| Author |
|
Keith Elder
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1973
|
| Posted: 28 March 2008 at 11:06pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Mike, I will bet you that story gets no traction, and a few weeks from now it will only be heard from angry liberals on internet forums. I've just heard "the story is about to break and take down the fascist Bush regime" too many times.
I dislike your characterization of the "average Joe" as racist. At least you didn't say "racist red-staters" or some such, I suppose. But most people aren't racist, and the surging candidacy of your man Obama proves it. I know you're an Obama supporter, but your arguments seem to mention race as much or more than any of his detractors.
I don't think this Wright kerfluffle is a big deal. I don't think that Obama agrees with the guy, and I don't think Obama has picked up racist tendencies from his pastor. I'm sure he just kept going to the church because it was his family's church, and why cause a row by switching? Just ignore the pastor's occasional crazy rants. His political handling of the situation could have been better, though; I get the feeling he's trying different strategies to get out of the situation, to see what might work. He needs to be a straight talker, not a disseminator, because his selling point is that he's not a business-as-usual politician.
I'll object strongly to any claim, from any side of the fence, that Wright's racist and foul comments are any more or less objectionable than the mirror image of his remarks coming from a white man. The qualities of an idea do not vary according to the hue of the skin of their bearer.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 12:56am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Well, maybe the story will have legs, maybe not - that's why I threw in the "average joes" comment - and you'll note - I didn't call them racist, I said they like their politics as such.
Which, if you're right about this story not having legs.. well.. that's my point right there. If not, I'll be happy to hold the average joe up and say he's better and smarter than that.
But having said that - you're right - so many times in the last few years, the public yawns and clicks the remote when they're informed that the President's office commited treason, etc, but you hope each time that this one'll stick.
Finally - in regards to this: "The qualities of an idea do not vary according to the hue of the skin of their bearer." - so... again, who is oppressed by the person not in power saying these things?
Let me put this in a different example. Let's say you're the boss and you say "Fire that guy" - he's fired. Let's say you're the guy and you say "F*ck the boss!" - the guy is still fired and the boss is still boss.
So... sure, it would be nice if only nice things were said, but I stand by my arguement that, as long as there's no power behind the words, uh... it's nothing to get concerned about, and it's human to voice and vent your concerns if you're oppressed or suppresed.
We'll have to agree to disagree!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Robinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5833
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 6:47am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
I actually doubt McCain would "go there" if facing Obama. As a Republican, he certainly has less to lose in alienating the black community (as we saw with the Clintons) but I get the impression that McCain wouldn't take that angle. Sure, they would both compete with independents and that might be a good wedge issue, but again, my instinct is that McCain will focus on a relatively clean win --- his experience and the fact that he also brings "change" to Washington and his history of bipartisanship.
Mentioning Wright will then make it fair game to mention Bob Jones and Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. It will get ugly. I think McCain would want to avoid that.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9126
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 7:43am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Mentioning Wright will then make it fair game to mention Bob Jones and Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. It will get ugly. I think McCain would want to avoid that.
***************************
True, but that won't prevent "Faux News" from constantly keeping it in people's faces.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Casselman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 9:40am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Yeah. Fox has been the only news agency following this. Uh-huh. Sure.
There's a vast difference between the relationships Obama had with Wright and anything McCain had with those other 'religious leaders' (said with all sarcasm possible, since I hold none of them in high regard myself).
Jones, Robertson and/or Falwell weren't
McCain's "spiritual advisor".
McCain didn't have a 20 year
relationship with them.
McCain didn't base his book on Jones, Robertson and/or Falwell.
McCain wasn't married in their respective churches
McCain didn't bring his kids to hear Jones, Robertson and/or Falwell speak every Sunday -- it
goes on and on.
Simply because a 'religious leader' leans Conservative doesn't paint that entire side with the same brush, nor does it imply that all Republicans are of the same thought... unless you happen to think in terms of absolutes.
If this is the best counter-argument that die-hard Obama apologists can come up with, it's going
to start to look like they aren't even trying.
Besides, Falwell is dead, and Robertson and Jones have been long thought to be laughingstock caricatures. When was the last time either contributed anything meaningful to national discourse that wasn't seen as kooky?
Does Obama recognize the racism inherent in Wright's speech in the same way he recognizes that his grandmother was a 'typical white person'? If he were he a white candidate, and this type of stuff
came out, not only would he be forced to withdraw from the presidential
race, he'd probably be asked to resign from the Senate. Just ask Trent Lott.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 10:30am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
And let's say he is a sleeper agent and as soon as he takes office,
whites are forced into manual labor or whatever it is that whites fear - so
what? He can't enforce it - he's got a whole white nation, supreme court,
congress, etc against him. It would still be impotent.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this - I can't find any
power in any of this so-called hate talk, and thus, it, like this issue, is
meaningless. That's how I see it. Until someone is actually physically
affected, until someone can show that something other than their feelings
have been hurt, I personally, am not buying this.
First I think you are minimizing the power of the presidency. Your
example, which I think was hyperbole, doesn't address the question I
asked you: if you were not informed about Obama (as a great many of the
electorate is not) wouldn't you want to know if he had been influenced by
Wright? Wouldn't you want to know if someone running for president
(and Commander-In-Chief) believed that that issues in the Middle East
had more to do with Israel than Islamic Fundamentalism?
