"They're Attacking Me Because I'm White!"

[souvlaki]

lazur, btw... I never said Dean ran a bad grassroots campaign. I simply said Obama did better.

 

[lazur]

Obama has the same exact mentality about Universal Healthcare that Clinton does. The only difference is how they approach it, but both are exactly the same in terms of coverage. Clinton's "it takes a village" is really no different than the "Let's all hold hands around a campfire and sing" message of Obama.

Negative. Obama's healthcare plan includes only partial subsidization for all Americans who can afford healthcare, and complete subsidization for every American who can't afford their own healthcare.

From his website:

“We now face an opportunity — and an obligation — to turn the page on the failed politics of yesterday's health care debates… My plan begins by covering every American. If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums. That will be less. If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness.”

Hitlery's healthcare plan ONLY changed with this campaign. Prior to that, she wanted a healthcare plan that forced ALL Americans to participate at no personal expense, regardless of income or ability to afford one's own healthcare, and this WOULD cripple the healthcare system and do untold amounts of damage to American health in general. But even her current healthcare plan outlined on her site is confusing and convoluted, talking about 'tax credits' and all sorts of other completely unnecessary features which only add to spending.

 

[lazur]

lazur, btw... I never said Dean ran a bad grassroots campaign. I simply said Obama did better.

I disagree. Dean ran one of the most effective grass roots campaigns in history. It was being crucified by the media for his infamous howl that did him in.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I disagree. Dean ran one of the most effective grass roots campaigns in history. It was being crucified by the media for his infamous howl that did him in.

Joe Trippi, the man who engineered Dean's grassroots campaign, has said that Obama took it a step further and did it better.

 

[Marx]

can you post the text of those fliers or point me to a website that might give me the gist of them, please? i'm not questioning what you said, i just haven't seen them and i'm curious to see what kind of false info they contain.

man, this is one humdinger of an election. i thought it'd be good to have two pretty good candidates like this duking it out for the nomination, but it's really just pitting their supporters against each other, which doesn't exactly help unify the party or allow them to focus on the republican's, like i'd hoped would be happening by this point. i'd be fine with clinton as prez, but her level of dirty politics just really doesn't do it for me. i'll admit obama's resorted to some questionable tactics that i'd rather not see between inter-party candidates and he's by no means the perfect candidate, but he's got more pros and less cons for me than clinton. i really wish clinton would drop out because there's just going to be more and more negativity and mudslinging, which will only continue to increase the size of the rift between both candidates' supporters and could potentially come back to haunt us in the general election. i don't see her dropping out before pennsylvania, though.

I'll look into it and see where I can look them up. I could write it all out but I'd rather find an easier way.

There's no way Clinton is going to drop out, and she shouldn't. She has just as much support as Obama does. Just because he is in the lead by 100 delegates doesn't mean that much. She will win PA, and more than likely alot of the others coming up. And if Florida and Michigan are straightened out, this will be closer than anyone could imagine. She's still very much in this race regardless of what some would like to believe.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Edwards and Obama are copies of one another. Plain and simple. One is not more of anything than the other. The difference between this time and 2004 is that no one is "willing to go there" with Obama and scrutinze him for fear of being blasted with "they're all just racist" comments. Look at what Ferraro actually said. Nothing about it was racist, but that's the spin that was put on it. No one can seem to criticize him without being labeled a racist or having racial undertones.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful in what we say, no one wins.

Oh I think he's taken plenty of criticism from Clinton and McCain without them mentioning the fact that he's BLACK, which is what Ferraro did. Stick to the issues like McCain and Clinton have, and the criticism is fine. Bring up race, and how can you sit there and say there wasn't any kind of racial undertones to it? Those weren't undertones, it was blatant. You're in denial on this one. There's nothing lucky about being a black man in this country.

 

[souvlaki]

Edwards and Obama are copies of one another. Plain and simple. One is not more of anything than the other. The difference between this time and 2004 is that no one is "willing to go there" with Obama and scrutinze him for fear of being blasted with "they're all just racist" comments. Look at what Ferraro actually said. Nothing about it was racist, but that's the spin that was put on it. No one can seem to criticize him without being labeled a racist or having racial undertones.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful in what we say, no one wins.

I don't think Ferraro made those statements with the intention of being racist. I think she is stupid for making that statement, and a hypocrite, and she deserves to be called out on that, and be torn apart by the media, because as a politician she should know better. She may not have intended to sound racist, but it's insulting to say that Obama has gotten a free pass because he's black, and then say that Clinton is getting attacked due to sexism. You cant have it both ways, unless you actually believe that sexism is more prominent than racism in 2008.

