Barack Obama's support among African-Americans (1 Viewer)

[Heavy B]

This is not a topic of any real substance. I think that it's more a talking point to pull the wool over the eyes of the public who may not be aware that Blacks do not evidence any diversity in political thought that can be quantified by polling of election results) - they are always a 85%+ locked-in vote for the Democrats.

90% of Blacks were going to vote for Hillary in this election if she were the candidate just as they would have voted for anyone else with the Democratic label.

Clinton News Newtork 2004 results

Same for 2000

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

Plenty over my phone lines.

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

Although it has nothing to do with this issue, you do raise a very good point.

He didn't raise a point. He asked a question without making a connection between your post and his question. So to ask again: What is the good point that he raised and what can you not say now that you could safely say in 2000?

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

Plenty over my phone lines.

Like?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

Plenty over my phone lines.

Like?

I wont discuss specifics here.

 

[saintfool]

I don't think Obama's race has impacted or will impact the election in anything but a positive way, (with the sole possible exception of the troubling Latino-African-American rift within the Democratic party.) As I wrote, his presence thus far and his triumph if elected will be a great day for all Americans, a proof to ourselves that we have "made it" as a nation. The concerns I am writing about regard what happens afterwards, not with the man per se, but with our reaction to him.

you think the matter of his and a portion of his supporters will suddenly change once he's sworn into office? he will have weathered a hard fought campaign to be his party's nominee and another likely bruising national election at that point. you think "hardball with chris matthews" will suddenly become "chris matthews' def political jam"? i'm confident that the issue of race will be minimized because he's not trading in it. nor are his supporters. those who have played on the issue of race, like Bill Clinton did, found themselves in a really odd position: they were in a minority. while obama has unprecedented support among the back Dems, his popularity and support extends far beyond that. his message and platform have been more than pluralistic and instead tread on universal themes of reform, hope and good governance.

 

[timschochet]

What's the importance of discussing this topic tim? Just curious what you'll say.

It was the Michelle Obama thread that made me think to bring it up. I don't think that story's any big deal, and I said so, but the story had nothing to do with race, and I was surprised how many times race is discussed in that thread. And it made me think: if Obama is elected, and if he gets ripped on every day (as he will) will race always come up? If so, it's something we need to be aware of now. Even if we agree among ourselves that we need to be cognizant of this issue, it's a step in the right direction.I realized the risk of bringing up this issue (though I never figured I would be accused of hating African-Americans), but I thought it was important.

 

[saintfool]

This is not a topic of any real substance. I think that it's more a talking point to pull the wool over the eyes of the public who may not be aware that Blacks do not evidence any diversity in political thought that can be quantified by polling of election results) - they are always a 85%+ locked-in vote for the Democrats.

90% of Blacks were going to vote for Hillary in this election if she were the candidate just as they would have voted for anyone else with the Democratic label.

Clinton News Newtork 2004 results

Same for 2000

i think what might be the story isn't that blacks voting for Dems but rather the turnout. i get the impression that more AAs are voting. they have been trending upwards for the past few election cycles but this could be a historic high for their turnout.

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

Plenty over my phone lines.

Like?

I wont discuss specifics here.

Not an atypical tactic of the Left. Throw out large-scale big-picture unrelated buzz terms and/or unanswerable rhetorical questions and then crawfish when asked for specifics. Though I have never before seen your fine work and don't know if you're a Lefty or just being funny. Because the "won't discuss specifics here" line could certainly be read as good low key humor.

 

[saintfool]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

his concern, as i understand it, is centered on perception. he is afraid that criticizing a black president will have some unfairly criticized as "racist". well, i could have sworn the love of country, family and fellow americans were subject to unfair criticism following 9/11 and the Iraq War. some were characterizing dissent as offering aid and comfort to the enemy, hating America, cowards and glad to see our soldiers killed. it was more and worse than simply questioning one's patriotism. this is was symptomatic of the decline in public discourse, as much as the quality of it which i would describe as partisan and vitriolic.

 

[Heavy B]

I don't think Obama's race has impacted or will impact the election in anything but a positive way, (with the sole possible exception of the troubling Latino-African-American rift within the Democratic party.) As I wrote, his presence thus far and his triumph if elected will be a great day for all Americans, a proof to ourselves that we have "made it" as a nation. The concerns I am writing about regard what happens afterwards, not with the man per se, but with our reaction to him.

you think the matter of his and a portion of his supporters will suddenly change once he's sworn into office? he will have weathered a hard fought campaign to be his party's nominee and another likely bruising national election at that point. you think "hardball with chris matthews" will suddenly become "chris matthews' def political jam"? i'm confident that the issue of race will be minimized because he's not trading in it. nor are his supporters. those who have played on the issue of race, like Bill Clinton did, found themselves in a really odd position: they were in a minority. while obama has unprecedented support among the back Dems, his popularity and support extends far beyond that. his message and platform have been more than pluralistic and instead tread on universal themes of reform, hope and good governance.

