See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Obama on small-town PA: Clinging to religion, guns, xenophobia
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhi ... -surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html
Published: Apr 11, 2008
Author: Ben Smith
Post Date: 2008-04-11 19:39:50 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 5575
Comments: 263
Obama on small-town PA: Clinging to religion, guns, xenophobia Huffpo's Mayhill Fowler has more from Obama's remarks at a San Francisco fundraiser Sunday, and they include an attempt to explain the resentment in small-town Pennsylvania that won't be appreciated by some of the people whose votes Obama's seeking: You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. That's a pretty broad list of things to explain with job loss.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-70) not displayed.
.
.
.
#71. To: Cynicom (#68)
As you know the forum has a clique of Ds. All is fine w/the common enemy is Bush, but come election time - some - flash their true colors and muster into line. These same Ds go ape shit here w/an occasional R appears, BTW, which is fine by me. But I must admit I have noooooooooo idea how anyone could hold, at this moment in time, that one branch of the Party is superior than the other.
Did you actually read the Novak column you posted?
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I'm sure that negative thought crept into his mind early on ... it had to for a man with the intellect of Obama. But he plunged in and was surely astonished by the reception he received from Americans of all walks of life, especially young people. It explains his early declaration of anticipating a need for federal funding for his campaign (which the weaseling McCain also toyed with but which he is now attempting to make an issue against Obama).
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I said I might be misreading him. I don't see how you can "hope" to "change" a system as close to collapse as this one is, financially speaking. Maybe he is trying to make us feel better about ourselves as we edge ever closer to oblivion. It's not working on me. I do prefer him to McHundred. I am still surprised Clinton's Dixie Mafia hasn't taken a shot, literally, at him yet. But a real "change" would be what Ron Paul was talking about — abolition of the Federal Reserve, for starters. No one proposing REAL "change" is allowed to get any traction. We just witnessed that with Paul's candidacy.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
Tom Coburn has never achieved a "branch" in the Republican Party, which says everything about that miserable bunch of scoundrels as far as I'm concerned. But, the implication that either Republicans or Democrats are a homogeneous group is infantile.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
The real laugh is going to come when they have to support and vote for Clinton/Obummer. What will they use as justification for doing so???? Well, we have seen the worms squirm here, this way and that, to cover their sheep partisanship for ANYTHING democrat, now will we see them do somersaults slobbering all over Clinton/Obama. Some here have no self worth at all. Their self esteem will be in the sewer when they have to idolize Hillary. Its coming, these people will don their kneepads and grovel all the way to the election. They have no shame.
Try thinking of him as the "Happy Warrior" (Al Smith) reincarnated. ;-) No, scratch that. Because if he fails it will be for the same reason as Al did, rural and southern prejudice.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
The real laugh is going to come when they have to support and vote for Clinton/Obummer. In your dreams. They have no shame. That's a hot one. ;-)
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Funny. "They were in full cry". I don't remember saying that. I can only remember perhaps one of the posters currently favoring Obama saying something like that. Am I misremembering?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Speaking of shame, will you admit you were wrong when Hillary does not get the presidential nomination?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Al Smith's glorious defeat in 1928 laid the groundwork for the Democratic victories in 1930 and 1932.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Below is audio from the April 6 Obama fundraiser in San Francisco: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/obama-no-surprise-that-ha_b_96188.html OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it's fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people feel most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre...I think they're misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to 'white working-class don't wanna work -- don't wanna vote for the black guy.' That's...there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it's sort of a race thing. Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter). But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What's the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is -- so, we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama's gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we're gonna provide health care for every American. So we'll go down a series of talking points. But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you'll find is, is that people of every background -- there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I'd be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you're doing what you're doing. I think the folks in PA have a case for Reparations.
Yes.
When was the last time a politician said that much that is truthful?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
ari. Lets not go too deeply into political forecasts. Before you anointed Obama, you were selecting RPs VP, IIRC. Was it Kucinich or Gravel who captivated you most?
In answer to the Wilkes-Barre gentleman's question about low levels of national pride, Senator Obama said, in part, that a new generation needs to move into government service, for there is "something big and noble and exciting and important about serving the country." First, however, Senator Obama-- and also Senators Clinton and McCain-- must see us and talk about us in such a way that sets the bar high. A leader will hold us to that standard. "Californians and Pennsylvanians," our next president must say, "find your best selves in one another." Now, let's see, a draft would move a bunch of them in pretty quick.
