White Silence, Illogic, and the Political Prigs

Prig
n.
1. A person who demonstrates an exaggerated conformity or propriety, especially in an irritatingly arrogant or smug manner.

I don’t believe that a Caucasian person could have given a speech like the one Barack Obama did on March 18th.

In fact, it is almost certain that a white person could not have even given a similar speech on race, or any subject pertaining to race in this country without being bent over the social and political knees of the liberal Prigs. I’m speaking of those within the Democratic party who have spent years framing the constitution of “political correctness,” not as a method to enhance dialogue, but as a way to inject fear and panic into the hearts of those not-of-color people who might speak openly and honestly of race and relations in this country.

The Prigs in our party seem to lie in wait for any mention of race made by a politician, nominee, or supporter and then jump dramatically, and often en masse, upon any comment they can twist into an accusation of racism.

The politics of language for white America has become drenched in fear and trepidation, and the political correctness that was meant to cleanse our speech of worn out, bedraggled stereotypes has itself become a ridiculous stereotype.

Witness this exchange between two Huffington post readers, one of whom did not support Barack Obama:

SERFIE: I gave a contrary view to what was expressed in this blog submission and you say that I have no intellect and not heart. Welcome to Obama’s Thugocracy. . .

LOSTONECHAMPION: Serfie, I think the criticism of you is well deserved. You refer to Obama and his supporters as Thugs? Is that supposed to be some comparison to Tupac? Maybe subconciously you are trying to get across that you think that Thugocracy is the political equivalent of Thug Life gansta rap? . . .

The Huffington Post, which has not exactly been subtle in their support of Barack Obama, gave the comment referencing Tupac a seal of approval by making it a “HuffPo Pick“, which only encourages others to use race as bait.

Yes, the Tupac comment may have been employing exaggeration to get (some) point across, but that would only work if the first commenter’s words had contained some reference to Tupac, or rap music, or linked the word thug to race. Instead, this was what “Serfie” wrote (in its entirety) that caused the small firestorm:

SERFIE: Funny, I was sitting in a Starbucks when I heard three old white guys almost go to blows over that speech. Two of the white guys liked the speech, another didn’t. The two guys were ridiculing and mocking the third guy just for having a different opinion. Hmm, just like the bullies at the Huffington Post. Welcome to Obama’s Thugocracy.

Unlike the word “lynch” which has clear and historical ties to racism, the word “thug” has no connection to color outside of the world of the fading and faddish genre of music known as “gangsta rap”. Mafia members, corrupt politicians, and aggressors of all colors, from here to the Middle East have all been called thugs. To say that Obama’s supporters are bullies, and that an Obama presidency would be a “thugocracy” may not be an accurate or even intelligent comment– but it hardly constitutes racism.

Internet posters seem to be following the lead of the professional, major league Prigs, who have used race as a tool of convenience, to stir up a ready-made dispute, freeze dialogue, or to outright silence those they oppose on other fronts.

For instance, let’s look at what Hillary Clinton actually said about Martin Luther King Jr. and Lyndon Johnson:

“I would point to the fact that that Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried,but it took a president to get it done.”

Incredibly, even this simple, factual sentence of Clinton’s was misquoted, truncated, misused, and — yes, purposely distorted — in order to taint her with the toxic brush of racism. The critics, according to the Washington Post, “read (Clinton’s remarks) as playing down King’s importance in the civil rights movement.” Obama, reacting to those Prigs, (black, white, and other), called Clinton’s comments “unfortunate” and “ill-advised.” Yet he also told ABC News that he didn’t believe what Clinton said was “in any way a racial comment,” and that only the way it “played out in the press” made it appear so.

The unavoidable and absolute fact is that as visionary, inspiring, and intelligent as Martin Luther King Jr. was, he did not stand alone. He did not, and could not have, effected changes in federal law on his own. It did, in fact, take a President — and the consensus of a diverse America — to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964. To accuse someone of diminishing King’s leadership and contributions by pointing out the obvious is ludicrous in itself, but adding the accusation of racism is reprehensible.

According to the Prigs, though, what Hillary Clinton was really saying was that “it took a white politician to fulfill a black man’s dream.” Never mind that it was not just one politician, or one social activist who shared that dream, some for decades prior to its realization — and never mind that the majority of the country, including Hillary Clinton, was invested in that dream — it’s more poisonous and deadly to the opponent to create a political wrecking machine out of one sentence. The kind that got Clinton, who has a long history of supporting civil rights and equal opportunity, booed at an MLK rally.

Edith Childs, a fervent Obama supporter who gave his campaign the slogan “Fired Up! Ready to Go!”, took her complaints of Clinton “racism” to the London Daily Telegraph, where she accused both Hillary and Bill Clinton of making racist statements — Hillary for “downplaying the role” of King in the passage of civil rights legislation, and Bill for his remarks about “a fairytale” when discussing the Obama campaign.

For those who have not seen Bill Clinton’s talk about the “fairytale”, here is the You Tube link.

It defies all logic to imply Bill Clinton’s remarks about a fairytale were racist — they had absolutely nothing to do with race at all. “Fairytale” isn’t in any way a racially charged word. Yet, according to Mrs. Childs, “They (the Clintons) could both have been less racist. It’s not a nice word but there you go.” Childs’ illogical, “not nice” accusations were echoed by Obama’s supporters, black and white.

Asked to respond to the flap, Illinois State Senate President Emil Jones, an Obama supporter, said “They (the Clintons) owe the African-American community — not the reverse,” he said. “Maybe Hillary and Bill should get behind Sen. Barack Obama.”

Jesse Jackson said, “”Regrettably, (the Clintons) have resorted to distasteful and condescending language that appeals to our fears rather than our hopes. I sincerely hope that they’ll turn away from such reactionary, disparaging rhetoric.”

