Welcome to PatsFans.com

Barack Obama's Race Problem: White Liberals

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IcyPatriot, Jan 15, 2008.

  1. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    37,706
    Likes Received:
    258
    Ratings:
    +477 / 2 / -10

    #87 Jersey

    I found this article quite interesting...

    I wondered what some members here think of Sykes' opinion?

    I think he's pretty close to accurate ... time will tell as the primaries roll on.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obamas_race_problem_whi.html

  2. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    That article has a bizarre point of view. It's worth noting that in Iowa, it was self-described conservatives who voted for Edwards, while liberals pretty much split their vote. Liberals by and large don't care about race, but there are plenty of conservative Democrats who do care. I know a number of white liberals who worked on the Obama campaign in NH, and frankly the reason Edwards, the most liberal of the Dems, is not getting more support, is because liberals (myself included) feel it's about time we elected a person of color or a woman to the White House.
  3. jack

    jack Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I would agree ... Racism is part of the human psyche and instinct survival mechanism....


    And I did'nt read the article, just watched pbs for years and watched some interesting shows on the human animal.
  4. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    I agree with this article 100%. I've been saying for a while that I'm astounded by the nature of how white liberals bring up Obama. I remember hearing NPR soundbytes last year saying, "Barack Obama, is America ready for a black president?" Is America ready? In even entertaining the idea that "America might not be ready" you are basically implying that if America doesn't elect him for being black, it's because they are not ready. You are telling everyone that, because he's black, less people will vote for him and therefore he has a disadvantage over the other candidates. Not only will this dissuade swing voters from voting for him, but it it will basically say that a black President is not "right" for this country who is not yet "ready." You shouldn't give racists that much benefit of the doubt. If America is not "ready" then America is "racist." And if that's the truth they should simply come out and say "Obama's electable if people aren't racist." Because if they're not, he's no less electable than any other candidate.
  5. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Not to draw a comparison between Obama and MLK jr., but what MLK said applies perfectly to this case in his Letter from a Birmingham jail. To paraphrase, it's not the kkk or the man with the noose that is the enemy, because we know what they are. It's the white moderate who sees justice and says "I agree but now is not the time."
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    But, Wildo, it's news that a black, Latino, and a women ran for President. After all, it's been 230 years of only white men. You can't ignore the elephant in the room. The fact is it reflects well on the United States, and especially the Democratic Party, that it seeks the most qualified people without regard to race or gender. Sure, we can pretend that our nation is colorblind and that it's only coincidence that the only qualified Republicans are white, but what's the point of pretending?
  7. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Because they aren't saying it like that. And everyone already knows that. They constantly keep saying "Obama: is he electable?" or "Is America ready for a black President?" I don't hear them phrase it as "Will Barack Obama be our first black President?" There's a huge difference there because it subtlety tells people that Obama's race is a disadvantage.
  8. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    37,706
    Likes Received:
    258
    Ratings:
    +477 / 2 / -10

    #87 Jersey


    Hmmm ... I have said many times I like Edwards.
  9. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    37,706
    Likes Received:
    258
    Ratings:
    +477 / 2 / -10

    #87 Jersey


    Now a woman and a black in the same year ... and they both hate each other ... what's up with that?
  10. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,851
    Likes Received:
    34
    Ratings:
    +39 / 2 / -0

    Everyone of Edwards' policies is superior to the other Democratic candidates, which is unfortunate because I really wanted to support Obama. I see a huge value in electing an African-American president, but I think what Edwards offers in terms of being the closest possible electable (as opposed to Ralph Nader or Kucinich) candidate to say and believe in the same things I outweighs the value of having an African president who I do not agree with on many of his stances unfortunately. That being said, Patters, for a long time I struggled with whether or not I wanted to support Obama anyway, because of what he would bring as an African American.
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,731
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -2

    :rofl: I don't know what's more tragic, the fact that you type that stuff, or that you believe it. :rolleyes:

    What Patters can't understand is reality. In NH, white people told the pollers that they were for Obama, and went in and pulled for whitey. It happened to Wilder in Virginia, but he held on by .04% of the vote, even though the polls said he'd win by double digits. Face it Patters, even your favorite party is full of racists, or if you prefer, prejudice people. It's not just pubies like you dream.
  12. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,731
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -2

    It's funny to see people talk about how color, or gender, shouldn't be an issue, and for anyone who does feel it is, is a bad person. Yet, on the flip side, we've got seemingly intelligent people supporting someone because of their race or gender. So which is it, is someone simply the better candidate because they're more qualified, or is someone a better choice because their white, black, or a female?
  13. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Are you suggesting the Democratic party is somehow more tolerant than the Republican party? Also, doesn't it reflect poorly on the party if what you say is correct, that people are turning to Hillary or Obama because they are female/black? Doesn't that mean you're NOT picking a candidate based solely on who is most qualified, but are using race/gender as a deciding factor? Don't forget, if Colin Powell hadn't been too smart to run for President in 2000 we very well could have had our 1st black president already, from the Republican side!

