John McCain's manifest impotence in his dealings with the North Carolina GOP's dog-whistle ad campaign has, predictably, been translated in MediaSpeak into further evidence of his "maverick" status -- and just as predictably, he's being criticized in some quarters for even protesting the ads in the first place.
But the GOP's ad is only part of the picture regarding what's happening in North Carolina. For the bigger picture, we need to talk about Floyd Brown and Bruce Hawkins.
You see, in addition to the Wright ad, there's a right-wing operation titled "ExposeObama.org", operated by our old friend Brown, running ads on North Carolina stations that are even more incendiary, even more obvious in their dog-whistle nature -- overtly associating Obama, through imagery and implication, with black criminals.
And as Joe Conason adroitly observes, McCain has remained strangely silent about these ads -- no doubt because he can claim that this is an independent conservative 527 organization with no official ties to the GOP. His hands are clean.
Which is how this scam is supposed to work. As we've explained, that's exactly how Brown has operated over the years, ever since the days of the Willie Horton ad, through the Clinton "conspiracies" and the swiftboating of John Kerry: Do the dirty work for the GOP, tossing in the grenades. Give them the chance to look noble disavowing you, at which point the media will play the ad endlessly. Worked wonders for the North Carolina GOP, just like it has for Brown & Co. in the past.
Along the way, Brown not only indulges in dog-whistle race-baiting, but he also consorts with all kinds of racists and extremists. Conason details, for example, Brown's long association with the ardent segregationist "Justice" Jim Johnson, who fed him a steady stream of baseless smears of Bill Clinton that then made their way into the mainstream press.
The sleaze at ExposeObama.org doesn't end with just racially incendiary ads. There's also an element of good ol' right-wing rip-off snake-oil sleaze along for the ride.
The group's executive director, Bruce E. Hawkins, was in fact disbarred in 2006 for peddling tax-fraud schemes of a distinctly far-right odor. And in 2007, the Justice Department filed suit against Hawkins to prevent him from peddling the schemes even after his disbarment.
Hawkins presents himself, in his role at ExposeObama, as a "political expert" mostly by touting his role as the Washington state campaign coordinator for Pat Robertson in 1988 and for Pat Buchanan in 1996. A Bill Berkowitz piece about the group describes his role:
The ExposeObama team includes Brown, who is also president of Excellentia Inc., which according to Brown's bio is "a consulting company specialising in non-profit organisational strategy, development and the marketing of ideas"; and executive director Bruce E. Hawkins, "a highly skilled political strategist" who has worked for such conservative leaders as Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan and Mike Huckabee.
At ExposeObama, Hawkins' bio touts more of his high political skills:
As Washington State Director for Pat Robertson, Hawkins delivered Robertson’s only Super Tuesday victory in 1988. As National Field Director for Pat Buchanan in 1992, Hawkins organized all of the states outside of New Hampshire. As Washington State Director for Pat Buchanan in 1996, Hawkins managed to win half the delegates for Pat with no money, no budget and no paid staff. As Straw Poll Manager for Mike Huckabee’s Iowa Campaign, Hawkins helped stun the world with a powerful second place finish and propel Huckabee into the top tier of major candidates. Governor Huckabee recently said of him, “He was exceptional in not only understanding, but having the ability to create and execute a very effective plan for us to compete despite being outspent by an estimated 20-1 from other candidates.”
But back in June 2006, Hawkins was permanently disbarred by the Washington Bar Association for selling classic old "Patriot" style tax scams. You can see the sleaziness in the Bar's description of the operation:
Hawkins associated with several nonlawyers who maintained websites that promoted a program to reduce or eliminate consumer credit-card debt through private arbitrations based on the premise that national banks could not lawfully issue credit cards. Debtors throughout the United States made "applications" to the "program" through the websites. They paid fees and were referred to a private arbitration service organized to facilitate the "program." Hawkins stipulated that he knew that since 1996 the Department of the Treasury, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency had decided it is well established that national banks can issue credit cards. He stipulated that of the approximately 100 clients he represented, he knew of none who achieved the promised zero credit-card balance. He stipulated that debtors following his program achieved the goal of having accounts closed with a "paid as agreed" notation in about five percent of his cases, and that he would consider such cases "a mistake on the part of the bank." He also stipulated that many attorneys called him to "make huge accusations of fraud and illegality."