This is how one gets from point A to lockstep racial dogma. By distortion, poor logic, charged responses, and bad intent. It is how Geraldine Ferraro, who has given this country an impressive three-decades of political service, becomes an overnight enemy of so many she has faithfully served.

When Ferraro said “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color he would not be in this position,” she clearly was not opining on the superiority or inferiority of any race, but on America’s readiness for a change away from the traditional white male hierarchy. “He happens to be very lucky to be who he is,” Ferraro continued. “And the country is caught up in the concept.” And in fact, aren’t they?

A March 9th article in the New York Times illustrates Obama’s lack of experience, and goes so far as to detail the strategy that led Obama to begin planning for a Presidential run before he had even completed his first year in the U.S. Senate. According to the NYT:

Early on in his tenure in Washington, he (Obama) concluded that it would be hard to have much of an impact inside the Senate, where partisan conflict increasingly provoked filibuster threats, nomination fights and near gridlock even on routine spending bills.

“I think it’s very possible to have a Senate career here that is not particularly useful,” (Obama) said in an interview, reflecting on his first year. And it would be better for his political prospects not to become a Senate insider, which could saddle him with the kind of voting record that has tripped up so many senators who would be president.

Behind the insubstantial voting record was not just a charismatic idealist, but a long-term strategy which involved making the fewest enemies and most friends possible in Washington.

“Hillary and McCain are the perfect examples of this,” Tom Daschle (D) said, “the longer you are here, you take on enemies. And these enemies don’t forget.” Obama has not been in the Senate long enough to earn those enemies — he has not faced any great opposition, or gone head-to-head with the entrenched politicians he often rails about. He has not had to make any life or death decisions on behalf of this country, nor has he been in the Senate long enough to rally for the massive changes he says he wants to make as President. Instead, he spent much of his time in the Senate raising money for other Democrats, garnering support, and grooming himself as a Presidential candidate.

Ferraro, who has said that her own nomination as Vice President was largely due to her gender, is no stranger to the American desire for social progress. When she pointed out that Obama’s lofty place in politics at the moment would not be if he were white or female, she was not speaking as either a sexist or racist, but as a career politician whose finger is very much on the pulse of society.

Ferraro knows that the “Obama = change” equation is very much at play in this election, and that the change goes beyond Obama’s soaring rhetoric and inspirational speeches. It is his combination of hope-filled messages, along with his sex, his race, his “clean slate” in Washington, and his diverse multi-cultural background that has helped generate excitement over his candidacy. It is not — and even his most avid supporters cannot convincingly claim — about Obama’s political experience and readiness to lead.

Obama’s speech on race was eloquent and moving, but I was surprised by the florid overreaction it stirred among Democrats, who hailed it as being on par with Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, and called it “magic” and “a monumental moment.” Jon Robin Baitz, in a Huffington post article, said “We are finally talking about race. . . Someone running for the highest office in the land finally talked about it — the dark and secret swamp that we Americans dodge at every possible opportunity.”

I do not believe white Americans would dodge the issue of race if the political Prigs were not so intent on poisoning the discussion pool with irrational and scarring accusations of racism when white politicians or speakers so much as dip a toe into the water.

White silence is not caused by a lack of interest in social progress or equal opportunity, or a lack of desire to engage in discussion and be “part of the solution.” Instead, it’s a silence caused by the fear of saying the “wrong” thing in an atmosphere where even a common word like “fairytale” is whipped up to racist proportions, and where even those with sterling records on civil rights are ridiculed in order to create politically expedient and damaging racial tension.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

40 comments

  1. You’re a brave one and will probably catch hell for this. i see Ro even removed the link to the EG’s story. Probably doesnt want to get accused of what you tal k about above. It’s sad but true.

    Well, at least no one can demand your resignation !

  2. Many identified as Elephant Girl, but will any of us recognize ourselves as Political Prigs? Obama’s speech elevated my respect and my understanding of who he is. I think it was an important speech. It did not measure up to greatness, however.

    Is there an unwritten dictionary out there? Is everybody speaking in code? If so how do we speak with any degree of confidence that our words will be understood as intended? Makes me think of the language of bathroom stalls. I have no idea what my “stance” may be saying to others. Certainly this tells us how difficult communication is.

    You are right, Jane. A Caucasian could not have made this speech. My respect for Clinton went down a tad when she disavowed Ferraro. I wanted her to make the Obama speech.

    For the first time too I can see them together for I believe on the issue of racism as well as most they are very alike.

    I believe Clinton has the experience to help fulfill Obama’s aspirations. I doubt his ego will let him see it that way.

  3. Jane, the headline at HuffPo this morning:

    “Groups Respond to Obama Speech. Finally we can talk about it.”

    Unbelievable. It was as if Obama gave them permission!

    Yet many of his supporters online still claim that anybody who doesn’t support him is racist.

    The shaming continues! Reading some of the comments over there shows your point perfectly.

  4. To the #1 comment – Rosie changes up her links all the time…..I’m sure it was nothing personal. She sends us to stuff she likes & leaves it up for a couple of days.

    I agree though, Jane is brave and will probably offend some people with this. Too bad because I think she speaks a hidden truth. We are and have become afraid.

    I don;t know if Mr. Obama’s speech will open a door that seems to get shut on a dime by the “prigs”……but I’m glad he made it & tried.

  5. You rock.
    The comment on Clinton/Johnson and the realty that LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act is so right on.

    I have been in tears about the truth of Hillary’s statement and the manipulation of people’s ignorance by Obama.

    If we are going to have an honest conversation about race, Obama has got to admit they screwed Hillary over this statement to take black voters from her.

  6. BRAVO.

    It is EXACTLY the attitude of people like Emil Jones, who says the Clintons “owe ” blacks so much, that HRC should be shamed into quitting and “get behind” Barack Obama, that has dominated this whole campaign season.