And gun control, income-redistribution, border dissolution, and destroying the best health care system going. All that fun stuff.

 

[adonis]

What's the importance of discussing this topic tim? Just curious what you'll say.

It was the Michelle Obama thread that made me think to bring it up. I don't think that story's any big deal, and I said so, but the story had nothing to do with race, and I was surprised how many times race is discussed in that thread. And it made me think: if Obama is elected, and if he gets ripped on every day (as he will) will race always come up? If so, it's something we need to be aware of now. Even if we agree among ourselves that we need to be cognizant of this issue, it's a step in the right direction.I realized the risk of bringing up this issue (though I never figured I would be accused of hating African-Americans), but I thought it was important.

Yeah, that's pretty silly.I think it's an interesting question, I just don't know where you are going with it, if anywhere.

 

[timschochet]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

his concern, as i understand it, is centered on perception. he is afraid that criticizing a black president will have some unfairly criticized as "racist". well, i could have sworn the love of country, family and fellow americans were subject to unfair criticism following 9/11 and the Iraq War. some were characterizing dissent as offering aid and comfort to the enemy, hating America, cowards and glad to see our soldiers killed. it was more and worse than simply questioning one's patriotism. this is was symptomatic of the decline in public discourse, as much as the quality of it which i would describe as partisan and vitriolic.

This is an excellent posting.

 

[tommyGunZ]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

Although it has nothing to do with this issue, you do raise a very good point.

He didn't raise a point. He asked a question without making a connection between your post and his question. So to ask again: What is the good point that he raised and what can you not say now that you could safely say in 2000?

Bomb on a plane.

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

What can you not say now that you could say 8 years ago?

his concern, as i understand it, is centered on perception. he is afraid that criticizing a black president will have some unfairly criticized as "racist". well, i could have sworn the love of country, family and fellow americans were subject to unfair criticism following 9/11 and the Iraq War. some were characterizing dissent as offering aid and comfort to the enemy, hating America, cowards and glad to see our soldiers killed. it was more and worse than simply questioning one's patriotism. this is was symptomatic of the decline in public discourse, as much as the quality of it which i would describe as partisan and vitriolic.

So really nothing?What I heard in my head as I read that was: "some people over-reacted in the time during and shortly after the second worst attack on American soil".

And since we're discussing free speech, the administration, and the neo-cons I was talking about governmentally protected or prohibited speech. I was not concerned with people having to pay a subjective social price for speaking their mind. This will always be the case and people's sensibilities will always be shifting. Further, there will always be heightened sensitivities with regard to our forward-deployed young people when they are fighting wars. You're not prohibited as far as I know from questioning the war, the administration, or even bad-mouthing the military, baseball, mom, or apple pie.

But if you do comment negatively on these things you should expect from some quarters some social backlash but IMO not any governmantal backlash.

What speech that is now forbidden by neo-con laws was permissible in 2000?

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

Although it has nothing to do with this issue, you do raise a very good point.

He didn't raise a point. He asked a question without making a connection between your post and his question. So to ask again: What is the good point that he raised and what can you not say now that you could safely say in 2000?

Bomb on a plane.

Really, Tim.That's the best you've got? Don't you think that this falls under the "Fire" in a crowded theater thing?

Bomb threats were legal 8 years ago? Maybe the FBG attorneys can help us with this. I don't recall a time when bomb threats were permissible but perhaps I'm wrong.

Certainly saying "bomb" on a plane will get you a great deal more attention than it would have prior to the 09/11 attacks. You may even be arrested but ultimately you will not be brought up on charges unless it can be reasonably proven that you're connected to something sinister or unless instead of saying something like "this song is the bomb" you say "I have a bomb in my luggage".

In order to get on the plane you have to pass through at least two layers of security where signs are posted all over the place advising you that threats and comments about weapons will all be taken seriously.

If you are still stupid enough to make a bomb threat on an airplane then good luck to ya.

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Blacks do not evidence any diversity in political thought that can be quantified by polling of election results) - they are always a 85%+ locked-in vote for the Democrats.

What's the diversity in political thought about NRA members? Among white males that go to church every Sunday?

 

[saintfool]

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

i don't think the purpose of his original post, nor my response to it, were confined to "gov't-curtailed" freedom of speech but then you know that already...

 

[timschochet]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

Although it has nothing to do with this issue, you do raise a very good point.

