Obama plays the race card...again

[the cat came back]

I was saddened to see Obama distorting McCain's words into a pretzel, accusing him of saying that people should not vote for Obama because, "He doesn't look like the other presidents on the bills."

Not overtly calling McCain racist, but clearly tiptoeing through the minefield.

Sad.

[InfinityGoddess]

You have a link for this? Because I've found a link that debunks that one (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/07/31/little-man-john-mccain-says-obama-campaign-is-playing-the-race-card/). McCain's making a false accusation. Personally, I think that's sad.


Also: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/31/mccain-camp-obama-playing_n_116081.html

[clintl]

McCain has no business complaining about the race card the day after he debuts a commercial overtly comparing Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. He really ought to be ashamed of his own conduct over the last few weeks - he has been taking the low road pretty consistently, and Obama has mostly been staying above it and defending himself against the absurdities the McCain camp has been spewing.

And by the way, McCain has said he's proud of the Spears/Hilton commercial, which FactCheck.org has analyzed and found to be a pack of lies.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_celebrity_cred.html

[the cat came back]

I saw Obama say it in a speech.

He said something to this effect:

McCain is saying that I'm too risky to vote for because..."I don't look like the other presidents on the bills."

I'm sure of the quoted portion. It was all over the news. The question is, how do you interpret it? In what way does he look different than past presidents.

Race would seem the obvious factor.

[Appalachian Writer]

Politics is certainly dirty business, and these two aren't doing anything to change my mind. Bobcat Goldwaith said it best. "By the time someone gains the status to be their party's nominee for President, you can pretty much rest assured that they're an evil,
a**kissing S.O.B." God, I wish I'd said that.

[InfinityGoddess]

I saw Obama say it in a speech.

He said something to this effect:

McCain is saying that I'm too risky to vote for because..."I don't look like the other presidents on the bills."

I'm sure of the quoted portion. It was all over the news. The question is, how do you interpret it? In what way does he look different than past presidents.

Race would seem the obvious factor.

That's not playing the "race card", I'm sorry. It could mean any number of things. The Huffington Post article I posted even says that the Obama camp says that wasn't the motive for saying that, but that it was because he was someone ""new" to Washington.

I'll also have to go with clintl on this. McCain's got no business whining about the race card being played when his most recent ad campaign compared Obama to two rich white women.

[rugcat]

McCain is saying that I'm too risky to vote for because..."I don't look like the other presidents on the bills."On Mccain's latest ad, there's the phrase "More FOREIGN oil" with the large word "Foreign" right below Obama's face. I'm sure it was just an accident -- no one looks at these ads carefully.

My computer is acting up, so unfortunately I can't upload the picture.

[clintl]

I saw Obama say it in a speech.

He said something to this effect:

McCain is saying that I'm too risky to vote for because..."I don't look like the other presidents on the bills."

I'm sure of the quoted portion. It was all over the news. The question is, how do you interpret it? In what way does he look different than past presidents.

Race would seem the obvious factor.

I saw it, too. And, according to NBC tonight, he has used the phrase before.

I myself think it's a warning shot to the McCain camp. They've been playing dirty lately, and it's Obama's way of telling them that if they're thinking of going there, they should think again. There is no doubt that the essence of the entire remark Obama made - that the Republicans are trying to create a sense that an Obama administration would be something Americans should fear - is largely an accurate portrayal of where the McCain camp's strategy has been going since Steve Schmidt came aboard.

[clintl]

I hadn't read this yet when I made my post above. But Andrew Romano has reached the same conclusions I have about Obama's remarks.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/07/31/playing-the-playing-the-race-card-card.aspx

[kuwisdelu]

McCain has no business complaining about the race card the day after he debuts a commercial overtly comparing Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

The amusing part is the Hilton family has donated several thousand dollars to the McCain campaign...

Lovely thank you note, no?

[donroc]

Obama has Ludacris albatrossing around his neck now, injecting race on his behalf whether he wanted it or not.

The nastiness is going to get worse.

[rugcat]

Obama has Ludacris albatrossing around his neck now, injecting race on his behalf whether he wanted it or not.