    It’s the promotion of guilt, rather than the promotion of real politics and change. And, dare I ask? What will Obama OWE the blacks according to people like Jones?

    Even as Obama strives to cover all bases, and cross racial divides, his SUPPORTERS seek to bash those who support HRC over the head with untrue accusations of racism.

    I am DISGUSTED by the hatred this season. We spend our time not talking about real issues, but creating unnecessary and ugly drama.

    So BRAVO to you for having the courage to speak up. I only wish more people would, or that your post would be published in the newspapers. People need to STOP and get back to what really matters.

  7. jane:

    i enjoyed reading this post — you make some significant points here especially those pertaining to who can talk about race and who cannot. you make a really excellent point that bears some thinking about. because of political correctness, at least in public space, white people will be really, really careful before making any “race” comments in the fear that it will be deemed racist. since even innocuous comments like the LBJ/MLK gets so easily racialized, any politician has to tread very, very carefully and most of the time they do, since the consequences for not doing so are so extreme. Result: Almost no evidence of white racism in public discourse. Conclusion: Whites are not racist since there is so little evidence.
    On the other hand, look at all the anti-white speech that goes on in communities of color as evidenced by Reverend Wright. You are absolutely right – people of color like myself should desist from making race comments in the same way that our white brothers and sisters have so that we too can minimize evidence of race speech in public. as things stand now, political correctness seems to only serve white people — keeps them clean so that people of color become the only racists standing! so, i take away from your post: either we have equal opportunity political correctness or none at all. as things stand, people of color are getting screwed — they are allowed to put their feet in their mouths and suffer no consequnces. that has to stop!

  8. We’ve got to get to a point in this country where it’s not acceptable for political campaigns to obfuscate the issues by playing p.r. games.

    Yep, there are racists in the world, and if they’re white they’re almost always caught and swiftly punished. And they should be! There’s no excuse 40 years after 1964 for white people to be idiotically caught up with skin color.

    However, when racists are black, they have to get pretty damn outrageous to even cause a blip. Not just because they’re black, and there’s this school of thought that blacks can’t be racist (another argument), but because media really doesn’t give them all that much exposure….. unless of course it’s time to call out the pundits.

    Good article. Thanks for setting a tone for polite but meaningful civil discourse.

  9. Sorry, I mistyped. What I meant to say is

    yep, there are racists in this world, and if they are white and OBVIOUS, they are almost always caught and swiftly punished.

    Plenty of closeted racists, homophobes, and sexists out there. We only know about them when they try to exert power over the group they hate.

  10. You are, as usual, bang on.
    I cannot stand to go to Huffpost anymore.
    If anyone told me I was a racist regarding Senator Clinton’s comment about President Johnson, I would tell them that perhaps THEY are being racist against a white man. Or at the very least to go and bone up on their history.
    But then, Sen. Clinton’s remark was in no way racist. And it was accurate.

    As for ttoday’s headline about Obama blaming the Iraq war for the state of the economy, good grief! My only answer is: Duh! He is merely stating the obvious. I am not impressed.

  11. I am still torn between candidates and have not made a decision, but I found a whole bunch of stuff on hillaryis44.com today that I did not like. Mostly, Barack Obama’s dishonesty about his church association and what he heard in 20 years.
    *****************

    Obama:

    But the sermons I’ve always hear[d] were no different than the sermons you hear in many African-American churches. I had not heard him make such, what I consider to be objectionable remarks from the pulpit. Had I heard them while I was in church, I would have objected.

    That was yesterday. Today Obama said:

    “Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”
    ******************

    To me, Rev. Wright and Farankhan (sp??) are the same kind of people, and I dislike their politics and thoughts. So where does that leave me? Not sure, but it seems there’s always something new to learn.

  12. Saira,

    White and black people know there are racists in their group, and I don’t think you’re correct that the perception is that white people aren’t racist.

    I think what happens instead is that when the accusations are made when no racism exists, the whole matter of real racism runs the risk of being viewed skeptically.

    When people start crying wolf at every opportunity, it’s not long before people stop listening. And I think that’s the danger, and that’s what’s happening, especially with whites.

    Attacking BC for saying fairytale, and calling it racist, was a major cry of wolf when there wasn’t even a kitten in the room! People are rolling their eyes and just waiting for the next stupid attack.

    How sad is it that with real racism still out there and acted upon that people need to create it when it doesn’t exist?

  13. dear laura

    in the present climate, how often will a white public figure make an on the record comment that will rise to the standard of “wolf’? really. a “macaca” here, a Trent Lott there. but are those the only white politicians who would like to use race divisively in this election? if you set the bar for what counts as evidence of “racialized” thinking so high, i believe you will never even find a kitten.

    so the “fairytale” comment was not racist but what about the jesse jackson comment? how come these comments followed each other closely and what about the context?

    if we are going to have true dialogue on this issue – and i would like to — a good place to start is to let the community concerned judge what does or does not constitute a “racist” remark. if black people heard a racist subtext in those comments, shouldn’t we listen to them and try to speak more sensitively next time? conversely, if white people feel injured or stereotyped, they should be the ones to make the call on that. i bet some members of the group will find the comments racist, other won’t. that diversity is great but let the community set the terms of the discussion and those of us who are outside that community should take our lead from the communities views on this issue which will be diverse.

    not to do so appears really presumptive. can you imagine, why should we be the judges of what counts as our own injurious speech? how can that judgment be considered impartial?

    saira

  14. But Saira, the community DID get to decide what was a racist remark, as evidenced by the outcry over the non-racist “fairytale” remark.

    To be fair, it was the part of the community that makes the news, but look at the thousands that followed that lead!

