Obama losing superdelegates due to prolonged assocn with hatemongering pastor?

DigitalDave said:
Hell, I'm angry at how I was treated by 'White America' when I was growing up. This dude lived through the civil rights era and is a Black Man that still experiences racism. Who controls the United States? People from Suburbian America. Rich White people! Is he lumping these people into one big ball? Yes, he's sterotyping. Not every white person in Suburban America is racist, but you try and be a black man in those areas. You'll get scared out. That's why it's called 'White America'.
Click to expand...
Try to be Native American anywhere. Racism is not fixed by equal and opposite force.
 
Damocles said:
Try to be Native American anywhere. Racism is not fixed by equal and opposite force.
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't. But getting mad because he is pointing out 'White America' is in general, racist, instead of doing something to correct it is not really helping either. He's not just saying it because he hates white people, he's saying it because it is generally true.
 
DigitalDave said:
Of course it isn't. But getting mad because he is pointing out 'White America' is in general, racist, instead of doing something to correct it is not really helping either. He's not just saying it because he hates white people, he's saying it because it is generally true.
Click to expand...
Generalizing is exactly what MLK spoke against, it is impossible to judge a man by the content of his character when you are judging him by the color of his skin to be US of KKK A.

"But I didn't mean you." doesn't cut it there.
 
DigitalDave said:
Let me fix that for you...
Click to expand...
lol. Ignoring the actual mention of the color of the skin in the actual statement. The statement does not include others who live in that same community, only those with that one color.

It's okay, you want to forgive. I understand that feeling. It's part of what we believe in common. I will continue to point out racist remarks when I see them. Just as I continued to say that Ron Paul needed to reject the statements written in his name far more strenuously than he did I will say the same of others in like positions.

It is because I believe in the statements of Buddha. Anger breeds anger, it perpetuates it.
 
Damocles said:
lol. Ignoring the actual mention of race in the remark.

It's okay, you want to forgive. I understand that feeling. It's part of what we believe in common.
Click to expand...

No, my correction is what is accurate. The term 'White America' refers to communties of rich white people, where blacks aren't accepted. That's why it's called 'White America', because blacks become victims in these areas. Only one race is accepted.
 
DigitalDave said:
No, my correction is what is accurate. The term 'White America' refers to communties of rich white people, where blacks aren't accepted. That's why it's called 'White America', because blacks become victims in these areas. Only one race is accepted.
Click to expand...
Which color people? It is a racist statement.

Again.

I believe the statements of Buddha written in the Dhammapada. Anger breeds anger, it perpetuates it. It is not the way to fix things.
 
Damocles said:
Which color people? It is a racist statement.

Again.

I believe the statements of Buddha written in the Dhammapada. Anger breeds anger, it perpetuates it. It is not the way to fix things.
Click to expand...

No, it's not the way to fix things, so I don't get angry at him for saying the things he does. I place myself in his shoes with what I have experienced, and attempt to fix the problem my own way.
 
DigitalDave said:
No, it's not the way to fix things, so I don't get angry at him for saying the things he does. I place myself in his shoes with what I have experienced, and attempt to fix the problem my own way.
Click to expand...
When did I say I was angry with him?

I simply point out that it is the same regardless of which group it comes from. Understanding where people come from notwithstanding, perpetuating the problem is not the answer and asking leadership to distance themselves from those who would perpetuate it is a good thing.
 
Damocles said:
When did I say I was angry with him?

I simply point out that it is the same regardless of which group it comes from. Understanding where people come from notwithstanding, perpetuating the problem is not the answer and asking leadership to distance themselves from those who would perpetuate it is a good thing.
Click to expand...

Ok, so Obama is in a Catch-22 then because if he pulls away from his pastor's statements, and disagree with his statements, he's alienating his base. 'Black America' perceives 'White America' as racist. That perception has truth to it. He pulls himself away from it, then his base will feel he's bowing to 'White America' and he will be questioned on his authenticity. What I am saying is that Obama, as a leader, does not feel it is his job to keep the division going. He doesn't have the same rhetoric as his pastor, but he understands where his pastor is coming from, as do I. Obama's rhetoric is to bring people together. What is happening is we are linking his Pastor's statements to pretend Obama is racist as well. Just simply understanding the perception puts him in a position to help fix the situation. There is a divide between 'White America' and 'Black America', Obama understands that, I think you understand that, his pastor understands that. His pastor isn't solving the problem, perhaps Obama is making an attempt to.
 