The nastiness is going to get worse.Yeah. It's getting...ludicrous.

[VGrossack]

McCain has been losing in the polls, and so he is starting to employ the same tactics which were used on him by GW Bush in the 2000 primary. Bush was losing and so he and his campaign friends started smear tactics, especially in South Carolina. I think Bush's tactics were to accuse McCain of fathering a black child (not true, but family pictures made it look as if it were, because he and his wife adopted an orphan from Bangladesh) and Cindy McCain being a thieving drug addict (this actually had some merit - Cindy McCain, after some injury, stole pain medication from a charity she was a part of). Anyway, these sort of ads were what forced McCain out of the 2000 race, and inserted a wedge between McCain and Bush. They have since reconciled and Bush has sent part of his old campaign team to work for McCain.

And what has happened since then?

(1) McCain has had an ad about Obama not visiting a hospital in Germany. (I understand he had another ad, just as negative, prepared if Obama actually went to visit the troops.)

(2) McCain has an ad comparing Obama to Hilton and Spears. (And which of the candidates is actually married to a Hilton-Spears lookalike?)

(3) McCain has been complaining about Obama going overseas - as if it were presumptuous. (McCain went to all the same places himself after winning the Republican nomination - furthermore he kept complaining that Obama had not made this trip)

(4) McCain has been complaining about the media loving Obama and ignoring him. (I'm probably biased, but in my opinion the media has been treating McCain with kid gloves, ignoring or passing lightly over huge gaffes that he has made with respect to facts about foreign countries, ignoring McCain's statement that he doesn't know much about the economy.)

(5) McCain has been calling Obama elitist. (Which candidate is campaigning in $520 Italian shoes? Which candidate has been flying around in his heiress-wife's private jet?)

(6) And now the accusation of the race card... Just by saying this, McCain is trying to be divisive.

And - what do any of these things have to do with the extremely important issues facing us? Very little - although I must say that Obama's popularity in Europe should be considered a good thing (don't we want to get along with our allies?) but it's largely based on the fact that Europeans want to like the US but Bush made that impossible.

Nevertheless the campaign will probably keep focused on these non-issues.

[robeiae]

"So what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, 'He's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name,' you know, 'He doesn't look like all those other Presidents on the dollar bills.'"--Barack Obama

What they "are going to try to do"...that's not criticizing a past action, that's painting future actions.

Regardless of what McCain is doing, what Obama is doing in this bit is quite clear.

If people feel such overt use of race as a defense is justified on Obama's part, good enough. But it is what it is. Obama is painting himself as the victim of outright bigoted attacks, prior to the existence of those attacks. That's divisive, and intentionally so. I think it's cheap, myself. But then, so is most of the stuff on both sides.

[oswann]

I'm surprised you actually elect anybody in the end.


Os.

[robeiae]

We really don't. Diebold and the Supreme Court handle that.

[Sheryl Nantus]

the election campaign is just WAY too long.

cut it down to thirty days and you'll cut out a lot of this crap - get them talking about the real issues and not tossing around silliness like this.

[oswann]

We really don't. Diebold and the Supreme Court handle that.

It's kind of a crap shoot at best.

Os.

[InfinityGoddess]

If people feel such overt use of race as a defense is justified on Obama's part, good enough. But it is what it is. Obama is painting himself as the victim of outright bigoted attacks, prior to the existence of those attacks. That's divisive, and intentionally so. I think it's cheap, myself. But then, so is most of the stuff on both sides.

Except that the bigoted attacks have been happening for some time now, such as the accusations that Obama is a Muslim. Yes, he's even been attacked for his race too. Obama saw this coming way back in June, and probably even before that.

That's not him playing the race card; that's him facing the reality that some groups who oppose him are going to go deep into the gutter just to get a McCain win, quite a bit of it including race-baiting in some subtle and not-so-subtle tones.

[oswann]

the election campaign is just WAY too long.

cut it down to thirty days and you'll cut out a lot of this crap - get them talking about the real issues and not tossing around silliness like this.

Thirty minutes would probably do it.

Os.