The applicants found one of the websites and paid $200 to "apply." They were referred to Hawkins. They paid him a fee of $5,722. Hawkins sent the applicants documents for the arbitrations, and he referred them to an arbitration service without disclosing that he had a financial interest in it. The applicants paid the arbitration service $139 for each arbitration and received five "arbitration awards." Hawkins then advised them to hire another lawyer to "confirm the awards." They did so, but when they filed the "awards," two of the banks filed oppositions and won. In the other two, after the banks communicated with them, the applicants stipulated to dismissal. The Committee approved payment of $6,417 to the applicants representing the $5,722 in fees paid to Hawkins plus the five payments of $139 paid to his arbitration service.
Hawkins also was sued by the Justice Department to stop him from soldiering on, as he did after his disbarment, with any further tax-scheme promotion:
Justice Department attorneys filed a civil suit to try to stop a disbarred Gig Harbor lawyer from promoting what they claim are tax-fraud schemes. Federal attorneys claim that Bruce Hawkins helped customers set up bogus corporations in the West Indies through which customers could claim their money was being held by foreign companies and was not taxable. The civil injunction suit, filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Seattle, asks that Hawkins be ordered to disclose to the Justice Department his customers' names, addresses and other information so back taxes can be collected where warranted. The government claims that Hawkins, who was disbarred in September, had been promoting several types of schemes since 1997 regarding allegedly fraudulent offshore tax shelters and corporations. Hawkins has not been charged with a crime. In the complaint, government attorneys allege that Hawkins also promoted the schemes at seminars; over the Internet; and in CDs, DVDs and a book. Hawkins "actively promoted, assisted and advised customers" to establish these fraudulent companies, partly through setting up Prosperitas Internationale Credit Union in Nevis, West Indies, which boasted supposedly tax-free, interest-earning accounts, the complaint said.
And in August 2006, the federal courts indeed enjoined Hawkins from promoting these schemes in any fashion, legal license or no.
Meanwhile, Hawkins gave us a clear look at the kind of extremist politics he promoted with a Seattle P-I op-ed that called for a Republican agenda that would, among other things, repeal the 16th Amendment (providing for a federal income tax), "Root out political correctness in all our armed services," withdraw the U.S. from the U.N., institute racial profiling at the borders and ports of entry, enact mass deportations, and make English the official language.
The John Birch Society agenda, in a nutshell.
And right there at the front page of the ExposeObama site, you'll see a prominent link to a piece by Hawkins that compares Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Black Liberation Theology to the Ebola virus. Charmingly eliminationist, don't you think? (And coincidentally, it also significantly bolsters Wright's claim yesterday that the attacks on him are really about attacks on "the black church.")
The ExposeObama ad campaign makes the North Carolina GOP ads look tasteful in comparison -- which is clearly the point. Pushing the envelope is a right-wing nutcase tradition, and it works like a charm in moving the public discourse so far to the right that any resemblance to reality is purely coincidental.
In a way, it's probably just as well that McCain hasn't publicly denounced the Brown ads yet -- because the moment he did, Fox, CNN, and MSNBC would begin playing them in an endless loop, just like they did the Wright ad. And really, we don't need that.
But if the NCGOP ad is really so odious that it requires denunciation because it would "hurt Republicans," the ExposeObama ads should earn far worse, since comparatively they take the campaign straight into the racial sewer. For a supposed Straight Talker like McCain -- who loves to peddle an image of flinty integrity, which is what the meaningless North Carolina spat was really all about -- it would be good know where he stands. Indeed, it's important.
Even if it is just the McCain of the Moment.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
So!
Interesting that these guys are active in North Carolina. Clearly Obama is going to beat Clinton there- so that is not really an issue. Apparently there are some local races that are the actual races of interest- and some local dems have endorsed Obama and are gettin nailed for it. Is that the game?
No, I think the GOP is sending out test balloons to see what works.
where’d i leave that pincushion?
Seriously. How about a safetypin campaign?
sorry… another senior moment…
*sits down on corner stool and adjusts soil duncecap*
FOIL dammit!
I have a question. Can the progressive blogosphere and the netroots counteract Brown, et al. effectively? In this respect, things have changed since 2000 haven’t they?