You're overgeneralizing. I grew up in the Bronx (and was beaten by a black gang with baseball bats in Landover MD 12 years ago).
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
It's true I was overoptimistic about Ron Paul's chances. And I expressed preferences about who he might pick as VP. But I don't think I made any predictions about who he would pick. By the way, isn't Cynicom criticizing the Obamaphiles for all saying RP could not win. Isn't your posting testimony that he is wrong? Damned if you do, damned if you don't, it's looking like.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
robin... You see nothing in this to get upset about??? Every day, there are postings on this forum that prove the truth of Obama's statement.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
And that is a dangerous comment.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ElectoralCollege1928-Large.png It looks to me like the Deep South preferred Smith to Hoover. Their anti-GOP prejudice overcame their anti-Catholic prejudice at that point in our history. It is hard to explain to today's youth that Southerners were once as virulently opposed to the Republican Party as most of them today are to the Democratic Party. In 1928, people were still alive who remembered Lincoln ordering Sherman's March to the Sea.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
Speaking of predictions, weren't you telling all of us a while ago that the Rev. Wright's comments had destroyed Obama's political chances?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Funny. "They were in full cry". I don't remember saying that. I can only remember perhaps one of the posters currently favoring Obama saying something like that. Am I misremembering? I believe I was one of those. I stated not only that RP was going to win ZERO primaries but that his running for the GOP nomination was going to hurt not help the cause of freedom because his run was going to help legitimize the GOP and the 2-party scheme. I believe that I was correct on both counts.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
In 1928, the Republicans and Hoover took half the formerly solidly Democratic South.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Before the American Revolution, Philadelphia had a large population of slaves.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Amazing, today Obama feels the heat and admits his improper wording. Strange, now Obama sees his insults but his white guilter grovelers here disagree with Obama. Odd, Obama says I made a mistake but his worshippers deny it. Oh well. "Barack Obama admitted Saturday that he chose his words poorly when he told a group of California donors that small-town Americans “cling” to guns and religion and xenophobia out of bitterness over lost jobs, but for the second day in a row stood by the comments and weathered pointed criticism from Hillary Clinton."
Granted, but the worst rural Southern prejudices have always been found in the states of the Deep South (that's where most of the violence broke out during the Civil Rights Era) and Smith carried those. Texas, Virginia and Florida are on the periphery of the Deep South, albeit all three seceded and had to endure Mr. Lincoln's "charms" to bring them back. I work with a lady who is originally from Mississippi. She was shocked to learn that Virginia is considered a Southern state. She said she consider them to be Yankees.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
It's true Obama says he could have expressed himself better. But what in what he said is untrue?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
In 1928, that "periphery" extended as far deep as North Carolina. And, at the time, Florida and Texas were pretty Deep South.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
The fact Obama has the racial background he does is a welcome change, but not enough to decide to vote for someone. I support him pure and simple as the best individual in this race where the contestants have to get the nod by the power elite of actually choosing to do a good job as POTUS and has the talents politically to do it well. You are hug up on this model of claiming supporters are hung up on a model of being weak in the knees in the face of a great black hope and this is actually a paradox where you do much of what you accuse others are doing. I know you won't agree, but that is the way I see it. Obama is actually lighter then many Caucasians I know. I am a quarter Puerto Rican and when I work in the sun - and I have as a forest worker and a bicyclist - I am darker then he is. Though perhaps he could out tan me, who is to say? My point is of course that skin coloring, hair type, lip or nose shape, or whatever esthetics people get hung up on, it means nothing about the value of each individual human being when all the bull shit about race is analyzed and but to bed and you look finally solely at a person on the basis of what they are as human beings. Obama could be plaid for all I care if he is a candidate who could chose to be a good POTUS that restores Constitutional government; I know that merely by blocking two proven to be insane and selfish opponents as the first plus of him winning is a bleak way to look at this, but definitely realistic. The lesser evil argument has a life of it's own because of that, but I don't see this as something that will go away any time soon. The powers that be are not going to give up their hold on making the choices of who are choices will be, not without a fight anyway. This is just my opinion on the matter, I am not interested in focusing all election cycle on minor details such as what ethnic or racial background any candidate has. There are just too many other things to worry about.
Only a Paul, or Barr, presidency would offer a small glimmer of hope for a change.imo
hell no.