[robeiae]

Except that the bigoted attacks have been happening for some time now, such as the accusations that Obama is a Muslim. Yes, he's even been attacked for his race too. Obama saw this coming way back in June, and probably even before that.

That's not him playing the race card; that's him facing the reality that some groups who oppose him are going to go deep into the gutter just to get a McCain win, quite a bit of it including race-baiting in some subtle and not-so-subtle tones.
Read the quote, again. A wordsmith like Obama should be able to say what he means, no? He's addressing what they are GOING to do, not what they have done. And of course, the "they" is wonderfully non-specific.

That is him making race an issue, above and beyond what anyone else has said. If there are specific attacks he wants to address, he should address them as specifics. But he didn't do that; he made himself a victim of future attacks.

Personally, I don't like the term "race card." It's really over-used (like "perfect storm") and has no clear meaning. So I can't say Obama "played the race card." But I can say he's using his race to garner support and sympathy, because that is what he is doing.

[InfinityGoddess]

Read the quote, again. A wordsmith like Obama should be able to say what he means, no? He's addressing what they are GOING to do, not what they have done. And of course, the "they" is wonderfully non-specific.

That is him making race an issue, above and beyond what anyone else has said. If there are specific attacks he wants to address, he should address them as specifics. But he didn't do that; he made himself a victim of future attacks.


He wouldn't have to make it an issue if others didn't make it one.

But they do make it an issue, and he has to respond to that. Otherwise it's a path to defeat.

[robeiae]

He wouldn't have to make it an issue if others didn't make it one.

But they do make it an issue, and he has to respond to that. Otherwise it's a path to defeat.But. He's. Not. Responding. He's instigating. Read the quote again.

[clintl]

But. He's. Not. Responding. He's instigating. Read the quote again.

He's not instigating, he's preempting. And as Romano pointed out, Obama said essentially the same thing in June. Why is McCain making a big deal out of it now, when he didn't then?

McCain has been the instigator lately. He's acting in ways that get people in trouble in kindergarten.

[Sheryl Nantus]

I personally can't wait until Obama wins and then we have four years of complaining that he can't get anything done because of the race card.

Oh, you KNOW that's going to happen...

*rolls eyes*

[robeiae]

He's not instigating, he's preempting.Preempting vs. instigating? I don't see a difference, here. And as Romano pointed out, Obama said essentially the same thing in June. Why is McCain making a big deal out of it now, when he didn't then?Because it's July? I'm not defending McCain in the least. But again, that doesn't change what Obama has said and what he is doing, that being using his race to garner sympathy and support. It's politics, though low-rent politics, imo.

[rugcat]

Preempting vs. instigating? I don't see a difference, here. Because it's July? I'm not defending McCain in the least. But again, that doesn't change what Obama has said and what he is doing, that being using his race to garner sympathy and support. It's politics, though low-rent politics, imo.Many voters make decisions based not on policies but instead on who they are comfortable with -- who represents their own tribe as opposed to an "outsider". As in, who would you want to sit down and have a beer with?

In Utah, where I currently am residing, the vote will be overwhelmingly for John McCain. You don’t see a lot of Obamas (or Kerrys, for that matter) walking the streets here.

In California, people who look like Obama are more common than those who look like McCain. California will be voting in almost equal proportion for Obama. The swing states are the ones where the population is truly mixed, with no clear preponderance of any particular type.

McCain is stuck defending Republican policies that are unpopular, and an economy that is dreadful. His only chance is to highlight the differences between himself and Obama -- not the differences in policy, but the personal differences of who they are.

Thus, the portrayal of Obama as "risky" and the attempt to make the entire campaign a referendum on Obama, the person. It's not specifically racist, nor do I think it's meant to be. But the subtext is clearly and deliberately, imo, "he's not one of us." He's different. He can't be trusted. I'm like your next door neighbor; he's not.

If Obama doesn't aggresively counter this strategy he will lose, and that's why he's jumped on this so quickly.

[MattW]

If it's such a big issue what Obama looks like, why don't we just start printing the money now?

http://www.obama-facts.info/images/1000-dollars-obama.jpg

[Joe270]

he debuts a commercial overtly comparing Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

I get the comparison to Hilton. Obama has done next to nothing, politically, and yet he's a media 'darling'. He has yet to say much except that he represents 'change', similar to Hilton, who has never done anything except promote herself. Spears also rode a huge media wave to success which she couldn't maintain.