Goopers oughta be most interested in what works in OHIO- so should the dems. Whoever wins Ohio will win the White House.
At the moment- McBush leads Obama.
The hard, cold reality is, Rev. Wright just cost Obama the General Election.
Add in Clinton’s 9 pt. lead over McCain and her getting Independents now, it’s time for Democrats to face reality head on and realize what’s going on and be glad it happened before Obama had secured the nomination.
If the Obama camp is as concerned about the party, the country, and the election as they say they are, they will ask him to drop out now (as they’ve been asking Clinton to do) since it is all but assured now that he cannot win in November. And don’t get me wrong, I support Clinton, but I think what Wright has done to Obama is sickening, but it’s a done deal.
The GOP is sleazy and they do not fight fair, and indeed fight very, very dirty. They’re in it to win. This is not news (no offense intended to author).
The picture should be very clear now for Democrats and the superdelegates.
So much for the Party of Law and Order!
[was it Regular or SVU?)
Shorter Juno: Wright just handed the election to McCain.
Part of this, too, is to develop effective attacks against Obama, since they’ve started to count on their knuckles and realize that Hilary might NOT be the nominee (despite their efforts to promote her).
One of my biggest worries is that Hilary, like McCain, has been completely bought by the corporations. So the corporations want a McCain/Clinton election, because that way they cannot lose. From lunching with Murdoch to using Karl Rove’s tactics, to her obvious desperation over losing to Obama, it seems very likely that Hilary is just like McCain - willing to abandon core principles in order to get elected.
McCain has turned on his own legislation, he supports torture despite being a torture victim, and it’s clear he’s completely bought and sold by the corporations. Hilary doesn’t seem any less desperate, to me.
But in case she doesn’t win, the corporations need to be ready to do to Obama what they did to Kerry in ‘04. Given that in ‘04 they took a senior senator with an exemplary war record and managed to turn him into a feckless hippie in the minds of the public, it will be a cinch for them to turn Obama into Willie Horton himself in the eyes of the public.
Yes and no.
The liberals are getting better and better at getting their message out their. But since the GOP is happy to base their campaigns on lies, they will always have a leg up on us.
No shortage of lies and smears to spew, and if they run out it is easy to make more…
Ohio is changing as we speak.
I’d exercise caution applying formerly iron-clad
gimmicksrules.It’s way to early to come to that conclusion in my opinion.
Dean wants a decision made in a month (which I think may be a mistake) but if a decision is made on June 4th- then the decision criteria should be “who will take the most electoral votes in the fall, Obama or Hillary?”
It’s really about performance in a few critical states.
Blaming Wright for Obama’s troubles is foolish. If Wright did not exist, the Corporations would invent or inflate something else.
The people who cost Obama the election (if they have) are the corporate right, who have subverted the democratic process, and the American people who allow them to continue to do so.
While I don’t think a moratorium on the gas tax will make one bit of difference to the consumer, I do like her idea of a windfall profits tax levied against oil companies. If she’s sincere about that, I’m not sure we can say she’s in the pocket of corporations. I think she and her husband are masters at compromise and finding ways to work with all factions, which I think is an asset.
No chance for you that the problem is what the media has done to Wright?
I do agree with you in the sense that it is important to rehabilitate the image of Rev. Wright, to deflate these nonsense “anti-america” claims.
Spreading around the full sermons and Moyers interview are good steps.
fiddlydee-ain’t necessarily so.
What rules? what changes?
Worst thing to do is to have Obama (or anyone) try to rehabilitate Wright- in my opinion….best thing to do is to make him go away.
What is not clear to me is that when somebody articulates some clear criticism of the(God anointed)USA they are branded as unamerican. Without criticism no progress can be made.
Ohio winner = General Election winner
Plus, I firmly believe the polls will shift away from McBush if we can ever bother to start campaigning against him!
Perhaps, but I do not see how he gets out from underneath the Wright sabotage, and it was sabotage. As the author notes, Repubs are sleazeballs with no ethics and they will run the Wright stuff ad nauseum.
(My belief is that, between his defending Farrakhan by saying that, since he didn’t put the chains of slavery on him, he is not Wright’s enemy - meaning, since the white man did, he is - and his mocking JFK, who was instrumental in the Civil Rights’ movement, and now his sabotaging the first black American to have a real shot at the presidency, which would have an effect of further closing the racial divide, Wright in fact doesn’t want that divide closed.)
It would not surprise me in the least if the oil companies are willing to offer a token “windfall profits tax” if it will get their candidate into office. It’s not like they can’t afford a token investment.
It’s hard to see Hilary, with her health-care industry support, as an anti-corporate candidate. But you know what, if I thought she WAS, I’d be much more eager to support her.
As for me, I’d like a candidate who calls for NATIONALIZING the oil industry. Really put the fear on those bastards…
What have Hill & Bill said about them? The stand to benefit from anything trashing Obama.
1. Your #8
2.
3.
…
It’s pretty close in Ohio. Obama WAS leading McCain by a bit and now is down two points or so- it’s not an emergency at this point. It IS one of the key states to watch though.
Hell yes.
National Resource = Nationalized control.
No, no chance of that.
(btw, Obama himself says he disagrees with Wright). A problem here is that many Obama supporters think that, in order to protect and defend Obama, they have to defend Wright. They don’t, and in fact it’s a big mistake to do so. A lot of what Wright said was repugnant, and you should be furious with him for what is obviously an attempt to sabotage Obama’s candidacy.
But he’s done so, and if Dems want to win in November, they’re going to have to buck up, admit it, and let Obama go for now.
The hard cold reality is that Monicagate, Travelgate, Vince Foster, White Water, Pay to Play in the Lincoln Bedroom and Bosnia Sniper Fire has sunk any chance of HRC winning the General Election. Obama is holding up just fine. No need to use the Tonya Harding option just because you are desperate for your candidate to be in the lead.
Why shouldn’t they benefit from it?
Obama has benefitted from the trashing of Clinton. IT’s how campaigns work.
Obama is sinking, and Clinton is rising. A 9 pt. lead over McCAin is the widest we’ve seen yet, and all evidence is that she’s getting the Independents.
The moratorium on the gas tax is a horrible idea. It won’t stop gas prices from continuing to rise. Imagine when it’s time to reinstate the gas tax on gas that’s now much more expensive.
A lot of what religious figures say is repugnant as far as I’m concerned, you buying into the meme that only Obama is morally required to sever all ties, repudiate every statement, and drop out in shame is what bothers me.
Oh I think that either dem should kick the shit out of McBush come fall- unless they create some NEW messes that take the air out of their respective campaigns. I suspect that this Wright thing will eventually go away–hope so.
A few weeks ago, absolutely everybody agreed Clinton would need a double digit win to keep going.
I absolutely love how 9 turned into such a “blowout win” when it dropped from 20.
Gas tax moratorium is stupid policy but may be good politics..Doubt if any prez candidate would vote against it.
I think it’s high time for Obama (and other candidates) to simply start calling bullshit on these tactics. And I’d be all for them using the word “bullshit,” because what the corporations are doing to the democratic processes warrants it - their unAmerican activities are much more offensive than the word “bullshit.”
But if Obama refuses to sink nearly to Dick Cheney’s level of discourse, then he can take a cue from South Park and start “calling shenanigans.” Like this:
Chris Matthews: “Yesterday Reverend Wright, your reverened, the man who suckled you at his breast for twenty years, said that American is, and I quote ‘The Great Penguin.’ Have you contracted a hit man on him yet?”
Obama: “Chris, I’m calling shenanigans on that question.”
Chris Matthews: “You’re what?”
Obama: “Chris, I’m calling shenanigans. That question is nonsense. Troops are dying in Iraq, people are being evicted from their homes, the economy is spiraling in to a full-fledged Depression, and you’re trying to distract with nonsense questions. Shenanigans, Chris.”
Chris Matthews: “But the Reverend…”
Obama: “Shenanigans.”
Chris Matthews: “So you’re afraid to answer…”
Obama: “Shenanigans.”
Chris Matthews: “But you have to…”
Obama: “Look Chris, if you have a substantive question to ask, please do so. Otherwise the American people are looking for leadership, and I have a campaign to run.”
Chris Matthews: “Fine. So Roger Ailes…”
Obama: “Shenanigans. Look, I gotta go.”
(Removes microphone, leaves.)
I don’t buy what you are selling. You quote one AP-Ipsos poll that interviewd 560 Democrats and 537 Republicans. It is well established that the GOP folks by direction of Rush Limbaugh will say they favor Hillary. Sheesh. Come on.
I feel like a “bleeding heart” liberal. This stuff is way past the sickening part. It is beyond me about blaming Wright and/or the press. After his performance at the Press Club yesterday, it is hard to conclude that he is on the side of Obama. We have talked about brain bleach on this site. How do you make clean something this ugly?
Maybe the strategy is in small, good steps, I do not know. We started this election season with a panel of good candidates, and narrowed the choice to 2, also thought to be strong. How to get past the smell? One site had a report being a link of Wright to a strong Clinton supporter. Maybe this is all intentional. Obama has to keep his own counsel and act in some clear, decisive, moral way if he is to continue amassing his supporters and regain his footing. His own message is being lost, and he is not getting above the noise.
I agree with you, but that is not the issue here.
I don’t think Wright’s criticism of America is the problem. His racism is.
He said a lot of very disturbing things, and the GOP is going to run them in an endless loop.
Always a mistake to believe the “pundits”. They get paid by the word.
And here we go again. A discussion about GOP sleazy nutcases turns into the always popular liberal circular firing squad.
Sorry to all for whichever of my ignorant statements offended you all today.
I’m out.
So Hillary is taking the GOP position on this and adding to the Deficit in contradiction to the Democrats pledge to only support pay as you go. Typical Hillary to say or do anything to try and win an election.
No. I’m buying into the meme that, rightly or wrongly, rationally or irrationally, this cost Obama the election in November, and I do NOT want another Republican president.
Speaking as an Ohioan who knows a lot of other Ohioans, black, white, brown, gay, straight, young, old, high school, PhDs, profs., factoryworkers, farmers, lawyers, musicians, bidnesspeople, retired ….
Lots of people here have HAD it UP TO HERE with pollsters!
Lots of people know about push-polls and the other variations on the theme.
Lots of people refuse to play that game any more.
Lots of people believe the election is the ONLY poll that really matters.
Lots of people have caller-i.d. on their phones.
*sits back down on corner stool and re-adjusts
soilfoil duncecap*We know you value your opinions very highly, Juno, but as a statement of fact you do not know that yet….unless you are clairvoyant.
I wouldn’t call it a horrible idea, but I don’t think it’s a particularly effective one.
MM—Might be too dramatic- dramatic actions keep the story alive…
Best way to kill it is to answer any questions in a way that’s SO boring that the reporter is left with nothing to print from the interchange—then give some stuff that they almost HAVE to print on another subject…
Candidates are carefully trained on how to do these things.
I couldn’t disagree with you more.
That would be so refreshing. Not that it will actually happen. The Dems are such cowards.
;->
Didn’t know that she is supporting it- but that’s what I would expect. I’d expect Obama to support it too.
Not to mention that the proceeds go to building and maintaining roads and bridges, which employs people who buy stuff and pay taxes. Jeeze, it’s a bad, bad, bad idea.
Most people love polls when they support their own views and detest them when they don’t.
I think the last few elections have demonstrated that hoping a propaganda-inflated issue will go away does not work. Kerry tried that with the Swiftboaters.
My idea is just ONE idea. Your idea is another. The left needs to brainstorm up and test a MILLION ideas to try to deal with the problem of corporate propaganda control of the “news” media. The right has thirty years of ‘right wing think tanks’ developing ideas, we need to build an infrastructure to oppose that.
But that’s for the future. For THIS election, we need to try SOMETHING new. It may be that we are doomed to fail. It would not surprise me. In order to win, a Democrat either has to sell out completely, or find a way to beat the entire media infrastructure as well as the Right.
Probably could have done without the “We know you value your own opinions…” part. UnObaman, divisive, mean-spirited, and unreverand-like.
I can appreciate your noting that obviously one cannot with 100% accuracy predict the future.
You think Obama supporters should try to prop up Reverend Wright?
Yeah the swiftboaters thing was a bad experience- but it was a different sort of issue- and at a different time in the election cycle. We’re still seven months from election night- so there may be a VERY good chance that this will all be old boring news by November.
most people around here ignore polls as so much trash, nothing more.
how many have you seen on the telly that even bother showing the margin of error.
how many “pollsters” have you seen during campaigns not-too-subtly “pushing” one candidate or another?
ditto “pundits”
ditto “newspeople”
garbage in, garbage out.
junk.
I just thought it was a comment on the obvious; the free shall set you free;)
1. “POP!”
2.
I watch the polls daily- and am very aware of the MOE. It’s the only scoreboard we have–candidates take them VERY seriously…
Normally- if you hear a canididate say “I don’t pay attention to polls” he or she is losing.
Obama is against it because of two fold: It would create about a 25 Billion dollar defecit and it is unlikely that the lowered cost would benefit the consumer. The market price would rise so the Oil companies get the money. It is not sound economics.
If some people are right, and Clinton is nominated because the belief grows that Obama can’t win in November, then McCain will be the next president. A major part of the Democratic Party coalition will leave teh party, perhaps for good.
Good for Obama!
Most candidates run internal polls constantly and know a great deal more about what is going on than we do - or the “regular” pollsters. I usually read the polls but give them the attention they deserve - none.
keeps u safely off the streets.
it’s supposed to pay well.
congrats.
i look too.
i do not obsess over them.
they are a tool, and not a terribly good one at that, when considered one by one.
RevBev April 29th, 2008 at 9:42 am
48
In response to Juno @ 46 (show text)
We know you value your opinions very highly, Juno, but as a statement of fact you do not know that yet….unless you are clairvoyant.
reply
Tes, but I think you’ll agree that if Wright IS ‘old news’ by November, it will only be because the Right found something even more inflammatory (and ridiculous) to seize on. We still need to have a response that isn’t “ignore it,” because whatever the equivalent of Wright is in November, the Right will not allow it to be simply ignored.
I think we need to start categorizing some stories as “nonsense” or “shenanigans” or whatever, and we need to consistently categorize some stories as propaganda and calling out the media on them. This would be an educational process for the public - they’ll see real issues being addressed, and fake issues being labeled as fake. I suspect the public will get it. And yeah, the Right will object and try to slander the candidate for refusing to answer the questions… and we have to be ready to deal with that, too.
I think this is the central, fighting match issue. We have missed out on the strategy, and I cannot figure out why we cannot play just as hard without lying and some of the other things we are fighting against. We should be able to call them out on every lie and all these things, like Blackwater and Halliburton, that are rip offs. What holds us back?
I don’t know if internal polls give any more accurate information- they MAY however ask questions that are more sensitive in measuring the effectiveness of portions of the campaign (advertising, events, PR, etc.)
What specific things did he say that were disturbing?
SVU of course. After all, remember that there are children involved…
I recall Bush also basically defending the Swift Boat Liars by taking some gutless and meaningless position on 527s.
That’s what Obama did in the last debate as I recall.
Pardon me?
hey, hep me out here. i’m that other kinda behaviourist.
was that freudian?
canids are dawgs.
awwwww Let’s hear it for Firepups!?!
best show in town
best brainteaser
best of the best
Now perhaps I haven’t heard the details that some of you here are citing. And RevDeb, whose opinion I respect, seems to think his statements are repugnant.
But I heard nothing repugnant. I heard him say that the policies of the government have been racist and discriminatory, and “God Damn” that government for its wrongs.
I do not object to that in the least.
Glenn Greenwald has a brilliant take down of Brian Williams today. It seems that the NBC anchor was seriouly pissed by Elizabeth Edwards’ criticism of the superficiality of the media’s coverage of the Presidential race in a NYT op-ed
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04.....wards.html
Williams went on to say that he thought Peggy Noonan’s questioning of Obama’s patriotism was Pulitizer quality material.
So lets see we have Charlie Gibson’s atrocious performance during the last debate and his creepy whining over the capital gains tax. We have the irrelevant fluff of Katie Couric and now Brian Williams’ very public meltdown.
Well, at least I have BBC news on TV that I can still go to, but I think I’m done with network news in this country.
His saying the US gov’t. created AIDS to kill black people.
His mocking the way white people clap.
His mocking JFK and LBJ.
But here’s the thing I find interesting, because I don’t actually care about what Wright said. He’s not running for president, and Obama is not responsible for anything Rev. Wright says. But I do think Wright was deliberately trying to harm Obama, and I was trying to figure out why a man so devoted to the issue of race and so angry about it would do such a thing, sabotage a black American’s very strong chance at being president.
Then I saw that pattern. He mocked JFK. JFK was instrumental in the Civil Rights movement, clearly wanted to confront racism. He defended Farrakhan by saying that Farrakhan is not his enemy because it wasn’t he who put the chains of slavery on his wrists (meaning, the white man did, so the white man is his enemy, and he did speak in the present tense); and finally, his sabotaging Obama, who by virtue of becoming president would help to further close the racial divide in America. It struck me that Wright, who is heavily invested in racism, doesn’t want that divide closed. Is he as petty to just sabotage Obama simply because Obama didn’t defend him enough?
It’s a real problem, I think.
huh? egad man. then why do you bother to read them?
this isn’t one of those twirly thingies you stick in the ground to scare moles, is it?
i thot it was one-a doze diskussatin’ thingies, but we’re goin’ nowhere fast, at this rate.
I’d be the last person to ask if it was freudian- haveta get one a them Freudians…
Yeah maybe a canidate is an evening spent with someone who didn’t turn out to yer taste…
Here’s the bottom line in the polling issue (IN MY OPINION)..When superdelegates decide who to support- the polls for the battleground states will be a MAJOR consideration if there is a sizable difference in the performance of the two candidates vs. McCain. They will ALSO balance their own personal political issues into the equation and out will come a thick political soup.
Not a man. I read them because they are all so different. It’s sorta funny to me that none of them match. Whatever.
faultytowers memory territory here, but wasn’t RevDeb referring to Juno’s comments, and not the Rev. Wright’s???
Obama has trashed Wright’s statements- I think that issue has been resolved for all practical political purposes. Obama can’t go back
One of worst things that pollute our discourse is that people tend to mistake our government with our country. I love my country but I despise my government.
I know this is off the TOPIC here but our veterans need our support and EP’ed from below:
sorry for the switcheroo.
me too. especially the “whatever”
still, yeah, the tummy churns a bit when a bad one passes by my nose.
bein’ a hoomin bein’ & all..
I think I missed by one “contravesy” but the next one for Obama will be this stupid-type chesnut:
“BREAKING: OBAMA listened to Dr. Dre & Snoop and liked it”
(Which actually means he is going to connect quite well to white urban & suburban 18 - 30 year olds).
Meanwhile important issues are going off like rockets.
One thing it will do, I would think, is let Obama slam him back and out of the ballpark, which would distance him once and for all.
I didn’t hear the whole speech, and I didn’t hear the JFK remarks…he bases his ideas on AIDS having been “planted” in Africa, on Horowitz’s book; which is not a new idea…
When it comes to religion, it looks like it is better politically to just pretend to be a Christian the way Bush has. No one ever challenges you and you cannot be blamed for something someone else said.
And what, exactly, is your problem with that. I don’t defend Farrakhan. But what is the problem with blaming the perpetrator of slavery and racial discrimination?
As Wright stated, it is not his responsibility to defend Obama. He is a minister, not a politician.
Wow. That sounds like blaming the victim.
I don’t think so. Obama supporters are satisified with Obama’s responses, but he’s really harmed by this.
I don’t care on what he bases that claim. It’s repugnant and crazy and is meant only to foment his own race war.
Obama dissociated himself from the most controversial of Wright’s remarks but as Wright’s appearances on Bill Moyers and at the National Press Club show Wright is not the angry irrational hatemonger he is portrayed as but as my brother in law who is a lot more attuned to these kinds of things than I said he is a scholar educator and that a lot of the criticism leveled against him comes from people with no understanding of black churches, the tradition of rhetoric within them, and that the highly selective cherrypicking of Wright’s most extreme statements constitutes an attack on them.
My take is simpler. Republicans have used race and exploited racism for 40 years in Presidential contests. The Rev. Wright is just the new Willie Horton. But the real goal here is to give predominately white male voters an excuse to vote for their racism.
What I was saying is that Obama has chosen to distance himself from Wright- not to defend Wright..so the key decision has already been made and we aren’t going to see any moves from the campaign to defend him.
okay.
bingo!
that’s why we’re putting up our Obama sign NOW, even though it’s not time yet/past time for primary. Some superdelegates live nearby, and our street is a nice bizzy little backroad.