 

[lazur]

Joe Trippi, the man who engineered Dean's grassroots campaign, has said that Obama took it a step further and did it better.

Yeah, Obama hasn't howled at the crowd like a madman ... yet.

I guess my point is that Obama's 'charisma' and ability to connect to 'common folk' as a result of that charisma is what's gotten him to where he is. It has absolutely nothing to do with a 'grass roots' campaign, at least imo.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I'll look into it and see where I can look them up. I could write it all out but I'd rather find an easier way.

There's no way Clinton is going to drop out, and she shouldn't. She has just as much support as Obama does. Just because he is in the lead by 100 delegates doesn't mean that much. She will win PA, and more than likely alot of the others coming up. And if Florida and Michigan are straightened out, this will be closer than anyone could imagine. She's still very much in this race regardless of what some would like to believe.

No, she doesn't. The popular vote says so. The amount of donors says so. The amount of money raised says so.

 

[souvlaki]

I disagree. Dean ran one of the most effective grass roots campaigns in history. It was being crucified by the media for his infamous howl that did him in.

No, the difference between their campaigns is that whereas Dean simply energized a large population of voters that normally didn't vote, Obama actually got those people to the voters booth. To say Dean ran a better grassroots campaign then Obama is not being fair to Obama. I'm sure even Dean himself would admit Obama took what he did and took it to the next level.

 

[Marx]

Oh I think he's taken plenty of criticism from Clinton and McCain without them mentioning the fact that he's BLACK, which is what Ferraro did. Stick to the issues like McCain and Clinton have, and the criticism is fine. Bring up race, and how can you sit there and say there wasn't any kind of racial undertones to it? Those weren't undertones, it was blatant. You're in denial on this one. There's nothing lucky about being a black man in this country.

No I'm not. To suggest that Ferraro, who has been an advocate for civil and human rights for the past 30 years, is a racist? That's ignorant.

I don't think Ferraro made those statements with the intention of being racist. I think she is stupid for making that statement, and a hypocrite, and she deserves to be called out on that, and be torn apart by the media, because as a politician she should know better. She may not have intended to sound racist, but it's insulting to say that Obama has gotten a free pass because he's black, and then say that Clinton is getting attacked due to sexism. You cant have it both ways, unless you actually believe that sexism is more prominent than racism in 2008.

I agree that you can't have it both ways. The Obama/Edwards debate holds alot of ground. I have said it many times before, Obama and Edwards are copies of one another. John Edwards was driven into the ground for the exact same thing that Obama should be driven into the ground for, but isn't because no one wants to go there. You can't seem to say anything against Obama because you may be labeled as a racist or have racial undertones. That's not the way our country should be. It isn't racist to question how someone got to where they are.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful as to what we say and how we say it - no one wins.

 

[redfirebird2008]

No I'm not. To suggest that Ferraro, who has been an advocate for civil and human rights for the past 30 years, is a racist? That's ignorant.



I agree that you can't have it both ways. The Obama/Edwards debate holds alot of ground. I have said it many times before, Obama and Edwards are copies of one another. John Edwards was driven into the ground for the exact same thing that Obama should be driven into the ground for, but isn't because no one wants to go there. You can't seem to say anything against Obama because you may be labeled as a racist or have racial undertones. That's not the way our country should be. It isn't racist to question how someone got to where they are.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful as to what we say and how we say it - no one wins.

Marx, no one has called her a racist. Her comments were playing the gender and race card. She's trying to play it both ways, suggesting that being black makes things easier but being a woman is harder. Being a black male in this country means you face more profiling and negative stereotypes than any other demographic in this society.

Also, last year Ferraro said it would be easier for a white woman to win than a black man. But now her tune has changed completely.

 

[Marx]

Marx, no one has called her a racist. Her comments were playing the gender and race card. She's trying to play it both ways, suggesting that being black makes things easier but being a woman is harder. Being a black male in this country means you face more profiling and negative stereotypes than any other demographic in this society.

Also, last year Ferraro said it would be easier for a white woman to win than a black man. But now her tune has changed completely.

I agree Firebird, no one in here has directly called her a racist. But there are implications flying around in the media and elsewhere suggesting that she is. And to me, that's ignorant.