    No, I have to disagree with you about “letting” the community decide. Not that my disagreement matters, because I’ll never make the 6:00 news, but I believe rationality should be the judge, not just one group (and here I’m talking about progressives in general) who has a history of making mountains out of molehills.

    Yes, I get to decide and you get to decide as INDIVIDUALS what constitutes racism for us, but what I’m talking about is what gets covered in the press, and why.

    Wright made those speeches for years without being attacked, and he was a semi-public figure. No one cared then. Had a white preacher with half the following of Wright’s made those kind of speeches, on videotape no less, someone would have informed the media, and there would have been coverage.

    The coverage is always skewed, but when prominent progressives, black AND white, get to dictate racial sensitivities because they ARE in the news, and they jump all over the competition (in this case Clinton), and make “fairytale” some racist remark…..well, that is tilting the wheel.

    I also believe that one of Jane’s points was that the oversensitivity is killing what could be meaningful discussions. She said “drenched in fear and trepidation” and you have to know that’s true.

    All those progressive, PC, everything-is-fair-game for accusations policies are standing in the way of really talking about the issues.

    My opinion.

  15. laura:

    i do not know – it just does not seem rational to me that the group making the putatively “injurious” remarks should be the ones to decide whether these remarks caused injury or not. that seems unreasonable actually. not rational. just think about the law which is rational — in a court case, the plaintiff makes the charges; the defendant DEFENDS them — s/he does not get to say the charges do not exist — but she must prove that they do not. In this case, the “chain” of events — the “LBJ” comment, the fairytale comment, the Jesse Jackson comment — need defending, not denying.

    as a member of a minority group, i have no trouble conceding the limits of my ability to make “individual” judgments on an issue as socially and historically constructed as race in america. i have no trouble conceding that some of the fears and anxieties that i have about white people might indeed be exaggerated and shaped by being not-white and by community perceptions. i am an individual – yes – but i am also a woman of color who will be viewed as such no matter what she may feel or be inside. i have no trouble owning my historical and sociological identity. that is just the way the world works. Thus I have trouble saying that as a woman, hillary will understand my needs better. I am not casting my vote for her as an individual – I have no idea what she is at that level – I am letting gender solidarity guide my decision. I am okay with that.

    actually, given the socio-economic realities of poverty and powerlessness among blacks and communities of color in america, i find this characterization of whites as “fearful and trepidatious (not a real word)” rather a missing of the wood for the trees but i grant, support, jane’s broader point that political correctness has not improved racial relations, but rather has made the dominant group feel victimized. If anything, it has hurt the disenfranchised. They police our speech so we forget that every single day they are policed by the mechanisms of state power. A topsy turvy world indeed.

    When you compare Wrights remarks to those of a white pastor, who treat these two groups as though they are equal and should be equally judged. But if you grant that in 2008 – whites are still the most powerful group in the US in social/political/economic terms and therefore the anger and bitterness of the powerless cannot be compared to the anger of the powerful.

    you know, until this race speech, I used to think that Obama was guilty of treating white and black as equal. But finally, he acknowledged, that Wright’s rage, however abhorrently expressed, may not be disowned entirely since it speaks to real inequalities that exist unto this day. I am a Hillary supporter because she openly embraced her “power” and promised to do something for the powerless. I felt the LBJ comment was an acknowledgement of the fact that at this moment a white woman can be more effective than a black man and I was fine with that since it seemed based on the truth of power.
    Now that Obama has also shown us that he knows the truth about power, I feel I should give him another look.

  16. As for Wright’s sermons, he made many good points and I wasn’t the least bit shocked. I’ve attended Prince’s church in South Minneapolis, which is primarily black (I’m white) and the pastor there also addresses real social issues with enthusiasm and passion. However, Wright seems to be myopic in believing only blacks are oppressed–Wright seems oblivious to the socio-economic stresses and challenges of the single white mother, Hispanics, the disabled, the Hmong and other Asian groups, poor and uneducated white men. And the seemingly relentless anti-Semitic feelings that continue decade after decade. The Louis F connection is a problem for me because I believe if you’re biased against any particular group of people for any reason, then you’re not trustworthy. Wright’s church and concerns seemed exclusive instead of inclusive.

    I’ve read both of Obama’s books and he’s a brilliant writer–more so in his first book, which seemed less calculated for political gain than the second book–but something about him seems too glossy, a bit unbelievable. Can’t place my finger on it, just my instinct. When I checked his voting record, he was absent on many important votes (afraid to offend anyone) and my sense is that he’s chameleon-like under the guise of running a “friendly” campaign “above the fray of politics as usual.” But to really get a true sense of who someone is, you need to see them angry, hurt, acting ridiculous…he plays it so safe he’s amoeba like and I have to wonder: who is the real Barack?

  17. Excellent post, Mrs. Jones, and I agree.

    I’ve also attended UCC church here in the Twin Cities, which is mixed in attendance, and racism was part of at least a couple of sermons, and there were criticisms of American policies. Not the country as a whole, but the policies and the people behind them. I felt the sermons inspired people to know more and do more.

    And I have nothing against righteous anger! It’s a starting point, and most often the result of something people are entitled to feel angry about.

    So I don’t fault Obama’s pastor for his fiery speeches, I only think he might have directed his anger at the wrong thing and wrong people.

    Did we cause 9/11? No, not in my opinion. We didn’t cause it, any more than any other victim of a crime caused their victimization. However, what we should be aware of, and reconsider, is how our actions in other countries grow the anger that fuels the terrorists.

    I do not dislike Obama, but like you I do not see him as altogether genuine. I read the Time’s article about how he started running for President in his first year in the Senate, and what he did to get support, and I really think his personal ambitions have exceeded his abilities and his experience.

    I think it’s fair to want him to have more of a record as a Senator before taking a Presidential run.

