Letters to the Editor
eliwatkins
Published Letters: 30
-
Doubtful
[Read the article: Sen. Bob Casey climbs on Obama's bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think it's highly doubtful that a significant number of Caucasian Americans will vote for Obama in the general election. Stereotypes from previous black leaders such as Coleman Young or Louis Farrakhan are difficult for politicians to overcome. Political idealism may be blinding democrats from a realistic view of today's societal perceptions on race and gender, most of which are based on generalizations and stereotypes.
As a male Caucasian independent who tries to overlook race and gender when assessing a potential leader, Hillary is the better candidate against McCain. She is probably the best skilled person for the job as well.
Folks will probably scream racism when reading this post. But I think a realistic person sees the world at it is, warts and all.
-
re: "The white male will vote for whoever is the nominee"
[Read the article: Sen. Bob Casey climbs on Obama's bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'd be careful about making this assumption. Yes, many folks will be loyal to political party above all else. I find that folks also bond based on ethnicity, patriotic perceptions, gender, shared emotions, common enemies, etc.
I do agree that racism and sexism are both part of our society and probably will be for the remainder of our lives. (Hopefully, these traits will reduce over time.) Of the two, I think racism remains the stronger force.
The way to break down these stereotypes is through direct experiences which contradict them. Everybody has a mother but not everyone has lived in an ethnic community in which they differ.
I think the observation that so many on these boards scream racism rather than sexism gives an accurate perception of where our society stands today. It reveals the state of the human condition in our country. Sadly, voting for Obama in the primary probably won't change that condition much.
Politics is much about emotion. Emotion drives judgmental cognitions such stereotyping. Stereotypes cannot be ignored when considering a mass population. I believe Obama has the higher hurdle to climb here.
Hence his speeches focus on race and unity even when a controversy is about patriotism (or not.) This is smart politically, i.e. he is trying to address the primary obstacle, but opens up the flank of patriotism which McCain immediately attacked. Michelle Obama's comments about not being proud of America (and lowering the bar) are likely to be played ad nauseam when the real battles begin.
In my opinion, if Democrats want to win the independent voters they'd put up Hillary as the candidate. I don't think they can win the general election without this constituency. I could be wrong.
I'm no shill for Hillary Clinton. Just calling it like I see it. I'd like to see a democrat win.
-
@Kansas O'Flaherty
[Read the article: Sen. Bob Casey climbs on Obama's bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Kansas,
The following link might be helpful. These ad hominems don't really benefit anybody nor further constructive dialog.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.
It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it. Many times, an opponent's use of an ad hominem attack is an indication that the opponent realizes that the argument itself is correct and cannot be refuted.
-
@MaddieP
[Read the article: Sen. Bob Casey climbs on Obama's bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oops, you're right. I missed the "this" in Uncle Fester's post.
I have hung out and read many posts on these boards prior to posting. I'm offering another perspective that contradicts what many of you perceive. It may cause some cognitive dissonance, particularly for idealists, which seems to be the Obama base. A dissenting voice may add value, though readers would need to be receptive to it to find out if it does or not.