Obama

By | June 5, 2008

I cannot help but be moved and excited by his candidacy. Clinton would be a great VP but a volatile one. She would have to be extremely disciplined. McCain looks and sounds creepier each day that passes. I think its time to root out the rosary beads.

35 thoughts on “Obama

  1. pth

    For me Clinton lost all right to be P or VP, and all credibility to boot with her reference to Robert Kennedy’s assassination, no matter how out of context it was taken. One thing is clear, she is smart as all hell, and sailing so close to the wind on such an issue is inadmissible. Don’t try telling me she wasn’t totally cognizant of the impact of the juxtaposition. Clinton has shown herself to be everything that is wrong with American politics (world politics even).

    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/06/04/173293.aspx

  2. Sarah Post author

    Ooh Darren that’s funny :-)

    Great column by McParland too…

  3. Frank Ryan

    One of the really funny things is the amount of liberal white people who along with the media are so “excited” to see the first mulatto American presidential candidate nominee [and not black as is always reported] As to why this might be and we get all sort of racist [inverted] comments which have nothing to do with the actual merits of the person.

    I mean why prefix everything with a reference to the mans pigmentation color. As it happens he seems to be only full of platitudes and populist rhetoric. Objectively he is not up to much at all and anyway I don’t think he has chance against a white middle of the road politician.

    Obama Hussein will be either shot or ignored by huge sections of the population. Either way the USA is not ready for a relatively unknown with a names like Hussein – Barrack- Obama

    Had he arrived on the scene with four years more experience then I think he would be a better candidate. Mcain is kinda creepy but he will still win.

    No doubt if Obama was going for election in Kenya the he wold be the first WHITE to do so? He is half white after all?

  4. Sarah Post author

    How charming. Isn’t every sentence in that comment laced with malice and racism and of course, the use of liberal as a term of abuse.
    Obama is not full of platitudes. He makes dignified, well thought-out, reasoned speeches in which he shows he has analysed properly and in a non-populist way some of America’s problems. He will have a problem showing the white working class democrat supporters in the declining industrial states that nuance has a place in politics. I was skeptical and worried about him until very recently. But he has won me over and hopefully he’ll win over more Americans. Otherwise its 4 more years of ignorant, neo-con, economy wrecking republican hell.

  5. An Fear Bolg

    “Mulatto” is now considered a racist term of abuse.

    Anyway, Obama is fine and all but he’s a movie president. He speaks well, delivers a line, but the lines are empty. Americans (and us, for some reason) love this uplifting BS message of change. E.g. his speech on Israel and re the link between the US & Israel – won’t be broken today, won’t be broken tomorrow … etc all this dramatic repitition. ..

    He’s often comparied to JFK but he has not moved on since then. JFK was the first TV president, but Obama has not developed from this. I haven’t read his book but apparently it’s the same schtick – message of change, inspirational platitudes, but no substance.

    Hillary has been demonised and brought down in a manner which I believe demonstrates sexism is more ingrained and remains a bigger issue than racism.

  6. An Spailpín Fánach

    “McCain looks and sounds creepier each day that passes.”

    What does that mean, exactly? What’s the matter with him? Shouldn’t these things be decided on matters of policy and competence? I’m only asking.

    McCain will win the election pulling up.

  7. graham

    Sarah you’re spot on there, Franks comments are racist and malicious.

    People keep asking what good is Obama and where is the substance. I think what they are failing to see though is that he is the first person in US politics since Kennedy who has the power to really inspire and motivate people. No president alone can change the US and the social and economic problems it is facing. It’s going to take a massive change that needs to come from within each and every American. Those that support Obama can see that his has the ability to inspire people like that and thats the reason he simply must win. Lets just hope that he can win over the hearts and minds of people like Frank, otherwise the US is facing another 4 years at least of the republican mess.

  8. Frank Ryan

    “Sarah you’re spot on there, Franks comments are racist and malicious.

    People keep asking what good is Obama and where is the substance. I think what they are failing to see though is that he is the first person in US politics since Kennedy who has the power to really inspire and motivate people. No president alone can change the US and the social and economic problems it is facing. It’s going to take a massive change that needs to come from within each and every American. Those that support Obama can see that his has the ability to inspire people like that and thats the reason he simply must win. Lets just hope that he can win over the hearts and minds of people like Frank, otherwise the US is facing another 4 years at least of the republican mess.”