  18. Saira, the group I was talking about were Progressives, whites included, not just blacks.

    You said, ” the defendant DEFENDS them — s/he does not get to say the charges do not exist — but she must prove that they do not. ”

    On this, I disagree. It’s the burden of the plaintiff to prove a charge, not the defendant’s burden to prove it fruitless, and that’s the way it should be.

    To, as I said, cry wolf over innocuous remarks like “fairytale” should not just be allowed and accepted, but torn apart and condemned by those who do not want the cause of ending racism tainted by baseless charges, when there are plenty of real and substantial ones to choose from – like the fact that so many young black men are serving prison sentences for drug charges that FAR exceed the ones given to their white counterparts.

    That is real racism, and its substantial enough to help ruin the lives of thousands, including the children these men leave behind.

  19. JANE, LOVEEEE IT!!! I AM MAD AS HELL..DON’T GET ME STARTED. RACIST???? WELL, LET ME SCRATCH MY HEAD… REV. WRIGHT DID DEFEND WOMEN IN PART OF HIS SERMON, BUT TURNED AROUND AND SCORNED HILLARY AND USED VERY INAPPROPRIATE REMARKS ABOUT FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON AND M.L. RACIST…YES, TOWARD WOMEN!!
    I HEARD BAY BUCCANON ACCUSE HRC OF SNOOPING INTO B.O. PASSPORT INFO. THIS WAS ON A MORNING TV SHOW FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD TO SEE. I DIDN’T HEAR AN APOLOGY AFTER THEY REPORTED THAT HRC ‘S PASSPORT INFO WAS SNOOPED INTO ALSO..
    I DON’T FEEL B.O .HAS BEEN MISTREATED, IN FACT HE HAS BEEN TREATED FAIR.. HE GOT AN EXCELLANT EDUCATION. UNLIKE SOME OF US THAT GOT NO GRANTS AND HAD TO PAY OUR OWN WAY AND HOLD DOWN SEVERAL JOBS…PLUS, RAISE CHILDREN. ” A TYPICAL WHITE PERSON” THATS HOW B.O. DESCRIBES HIS G.M. I WOULD SAY SHE WAS ATYPICAL . IT CLEARLY SHOWED A LACK OF RESPECT TO THE WOMAN THAT RAISED HIM. I WOULD SAY HE WAS PRIVILIGED!!!! HE LIED ABOUT NEVER HEARING REV. J. WRIGHT MAKE RACIST REMARKS,THEN TURNED AROUND AND ADMITTED DURING HIS SPEECH THAT HE HAD. B.O. IS AN OPPORTUNIST. “JUST WORDS”, “ALL MEN WERE CREATED EQUAL” ” JUST WORDS” ” GOD BLESS AMERICA ,WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL”…. INCLUDING A WOMAN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.LOL,J

  20. Thank you Jane!
    This stuff has been going around and around in my head for months!
    All the thing you pointed out I have been telling anyone who will tolerate me!
    Sadly I think people are focusing on all the wrong things.

    It’s getting really bad, Allison. MSNBC all but accused Clinton of misdeeds over Obama’s passport, and the next day it was discovered hers and McCain’s were accessed, too. Then Bill Clinton said a race between HRC and JMc would be a race between two people who loved their country, and it was spun by the media into “Bill Clinton says Obama doesn’t love his country.” Clinton’s focus was obviously on HRC as the nominee, not Obama. I can only hope we pull it together after the DNC, because at this rate, we’re sinking. – Jane

  21. An observation, just some food for thought:

    I think the anti-Obama statements here are absolutely no different (in tone and volume and one-sidedness) from the anti-Clinton statements I’ve read elsewhere. I see no difference whatsoever.

  22. Laura, nice to “meet” someone else who has gone to UCC. I like the church very much but parking is a problem ( especially in winter!). Good distinction between country/policies.

    Peejays, think you may have a point–except I was torn between the two for some time and am, of course, convinced I’m right (lol). However, I do think the media and press have been much much harsher and more negative toward Clinton. I’m pretty sure that statistics would support this belief. HRC has been criticized for her clothes, not “controlling” her husband–things that smack of sexism.

    Today, The Obama campaign compared Clinton to Joe McCarthy. Carville accused Richardson of being “Judas.” I am at the point, however,where I fear if Barack is elected, McCain will win, so like you Jane, I hope the DNC gets their act together soon.

  23. Mrs. Jones, by “volume” I didn’t mean quantity. The anti-Obama feeling “seems” (to me) equally as strong here on this blog as the anti-Hillary feeling I’ve seen elsewhere. Here are my random thoughts, for what they are worth:

    I’m an equal opportunity cynic about ALL politicians; I assume there is fire where there is smoke; I entertain the possibility that there is a germ of truth in most criticisms of all of them in terms of the political games they play. This may not be the right attitude I should have, but I have it. I can’t help it. It stems from the 60s when fellow left wingers rebuked LBJ as well as Nixon. It doesn’t prevent me from liking those things that I do like about a candidate. Does this make me disloyal? Maybe. I’m sure by the GOP’s (Reagan GOPs) “never eat your own” philosophy, I would be booted out.

    In this race I haven’t run into too many supporters of Obama or Hillary who are as wholeheartedly for the person as the pro-Hillary people seem to be here. I haven’t met any Obama supporter who is starry eyed or an Obamatron such as what the media has portrayed. The people I run into (in real life, that is) seem more or less resigned to choosing one of them as the one they think could beat McCain. It’s almost as if they are choosing the lesser of two evils. Though not quite.

    So this blog is very interesting to me, to read such ardent pro-Hillary opinions from “real” people as opposed to from surrogates or campaign/volunteer staff such as what you see on Hillary’s site. (I’m sure Obama’s site has the same thing.)