Folks might disagree with the message, but it has some foundation. Certainly Obama has vastly more news coverage than McCain does. So the accusation that he's a 'media darling' is accurate. Folks just don't like the comparison to other media darlings.

Is it outright dirty politics? Not compared to the crap Hillary pulled earlier in the primaries. Funny that the same folks who defended her attacks on Obama are crying foul when McCain makes a simple allusion in a commercial.

The outrage expressed over these pretty tame commercials sort of supports the GOP argument that everyone is treating Obama with kid gloves.

[MattW]

I get the comparison to Hilton. Obama has done next to nothing, politically, and yet he's a media 'darling'. He has yet to say much except that he represents 'change', similar to Hilton, who has never done anything except promote herself. Spears also rode a huge media wave to success which she couldn't maintain.Obama gets coverage on Access Hollywood ferchrissakes!

Between fluff and scare pieces, local news stations talk about how he's being victimized again (in ways that never reach even obviously biased national media).

His Germany trip might as well have been to a stadium in Nuremberg.

If no one who has access will ask him tough questions, can we at least start the debates sooner?

[clintl]

Preempting vs. instigating? I don't see a difference, here.

Really, considering how many times the Republicans have used race in presidential and other elections (Nixon and Reagan pandering to "states' rights" conservatives in the South, Bush Sr. and the Willie Horton ad, North Carolina Republicans this spring, the ads against Harold Ford two years ago in the Tennessee Senate race) - they've got no grounds for complaint. The race issue is out there, and I don't have any problem with Obama making a preemptive defense against what has been a common offense by the GOP.

[mscelina]

Obama had the chance to debate McCain in the Town Hall meetings. Obama refused; he doesn't do as well without teleprompters. Instead of concentrating on all this fluff, we could be watching meaningful discussion instead of thousands of people at a campaign rally OVERSEAS,yelling for Obama and hoping that the rock concert would start soon.

However, Obama chose this route in lieu of meaningful discussion. He has no one to blame but his advisors and himself.

[Joe270]

Obama gets coverage on Access Hollywood ferchrissakes!

Yep. That could well be where the idea for the campaign commercial came from. How often has he been featured on those 'fluff shows' along with Hilton and Spears?

[rugcat]

I get the comparison to Hilton."Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens." -- Britney Spears, 2003.

I was looking for this quote and googled "Britney Spears Bush." Sometimes I don't think ahead.

[Joe270]

I was looking for this quote and googled "Britney Spears Bush." Sometimes I don't think ahead.

:roll:

[ALG71]

Since I don't know how to put mulitple quotes into a reply, I'll just use one quote and copy/paste the other.

I get the comparison to Hilton. Obama has done next to nothing, politically, and yet he's a media 'darling'.


While I'm a big Obama supporter, I'd have to agree with you Joe. He hasn't been in politics for very long compared to McCain. But that's part of the reason I am an Obama supporter. While, before this election season, I actually liked McCain--certainly one of, if not, the most centrist Republican--it is these longtime politicians that I trust least. They know all the ins and outs and how to get around things, how to dodge questions, how to talk like a snake. And, although McCain has done some good things during his time in Washington, he's too much like everyone else in Washington. They get a few things done to appease their voters in their home states, but when has Congress actually done something major in recent years (besides giving a greenlight for war?).

It's like in medicine. When was the last time something actually got cured? Polio--what, 60 years ago? And now things which had been eradicated in the first part of the 20th century are now making a comeback. But these pharmaceutical companies sure are making a killing making medicines that'll "slow the effects" or "ease the symptoms", but not CURE.

And how many of these politicians have lined their pockets over the years from these companies and all the other major industries? How many of them, besides Ted Stevens, have gotten their houses remodeled, how many have had vacations the rest of us only dream of, how many of them have secret off-shore accounts? Probably dozens, and not just Republicans.