    What an ignorant and stupid post!

  9. Frank Ryan

    “How charming. Isn’t every sentence in that comment laced with malice and racism and of course, the use of liberal as a term of abuse.
    Obama is not full of platitudes. He makes dignified, well thought-out, reasoned speeches in which he shows he has analyzed properly and in a non-populist way some of America’s problems. He will have a problem showing the white working class democrat supporters in the declining industrial states that nuance has a place in politics. I was skeptical and worried about him until very recently. But he has won me over and hopefully he’ll win over more Americans. Otherwise its 4 more years of ignorant, neo-con, economy wrecking republican hell.”

    999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

    Well lets break down this hypocritical missive and expose it for the narrow minded sanctimonious nonsense it is.

  10. Frank Ryan

    =======================================
    “How charming. Isn’t every sentence in that comment laced with malice and racism and of course, the use of liberal as a term of abuse.”
    ———————————————————–
    Well how charming of you to make an allegation of racism where there is no foundation but rather your own assertion of this [inverted reflexive racism by you – first time someone mentions anything critical and they are racist according to you! _ People see what they want to see I guess. I know that I don’t have a racist bone in my body so I don’t care what you choose to project]

    There is no malice but rather exasperation and frustration and annoyance at the preoccupation of others with race, including the liberal media who have been totally biased in favor of barak obama hussein.

    But no doubt you do not approve of giving his full name? I pointed out that as a matter of fact that I do not think Americans [the majority] will vote for someone with such a foreign and thus alien name. And BTW the name Hussein is very very significant in the Islamic world, for cultural and religious reasons- you do the research.

    Now we could debate the merits or lack of for this in other debate but all I would say is that I can understand why large sections would feel uncomfortable with this but at the same time I think it would be a mistake to let that get in the way of making the right vote. Obama should be assessed on his own merits as a future president. I might well be inclined to vote for him in 2012 but certainly not 2008.

  11. Mizlarko

    The only racism is the inverted sort where people bang on and on about the significance of the mans pigmentation color [Like that should have anything to do with anything??? of course not] I am very angry at the duplicity which sees him constantly referred to as the first black- the first african american etc etc despite actually being half white!- or by implication does that not matter?, which is why I point out the fact that he is in fact a Mulatto, which in case there be any misunderstanding is merely a term that describes a person of mixed color/race, but don’t take my word for it

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulatto

    It is ironic that he was raised by “White people” for the best part of his life while his Kenyan father was off the scene after 2 years- though in fairness it seems that his mother was a major FLAKE and so who knows what went on between them- the father might have been dealing with a nut which effectively prevented/discouraged him to have any role in his sons life? Or he may have been fulfing all the negative stereotypes about Black men as fathers [sadly backed up with plenty of stats]
    =======================================
    “Obama is not full of platitudes. He makes dignified, well thought-out, reasoned speeches in which he shows he has analyzed properly and in a non-populist way some of America’s problems. ”

    ————————————————————-

    Well many think he is indeed full of hot air and as one post already says he is just a celeb candidate in keeping with our celeb culture. You think otherwise and in fairness that is a valid [but ultimately mistaken] view. I just don’t see it. Instead I see a very smooth operator being advised very well politically and many many people jumping on the bandwagon -like yourself
    ===========================================
    He will have a problem showing the white working class democrat supporters in the declining industrial states that nuance has a place in politics.

    ————————————————————

    Eh no! He will have a problem getting people to trust him as not being a racist in sheeps cloths because he has been attending and is/was good friends with an overtly, off the wall, racist who he ditched as soon as it was politically embarrassing. He was between a rock and a hard place on this but the worry for many is the FACT that for years he was attending that church and part of that ministry.

    Plus given the fact that Blacks were voting for him by margins of 90 percent [thus clearly along racial lines] there is reason to fear that he is indeed a “racial candidate” and may be beholden to “the black community” just for the sake of color. Personally I am inclined not to think he is like that, and that he genuinely might be a more unifying character but but I do have some reservations- especially as regards his wife who should keep her mouth shut coz she would turn off many ordinary Americans- She is as creepy to me as Mccain but at least she is not running for office .