DigitalDave said:
Ok, so Obama is in a Catch-22 then because if he pulls away from his pastor's statements, and disagree with his statements, he's alienating his base. 'Black America' perceives 'White America' as racist. That perception has truth to it. He pulls himself away from it, then his base will feel he's bowing to 'White America' and he will be questioned on his authenticity. What I am saying is that Obama, as a leader, does not feel it is his job to keep the division going. He doesn't have the same rhetoric as his pastor, but he understands where his pastor is coming from, as do I. Obama's rhetoric is to bring people together. What is happening is we are linking his Pastor's statements to pretend Obama is racist as well. Just simply understanding the perception puts him in a position to help fix the situation. There is a divide between 'White America' and 'Black America', Obama understands that, I think you understand that, his pastor understands that. His pastor isn't solving the problem, perhaps Obama is making an attempt to.
Click to expand...
He won't alienate his base. Where else are they going to go? I think that is preposterous.

If he pulls away and continues to speak against his sort of vitriol he will not "lose his base".
 
Cypress said:
I'm not taking lessons from anyone who cheerled us into the Iraq War, on what or what should not be a legtimate news story for months on end.

Its bigots, partisan hacks, and well meaning, but uninformed people who will continue with the rush limbaugh allegations of obama's church being racists.

Unfortunately, white people like you and many others, have no knowledge on the history of the african american churches, which were born out of the crucible of slavery. And while white people like you can congratulate each other that slavery and racism have been defeated, that's not how others see it. This is still a racist country. Maybe not overtly, but the institutions of racism exist everywhere.

The fact that people might join a church (including white people) who's mission is to use the gospel for social justice, and for solidarity among the people who are actually vicitims of oppression, may be unfathomable to a rush limbaugh fan. But, its perfectly understandable to a person with a modest amount of appreciation for historical context.

The fact that a pastor in one of these churches may use firey language occassionally, to make a point about race and oppression, may make you cower in fear. It doesn't make me cower in fear. I'm not threatened by it. And neither are the other white people in Wright's church.
Click to expand...




"But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright’s comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all."


Apparently it wasn't just "fiery language" or "fear of the angry black man".... was it Gumby????
 
Damocles said:
He won't alienate his base. Where else are they going to go? I think that is preposterous.

If he pulls away and continues to speak against his sort of vitriol he will not "lose his base".
Click to expand...

That is an oppinion I think we'll have to agree to disagree on. I'm no spokesman for the Black community or anything, but I think they wouldn't just be ok with it. Where else would they go? Uhh, well, I'm guessing a portion of them would stay home. He'd still get the majority of black voters, but you might see a dip in turnout.
 
DigitalDave said:
That is an oppinion I think we'll have to agree to disagree on. I'm no spokesman for the Black community or anything, but I think they wouldn't just be ok with it. Where else would they go? Uhh, well, I'm guessing a portion of them would stay home. He'd still get the majority of black voters, but you might see a dip in turnout.
Click to expand...
I doubt it, his message is different and I don't think he'd alienate anybody. If you think he has to walk some thin line in order to balance the votes, yeah, we'll have to disagree.

They will vote for him. And that is ALL of his base, not just black people as you seem to have assumed.
 
Damocles said:
I doubt it, his message is different and I don't think he'd alienate anybody. If you think he has to walk some thin line in order to balance the votes, yeah, we'll have to disagree.

They will vote for him. And that is ALL of his base, not just black people as you seem to have assumed.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm thinking that if he did it in a scolding way, basically saying he is wrong and not giving much else of an explanation, he would piss'em off. But, judging by his last speech (which I didn't get to see, only heard about), he did it in a way that didn't necessarily scold them but carried the message without the anger and hatred his pastor seemed to put out there. If he found a way to articulate the message without actually being divisive, the guy needs to get some props.
 
DigitalDave said:
Well, I'm thinking that if he did it in a scolding way, basically saying he is wrong and not giving much else of an explanation, he would piss'em off. But, judging by his last speech (which I didn't get to see, only heard about), he did it in a way that didn't necessarily scold them but carried the message without the anger and hatred his pastor seemed to put out there. If he found a way to articulate the message without actually being divisive, the guy needs to get some props.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the speech was good, until he thought to fluff it up with stump campaign crap. He detracted from what I thought was going to be a powerful speech to add "Aleisha, who ate mustard and relish to save money, works for my campaign because" stuff that is so rote nowadays for stump speeches...
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, the speech was good, until he thought to fluff it up with stump campaign crap. He detracted from what I thought was going to be a powerful speech to add "Aleisha, who ate mustard and relish to save money, works for my campaign because" stuff that is so rote nowadays for stump speeches...
Click to expand...

LOL, I always hate that stuff...

He and Hillary both do it. Play on the fears of the poor to try and connect with them. If they just cut that part out, it could have been historical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top