| Author |
|
Stephen Robinson Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5833
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 8:48am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Yes, but it would be a division that would be needed. If voters are really going to stop supporing Obama over this, then these people don't deserve to pick the winner. This is a pathetic racially motivated non-issue, and it's getting way more action that it deserves, primarily because it's racially motivated.
********************
SER: Well, it's clear that it's a deal-breaker for some white voters. However, the reason this disturbs me is not just about Obama winning the election. It's about the wounds to the Democratic party. It would basically tell African-Americans that Obama got *this close to the finish line* but lost it all because the curtain was pulled back on his race. In other words, he basically went from Will Smith to Spike Lee. The "comfort level" that white voters have for blacks has its limits.
Bill Clinton gave the medal of honor to a former segregationist who he called his "mentor":
ack on May 5, 1993, in what the Washington Post characterized as a ". . . moving 88th birthday ceremony for former senator William Fulbright, President Clinton last night bestowed the Presidential Medal of Freedom on the man he described as a visionary humanitarian, a steadfast supporter of the values of education, and 'my mentor.'" Clinton added, "It doesn't take long to live a life. He made the best of his, and helped us to have a better chance to make the best of ours. . . . The American political system produced this remarkable man, and my state did, and I'm real proud of it."
Clinton -- and I agree with this position -- said that he was praising his overall service not his segregationism. He allowed that people made mistakes. This didn't appear to hamper Clinton -- and you can't just dismiss it, as you would Strom Thurmond by saying that Clinton was a Republican, so didn't really need to worry about alienating the black vote. He was the most popular president in history among blacks.
The fall-out from this could be tremendous. What if blacks begin to think that there's no real difference ultimately between white Democrats and white Republicans -- at least so far as understanding goes? That, I think, is the first step toward a permanent minority party.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Mike O'Brien Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 8:51am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Anyone notice the funny trend here - Republicans and Clinton supports teaming up? Doesn't that lend credence to my point that Hillary is more Republican than anything?
Vote for America! Vote Obama!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Brown Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 31 May 2005 Location: United States Posts: 9126
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 9:16am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Exactly. If the delegates in Michigan and Florida aren't seated at the convention, the Democrats might as well stick a bow on those two states and hand them to the Republicans. Here's a slogan the Republicans can use:
"Oh, now the Democrats want your votes ..."
*********************************
I don't see FL going towards the Republicans in the general election if Obama is the nominee. MI is a crapshoot.
People in those 2 states can complain all they want about their votes not being counted, etc., etc., but they KNEW going into those primaries that those votes would not count. They weren't told after the fact, but weeks beforehand. I feel sorry for those who voted, but the blame should be placed squarely on their state's legislature for allowing it to happen.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Josh Sherwood Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 29 May 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 280
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 9:27am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Basically, somebody with greater resources than me needs to look into Hillary and McCain in order to determine who they have spent time with who's said controversal things. Maybe that will neutralize it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike O'Brien Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 9:33am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
SER:What if blacks begin to think that there's no real difference ultimately between white Democrats and white Republicans -- at least so far as understanding goes?
++++++++++++++++++++
Not just blacks. But we'll see... I still say this is just a momentary blip - I still say it could blow away... we'll see...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Robinson Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5833
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 9:52am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
People in those 2 states can complain all they want about their votes not being counted, etc., etc., but they KNEW going into those primaries that those votes would not count. They weren't told after the fact, but weeks beforehand. I feel sorry for those who voted, but the blame should be placed squarely on their state's legislature for allowing it to happen.
**************
SER: Yes, I don't see how anything was done unfairly. They moved the primaries up against the rules and were penalized. If the DNC can't penalize states for moving up their primaries, then how do you control the primary system at all? What annoys me now is that Florida and Michigan is still getting special treatment -- as any "do-over," which granted might not happen, would come at a critical time in the campaigns, when they *should* have occurred during Super Tuesday.
You make a very good point about the voters knowing well in advance that their votes wouldn't count. In fact, if I were a clever lawyer, I'd state that even though Obama, Clinton, and Edwards couldn't legally campaign in the states they did basically campaign about the non-campaign. In other words, they made it clear to their supporters that the primaries were a sham.
No one would be trying to seat those delegates if this were a typical race -- e.g. 2000 and 2004 when the race was decided fairly early on. Clinton's hypocrisy on this is galling. Many argue that she showed up for her fake Florida election night "victory" in order to off-set the trouncing she'd received in South Carolina over the weekend. Had she won, would she have gone to Florida? Would she have talked about seating delegates? Of course not. And if the roles were reversed, there's no way she would make the argument. I know politicsc are politics but still, let's try not to be so transparent about it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Brian Floyd Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 07 July 2006 Location: United States Posts: 8825
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 10:23am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
In Florida, the Democrats there wanted to hold their primary on a date in February that would have been fine and legal and wouldn't have gotten them in trouble with the DNC. It was the Republican controlled legislature that set their primary back earlier.
