McCamyTaylor

Great article by Mary Mapes. What is up with all the people bringing their Obama vs. Clinton flame war here when she is poking a stick at the TV news entertainment industry that is trying to divide and conquer the Democratic Party with their baiter questions? Are you

1. Incredibly brilliant and you have all coordinated a bit of blog theater to demonstrate how ugly and silly divide and conquer among Democrats looks? (in order to prove Mapes point If so Bravo!)

or

2. Are you all flaming idiots? If so, go live in a project somewhere on 100% poverty wages for a couple of months next to a waste dump. Without health insurance. Then, start telling us how you are staying home if X isn't the nominee. posted 04/20/2008 at 04:00:41

If you say "Obama was right" then you say that America' s poor are likely to blame people of other races for their poverty. That is what Obama said when he talked about "antipathy" to people not like themselves when asked why he is not winning in Pennsylvania. Now, I know Democrats and most Democrats choose to become Democrats because they believe in justice, equality and equal opportunity. Bigots have a perfectly good party they can join in this country---the Republican Party.

If you look closely at this election, you will see bitterness within the Obama campaign. When Hillary won California, they declared that Asians were racists. In Nevada, they said that Latinos were racists. In New Hampshire, the Guardian UK could not wait to come out with a racist theory to explain her win. Ohio was the biggest racist win of all based on a poll that showed that 20% of voters "considered" race and 59% of them voted for Hillary. But that could have meant that they considered whether or not race---and gender---could affect a candidate's general election chances. That isn't racism. That is pragmatism.

By stigmatizing the poor as characters out of Tobacco Road, Obama is appealing to people with money, the nation's elite. He is telling them, subtly "I am no John Edwards. I will not forget who the important people are." That is why the nation's poor are having trouble getting behind his words of hope. posted 04/14/2008 at 16:46:11

And Ms. Huffington calling Hillary "Rovian" isn't hurting the Democrats? From the moment that Barack Obama decided to pretend to believe Bob Novak and pretend to believe Drudge and pretend to believe every other right wing smear about Hillary including the media distortions of her words---and people at the Huffington Post and Keith Olbermann went along with the charade---his campaign has showed what they are really up to. Their plan is to knee cap Hillary so that super delegates will be afraid to vote for her. "You can't select her," they will whisper. "Look, we have reduced her to a female stereotype. You had better pick our guy."

And now you have to nerve to talk about party unity? Obama's "truth" is that in every major contest that he has lost, he supporters have declared the voters of that state racists. In California, it was Asians, In New Hampshire, it was everyone. In Nevada it is Latinos. In Ohio, it was those 20% who "considered" race and then the 59% who voted for Hillary--never mind that they may have all considered gender too and 41% picked Obama because they figured a woman could never win in the GE. And now, once again Obama shows his bitterness by explaining that he can not win in a state with economic troubles, because they are a bunch of racists.

Poor people everywhere should find this offensive. But they won't because the press will not tell them. posted 04/14/2008 at 21:22:07

Ms Smiley writes fiction so she should know that "Barack Obama tells the truth" is a relative thing. No author speaks the truth in a vacuum. The symbols do not create a message in free space. They perform that function when heard or read. His audience that day understood what he meant when he said "It's not surprising then 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," However, the words he spoke escaped that audience and reached a wider one as words often do in this age of the internet. Obama should have expected that. Blaming Hillary for the hurt feelings that his carelessness has caused is par for the course for Hillary bashers, but it is unfair to Obama. He is a grown man, not Hillary's son. It is not her job to pick up the slack for him when his inexperience causes him to make youthful blunders like these. posted 04/13/2008 at 00:16:46

The author makes an excellent point. The Democratic Party changed the rules. The votes should count----50% of them. And Iowa's and New Hampshire's votes should only count 50% too.

Them is the rules, and we do not want to change the rules, do we? posted 03/31/2008 at 14:02:19