First lets see who does NOT agree with you. Obama himself. Hillary Clinton, fellow democrat. McKooK, "adversary" republican. And last but not least most of the major media outlets. Therefore you are placing yourself with the elitist views of white rural America. Actually Ari, I am not surprised, as you have always had elitist views here which I and other tolerate.
This is an absurd analysis.
Did you or did you not just yesterday comment that you hope he wins?
That's sad. The dumbing-down must be near complete.
see orangedog's post here. i don't know why you would expect that Obama would restore constitutional government. ok, he said he'd restore habeas corpus, but look at his position on the 2nd and remember he voted for the Patriot Act. i do agree that if he truly were a constitutionalist, i wouldn't care what color he is.
That they suupport gun rights, don't support illegal immigration or are anti- NAFTA becasue they're bitter they don't have jobs? WTF is wrong with you?
He's not talking about Philly. You talk like you know something about Pennsylvania...do you?
Peas in a pod.
Correct, peas in a pod, however to be fair, you must admit there is ZERO support here for Clinton and McKooK.
Comments (112 - 263) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#72. To: Jethro Tull (#64)
And remember that he is on record as stating that he would like a ban on all sales and transfers of ANY semi-automatic weapon. Barack Obama is for total gun control.
#73. To: Sam Houston (#67)
Obama never had a chance anyhow, but it IS refreshing to hear politicians at that level speak honestly and truthfully.
#74. To: iconoclast (#70)
#75. To: Jethro Tull (#71)
But I must admit I have noooooooooo idea how anyone could hold, at this moment in time, that one branch of the Party is superior than the other.
#76. To: Jethro Tull (#71)
#77. To: Sam Houston (#74)
I said I might be misreading him.
#78. To: Cynicom (#76)
#79. To: Cynicom (#68)
Yet when Paul was running they were in full cry that he could not win.
#80. To: Cynicom (#76)
The real laugh is going to come when they have to support and vote for Clinton/Obummer.
#81. To: iconoclast (#77)
#82. To: christine (#0)
Don't know how to post vid:
#83. To: IndieTX (#33)
This is a dangerous man.
#84. To: Arete (#55)
Every word of what Obama said was true.
#85. To: aristeides (#80)
Speaking of shame, will you admit you were wrong when Hillary does not get the presidential nomination?
#86. To: All (#82)
Obama: No Surprise That Hard-Pressed Pennsylvanians Turn Bitter www.huffingtonpost.com/ma...rise-that-ha_b_96188.html
#87. To: Jethro Tull (#50)
I grew up in Brooklyn and spent nearly 15 years in the NYPD so I have friend and foes who are black. It's the sheltered closet liberals who fawn over the Big O simply b/c he's black.
#88. To: Jethro Tull, Cynicom (#85)
Before you anointed Obama, you were selecting RPs VP, IIRC.
#89. To: Cynicom (#12)
they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
#90. To: IndieTX (#33)
This is a dangerous man.
#91. To: iconoclast (#77)
Because if he fails it will be for the same reason as Al did, rural and southern prejudice.
#92. To: Jethro Tull (#41)
#93. To: aristeides, Cynicom (#79)
Yet when Paul was running they were in full cry that he could not win.
#94. To: Sam Houston (#91)
#95. To: iconoclast (#45)
I think Philly has had Blacks for many years.
#96. To: Jethro Tull, robin (#85)
#97. To: aristeides (#94)
#98. To: Cynicom (#96)
#99. To: Sam Houston (#97)
#100. To: Jethro Tull (#85)
Obama for president 2008
#101. To: Jethro Tull. The thread (#71)
But I must admit I have noooooooooo idea how anyone could hold, at this moment in time, that one branch of the Party is superior than the other.
#102. To: lodwick (#101)
or Barr
#103. To: aristeides (#98)
But what in what he said is untrue?
#104. To: christine (#0)
"...they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
#105. To: Jethro Tull (#64)
He's not getting my vote.
#106. To: Sam Houston (#97)
I work with a lady who is originally from Mississippi. She was shocked to learn that Virginia is considered a Southern state. She said she consider them to be Yankees.
#107. To: Ferret Mike, orangedog (#100)
Obama restoring constitutional government?
#108. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#3)
I believe that the essence of what he said is true.
#109. To: robin (#5)
(Edited)
I think Philly has had Blacks for many years.
#110. To: Cynicom (#9)
(McCain's) Schmidt also said it shows Obama views the people he’s trying to relate to with “contempt.”
#111. To: angle (#110)
.
.
.