    ==========================================
    “But he has won me over and hopefully he’ll win over more Americans. Otherwise its 4 more years of ignorant, neo-con, economy wrecking republican hell.”
    ————————————————————
    my my – quite an assessment ! Ok so your jumping on the bandwagon and going with a particular tide, fair enough then, lots are doing the same and most in a mindless way so nothing special there.

    I dont know if I agree or disagree with the thing about the republicans wrecking the economy but I would not be a fan of Bush or his admin either

    I think it is a lot more complex than you and the liberal media suggest.

    BTW I AM A LIBERAL AT HEART, SO NO IT IS OT A TERM OF ABUSE- RATHER IT IS AN indicator of the leanings of a particular group or section of society

    Obama has had an incredibly inordinate amount of fawning, and the whole historic stuff constantly replayed is a disservice to him and both mixed race people and black people, not to mention politics.

    LET THE MAN be judged for who is and his own merits THEN he just might prove to be somebody of real substance and a good candidate or US president?

    Regardless though, I repeat that I don’t think he will win- but who knows maybe I am totally wrong? Certainly I do hope that he does not become a victim of an assignation.

    My prediction/guess is that McCain wins and then he is turfed out in 2012

  12. Colman

    Oh, there’s a whole new level of crazy on the anti-Obama side – the anti-Obama “Democrat’s” are just plain creepy. I’m talking about previously rational people I know on-line that have departed from this universe for another one where nothing makes any sense. And I don’t even especially like Obama.

  13. John

    Obama may be a great orator. Unfortunately that is as far as it goes. In 2007 he was ranked as the most liberal Senator in the whole senate. He supported partial birth abortion in the Senate and has made promises totalling over $800billion(spread over 4 years). His economic policies will cripple small businesses. He wishes to double capital gains tax. This will hit 100 million Americans.
    I accept that McCain comes across as rather dour and is a poor orator. However in my view he is a safer pair of hands. Incidentally he has worked very hard for illegal Irish immigrants.

  14. Sarah Post author

    I know about the Irish immigrants but he bowed to Bush who has done quite a good job crippling the American economy.
    Obama had the good sense and the bravery to oppose the invasion of Iraq. I like that foresight and courage to vote against it when everyone else was losing the head and buckling to propaganda and lies.

  15. CG

    Colman, I think a lot of the vitriol will die down in a week or so – it’s just passionate Clinton supporters who are upset their woman isn’t getting the nomination. McCain, remember, got the exact same treatment right after he won the Republican nomination – lots of Repubs searing they’d never vote for him, he was awful… and a month later it was all forgotten. So shall it be with Obama. And it looks like Clinton is throwing her weight behind him -she met with him personally today and yesterday started fundraising for him. Hopefully her speech today will be gracious in defeat.

    Obama is a far, far better public speaker than McCain or Hilary, but that doesn’t mean that he’s all style and no substance. Read his speech on race – the man is incredibly intelligent. McCain’s speeches are far more full of puff than his if you ask me.

  16. CG

    Oh Spailpin – I agree that McCain looks AWFUL at the moment and I do think it’s significant because I don’t think this is the position that suits him best. He was far better as the maverick. He’s been pushed further right than he ever was in his Senate career, and I don’t think it’s sitting well with him. He looks uncomfortable because he doesn’t believe in a lot of what he has to say. Bashing Obama in particular – they got on very well in the Senate (if McCain hadn’t got the Repub nomination, Obama could well have chosen him as his VP) and I don’t think the politics he has to engage in as Repub nominee are the kind he likes at all.

  17. John

    I agree with you Sarah re Bush and the economy. Nevertheless he has had many willing accomplices in the Senate-both Democrats and Republicans.

    However John McCain has long argued for a balanced budget and his voting record in the Senate generally bears this out. Unfortunately this cannot be said about Obama’s record. He has continuously pushed for higher spending.

    I agree that Obama opposed the invasion of Iraq -in this he was correct-but he has also said that he is prepared to invade Pakistan which is a nuclear power, in pursuit of Bin Laden (if necessary). Such an invasion would topple the Pakistani Government and allow Muslim extremists to take power. They would then have access to nuclear weapons. The implications are horrendous.

    Obama in my view lacks experience having served only three years in the Senate. Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Joe Biden referred to this during the primary debates.

    I think that many in the US media have failed to scrutinise Obama’s economic policies. I know that he has been savaged on other issues. John Edwards who has broadly similar economic policies was hammered by elements in the media.