Personally, I think that the Florida primary should count if they can't do a re-vote since it wasn't the Democrats who are responsible for their primary being held too early. Its just another case of vote fixing by the Florida Republicans.
And Hillary may be a hypocrite, but I fail to understand how Obama or people around him (his wife, "Pastor" Wright, etc) keep sticking their feet in their mouths yet he comes out smelling like a rose every time when some of the explanations or excuses are fairly weak and these incidents should add up.
Keep on drinking Obama's Kool-Aid, folks.
Edited by Brian Floyd on 21 March 2008 at 10:23am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Horace Austin Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 03 November 2006 Location: United States Posts: 634
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 10:31am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
A conservative case for Barack Obama.
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_03_24/article.html
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Michael Roberts Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 20 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 14911
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 10:38am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
And Hillary may be a hypocrite, but I fail to understand how Obama or
people around him (his wife, "Pastor" Wright, etc) keep sticking their feet
in their mouths yet he comes out smelling like a rose every time when
some of the explanations or excuses are fairly weak and these incidents
should add up.
---
I wouldn't say he comes out smelling like a rose. He's certainly had a lot
of momentum killed by the Wright controversy. The thing is that these
incidents really don't add up to anything. The reactions that Obama is
some sort of crypto-black nationalist are sort of a joke. If I were to
mindread an agenda for Obama in all of this, it was that he associated
himself with the church in order to ingratiate himself with the black
community in Chicago. Which would make him no worse than every other
politician.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Keith Elder Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 1973
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 10:43am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Doesn't that lend credence to my point that Hillary is more Republican than anything?
Or that McCain is not remotely conservative?
I think the team-up is solely a coincidental conflux of interests. Hillary wants the nomination, and the republicans think she'd be easier to beat than Obama, so they are both ripping on the guy.
I don't see huge fundamental differences on issues between Hillary and Obama. Granted, as far as presentation and style, they're vastly different.
I have to admit, Obama is coming to my small town Saturday morning, and It's making me a little irritated. People are acting like fourteen year old girls at a Hannah Montana concert. If Hillary came through, people would look on with (at most) mild interest. This is a strange campaign.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Teod Tomlinson Byrne Robotics Member

Joined: 25 August 2004 Location: United States Posts: 1782
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 10:46am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I thought the scandal was much ado about nothing, and I thought his
speach, like everything else in his campaign, was excellent.
---------------- The thing that is interesting about this whole "Wright scandal" is how it reveals the complete hypocrisy of how we look at black and white candidates. We all know the connections and support the republican party has had with Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson. Here is a nice snipet from these two chums hanging out.
JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But,
throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court
system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools.
The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because
God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little
innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the
pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays
and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative
lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way -- all of them
who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in
their face and say "you helped this happen."
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda
at the highest levels of our government. And so we're responsible
as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people,
of course, is the court system.. At the time McCain came and blasted Falwell, yet some time after reconnected and spoke at his college. Also the endorsements that are accepted by the republicans are not really questioned. Like John Hagee accepted endorsement "We must attack Iran to bring about the Second Coming."
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/27/hagee_en dorses_mccain_1.html
Others McCain has accepted endorsements from;
Rod Parsley (McCains spiritual advisor): "I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its
divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam.
I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its
implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the
intention of seeing this false religion destroyed"
Pat Robertson: "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a
socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to
leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy
capitalism and become lesbians."
So I ask where is the public outcry for McCain's connections to these complete nut cases? Has McCain felt pressured to make a big speech explaining or apologizing for any comments made by the extremist connected to him? I have not seen it. What I do see is a double standard and this is with McCain who has been at odds with the extremist. Bush however has always had an open door policy with the most fanatical Americans you could find, yet seems to have been given a free pass.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Mike O'Brien Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 21 March 2008 at 11:05am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
The best part? If you listen to/read Obama's speach, it's not a "I'm sorry" speach - it's a call to put this sort of stuff to bed - Hell Yes black people have a different take on things than whites, and hell yes a lot of them are, rightiously, upset. But we should be working to deal with these things, not using them to rile up voters.
We're teetering on the edge here - America can stand up and do the right thing, or ... it won't. We'll see.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
|
|