Washington, needs an outsider, someone like the overwhelming majority of Americans who, for most of their life, haven't had much to do in politics besides vote. Someone that will go in there and shake things up, shake the silver lining out of these dirty politicans' pockets. Someone that's actually spent time on the streets and seen real problems in communities, worked in those communties to fix those problems.

When Obama was small time, working on the South Side (where I'm from)and going into neighborhoods to help people, how many times did he go into rat and cockroach-infested buildings, buildings with strung out crack and heroin addicts, just to get to the few sober people who needed a job to support their children?

That, is truly caring about people.

When was the last time McCain did that? I bet he's been in a thousand mansions since the last time he was even close to a real ghetto.

And, I'm not saying Obama is going eradicate crime and drugs in the ghetto, I'm not saying he's only going to help blacks and latinos (me), I think he truly wants to make everyone's life better by giving every single person a chance.

I'm not saying McCain doesn't want the same thing, but he's part of the Republican machine which passed one of the biggest disgraces of the past eight years. "No Child Left Behind."

That Bill did the exact opposite than its title. In the past eight years, of all the kids that fell by the wayside (no matter what color they were) to drugs or crime or gang violence or teen pregnancy, could've been the mind that held the cure to cancer, to AIDS, to Ebola. It could've been the mind of the next Einstein or Hawkings, a mind that might have revolutionized our space programs in ways we never thought possible.

I don't see McCain wanting to stop up the cracks our children fall into with the passion I think Obama would. And in the one generation of children that finally has the chance to go through their formative years without so many bad influences and are allowed the chance to thrive and excel, will be the generation that changes the US and the world into something no one thinks possible.

Obama has the passion and energy to help people. And while I think McCain might've had that passion and energy in his career, I think now he would be happy to just have a full night's sleep without having to get up to pee.

************************************************** ****

Robaie said, "He's addressing what they are GOING to do, not what they have done."

First of all, they have been doing it since like March. Who was the radio guy in Ohio at the McCain rally who kept saying "Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Barack HUSSEIN Obama?"

And that commercial wasn't racist? You put a semi-young (compared to McCain) charasimatic black man in a commercial with two younger white females, and that wasn't meant to peak the subconscious of rural white America? Please. If they wanted to use irresponsible celebrities, they could've used males. Just to think of one really irresponsible, party-animal male celebrities, Andy Dick comes to mind. I'm sure there's at least a half dozen young, male, irresponsible celebrities they could have used. But the McCain camp went to the ages old fear of showing a black man in the same commercial with two young white girls.

/rant off.

[robeiae]

I'm not saying McCain doesn't want the same thing, but he's part of the Republican machine which passed one of the biggest disgraces of the past eight years. "No Child Left Behind."

That Bill did the exact opposite than its title. In the past eight years, of all the kids that fell by the wayside (no matter what color they were) to drugs or crime or gang violence or teen pregnancy, could've been the mind that held the cure to cancer, to AIDS, to Ebola. It could've been the mind of the next Einstein or Hawkings, a mind that might have revolutionized our space programs in ways we never thought possible.You're kidding, right? Who pushed that bill through the Senate and wrote a good chunk of it? Ted Kennedy, that bastion of all things Republican.

Robaie said, "He's addressing what they are GOING to do, not what they have done."

First of all, they have been doing it since like March. Who was the radio guy in Ohio at the McCain rally who kept saying "Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Barack HUSSEIN Obama?"
Look, Obama is an adult, right? And he's supposedly intelligent, right? He said what he said. If he wanted to criticize things that HAD ALREADY BEEN SAID about him, he could have. But he didn't. He intentionally chose to criticize all future attacks--to some degree--by pointing out his race, in the hopes that it would serve to insulate him. If you have no problem with that and/or think he was "justified" in doing it, good enough. Just be honest about what he is doing. That's all.

[donroc]

If it's such a big issue what Obama looks like, why don't we just start printing the money now?

http://www.obama-facts.info/images/1000-dollars-obama.jpg

Are you implying if elected his policies will engender serious inflation. $1000 = the new dollar? :D

[ALG71]

You're kidding, right? Who pushed that bill through the Senate and wrote a good chunk of it? Ted Kennedy, that bastion of all things Republican.