    I know that you may not agree but that’s how I see things.

  18. An Spailpín Fánach

    The US Democratic Party will have the next four years to regret not picking Hillary Clinton as their Presidential candidate. Clinton would have been unbeatable as a candidate, because there is nothing the Republicans could have thrown at her that that they have not thrown already.

    Instead, the Democrats have done their usual thing of falling for a candidate who is unelectable, just as John Kerry was unelectable, just as Michael Dukakis was unelectable, just as George McGovern was unelectable, just as Adlai Stephenson, arguably the original Obama, was unelectable. My God, Jimmy Carter would have got turned over if the Republicans hadn’t got themselves stuck with Gerry Ford, God love him. Gore is a clem as well.

    Personally, I would have preferred Hillary. My own choice. Failing that, President McCain will be fine, although I would have preferred had he not run out of money in 2000, of course. Obama’s schtick doesn’t work in the real world. The audacity of hope isn’t going to pay the rent, you know? Hillary could have retained the Reagan Democrats. This year, I reckon they’ll vote McCain, and he’ll win by a clear margin. Im’ thuairim féin.

  19. Niall

    Of the available candidates, Obama is the lesser evil. His comments prior to the Iraq war gained him some points, his recent comments regarding Israel, lost him some. Clinton irritated me. Everything she said came across as false.

    McCain seems like a nice guy. But he’s has no real knowledge of economic matters. He was wrong about Iraq. His comments about Iran are alarming and by all acounts he’s not the kind of man you want to see holding his finger over the button that when pushed leads us all to oblivion.

  20. Niall

    Peter, being half black isn’t any different from 100% black as far as the average racist is concerned. It’s not as though the half white children of slave owners and slaves were treated all that better than their full-blood peers in the US. It’s not as though half-white people of colour got to sit half way up the bus during the civil rights movement. It’s not as though half-white students were allowed to attend white schools when segregation was in place.

    Make no mistake, if we were to throw Obama into a time machine and send him back 60 or 300 years in time, the fact that one of his parents was white would offer him next to no protection from the horrors he would face in those historical contexts. That is why he is regarded as a “black man” by most people.

  21. peter_wolf

    So you mention all sort of things from history which we now surely all agree were wrong. However you then fall into the trap of being just as racist by abiding by the terms and attitudes of those very same “white” racists.

    In other words; you allow them to win by not transcending race and seeing the person instead of the skin color. So somebody that is/are/were racists and as you say, would have regarded Obama as “black” are allowed to dictate that stupidity to the rest of us in the year 2008! You and others perpetuate the whole thing by branding Obama as a black man and throwing in with the white racists by only confirming that they were right all along [from their narrow perspective]

    I refuse to be influenced by the skin color of anyone. As it happens Obama would have been raised and surrounded by “white” people far more than Black people, yet people in the liberal media and blacks themselves continue to brand him as a black man when in point of fact he has very little in common with the vast majority of black people who have a very tough life indeed.

    What you seem to be saying is that when a black person and a white person have children together they produce only black offspring. Well if that is the case then the racists were right all along and they have won their argument?

    If that is the case [and I despair at the idea of it] then the white race [if there is any such thing] is doomed in the long term to extinction and oblivion.

    My point is that TRUTH is more important and WE SHOULD TRANSCEND racial issues to the point where we all don’t give a damn about skin color

    Sending out the message that the Black half of Obama defines him and obliterates the white half of him is dangerous and dishonest.

  22. Niall

    Um, who sent out that message?

    Race is an inherently ridiculous concept. But it is a concept that most people seem to have internatlised and as a result in our everyday lives people treat our race, or what they perceive to be our race as an important factor in determining how they act toward us. Furthermore, race, caste, nationality, gender, class and ethnicity are all important factors in how people define themselves. The fact that these concepts tend to fall apart on careful examination is not something I’d contest. But in the reality of lived experience, they are as real as anything else. It’s as appropriate to call Barack Obama black as it is to label almost anybody else black in the context of the US.

    Perhaps some day our children’s children’s children’s children’s children might live in world where our quaint little concepts have been eliminated from society, but that changes nothing right now. So calm down or the liberal media will hear you and no doubt send you off to a concentration camp for the politically incorrect!

  23. CG

    The ‘liberal media’ is ignoring nuance and contributing to the death of the white race? Would you go way with your mad ramblings.

