Letters to the Editor
-
Talk about elitist
If Obama is an elitist for saying the working class people of Pennsylvania feel bitter, what do you call the people who are telling those Pennsylvanians how they are supposed to feel about his comments?
-
Obama's original remark was half right and half wrong
I agree that a lot of people are angry and perhaps bitter. It's good that a politician is acknowledging this and not blowing American Exceptionalism upwards. I'm not exactly a happy camper myself regarding the current direction of our republic. But it was a mistake to use the language he did. I'm sure a lot of people in PA and elsewhere had strong faith and a firm belief in the second amendment prior to the economic deterioration of their states. And we could be charitable in interpretation of his remarks and say that as times got worse, people took refuge in their faith, and valued their rights even more than before.
But I feel more comfortable with saying that ultimately his statement was clunky, given a favorable intent. Even the wordy one, the one who speaks with utmost felicity can trip on his tongue.
Yes, his response was awesome, and fast (worth seeing on YouTube). Let's see if it makes up for his original mistake. For Hillary and McCain to pretend that large portions of the public aren't angry might backfire. Watch those tracking polls for clues.
-
Hillary and McCain...
...both come from wealthier backgrounds than Obama. His life is, and always has been, much more like the average American's than either of his opponents.
-
Thanks Joan
Thanks. Joan. for this piece of wisdom. Knowing where you're coming from, this was a brave attempt to widen the horizons of all democrats. Obama's ability to explain what he meant is what attracts many of us to him. I am for Obama, but if Hillery is the nominee, I will happily support her. When you compare either of them to the Republicans, to my mind, there is no contest. Let's stop the partisan infighting and let the primaries work out as they will. We all have a lot to do before November.
-
A Mound of Mold
This class, race, and sex conflict, is wearing old.
-
What's not to understand?
Obama is more willing than any presidential candidate in my lifetime (I'm 51) to talk to voters in a manner that doesn't seem to infer he thinks voters are all stupid. I'd rather disagree with a candidate who treats me like I can understand context and intepret meaning than to agree with somebody who sugarcoats or just distorts the truth.
So, it baffles me that media critics jump to join the other candidates -- who have to take his comments out of context and offer misinterpreations, it's their job -- to criticize Obama. The guy opts not to give some pat response to "What's going on with voters in Pennsylvania?" and Walsh and others are saying it'll cause him trouble. Because? Because people in the industrial states aren't actually embittered by a government that hasn't done anything to help them in years? Because it is easier to make abortion rights or gun control or religion the issue you cling to when you have no belief that any candidate can make a difference when it comes to the economy?
He didn't say anything fundamentally wrong. He offered it as his interpretation of what must be a pretty complicated situation in the industrial states. Yet, the other campaigns scream that he made elitist comments that show he doesn't understand them and Walsh lends creedence to the claims -- even while she points out that Obama's sort of an entitled Ivy League type who would likely misunderstand regular folks.
I'm pretty sure Obama wasn't raised in an entitled sort of lifestyle. But, in order to explain how a mixed-race kid raised by a single mom could get to the Ivy League and within shouting distance of the White House, the other campaigns and writers like Walsh have to ignore the guy's actual upbringing.
Like him or not. Vote for him or don't. But, there's no disputing Obama's trying to explain himself and his views to us in a way that shows respect for our ability to reason.
-
It's just longer, not different
Obama's success is based upon his being able to make us feel he feels our pain (thanks for that, Bill) and believes exactly as we do--and on one other thing. Our victim culture.
Barack Obama, in every single speech, emphasizes the way in which he has been victimized by those who misunderstand him. It's like hearing, again and again and again and again, about his abandonment by his father. Same story. Over and over and over. If he becomes President, that's all we're going to hear.
Listen for it. It's all over these excerpts.
-
@manos99
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/12/03854/5216?detail=f
"It's So Very Over for Obama Unless He Apologizes Very Soon for. . ."
daily dose of campaign humor.
-
Spell checker
"We hear that’s its hard for some working class people to get behind you’re campaign."
Your spell checker did not catch this one. Spell checkers have made everyone sloppy including you. A spell checker just looks for valid words in a table. One word at a time.
On Saturday at 10 PM eastern, CNN will have its first look at the event at Messiah College.
The Compassion Forum itself will be at 8 PM eastern on Sunday. Also on CNN. It is not a debate.
Click on my name to see the Messiah College website.
-
who me?
Bitter? Damn right, I'm bitter! I get poorer every day Bush is in office.
--member of the non-elite, rapidly sinking middle-class
-
RARELY will i agree with Xrandadu
but if not a blockquote, at least close the quotes!
-
@XH Blockquote beggars
This column is begging for use of the "blockquote" tag
Indeed. We will have our posting work cut out for us. It's the weekend; it will have to last until Monday.
-
@unschooler re: It's so very over... (dKos)
What is that? Death by Henry James?
-
Can You Say "Hypocrite"?
I have hardened to any defense of Barack Obama.
The press is allergic to him. His followers are apologists for his hypocrisy and doublespeak. Many of his followers are some of the most angry and hateful "people" I have witnessed in the political process for many years, and his voting record in the U.S. Senate speaks more loudly than his words.
He talks about fairness to workers but votes in favor of a bill - The Class Action Fairness Act of 2006 (now law) - that limits employees' ability to file class action lawsuits against corporations (think Enron, Bear Stearns, Wal*Mart).
Many of the same FEDERALLY REGISTERED lobbyists who give money and support to him lobbied on behalf of this bill. So did the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; so did the White House. Clinton didn't support it, but he did.
He lies about Sen. Clinton's vote on the 2005 bankruptcy bill - a bill she didn't even vote on - but oops! He doesn't mention that he voted against an amendment to this same bill to limit consumer credit card interest at 30 percent. Again, lobbyists.
He accuses Sen. Clinton of taking money from oil companies, but, oops! Voters don't hear that oil company executives are bundlers for his campaign and he takes money from employees and family members who work for these oil companies.
And voters never hear about the 2005 Energy Bill that he supported. This bill gave $14.5 billion in tax breaks to the oil companies for the express purpose of developing and using renewable energy sources.
But, oops! In a congressional hearing last week we learned that none of those tax breaks were or have been used for renewable energy sources.
How, exactly, does BIG O square his soaring rhetoric with all of this? I have heard every excuse and every justification - parsed to the nth degree - about these double standards.
I am tired of the excuses and justifications for his hypocrisy, his lies, his misstatements, his arrogance, and his disrespect for the citizens of this country.
There is a jarring and very troubling disconnect between BIG O: the image and Barack Obama. When do you suppose the media will ever catch on?