    When I said “one sided,” I meant I hadn’t seen any criticism of Hillary here (I confess I haven’t read the entire site). I’m not used to that. I come from a background where we Democrats and lefties criticized our candidates constantly, but in the end always felt despite their flaws, any of them would be better in the end and overall than a Republican. Not sure that’s the right way, but it’s what I’m used to.

    I know can find plenty of criticism of Hillary, even on left-wing sites …. but that criticism doesn’t quite count for me because it’s from people who are not for her in the first place. What I’d like to find is criticism of her by people who are for her.

    Ditto for Obama.

    In the end I am less worried about Obama beating McCain than I am Hillary. I’ve heard too many right wingers scream for too long about the mere fact of Hillary’s existence. Their hatred has been tempered in public lately, but I don’t trust that to mean they have changed their tune.

    I hope all Democrats agree either Democrat at this point is better presidential material than McCain. I hope everyone remembers the election of 2000.
    (sorry this is so long!)

  24. Ok, I get what you’re saying so here goes–have met her in person and felt she lacked any charisma and is a boring speaker. She’s very measured in her speech and usually sounds like she’s repeating a campaign stump speech–not too inspiring…

    She has great plans but also tries to please too hard and occasionally has a few wacky ideas that seem to come from left field (i.e giving money to every baby born…????)

    I personally didn’t get choked up when she cried or felt her tears were really legitimate in NH, but that’s just me.

    That being said, she has a boatload of strengths and I think what you see is what you get.

  25. Mrs. Jones, I enjoyed reading your post. I agree HC has many strengths. If the political calculations and games that she is so accustomed to playing could vanish, and the right wing’s echo chamber could be finally seen as the sham that is is, I’d be more confident about an HC/BC presidency being effective. Unfortunately I worry it will be saddled and addled with controversies, whether cooked up or real, that will distract them and us, will rev up the right wingers, and will ultimately propel HC to compromise where I wish she would not. The same scenario could well happen in an Obama presidency, but I think the chances are not as likely. I confess I never have a problem believing the political calculations attributed to what she and Bill have said and done on the campaign trail (and elsewhere–that’s just who they are). Not a lot more than what other politicians do, but done much more thoroughly and frequently. And skillfully, though at times that has backfired.

    I like Obama, have chosen him over her, am not google eyed and starstruck over him. I don’t see the charisma thing others say that Obama supporters see. I like his speeches a lot; I like his one on ones less so — he has a halting way of speaking that makes me wonder if he is hedging, borrowing time to think of an answer. He does this so often, I’m starting to think it is just the way he speaks….. I just haven’t seen the free pass by the press toward him that everyone else sees.

    I like to think I don’t care about personality or charisma in a president. But to an extent I do care about personality as to how a person communicates. In this area I feel confident that both he and HC are by leaps and bounds better for our country than GWB: neither of them even at their worst will possess GWB’s horrible combination of ignorance and arrogance, that adolescent sneering when faced with the tough questions. The bully boy obstinance. Not only in communicating, but in executing policies, handling crises, the everyday business at hand.

  26. Obama’s speech was written for him and all he did was adjust some of it to fit his needs. This is the problem, we don’t know Obama’s true words unless we pick out “his typical white grandmother” and fly with that statement.

    The media is doing a win-fall on anything with Hillary but are “oh so careful” when it comes to Obama. It will only get worse for the media should Obama be President because there is no way in heck the media will bash Obama because it will always end with the race card on the table.

    Right now, if you watch “The View” they are clearly struggling with what to say especially after Whoppie said: she cringes if someone says to her “how articulate you are, etc.”

    White folks are at a point that they have to check their words before making a comment, compliment or disagree.

    I have watched all the Democratic debates and clearly see the difference when words are written for Obama. (I think there is another debate on April 16th or thereabout on ABC)

    I could go on and on but I post on my blog my thoughts.

    By the way, Obama will be on The View on Friday, March 28th. This is going to be very interesting as Barbara will be on and Elisabeth is fired up and Barbara seems to be curtailing Whoppie some.

  27. Should be interesting Patty G–agree about the walking on eggshells attitude, but some have taken the Wright thing too far, just as Chelsea was asked about the Lewinsky episode yesterday, questioning that if HRC put up with a cheating husband, was she strong enough to be president?

    The sexism in this campaign has been rampant but largely ignored (the comment about not wanting to see HRC become an “old lady” etc. etc.) I wish we’d have a “discussion” about that and why women still aren’t paid the same amount for equal work.

  28. What a joke we must be to other countries right now, electing officials that haven’t been able to do anything for the last 25 years with our system and actually allowed it to get where its at now and then arguing about race,sex, and wasting so much money..??Today they r talking about gas getting to be $4.00 a gallon, What are the people we are paying for doing?They are still spending r money, for special interest groups trying to get elected(Alice Cooper).Taxes are highest they have ever been, gas is highest they ever been(and this would have happened with or without Bush) and we still have r children on the back burner, Security still sucks,we r behind in everything I believe Bush is just the one taking the fallback Congress runs this country not Bush and who runs Congress all the people we voted in there, what are they doing? They are worried about their retirement not about the future its an instant gratification country what happened to George Washington’s or Abe Lincoln’s people who took over the role of being President without all the money. One good question I couldn’t answer to my 12 year old daugher, was why can’t we forget the President and just vote for Congress and yes Jane “12″ is still a baby, 16 too and 39 we are leaving too much for r babies to clean up. And believe me they will clean this up one day. My question is when r we going too?Forget the Hillarys, Obama’s, and McCain’s they all have been there and still can’t do anything for us. If they where doing their jobs the whole time we would have min. wage where it’s suppose to be $8.00 an hour, we wouldn’t have had 9/11, and we could walk into a hospital without the fear of losing our homes. Good luck with your voting. Me I’m sitting this one out. E.