    Barack Obama has written an entire (best-selling) BOOK about his race and his parents’ races. He has far more interesting and nuanced opinions on it than you do, by the way.

    I do find it pretty funny that pasty Irish guys consider themselves arbiters of what it means to be black in America, though.

  24. CG

    Above comment is directed at peter_wolf, not Niall, with whom I entirely agree.

  25. Rrank Fyan

    “TRUTH is more important and WE SHOULD TRANSCEND racial issues to the point where we all don’t give a damn about skin color

    Sending out the message that the Black half of Obama defines him and obliterates the white half of him is dangerous and dishonest.”

    Best comments so far from this thread and the response from Nial and CG are silly and ignorant. “what it means to be black” real dumb! Barak is NOT BLACK he is half and half IT IS A FACT! Yet as pointed out you and your kind wish to brand a man according to skin color and force us to accept that this is just the way it is.

    “It’s as appropriate to call Barack Obama black as it is to label almost anybody else black in the context of the US.”

    Yeah sure ! and Bruce Willis is Black too as is Arnie, hey we are all black really! Sure there is no difference at all.People are the same everywhere and in every way.

    SO it is appropriate to tell lies! To present information that you know is wrong as being correct ? Thats really clever! How about this radical and crazy thought.

    We don’t preoccupy ourselves too much with the color of peoples skin and present things as they are! So Barak is half White and thus a mixed race person. Is there something wrong with this? maybe that is the problem here!

    Secretly many of you liberal whites do indeed regard any sort of mixture as meaning someone is no longer white! So who are the real racists?

  26. B

    We can’t even agree among Irish white people.

  27. Gingerale

    Hello. I pretty much agree with what Niall said.

    To Frank Ryan: Hi. The social categories are socially constructed and socially recognized. We can dislike the fact these categories are socially constructed. We can argue to reconfigure them. But even then, they still will have been socially constructed.

    I’m writing from the US as a middle-aged white female. After the Democratic primary my sister asked me for whom I’d voted. Using an idiom in the US for a person of Irish descent regardless of nationality I said, “I voted for the Irish guy, but not because he’s Irish.” “I did the same thing,” she said. In other words we both voted for Obama.

    This ties in with the discussion. Does Obama’s Irish ancestry (it is one of his many ancestries) get attention in Ireland? If he’s elected, and visits your lovely country, I wonder whether he’ll be welcomed in Ireland as a person of Irish descent, as were Kennedy and Reagan. I hope we get to find out over time.

    I’d like to address the notion that Senator Obama has much eloquence but little substance. I was slow to decide for whom to vote and I was somewhat put off by his smooth style. I looked into his positions though and was pleased to find there’s a there there. I also like the way he works; he’s much more ground-up than most politicians. There are many examples of this. And the guy is smart.

    He certainly doesn’t walk on water and I’m nervous to be voting for a candidate younger than myself (my first time doing so). But one thing the long primary gave us was an opportunity to look at the candidates more fully. Having done so, I voted for Obama.

  28. Rrank Fyan

    All evolutionary scientists I am familiar with — Dawkins, Dennett, Gould, Halacy, Morris, Sheppard, etc — affirm that raciation is good for a species because it makes it possible for it to put its survival eggs in many baskets (in case of an environmental holocaust).

    This puts Barack Obama in a much better position than any “pedigree whites” or “pedigree blacks.” He is 50 per cent European and 50 per cent African. And, if he is conscious of this double heritage, he might serve America with a much keener sense of justice than any “pure Caucasian” or “pure Negro.”

    Dawkins, then, is right in a double sense. It is the height of injustice to think of a person as “black” just because his blood is “tainted” with “black,” whereas, if “taint” is what it is, then his blood is equally tainted with “white,” in which case, he equally qualifies also as white.

    The anthropologist Lionel Tiger — I learn from Dawkins — called it a “contamination metaphor.” It is perilous because it emphasises the inessential (external appearance) at the expense of the essential (the internal composition) of the individual, whatever his or her race may be.

    In this way, the United States — a great country in every other way — has denied itself potentially excellent leadership for too long by putting a premium on such superficialities as race, sex and religion.

  29. Niall

    Frank/Rank, can I get a reference on where the likes of Dawkins, Gould or Dennett refer to raciation?

Comments are closed.