 

[souvlaki]

No I'm not. To suggest that Ferraro, who has been an advocate for civil and human rights for the past 30 years, is a racist? That's ignorant.



I agree that you can't have it both ways. The Obama/Edwards debate holds alot of ground. I have said it many times before, Obama and Edwards are copies of one another. John Edwards was driven into the ground for the exact same thing that Obama should be driven into the ground for, but isn't because no one wants to go there. You can't seem to say anything against Obama because you may be labeled as a racist or have racial undertones. That's not the way our country should be. It isn't racist to question how someone got to where they are.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful as to what we say and how we say it - no one wins.

Wait, when have I said she was being racist? I've said a number of times her comments remind me of things my parents have said before. Not intended to be interpreted as racist, but a careless comment nonetheless. It's just as a politician she should have known better. She is receiving criticism from Obama because of that, not because she is racist. That doesn't mean she doesn't deserve all the criticism she's receiving. It was a stupid, careless, and hypocritical statement, and she just fans the flames even more with every statement she has made since then. Instead of apologizing and saying she was taken out of context, she blames Obama for being sexist, and racist against white people. She's an idiot, and deserves to be called such.

 

[Marx]

Wait, when have I said she was being racist? I've said a number of times her comments remind me of things my parents have said before. Not intended to be interpreted as racist, but a stupid comment nonetheless. It's just as a politician she should have known better. She is receiving criticism from Obama because of that, not because she is racist. That doesn't mean she doesn't deserve all the criticism she's receiving. It was a stupid, careless, and hypocritical statement, and she just fans the flames even more with every statement she has made since then. Instead of apologizing and saying she was taken out of context, she blames Obama for being sexist, and racist against white people. She's an idiot, and deserves to be called such.

I never said that anyone in here called her a racist Souv. I am saying that there are suggestions that she is in the media and elsewhere. That's what it is ignorant to me.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I agree Firebird, no one in here has directly called her a racist. But there are implications flying around in the media and elsewhere suggesting that she is. And to me, that's ignorant.

No, there are implications that what she SAID was racist, which I think it was. But hell, everyone makes a mistake and says insensitive crap at some point in time. That doesn't mean anyone should assume they live by that statement and I don't think anyone has, except for hate mail she's probably received. If you were black, though, how would you respond to it? She made a mistake, she's paying the price, but I don't think the media or a majority of Obama's supporters think she's racist. And no one has said it in the media.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I never said that anyone in here called her a racist Souv. I am saying that there are suggestions that she is in the media and elsewhere. That's what it is ignorant to me.

There are no suggestions. They are merely reporting on her actual statements, which have been bitter, mean, and downright ridiculous (the actual word Obama used to describe them). Her comments can be racist without her being a racist herself. The media hasn't said she's a racist or even hinted at it. The only people that would do it, and rightfully so, are black people that might be offended by it. If someone had said the same crap she said about Obama except about Hillary's gender, I would expect huge outrage from females -- plenty of which are on TV as pundits and would be ranting and raving about it.

 

[Marx]

No, there are implications that what she SAID was racist, which I think it was. But hell, everyone makes a mistake and says insensitive crap at some point in time. That doesn't mean anyone should assume they live by that statement and I don't think anyone has, except for hate mail she's probably received. If you were black, though, how would you respond to it? She made a mistake, she's paying the price, but I don't think the media or a majority of Obama's supporters think she's racist. And no one has said it in the media.

I'm not, so I don't know how I would take it. But as a caucasian, I see nothing racial to it. The comments were careless, but it isn't racial to question how someone got where they are. I can't help but keep going back to Obama and Edwards. One was ridiculed into the ground, the other hasn't been - even though the both of them are exactly the same. Draw your own distinction.

 

[redfirebird2008]

But don't you see the irony in that? A female who has benefited from gender bias complaining about racial bias? It's ridiculous and hypocritical to say the least. And it wasn't stated in a nice way, which is how she tried to spin it after the fact. It was stated in a mean-spirited, jealous manner. And then after the fact she tries to claim it was a comment on the pride of blacks? No, not when you listen to the tone of her voice as she says the original statements.

 

[Marx]

But don't you see the irony in that? A female who has benefited from gender bias complaining about racial bias? It's ridiculous and hypocritical to say the least.

I see what you're saying, although I wouldn't necessarily agree that she has benefited from gender bias.

 

[souvlaki]

I never said that anyone in here called her a racist Souv. I am saying that there are suggestions that she is in the media and elsewhere. That's what it is ignorant to me.

