deep end, and the worse GOP abuses occurred. Delay and congressional corruption became a circus as the the GOP rubber stamp congress became addicted to power.
It is widely considered that the congressional elections of 2006 were a referendum on GWB and the GOP lost those elections badly.
Sadly, I do not think the democrats have been effective in pushing their own agenda and the GOP desperately rear guards the same policies the lost them the election of 2006. Now despite a near doubling of the national debt, the American economy can no longer be artificially pumped up, Iraq looks better but may not by November/08, Afghanistan really looks bad, and the entire message on both sides in the primaries is that the voters want a radical change away from the proven failed policies of the past eight years.
In MHO, McCain won the republican primaries because he was the only candidate on the GOP side who was remotely critical of GWB. On the democratic side,
Hillary doomed herself because she was dumb enough to vote for the Iraq war and her message of change therefore fell on deaf ears with too many democratic voters. That and the fact the Hillary was the victim of 15 years of republican swiftboating her message of trust me, I have experience message did not sell.
Now the main protagonists in the election of 08 are all too clear. It will be the inexperienced Obama against an experienced McCain. Or to put it another way, change vs. McSame.
Right now the election strategy is shaping up to McCain saying nothing about exactly how he will change policy while the entire GOP tries to sell the message that Obama can't be trusted. A position that may wear thin and boring before 11/4/08. But with some three months left until the general election,
McCain and the GOP have to hope like hell that the economy holds up and nothing turns to crud in Afghanistan or Iraq. That and the fact the the rest of the world is very up happy with GWB allows external events to discredit McCain.
Its going to be a difficult sell for the GOP with McCain. And a difficult sell with the democrats with Obama. But in many ways, Obama has both charisma and has all the options open. McCain on the other hand is a captive to GWB and the failed policies of the past. Its Obama's election to lose and not Mccain's election to win. Right now McCain is scoring some points, but look for Obama to start to really bruise McCain as the campaign progresses.
But if you've read about what Obama plans to spend money on, you should realize that in the long term there are tremendous potential benefits that can help balance the budget. He wants to reinvest in educational infrastructure, health care, and alternative energy. Each of these would cost a great deal of money up front, but in the long term will pay massive dividends in the ways of a healthier, more educated workforce, and a true independence from foreign countries.
If we spend 3 trillion dollars building new renewable energy power plants in the U.S., we would save something like $600 billion a year in money that is sent over seas.
IF we stopped fighting in Iraq (something McCain doesn't want to do) that is another $180 billion a year.
Obama's policies would be horrible for the deficit in the short-term, but long-term the potential benefits are enormous.
He is frankly quite open in stating that his policies would cost a ton of money up front, which is why he doesn't feed you a like of crap like McCain does about balancing the budget.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
How about you respond to my reply to it?
And allow me to rephrase my position using exactly your logic. How is McCain's plan of taking my taxdollars and your taxdollars and everyone else's taxdollars and using it to fund a trillion dollar defense industry that employs millions not socialism?
Let me guess your answer... common good and defense? Bzzt... socialism. Try again.
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
It is called 'preemptive' because McCain and mainstream Republicans are scared out of their wits to even mention that Obama is black.
Find me a comment by one mainstream Republican that talks about Obama being black in a negative way.
Despite this Obama is out there with his "I'm different" speech trying to make people think that the Republicans are getting ready to lynch him.
Finally, Obama's race is most likely not going to make a difference. No Democrat is going to win any of the deep south states where Obama's race will be a major issue when it comes to voting.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter