Politics – For all the hope and excitement Obama's candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed -- and unreported -- this election season.
For us Christian Conservatives, wed be Okay with Obama if he repeated often that God is his co-pilot ... or that 'Jesus is the philosopher who most changed his life' ... liek GW.
See, we are okay givin a chance to a Master of Mediocrity, a Draft Dodger, a Cocaine Consumer, an Admitted Alcoholic ... those are all things we can forgive. After all, dont all them weaknesses prove that the love of Jesus can cure all?
Course, we dint know at the tiem that GW was fakin it.
Nevertheless, unless Obama convinces us hes a Born Again Christian ... and advertises it liek GW ... I doubt we will look past the color of his skin.
You got to think about he roots of this Political Party we invented knowed as the Christian Conservative Party. Only then will you understand.
Only then will the scales be lifted off your eyes.
I really didn't get the story very much. Was the point that a European woman gets votes cuz she's not an African American man? Or was it that the dems should have a European man run so we can see if Obama is really discriminated against.
Maybe the WP also has to do a story on how a lot of guys in the locker room say she's just a c-word, w-word, b-word, I could go on and on with those. OMGss--there's more derrogatory terms for a woman than an African American you can't say.
My favorite is someone calling out to Hill "wash my shirt" and no one said boo, but you know if someone called out to Obama "shine my sh___", you'd have a mass inquiry.
Hill apparently gets comments like these all the time, and she deals with it.
But then again, women have to be tough, very tough, to survive in the world and not make a fuss about gender.
I bet Hill's had to make the coffee and do laundry many more times than Obama was called to do something lowly.
"Maybe the WP also has to do a story on how a lot of guys in the locker room say she's just a c-word, w-word, b-word, I could go on and on with those."
--I'm all for that...As long as they do a similar story centered on the soul-searing hatred many women feel towards her and mention some of the vile things I've heard women call her over the years too. Prejudice, bigotry, and hatred is not just between blacks and whites. Nor are these the only groups about which their are perceived double standards where the issue of prejudice is concerned.
Personally, I've long wondered why people who feel perfectly comfortable saying things like "blacks should just get over it" or "I never owned slaves" or that they could never vote for a black person wouldn't in a million years make such statements about someone who was Jewish.
mesodude
Those kinds of statements are made all the time about the Jews too, mesodude. You just don't notice them. What's the point of your statment about the Jews? Does any group deserve that kind of treatment?
Spadecaller
I didn't mean to single out or disparage Jewish people in any way. Nor was I suggesting that bigotry toward any group was acceptable. I was essentially agreeing with what i thought koranagirl's point was--that certain prejudices and bigotry seem to garner more outrage and are more likely to be publicly censured than others. I think it's interesting to consider how we as individuals and as a society take certain isms more seriously than others and I think it's worth exploring why that is. For instance, why *haven't* we been more outraged over some of the blatant sexist and misogynist remarks made by the media (frequently by women)made about Hillary Clinton throughout this campaign? (more)
From a scholarly perspective, I'm always curious to see the different lenses through which people see the world. I recently heard or read a complaint that the media seems to refer to other candidates by their first and last names while Barack Obama is usually called just "Obama." This, according to the complaint was a sign that the media was being "racist" and disrespectful. I had never even noticed this (I usually refer to Hillary as...well, Hillary) but what I thought was interesting was that instead of being viewed as a sign of celebrity (Oprah, Madonna, Cher, and...um, Hillary), someone would perceive this as being racist. Just made me think of the baggage we carry around and how this colors our perception.
I mean, if you want to talk discrimination, it's a better bet we can all envision Hillary being responsible for groceries, laundry, doing dishes. Now maybe she has others do most of this for her lately, but no one would say boo if they saw it.
On the otherhand, I bet Obama either rarely changed a diaper or he balked at it.
Is this discrimination?
Just asking. If we can all envision Hillary doing more housework than Obama, and it's not an issue, then why is what's going on in this article any different?
You're making a good point in light of the sexism turned against Hillary not getting nearly as much coverage as Obama and racism. Then again McLame isn't getting as much coverage about his connections to that nutjob Hagee in comparison to Obama's coverage about Wright.
Sen. Clinton's gotten the crappy end of the media stick in comparison to Sen. Obama. They've been hyper-critical of her and let a *lot* pass for him. Especially when it comes down to specifics versus pie-in-the-sky idealism.
Now what's the solution? What's it say about the media (which we have to remember is a slightly right-of-center operation)?
AND when Hillary mentioned that she is getting more support from white blue collar workers according to an AP story, everyone condemned her
It wasn't something that should be mentioned
As one pundit said "It's not something she should say"
Now we see the Washington Post reporting on something similar
Does everyone want to brush what is going on under the rug and pretend it doesn't happen?
As I've said elsewhere, IMO some are quick to label as "racist" any event they perceive as a double standard. Personally, I don't think that just because I'm p!ssed off that someone else's racist behavior (real OR imagined) isn't being sufficiently censured that I have the right to claim that *I've* been victimized by racism. All of us have been discriminated against in to one degree or another in one form or another. But when people start claiming to know someone else's pain, I'm concerned.
Take the Martha Stewart verdict a few years back. Many men (myself included) thought she got a raw deal because she's a woman. True or not, no men were up in arms claiming that the anger and disappointment they felt over the double standard was a setback for the "men's suffrage movement" or that their victimhood made them empathize with Holocaust survivors. Why? Because that would be stupid and insulting to *real* victims of hatred and discrimination.
Dionys: "What's it say about the media (which we have to remember is a slightly right-of-center operation)?"
Perhaps that they operate on the basis of "divide and conquer." When Obama was the underdog, they let all kinds of things pass on his side and attacked Clinton relentlessly. Now that he seems to be winning, they attack him, hoping that McCain will quietly pass under the radar in the meantime and win the election.
Both sexism and racism are alive and well, and will rear their ugly heads more and more as November approaches.
Dionys, have you looked at the numbers? Really looked at them? Obama wins the male vote by razor thin margins alot of the time. I think he won it by about 4% in Pennsylvania and I'd bet the African-American male put him over the top there. The female vote favors Hillary by a larger margin then the male vote is against her. In essence, sexism is working in her favor. Also you can go to Obama's site any time you wish and find specifics.
"On the otherhand, I bet Obama either rarely changed a diaper or he balked at it"
Why would you bet that??
I'd very strongly bet the opposite.
hehehe...I agree and I was thinking to myself "gee, that sounds like someone who must have never seen or heard Michelle Obama in action. ;-P
Hah, yup! You beat me to it gama... beat me to it. Oh well, I'll just point out again that the "sexism" in the campaign is actually favoring Clinton numerically. As a percent and in raw numbers. Not to mention that the statement by KoranaGirl shows sexism as well as people who believe that Hillary should be doing house-work.
I'm not surprised on bit. Hell the racist, bigoted powers that be can attack the dude 2 ways. They can always play up the fact that he is black, never mind the fact that he pulled himself up with his bootstraps. Dude has worked hard his whole life and now its paying off. When I was a kid, i was told that if i studied hard and got a good education, then I would be president of the United States. When I told my dad that, he laughed and said that studying hard would allow me to have a good life and enjoy many things, but as far as being President, he said that they didn't call it the White House for no reason. A second avenue is Islamophobia. I heard on Good Morning America, that 15% of America still believes that he's a Muslim, even though he has stated time and time again that he isn't. If he wins the nomination, that will put America on stage. Are we really the bastion of racial tolerance? Or are we no better than the rest of the world?
AbuAmirah: "15% of America still believes that he's a Muslim"
This raises another question: Even if he were, why should that be a problem? Can anyone answer me from the bastion of tolerance?
Because that number indicated no racial problem. Tell me, why do you automatically infer that the "He is a Muslim" angle automatically means a negative in the eyes of the American people? All that number shows is that 15% of people are to lazy to go out and look for the facts, probably mainly Republicans who aren't interested in the Democratic nominees because they already know they will vote McCain. Not the best mind-set, but not racist at all.
Mdiar: "Tell me, why do you automatically infer that the "He is a Muslim" angle automatically means a negative in the eyes of the American people?"
Because it is. Read the comments on the right-wing threads and you'll see. No Muslim and no atheist will be the president of the US in the foreseeable future. No, it's not racism, but it is discrimination.
That 15% won't vote for Obama either way. I'd put it at those who know who they are voting for no matter what and, if Clinton falls out of the race, they will be forced to research Obama and find the facts. That number will shrink and it will basically be those who know they are voting McCain no matter what and don't bother to research the matter or watch debates.
This stuff sounds pretty trivial. Shouting racial slurs at teenagers who are setting themselves up as targets (that is, they are CAMPAIGNING) seems to be the worst of it. As for the headquarters vandalism, there is no indication in the article or picture that it is any more racist than political, and unless there were unreported remarks in the bomb threats, well, Hill had bomb threats too. I'll bet everyone doing door-to-door in anyone's campaign has had the door slammed in his face. Seems to me that we have come a long way from lynchings and cross-burnings.
"As for the headquarters vandalism, there is no indication in the article or picture that it is any more racist than political, and unless there were unreported remarks in the bomb threats, well, Hill had bomb threats too."
--Hmm...That's a tough one. The spray painted message on the window references the Wright incident.
I'll give you a positive for that meso, but the thing is something may be cultural and not be racial. I believe the Rev. Wright incident to, by and large, to be a cultural incident as opposed to a racial one. In a below post you seemed to show a similar ignorance of Ron Paul's philosophy when stating he had no conscience, do you expect me to say that you dislike whatever ethnicity Dr. Paul comes from? Or do you expect me to simply explain to you his philosophy the best I can and you can decide for yourself whether you agree with it or disagree with it or if he still lacks a conscience.
Thanks. That's why I said it wasn't exactly a slam dunk. I personally didn't hear Wright's remarks as slamming white people per se but rather criticizing the actions of those in power (which, as it happens in this country, is made up mostly of white people). That some people viewed or claimed his remarks to be racist was the reason I said the spray painted message qualified as racism.
Racism exists no doubt.
Obamas going to face it. The question is.
Is the reason Obama is receiving these racist remarks and threats because some people sense he could really win. Do a good job and thereby disprove their unfounded racism?
That is how I see it. Now I don't know if he has enough experience. That has always been my one big doubt about him.
He is showing some strength and wisdom in what he is doing lately. Talking about McCain instead of Hillary so much.
I'm starting to like the way he is handling himself. If he continues and shows his maturity and wisdom I'll be more than glad to support the man.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
MacBookForMe
nopatacious
inplacenews.
hatukabu
PrettyWoman911
GreenBayFan
mayrassa
mekhifranks1975
alamala
SunnyDays
Monte G
yarrkz24
fyuuuuut
Spadecaller
juvel
ind06
ETproductions
Mdiar
Ciera Marie
GWHayduke
bruhaha
tchef
BJTJ
miklkit
cosmogenium
eugenegerard
DeLeMa
Neophile
capn_caveman
spkguy
Helixbuilder
oldgringo
ramblasos
hurr1
AtheismIsReality
BronxBomber
digitalfever
taciturnman
christopher1
DiffeeOnline
lolip
83)
This is no surprise to me. Just look at the vitriol expressed by the bigots residing on this site!
Nor to me and given how many more posts there have been in recent weeks spewing out a litany of outright lies, half truths and innuendo I fully expect that it will get much worse after Barack is finally confirmed as the Democratic nominee!
As far as I am concerned the people doing this are not Americans for all of their flag waving and pseudo-patriotic rantings!
...and the Bush Justice Department only has guidance to go after reverse discrimination cases. Firing those 8 prosecutors makes sure the rest stay in line, obeying their evil, un-American political bosses!
scott4261: "This is no surprise to me."
To me neither. Two days ago some friends were guessing who the next president of the US would be. When they asked me, I said: McCain. "You are hoping for McCain?" they asked, shocked. "No, I'm afraid he will be the president," I said. In spite of all indications to the contrary, I don't think the US is ready to elect either a woman or a (half) black man. People claim that they are not prejudiced, but on election day the real feelings will come out.
I still hope though that I'm wrong.
...bloody Propeller. Not only did it lose my comment, it also decided to sign me out...
Anyway, in a nutshell I stated that you are wrong and be happy because of it. Either Democratic candidate will win this race. At this point the polls are unreliable and, due to the advent of the internet, corporate media is becoming less and less influential. If Obama DOES lose it won't be due to race. It will be because of a culture that believes experience trumps ability. Obama is winning the idealistic vote, who believes things can be better and must be better. Different philosophies, but, at the end of the day most of the experience voters who are Dems will back Obama. The "whites" that have voted Clinton due so because experience is important to them... economics actually is determining the vote more then race. Also the young vote will trump the racist vote if it comes to that, IMO. Frankly either Hillary or Barack can win this thing hands down in November.
Candida, the thing that makes me really sad about this is that the people who won't vote for Obama are many of the people who were apparently traumatized by the moral failings of our previous President. Yet, when George Bush got into office and alienated most of our allies, suddenly what the rest of the world thought of us was totally irrelevant to them. Neocons aren't ashamed of having voted for Bush twice (or they would never admit it) and they don't have any idea how much lower the international community's opinion of us will sink if we elect McCain (especially after the last 8 years) over either Hillary or Obama. ;-(
"This is no surprise to me. Just look at the vitriol expressed by the bigots residing on this site!"
I couldn't agree more! Those Obama supporters are a surly lot ...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8762....
"African-American superdelegates are being targeted, harassed and threatened," said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.), a superdelegate who has supported Clinton since August. Cleaver said black superdelegates are receiving "nasty letters, phone calls, threats they'll get an opponent, being called an Uncle Tom.
"This is the politics of the 1950s," he complained. "A lot of members are experiencing a lot of ugly stuff. They're not going to talk about it, but it's happening."
So according to you: Up is down and down is up...
I ALMOST feel sorry for you and your lot... (actually it's more like pity...)
You mean like accusing folks of being racist merely for preferring a candidate who is not Obama?
Vandalizing campaign headquarters is now acceptable behavior to cons. Wow.
That is not at all what I am saying, but many on the right here (not all, mind you) have written some pretty appallingly racist comments here...
I have been called racist for preferring Clinton to Obama. That was not by people "on the right," or at least they don't see themselves as right wingers. (They just act that way.) THAT is what I am saying.