Look, Obama is an adult, right? And he's supposedly intelligent, right? He said what he said. If he wanted to criticize things that HAD ALREADY BEEN SAID about him, he could have. But he didn't. He intentionally chose to criticize all future attacks--to some degree--by pointing out his race, in the hopes that it would serve to insulate him. If you have no problem with that and/or think he was "justified" in doing it, good enough. Just be honest about what he is doing. That's all.

But when it passed, who was in control of the purse strings for it? What's the point of writing something if it won't get funded? There should not be a limit to the amount of money we put into education for our citizens. No matter which party is in charge of the checkbook. The problem is, regardless of which party is in control of that checkbook, someone is always going to have sticky fingers.

And why he shouldn't Obama criticize all future attacks against him? He knows they've done it already in this election and there'll be more coming. If not by the McCain camp itself, then by someone on McCain's side. Someone who he can say, "I disagree."

I'll admit, however, that this "surrogate" crap on both sides, is getting out of hand.

[robeiae]

But when it passed, who was in control of the purse strings for it? What's the point of writing something if it won't get funded? There should not be a limit to the amount of money we put into education for our citizens. No matter which party is in charge of the checkbook. The problem is, regardless of which party is in control of that checkbook, someone is always going to have sticky fingers.Who is in control of the purse strings now? But it's not a sexy enough issue...

And why he shouldn't Obama criticize all future attacks against him? He knows they've done it already in this election and there'll be more coming. If not by the McCain camp itself, then by someone on McCain's side. Someone who he can say, "I disagree."Well see, that's your defense. But you first disagreed with me by suggesting his statement was somehow not about doing this. But it is. And it is Obama intentionally using his race as a defense mechanism, justified in your mind or not (NOT in my mind--the "high road" is a thing of the past, obvioiusly).

[ALG71]

I believe I still disagree with you. Maybe I don't get what you're saying.
I'm not sure how you think I agreed with you with my second comment. Unless it's where I said, "...then by someone on McCain's side. Someone who he can say, "I disagree." In which case I meant, "Someone who McCain can then say, "I disagree with this person from the Republican party who attacked my opponent..." Blah, Blah, Blah, the rest of the standard politician's rhetoric. Both sides do it.

But like I said, they (people in the Republican party), have been doing this since March, since after Obama became a threat. And although, technically, Obama used future tense in his speech, "They ARE GOING to say I have a funny name. They ARE GOING to..." I think he was talking about the past too. Reminding people of what's already been said, and what will be said again a dozen times before election day.

[robeiae]

You seem to be agreeing--now--that what Obama said was a defense against future attacks. And if you do, you would--I think--accept that Obama is using race for that defense, since he is the one interjecting it. How can it be interjected by something that hasn't happened? Saying he's talking about the past and present with his words strikes me as flimsy reasoning, unless you think Obama incapable of clearly expressing himself. I thought that was one of his strong points...

And again, if you think he's justified, that's fine. I disagree that he is.

[cethklein]

Obama was an idiot for maknig these comments. Even though at least some of them are true, there are some things better left un-said. (The part about people not voting for him because of his name is very much true. It would amaze you how many people still think he's a Muslim and connected to al-Qaeda. I overheard a man and woman having sch a discussion just the other day.)

But again, he made a mistake. He needs to leave this crap to the Jesse Jacksons of the world. No sense in stooping.

[clintl]

If this is "playing the race card," then I think we are in severe danger of being a country where race cannot be mentioned. And that's a very unhealthy place to be. Race-based discrimination still exists and still needs to be actively addressed, despite the wishes of some to ignore it or pretend that the problems of the past have been solved.

[InfinityGoddess]

Obama was an idiot for maknig these comments. Even though at least some of them are true, there are some things better left un-said. (The part about people not voting for him because of his name is very much true. It would amaze you how many people still think he's a Muslim and connected to al-Qaeda. I overheard a man and woman having sch a discussion just the other day.)

But again, he made a mistake. He needs to leave this crap to the Jesse Jacksons of the world. No sense in stooping.