Well, regardless of intent, anyone that looks at those statements can see how they can be regarded as racist. The point being any smart politician would apologize, and say they were taken out of context. What does she do? Say that Obama is picking on her because she's white. That is a sign of complete idiocy right there. I would be upset if the media didn't call her out on it, because it's a perfect example of a Clinton supporter trying to make a big deal out of something that has nothing to do with this race, and the Obama campaign throwing it back in their face. Clinton doesn't deserve criticism for this, but Ferraro surely does. SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER. Like any other politician that has made a stupid comment, the media blows it up in their faces as they probably should.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I see what you're saying, although I wouldn't necessarily agree that she has benefited from gender bias.

Geraldine herself said she has. In fact, that's how she attempted to qualify her statements about Obama (by saying she wouldn't have been on the '84 ticket if she wasn't a woman).

 

[Marx]

Well, regardless of intent, anyone that looks at those statements can see how they can be regarded as racist. The point being any smart politician would apologize, and say they were taken out of context. What does she do? Say that Obama is picking on her because she's white. That is a sign of complete idiocy right there. I would be upset if the media didn't call her out on it, because it's a perfect example of a Clinton supporter trying to make a big deal out of something that has nothing to do with this race, and the Obama campaign throwing it back in their face. Clinton doesn't deserve criticism for this, but Ferraro surely does. SHE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER. Like any other politician that has made a stupid comment, the media blows it up in their faces as they probably should.

I agree that she should have known better.

 

[sinewave]

I'll look into it and see where I can look them up. I could write it all out but I'd rather find an easier way.

thanks.

There's no way Clinton is going to drop out, and she shouldn't. She has just as much support as Obama does. Just because he is in the lead by 100 delegates doesn't mean that much. She will win PA, and more than likely alot of the others coming up. And if Florida and Michigan are straightened out, this will be closer than anyone could imagine. She's still very much in this race regardless of what some would like to believe.

to me, it just doesn't look like she's going to pull in enough delegates from the remaining primaries to take the lead in pledged delegates. if that means the only way she can win is by having the super delegates go against the voters and give her the nomination, i don't think that's going to play well with the party in the general election. the bottom line is, he polls better than her against mccain and i happen to agree with that and i don't want this campaign to get any dirtier. she should drop out. she's not doing the party any favors by continuing to run.

I don't think Ferraro made those statements with the intention of being racist. I think she is stupid for making that statement, and a hypocrite, and she deserves to be called out on that, and be torn apart by the media, because as a politician she should know better. She may not have intended to sound racist, but it's insulting to say that Obama has gotten a free pass because he's black, and then say that Clinton is getting attacked due to sexism. You cant have it both ways, unless you actually believe that sexism is more prominent than racism in 2008.

i'd hesitate to call her racist for those remarks, too, but she's got a history of saying these types of things about black candidates, dating back to jesse jackson. i'd like to know if she honestly believes that any candidate who happens to be black is going to get special treatment for that.

I agree that you can't have it both ways. The Obama/Edwards debate holds alot of ground. I have said it many times before, Obama and Edwards are copies of one another. John Edwards was driven into the ground for the exact same thing that Obama should be driven into the ground for, but isn't because no one wants to go there. You can't seem to say anything against Obama because you may be labeled as a racist or have racial undertones. That's not the way our country should be. It isn't racist to question how someone got to where they are.

When we come to a point in this country when we have to be so careful as to what we say and how we say it - no one wins.

i don't think that's true. it's only a factor if you bring race into it. he's not running as a black guy. he's running as a democrat who happens to be part black. it's nothing he can control. he's not out there on the campaign wearing a grill and eating fried chicken and collard greens, for pete's sake. however, if someone brings up the idea that he's only a viable candidate because of the color of his skin, i think he's got an obligation as a member of the african-american community to not let that kind of stuff drag his campaign down and to speak out against it. judge him on his policies and credentials, not on whether he's just some slick talking, non-threatening black dude who's got no business running for president. that's just going to piss off the black community, who, last i checked, make up a large portion of democratic voters.

 

[souvlaki]

I agree that she should have known better.

Well, the thing is, whenever these type of allegations are made against a politician when they make a stupid, possibly racist remark, is that it's never that the public sees them as racist. It's that they see their remarks as stupid, and careless, and for that reason they deserve criticism because they should know better. I doubt most politicians accused of being racist are really racist. But as politicians they should know better than to resort to making possibly suggestive comments about something as sensitive as the subject of race.