    (Edit) Dammit RW, stealing my thunder AGAIN! Next time I'm waiting an extra 10 minutes before posting to save myself the typing, then I can just quote your post and write "yeah, what he said."
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,731
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -2

    Maybe I should just get a life and post less, so that you can post before me. :eek:

    Patters isn't suggesting anything. Patters is stating that pubs are racist, and dems are not. He's been on that train since the first day I got here. It's part of that D=good R=evil bit.
  15. Turk

    Turk Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I could not agree more, RW.

    I think it is time we chose the right candidate and not the black, yellow or brown one; or the female or gay one, just because we never have before.

    How superficial is it to vote for someone because of their skin color or gender and how is that different than voting for a candidate just because of the very same reasons reversed? In other words, a Billy Bob voting for a southern white man?


    IMHO Obama is no different than any of the other establishment candidates. The "change" that he keeps talking about has no substance whatsoever.

    We are getting into heated arguments thinking that there is a vast difference in what these "candidates" are and what they offer. How pathetic are we?
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  16. STFarmy

    STFarmy Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    You and me both have that problem. We should all just save ourselves the effort and just /ditto each other. It would make for interesting reading.
  17. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    Of course the Democratic Party is more tolerant. There's a reason blacks overwhelmingly vote Democratic, and that's because it's been a far more inclusive Party that led the fight for Civil Rights. It's no secret that the Republicans played the race card to get control of the South and when JFK an LBJ made civil rights the law of the land, the Dixiecrats became Republican.

    I would have strongly considered supporting Powell. I think to break barriers you need some affirmative action. It's just the way it is. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't vote for someone I thought was incompetent or had dramatically different views than I had, but I'm willing to support Obama first and Hillary second over the more liberal Edwards because I think breaking the race or gender barrier will lead to a large pool of candidates (for both parties) in the future.
  18. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,650
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +142 / 1 / -4

    I see what you're saying, and I agree their is coded language, and similar language is used with regard to Hillary. If one of them is the nominee, we'll see a lot more of that, just as if McCain is the nominee we'll see ageist remarks and with Romney, we'll be reminded of his religion. But, as far as the way the media covers it, I think they are just now learning to cover these kinds of stories in a fair way. They are learning to be sensitive to the kinds of issues that you raise.
  19. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,731
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +249 / 3 / -2

    ditto. :D
  20. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Don't confuse being tolerant with offering easy answers. Blacks vote Democrat because that is the party that gives handouts, supports outdated affirmative action standards, and insists that it is the system's job to spoon feed individuals rather than encourage achievement. You talk about racism in the past, but what about the Republican party of today? I posted this in another thread, but it is important enough it bears repeating here:

    How about voting for a black candidate? Here are some poll numbers from CBS

    http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/012207_dems_poll.pdf

    "Would you vote for a qualified black candidate from your own party?"

    Dems: 92% yes, 3% no
    Reps: 92% yes, 6% no

    Now, there were more Republicans that answered no, but for both parties the exact same percent said race WOULD NOT MATTER (92% for both).

    What about from the other party (Would a Repub vote for a black Dem, and vice versa)

    Dems: 73% Yes, 23% no
    Reps: 74% Yes, 21% no

    Again, the positive numbers (indicating race plays no role) are the same for both parties, and actually Democrats are less likely to vote for a black Republican.


    You mention the great work of JFK and LBJ to promote civil rights, of course you leave out the fact that Senate DEMOCRATS filibustered the civil rights act of 1964, and a DEMOCRAT tried to block it from ever getting out of committee in the house. In fact, here are the vote totals by party for the final version of the bill broken down by party (from wikipedia) shown as YES - NO

    The Senate version, voted on by the House:
    Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
    Republican Party: 186-35 (80%-20%)

    Or what about the DEMOCRAT gov of arkansas refusing to comply with Brown v. board of education and a Republican (Eisenhower) sending in the national guard to force him to comply?

    There were racist elements in both parties, and it is shameful, but the Republican party of today is not the party of racism and intolerance, like Democrats would have people believe.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>