I disagree strongly with this. We need to have an open and honest discussion about race, religion, ethnicity, and whatever else that makes us different, otherwise the issues with the differences will never be resolved.

Racism isn't dead. It's more subtle than it used to be, but it's still alive and well regardless. That's not "stooping"; that's reality.

[mscelina]

I disagree strongly with this. We need to have an open and honest discussion about race, religion, ethnicity, and whatever else that makes us different, otherwise the issues with the differences will never be resolved.

Racism isn't dead. It's more subtle than it used to be, but it's still alive and well regardless. That's not "stooping"; that's reality.

An open and honest discussion about race, etc. isn't going to happen if it's started with negativity, IG. If a public figure, especially one of national importance like Obama, does the Monty Python routine of "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" then he's not starting an open discussion. He's stomping the idea into people's head that because he's black, he needs to be treated differently. "Different" is not "equal." If an open discussion was the goal, he wouldn't begin it with a list of his perceived slights; he'd begin with "Let's talk about how much alike we are. Let's find a way, together, to bring those likenesses into a tangible and credible reality for all the people in our country."

Right now it's all about Obama, not about the deeper problems of racism that still persist. And rhetoric issued from a mememe perception usually falls on deaf ears among the masses. That open discussion that ( I agree) we must have will not and cannot happen until someone intiates with a view for the many instead of just one. Obama is nowhere close to MLK for that reason--MLK's dream was for everyone. Obama's dream is just for himself.

Just my opinion of course.

[rugcat]

If a public figure, especially one of national importance like Obama, does the Monty Python routine of "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" then he's not starting an open discussion. He's stomping the idea into people's head that because he's black, he needs to be treated differently. Mis-characterizing and distorting Obama’s positions and then opposing them is hardly a balanced way of assessing things.

The Monty Python reference, implying both that Obama is loony and that he's said he's being "repressed" and your use of the word "stomping" and the unwarranted conclusion that Obama feels he should be treated differently because he is black are certainly opinions, but they're opinions based on a unique interpretation of fact. If an open discussion was the goal, he wouldn't begin it with a list of his perceived slights; he'd begin with "Let's talk about how much alike we are. What exactly is this "list of his perceived slights" you are referring to? Obama has consistently, even throughout the primaries, emphasized the message of inclusiveness.

Obama believes (and correctly, imo) that the McCain campaign has decided to focus not on issues, but on Obama himself. And they will use the fact that he is different from what the American public is used to seeing in a presidential candidate as a focus to give people pause when deciding whether they will vote for him.

Whether or not Obama has made a mistake in bringing this up is an open question. I tend to think it's a bad idea. But the claim that he’s playing the race card and demanding special treatment is nothing more than cynical partisan rhetoric.

Just my opinion, of course.

[Joe270]

Whether or not Obama has made a mistake in bringing this up is an open question. I tend to think it's a bad idea. But the claim that he’s playing the race card and demanding special treatment is nothing more than cynical partisan rhetoric.

Obama could turn it into a positive by re-iterating the statement 'I don't look like those guys', and pressing the point that he is black.

He presses home the 'change' bit so much that it has gotten stale (besides, cynical people like me just don't buy that things will change much), but to push the point that he truly does, in fact, represent change by race alone could get him lots of votes.

Why not bring it out the elephant in the room and deal with it head-on?

Certainly lots of people, and certainly the media, has discussed the historic implications of the possibility of the first black president.

But the claim that he’s playing the race card and demanding special treatment is nothing more than cynical partisan rhetoric.

Obama is getting special treatment by the media. I have never heard of any other candidate featured on shows like 'Entertainment Tonight' who weren't involved in devastating scandals. Obama gets three to five articles a day over the last week or so in my local paper, not counting editorials which are all Obama all the time, McCain often has not one single blurb in the whole paper.

While it certainly isn't Obama demanding this treatment, he sure is benefiting by it.