  29. Mrs. Jones, I so agree with you on the
    “sexism” issue in this campaign. I must of missed the HRC comment about “not wanting to see HRC become an old lady.” I wonder what the people making these comments think of the Queen of England?

    If a spouse choses to forgive the spouse for “infidelity” so be it!

    The college student who asked Chelsea the question was a mere child at the time this all happened. If this is what the college students are worried about today, God help the future!

    Elf, everything is high now because of the war in Iraq and also because we are in debt to China. China basically owns us right now.

    This country experienced the same issues with high taxes, gas prices, food prices etc., during the Vietnam War, another senseless War.

    9/11 was not caused by Congress not doing their job, my goodness me. We were ATTACK!!! Just like we ATTACK Iraq!!!!

    The minimum wage is working it’s way up and each state is starting to adjust the minimum wage based on the Federal requirements. Here is a link …http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm

    People are losing their homes because of how they got their mortgages. People locked themselves into an adjustable rate mortgage so they could have the house of their dreams. Then as the years passed, the rates went up and now people are losing their homes.

    Yes, we are a joke to other countries when it comes to our voting system here in the USA. Some countries use cardboard boxes for voting and their system seems to work just fine.

    Healthcare needs to be fixed so people can go to the doctor or hospital without fear of anything. I live off Social Security and have Medicare. I can go to the doctor, pay my bill most of the time , but can’t always get my medication.

    It’s your generation NOW that needs to fix the system, not YOUR children in the fthe very near future. Sitting out and not voting now is showing your children that you are leaving it for them to fix!

  30. DEAR PATTY G AND ELF, I REALLY ENJOYED READING YOUR POST. ELF PLEASE VOTE, THERE ARE “SOME GOOD QUALITIES” THAT COME SHINING THROUGH ON AT LEAST ONE CANIDATE. THE ONE OF YOUR CHOICE. SOME TIMES IT IS HARD TO SEE THE ROSE AMONG SO MANY WEEDS. BUT YOU CAN FIND THE ROSE WHEN YOU SEARCH…AS IN RESEARCH. PATTY, WE ARE LIVING IN UNCERTAIN TIMES… IT IS NOW CRUCIAL THAT WE AS WOMEN LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD. AGE IS JUST A NUMBER.
    I AGREE THAT OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IS BROKEN . PEOPLE ARE UP IN ARMS ABOUT UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. WE ARE , AS TAXPAYERS, PROVIDING IT NOW. EVERY TIME A PERSON GOES TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM THAT DOES NOT HAVE INSURANCE..WE EAT IT. EVERY TIME A PERSON CROSSES THE BORDER AND HAS A BABY… THEY GET ON WELFARE..PLUS ,MANY OTHER BENIFITS. FOOD STAMPS,HUD HOUSING ECT. I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND OUR PEOPLE. FOR MANY YEARS I WORKED AS A NURSE AND OFTEN ACCEPTED TRAVEL JOBS. I HAVE WORKED CLOSE TO THE BORDER ON SHORT ASSIGNMENTS. WE ARE IN A MESS. AND YOU ARE RIGHT..CHINA AND A FEW OTHER COUNTRIES OWN US. WE HAVE GOT TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK AND TAKE CARE OF OUR PEOPLE. IT SICKENS ME WHEN I SEE SOME OUR ELDERLY [THE VERY PEOPLE WHO WORKED HARD FOR US]LIVING OUT THEIR LIVES W/O THE PROPER FOOD, CLOTHING, SHELTER AND MEDICATIONS THAT THEY NEED. THIS IS WRONG. WE HAVE TO HOLD EVERY ONE WE VOTE FOR ACCOUNTABLE. THEY ARE WORKING FOR US! WE HIRED THEM!!
    THIS IS OFF THE SUBJECT.. BUT I WILL “SPIT” IT OUT ANYWAY.
    THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEMACRATIC PARTY,DID INDEED,VIOLATE DNC RULES. THE 1.75- 2.0 MILLION DEMOCRATES WHO VOTED IN THE FLORIDA PRIMARY DID NOTHING WRONG.WE, THE PEOPLE, WENT TO THE POLLS ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA STATE LAWS AND IN GOOD FAITH. IT WAS A RECORD TURN OUT. DISENFRANCHISING THE FLORIDA DEMOCRATES FOR SOMETHING WE HAD NO VOICE IN…IS WRONG,WRONG WRONG. IF THE DNC NEGATES MY VOTE….I WILL NOT SUPPORT THESE PEOPLE AGAIN. I HAVE E-MAILED AND E-MAILED MANY ,MANY PEOPLE. SO PLEASE, VOTE,LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD. LETS BE THE VOICE BEHIND OUR GOVERNMENT. WE CAN MAKE CHANGES NOW TO ENSURE A BETTER LIFE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. IT’S UP TO US..NOW!! BLESSINGS TO ALL OF YOU.

  31. PATTY G, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INSPIRING RESPONSE. I HAVE BEEN DONATING AND CALLING FOR HILLARY.COM. I HAVE E-MAILED DEAN FOR THE SAME REASONS YOU DID. DO YOU THINK THESE CLOWNS WILL EVER “GET IT’? SENATOR NELSON SUED THE DNC TO HAVE OUR VOTES COUNTED…IT WAS THROWN OUT. SOME OTHER LAW SUITS ARE IN THE WORKS….PLEASE KEEP E-MAILING THE DNC,GOV. CRIST AND H.DEAN.. I SMELL A RAT. SHORTLY, SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN AND THIS SITUATION WILL BE RESOLVED IN OUR FAVOR. I WILL LET YOU KNOW IF I HEAR SOMETHING.J

  32. Congrats! You speak the truth…

    Neither Bill nor Hillary are racist, and have done more to promote so-called Black issues than most other public officials.