You have a better understanding of Obama's background and record than
most, you know more which is why you know his relationship with Wright
should not be a concern. But to dismiss that concern out of hand would
be shortsighted. The Senator didn't thats why he gave his speech. To use
a comic book analogy: You are the reader you know Clark Kent is
Superman; Lois Lane is a character and doesn't. You have knowledge she
doesn't so you know Superman is Clark and don't have to ask, she doesn't
and does. By the same token many voters, like you, know Obama has not
been influenced by Wright, but there are other voters who do not have
your knowledge base. When they see or hear words spoken by someone
a candidate has identified as a mentor and close advisor (whether it is
political or ecumenical advice) they question whether that candidate
shares those views. This is why Obama addressed it in his speech. This
is why it is an issue. Your knowledge of Obama and his record is not
shared by the entire electorate.
By arguing that the concern is fair, understand I am not being an
apologist for people like Sean Hannity who are corrupting the fair
question to their own ends. The spin some are using is, as you have
somewhat articulated, based on ignorance. And that is indefensible.
By the same token, however, your contention that racist or hate speech is
impotent if spoken by someone "without" power is fundamentally wrong
and I would debate that to my dying day. Any speech which is divisive or
casts groups of people in a false light is dangerous, no matter who the
speaker is. When we minimize the power of words they often have their
greatest effect. This is why the adage "the devil's greatest trick was
convincing the world's he didn't exist" is true. Words have power . The
Blogosphere has proved as much. Further, as illustrated earlier and using
Wright as an example -- if his positions on Israel were what Obama
believed in his heart (which I know is not the case) his words would have
had an extreme impact on American Foreign Relations, particularly if
Obama becomes president. But even as a Senator those words could have
impact in countless ways. Words have power, Mike.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
David Ferguson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 6782
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 11:37am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
"I too am a proud Irish American, but save some of that Irish pride! One head of state signed Adolf Hitler's condolence book. That man? Eamon DeValera. Sigh."
Er, I never said we were a terribly smart people...
*******
That was DeValera's over-zealous attempt to prove the Ireland was truly neutral. We weren't and still aren't. That part of our constitution has already been trodden over by your current commander in chief.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 1:03pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
David:
What has Dubya done to "trod"over the Irish Constitution? He's treated the
American one like toilet tissue, but I did not realize he'd affected the Irish
constitution!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9126
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 5:31pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Does Obama recognize the racism inherent in Wright's speech in the same way he recognizes that his grandmother was a 'typical white person'?
***************
Well, you need to get it correct first of all: Wright was not being racist, nor were those HIS words. (As has been mentioned many times before.)
Definition of racism:
|
1. |
The prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races |
|
2. |
Discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race |
Wright never preached that "his race" was superior, especially in the sermon he's getting all the heat for. And please show me where he's been discriminatory or absusive.
So stop with calling it racist. It's WRONG.
And I truly love how those who dislike Obama use the same 3 words in try to destroy a 38 minute speech or to cast a less than favorable light on him. "Typical white person," Ooooo, how cruel. As a "typical white person", I recognize exactly what he's saying and I did not take offense. We all have our fears, whether they're real or imagined, they're not always easy to push aside no matter the situation. A "typical black person" has those fears, as does a "typical latino person" and a "typical asian person".
And, Michael, I'm willing to bet you have not heard the entire Wright sermon AND the entire Obama speech you seem to love to ridicule. If you had, you wouldn't be commenting the way you have been.....
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 6:17pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Well, he's a typical wh...oops!
Just kidding!
But seriously...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Casselman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1266
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 7:01pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
And, Michael, I'm willing to bet you have not heard the entire Wright
sermon AND the entire Obama speech you seem to love to ridicule. If
you had, you wouldn't be commenting the way you have been.....
***********************
You mean all one post of how I've been commenting on this thread since the Wright story broke?
'Ridiculing' both of those speeches (which I have heard in their entirety, BTW)?
Ridicule? {chuckle} I've seen some thin-skins here before, but if what I wrote constitutes 'ridicule', then the bar for ridicule has been substantially lowered. That, or you have me confused with someone else.
But if I must...
But she is a typical white person, who, if
she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, you know,
there’s a reaction that’s been bred in our experiences that don’t go
away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that’s just the
nature of race in our society.
So, now it's not just blacks we're afraid of -- now it's people on the street that we don't know. Gosh... I don't know how we make it through the day -- being surrounded by all those strangers -- saying the wrong thing to them -- 'ridiculing' them...
I've even been looking at Wrights church...http://www.tucc.org/talking_points.htm.
On that "talking points page" Obama's
Church references other people's "ignoran(ce) when it comes to the
Black religious tradition." It goes on to reference the origin of the
Trinity United Church of Christ and how it's based on the black
liberation theology espoused by Dr. James Cone. Just so we're all not completely ignorant when it comes to Obama's Black Religious Tradition, let's hear how Dr. Cone describes black liberation theology:
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. . . . Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy.
What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is
the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by
any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy
activity, we must reject his love.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JC18Aa01.html, And you can throw Dr Cone's name into your favorite search engine for more info, if you think the Asia Times Online is simply another Fox-lackey.
This isn't something from centuries or decades past -- it's what they believe today. On their website, they state that their Church is based on these writings.
Sure, let's have an honest conversation about all things race and racism. But do I have to give
a pass to someone who actively participates in a church that calls for
my destruction in order to take part?
I love how people who bend over backwards for Obama automatically try to draw a parallel between McCain (or Hillary, for that matter) with any 'religious leader' who happens to have any controversy under their belt, but are afraid to simply acknowledge that this sort of thing might... just might... beg some questions that need answering before they assume the Presidency.
My sincerest apologies for offending anyone's deeeeeeeehlicate sensibilities.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 29 March 2008 at 7:08pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
It sounds like it was your deeeeeeehlicate sensibeeeeeeeities that were hurt by the big bad Pastor, Michael.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
