Letters to the Editor
-
Only Stephen Colbert doesn't see color
I support Hillary, I'm OK with Obama. I don't think she's racist, and I don't think Obama is trying to paint her as one.
But I don't understand why we are all supposed to pretend that race and gender shouldn't be factors here. White guys have reaped the benefits of white-guy-ness since forever. If Obama actually benefits from being the black candidate, what is the problem with that? Why shouldn't a black person (or a white person) be inspired by the idea that this guy has a real shot at the top job? Why shouldn't I find it inspiring that a member of the female half of the population might get elected? Why shouldn't the candidates get the benefit of it, if for once it is a benefit?
Men have always been allowed to be swayed by the "manly" brush clearing, who-would-you-like-to-have-a-beer-with factors, so why is this unacceptable for the Obama and Hillary supporters? I'd love to have a beer with Hillary.
-
@i'drather not
You say: "If Obama actually benefits from being the black candidate, what is the problem with that?"
You're missing the point here: Obama is benefiting at the expense of the Clintons, and in a highly public, unscrupulous manner. If the price of Obama winning is the trashing of the Clintons's integrity and respective reputations on matters racial, then the price is not only way too high, but ugly in the bargain. So ugly that, Supreme Court and Iraq be damned, I will almost certainly not be able to vote for him if he becomes the Demo candidate. This is as down and dirty a primary as I've ever seen, giving the lie to Obama's very tired theme of hope and change. It's entirely possible that one day, he will be viewed as the Ralph Nader of this election, not the Messiah from the South Side. I'm not only angry about the corner Obama has backed too many of us into, I'm deeply saddened.
-
@KateTex
I respectfully disagree that Obama is trashing the Clintons using race. I just don't see it that way. Of course, neither do I think he is pure and color blind. He is a smart politician who is taking the comfortable ride the media is giving him as far as it will go. Sen. Clinton would do the same, and did back in her front runner days.
I think the media is spoiling for an ugly racial fight, and makes a huge deal out of any remark. To me the only remark I can recall that crossed the line was the "Jesse Jackson won here too" comment from Bill, which backfired on him anyway.
Given the incendiary nature of racial issues, I think the candidates are doing a decent job in a campaign of firsts. The media, on the other hand, has been embarassing itself on a daily basis.
-
The Clinton koolaid drinkers
simply never give up.
They have several characteristics: They refuse to admit that Hillary and Barack have similar programs, and they CONSISTENTLY select a point that Hillary has VAST weaknesses on and blame those on Barack.
I originally began as a Dodd/Richardson supporter. After those guys dropped, I had to decide. I went with Edwards for a while, but then I had the binary choice. After reading the unfair, biased, slanted, over-the-top, moronic, and TOTALLY ScREWED attacks of the Clinton koolaid drinkers to Barack, I knew that I could NEVER agree with such persons.
The final issue is the B word. Hillary has a B problem. Until she fixes the B problem, she cannot be taken seriously.
Hah!! Fooled you .... you thought I meant the 5-letter B.
I mean the 4 letter B - the BILL problem. Hillary has a Bill problem. Since Hillary in the WH means that Bill is there as well, I have very serious problems with her candidacy.
-
Opus and Katetex
To Opus: thanks for questioning. I am notorious in my own right for not being clear in my initial points (why cant you just read my mind and understand me damnit! :P). Essentially I am saying that a lot of the fuel being used to fan the flames against Obama in sites like this, is also stuff that would shut him down in his national campaign but curiously its not being brought up by the one person that would benefit the most from it mainly Hillary Clinton.
Based on that I am assuming that the majority of this stuff (race cards, sleazy land deals for mansions, voter purging etc.) that is being aimed at Obama are all non issues or have no verifiable facts backing them.
Again thanks for helping me clarify this.
To Katetex: what corner has Obama backed people who do not support him (i'm just guessing this is who you mean)?
-
Yes, he is
Obama -- half-white, 1st generation Kenyan-American, from Hawaii, schooled at an elite private academy and then Harvard -- has co-opted a vast American family history that isn't his to advance an oblique argument that it's time an African American led the nation. That notion is welcome and way overdue, but why hasn't Julian Bond or John Conyers or Kweisi Mfume or Eleanor Holmes Norton or Andrew Young or any other eminent and civic-minded African American fully possessed of policy expertise and political acumen been so adored? Race-baiting takes all forms, and Obama has proved a master at helping white people to feel good about themselves, so broad-minded as to vote for a black man, while also subtly encouraging the virulent misogyny that is an enduring stain on this nation. His feet are made of clay, too, as we all will realize when he's president.
-
But how is it Obama's fault that the Clinton's stumbled?
"If the price of Obama winning is the trashing of the Clintons's integrity and respective reputations on matters racial, then the price is not only way too high, but ugly in the bargain."
But no one here supporting Clinton has explained how Obama is responsible for Clintons fumbling. Why don't you think that the Clintons are responsible for their own statements, like the Jesse Jackson statement, that even their own supporters found difficult to accept? Racist? Maybe not. But race insensitive....we can all be race insensitive, frankly. But to be so on the campaign trail is a political fumble. Blaming Obama for the Clintons' fumbles doesn't make sense to me. Saying that he should have waved a wand and made all questions of race or racism go away...taking the "high road" and protecting America from its own racist history that is way bigger than this election or any participants in it....doesn't make sense to me either.
Please explain. It would be like holding Clinton to blame every time "sexism" comes up in this election. If racism is a serious charge, then its serious for everyone. It's serious for Obama too because a lot of people initially didn't want to vote for him because they thought "racist America" wouldn't support his campaign...the idea that Obama somehow mysteriously benefits from bringing up race is far from evident--even given the amount of anger here against him and the blame for race being brought up--even when he didn't start (or end) the conversation.
By the way, when I say that his race is a positive I'm not refering to any of this manchurian candidate innuendo or PC police or anything like that. That part of it has been a negative. But I simply mean that someone of another color brings something positive to the table--just like Clinton's gender is a positive. I know that the Clintons know this and that they even like him. But I think they've been surprised at the way America has embraced a black candidate so quickly...everyone has been surprised. But I think it's been a good thing and the result of a good campaign.
I'm sorry that Clinton supporters cannot see this.