    Huffington Post is maddeningly pro-Obama to distraction. Their lead titles shout their bias, and it drives me crazy.

    Hillary has been misrepresented countless times and does not deserve the attacks.

    The press reports Hillary should resign, but when Obama was behind by the same amount they reported the race “too close to call.”

    This race has really opened my eyes to the prejudice of our Newsmakers and the power they have to sway public opinion.

  33. re: the “old lady comment”

    That was Rush Limbaugh. IMO he doesn’t count. If any liberal or left wing blogger on the Huffingtonpost or anywhere agreed with Rush on this ridiculous comment about Hillary, please show me the link.

    I’m frustrated & discouraged that the criticisms by liberals and progressives, including feminists like me, of Hillary are lumped in with the trash talk like this made by Rush & the usual suspects on the right. I’m as feminist & liberal as can be & I have problems with things HC has done & said in her campaign. I ignore the crap from the right wing but I sure as heck read what others on the left have to say about her, or Obama, so I’ll be armed with as many perspectives (on the left!) as possible.

    If we all agree that McCain must not be elected, wouldn’t it serve that goal best by acknowledging that some things Hillary has done and said warrant questioning and criticism?

  34. wonder how you guys feel about hillary “misspeaking” on the bosnia issue? does it worry you that she “misspoke” multiple times about this when “mis-speaking” was clearly to her advantage? does it worry you that she “forgot” what happened when she has written about in her own book? all candidates pad their resumes and that is fine, but don’t you think we need to be a little more vigilant when it is used to draw a contrast on “experience” the main thing she is running on?

  35. I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU AND YOUR COMMENTS. WE ALL COME FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS, AGES AND EXPERIENCES. I RESPECT OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS AND EXPECT THEM TO RESPECT MINE. THATS WHO I AM. I AM PROUD OF WHO I AM..DESPITE THE”FLAWS’.
    NO, IAM NOT WORRIED THAT SHE “MISSPOKE”, NO MORE THAT IAM WORRIED THAT MCCAIN STATED ONE HUNDRED YEARS IN IRAQ OR OBAMA’S PREACHER RANTING RACIST,SEXIST REMARKS IN CHURCH. YOU DECIDE… I ALREADY HAVE ALREADY HAVE. LOL,J

  36. Hello Jimi and Patti G.,
    i thank u for your response to me ,but, yet, i would like to comment on China .China is a a Communist country as much as American business men have seen it. Chinese people are not allowed to have the freedom as we do in work. If an intelligent human being is there they are asked to step up to the plate and produce for their country, if they decide not to they will not eat, they will not have food on the table for their family, they will not have a roof over their heads. Communism?I know this first hand as i had a friend who lived under Communism in Europe/Russia occupation , they had no choice, so while we sit here and believe China is controlling this country it is not. It is the fault of our Congress(and people we elect to run it)for allowing this interaction to continue to go on in a country that rules with dictarship the last 60-70 years and also us. But apparently we need to waste and spend enough money for these people to get their asses out of their but, and do their jobs(and i am not talking special interest groups who do u think President’ s have to pay off in the end of their elections)? But this won’t happen I do research and there isn’t one of these people worthy of my time. How can these individuals in these positions (all those years)not see?? The last time i VOTED was for Ross Perot(self made business man, no long term politician, no special interest groups, just someone who wanted to make it happen for us) without having to pay off someone in the end(WONDER WHA HE IS DOING NOW)But along the way Igot sucked into every Tom and Dick and Harry whoever was on the ballet i had to vote for, because the stupid computer wouldn’t let me not, or whatever, I just went in to vote for President it never happened. Now when u go in to vote one is always in the wrong spot.Patti G. i WOULD RELISH THAT BOX, AT LEAST IT WOULD ‘NT MAKE AND VOTE FOR PEOPLE U DO NOT KNOW OR CARE ABOUT.Whatever happens will happen anyways, i say. And to these people i say stop already AVERAGE chinese do not have a chance and REALLY TAKE A CLOSER LOOK. THANK U JIMI AND PATTI G. AND JANE & once again have a Happy Birthday.E. I THINK I HAVE THE RIGHT TIME SLOT NOW:)

  37. DEAR ELF, THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING YOUR TRUTH. I AGREE WITH A LOT THAT YOU STATED ABOVE. I AM REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THIS COUNTRY IS GOING. I CAN ONLY SAY,AS I HAVE BEFORE,CHOOSE WISELY. WE HAVE TWO CHOICES, I MEAN THREE. ONCE THESE PEOPLE GET IN OFFICE AND REALITY HITS HOME….WELL, THEY REALIZE THEY CAN’T DO WHAT THEY PROMISED. WE,AS VOTERS, MUST HOLD THEIR HAND TO THE FIRE. WE HAVE TO SPEAK UP AND LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD. LIKE A MARCH ON WASHINGTON. I CAN SEE IT NOW. YOUNG WOMEN, MIDDLE AGED AND SENIORS…MARCHING FOR JUSTICE AND OUR RIGHTS…DEMANDING ALTERNATIVES FOR A BETTER TOMORROW. ELF, I’M GETTING EXCITED JUST THINKING ABOUT IT. I CAN ONLY SAY DON’T LET OTHERS INFLUENCE WHAT YOU FEEL IS RIGHT FOR YOU. BLESSINS,J

  38. Jane, good article. I do not trust Obama. I think he is one smooth operator, possibly with a hidden agenda that we won’t know about until it’s too late. He’s a bit too ambitious in wanting to be president, so early into his political career. I just don’t trust him and he has absolutely no experience to be even thinking of running this country.

    I do think Hillary has the experience and would do a fine job. There is just something about Obama that worries me. It’s a sixth sense thing and usually my sixth sense is right on. I hope I am wrong this time.

Comments are closed.