[rugcat]

Obama is getting special treatment by the media. I have never heard of any other candidate featured on shows like 'Entertainment Tonight' who weren't involved in devastating scandals. Obama gets three to five articles a day over the last week or so in my local paper, not counting editorials which are all Obama all the time,I agree, but I don't think it's because of political reasons. It's because he, his wife, and his kids are all very photogenic. And he is something new; it's an irresistable lure to the media. Whatever else you think about it, a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin is arresting and bumps ratings -- it may not be fair, but that's what the bottom line is.... McCain often has not one single blurb in the whole paper.I'm not sure that's really a drawback, considering how he sometimes presents himself.

[whistlelock]

I think Obama did play the race card not as an attack against McCain, but as a trump against other Republican's.

A good move, really. Now that it's out early, the Obama camp only has to come out and say, "See? They ARE making it about race." if anyone trys to play race as a negative.

[InfinityGoddess]

An open and honest discussion about race, etc. isn't going to happen if it's started with negativity, IG. If a public figure, especially one of national importance like Obama, does the Monty Python routine of "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" then he's not starting an open discussion. He's stomping the idea into people's head that because he's black, he needs to be treated differently. "Different" is not "equal." If an open discussion was the goal, he wouldn't begin it with a list of his perceived slights; he'd begin with "Let's talk about how much alike we are. Let's find a way, together, to bring those likenesses into a tangible and credible reality for all the people in our country."



Obama has done nothing of the sort. He's been all about inclusiveness, while at the same time dealing with the reality that some folks out there just won't vote for him because he's a biracial man. I agree with most of what rugcat said, save for the fact that I don't think that it's a mistake to bring it up, and only if it has been done in a way that tries not to offend people (some folks will always be offended by something, no matter what) and doesn't scream the way you think he's doing, which he didn't. There is no harm in pointing out one's differences.

[soleary]

Breaking it down to the ABCs of it, I will vote for who I think can make this country better. Not the most experienced, as smart guys will seek out experience. Not the oldest, as smart guys will find young guys to assist. Not the blackest or whitest or most religious or less religious. I'll vote for the person who I believe in my heart can move America forward. No one less than that deserves my vote.

[MattW]

Obama is getting special treatment by the media. I have never heard of any other candidate featured on shows like 'Entertainment Tonight' who weren't involved in devastating scandals. Obama gets three to five articles a day over the last week or so in my local paper, not counting editorials which are all Obama all the time, McCain often has not one single blurb in the whole paper.

While it certainly isn't Obama demanding this treatment, he sure is benefiting by it.Bu even thought he is clearly a media darling, mere moments from coronation, he can't break certain demographics, and poll numbers give him pretty much low single digit leads.

[Joe270]

poll numbers give him pretty much low single digit leads.

Another poll out today had them both at 44%.

[cethklein]

Obama is getting special treatment by the media. I have never heard of any other candidate featured on shows like 'Entertainment Tonight' who weren't involved in devastating scandals. Obama gets three to five articles a day over the last week or so in my local paper, not counting editorials which are all Obama all the time, McCain often has not one single blurb in the whole paper.

While it certainly isn't Obama demanding this treatment, he sure is benefiting by it.

Where have you been the last few campaigns? the Democrat almost always gets special treatment in the media. That being said, I don't see it as an advantage come election day. The media was completely up John Kerry's ass and he still lsot by a decent margin (admittedly he was also an abysmal candidate.)

As for McCain not getting one single blurb, your local papers must have some issues then. Ours almost always talks about McCain, and never in a negative light.

But this is all trivial. Whichever candidate loses, they're zealots will always whine about media bias and crap like that. If Obama loses it will be "the media was racist." If McCain loses it will be "the media sided with Obama." The fact is, candidates lose on their own merits msot of the time. Although I still think this year McCain doesn't stand a chance unless Obama has another big scandal. I'm starting to believe that theory about how the GOP are throwing McCain under the bus since they know they can't win/. All these GOP goons making all these uncouth commercials lately and other similar crap do lend credence to that theory.

[InfinityGoddess]

Breaking it down to the ABCs of it, I will vote for who I think can make this country better. Not the most experienced, as smart guys will seek out experience. Not the oldest, as smart guys will find young guys to assist. Not the blackest or whitest or most religious or less religious. I'll vote for the person who I believe in my heart can move America forward. No one less than that deserves my vote.

I agree with this 100%.