He didn't raise a point. He asked a question without making a connection between your post and his question. So to ask again: What is the good point that he raised and what can you not say now that you could safely say in 2000?

Bomb on a plane.

Really, Tim.That's the best you've got? Don't you think that this falls under the "Fire" in a crowded theater thing?

Bomb threats were legal 8 years ago? Maybe the FBG attorneys can help us with this. I don't recall a time when bomb threats were permissible but perhaps I'm wrong.

Certainly saying "bomb" on a plane will get you a great deal more attention than it would have prior to the 09/11 attacks. You may even be arrested but ultimately you will not be brought up on charges unless it can be reasonably proven that you're connected to something sinister or unless instead of saying something like "this song is the bomb" you say "I have a bomb in my luggage".

In order to get on the plane you have to pass through at least two layers of security where signs are posted all over the place advising you that threats and comments about weapons will all be taken seriously.

If you are still stupid enough to make a bomb threat on an airplane then good luck to ya.

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

Your response is to someone else, not me.

 

[timschochet]

Blacks do not evidence any diversity in political thought that can be quantified by polling of election results) - they are always a 85%+ locked-in vote for the Democrats.

What's the diversity in political thought about NRA members? Among white males that go to church every Sunday?

NRA members usually vote Republican, but this is issue oriented. White males who attend church every Sunday are probably divided like most of the rest of us.

 

[Spiderman]

Tubbs Jones and Texas State Sen. Kirk Watson on MSNBC Tuesday night. Host Chris Matthews asked Watson, a supporter of Obama, to name the Illinois senator's chief legislative accomplishments.

"Well, I am not going to be able to name you specific items of legislative accomplishment," Watson said.

Asked if it was a problem he was unable to name any of Obama's accomplishments, Watson said, "Well no I don't think it is. Because I think one of the things that Sen. Obama does is he inspires. He's able to lay out a vision, he's able to lay out solutions."

What?? Are you kidding me? Obama for President and he couldn't name one thing that he's done?

Anyways, Hardball had a guest on today, Senator Claire McCaskill (D) on...She gave Obama credit for:

1) working with Senator Lugar in securing nuclear weapons around the world

2) opening the spending habits of government to the public on the Internet

3) Walter Reed Hospital - filed legislation on improving health care.

4) Earmark reform

She claims he introduced the bills on item #3, but is that accurate ?....The ones sound like bills that Obama, and many senators probably agreed upon so I'm not sure how these are actual accomplishments unless voting is not an accomplishment.

 

[Da Guru]

I did not put this in the Obama thread for two reasons: first, because it is really more about society in general than specifically about Obama or any issue he stands for, and second, because I realize this could be a very volatile topic, even though I think it needs to be discussed.The percentage of African Americans who support Obama's candidacy is now 90%. We can therefore assume that at least part of this support is based on identity politics: they are voting for him, at least in part, because he is a Black man.This by itself should be troubling to no one. It is not racist, at least in my opinion, for Black people to want to see a Black man accomplish what only white men have up to this point in the history of our country. Indeed, from a purely historical standpoint, Senator Obama's election would be a milestone that all thinking people should be proud of, and it's quite proper for African Americans to be especially proud and happy if this happens.What's problematic is what takes place afterward. If elected, Obama will immediately become the most prominent African-American in the history of this nation, even surpassing Martin Luther King. As has happened to every president in my lifetime and before, he will be subject to an immediate barrage of criticism from every part of this country, some of it so vitriolic it will border on hatred. That's how we roll in politics in this country.My concern is that African-Americans (and others) will regard all such criticisms, including the valid ones, through a racial lens. Unfortunately, there is precedence to suggest that whenever criticism is directed at a prominent Black person in this country, it has been seen as racist by many within the African-American community no matter how justifiable that criticism is (recent examples include Barry Bonds and Michael Vick). In a way, I understand this phenomenon, partly. I was raised a Jew, and to this day I (and many of my Jewish friends) are immediately suspicious of any criticism of prominent Jews or of Israel. Is it anti-Semitic? we always wonder before we hear anything else, as an automatic reflex. And Jews did not suffer any of the trials and tribulations of African-Americans in this country. There is a reason that they look at many things through a racial lens, and that reason is for the most part justifiable.But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?Please do not take this as an argument for voting against Barack Obama. It isn't. I will not vote for Senator Obama, but my reasons are substantive, I have stated them elsewhere and will continue to do so. If someone used this argument to in order to convince you to vote against the man, I would regard that as racist, and my response might very well be to vote for him just to prove a point. But that doesn't clear up the issue I have stated. It looks more and more like Obama has at least a 50-50 chance of being our next president. If he is, how should we deal with this issue? Or, if you think its not an issue at all and that I'm just being delusional, please tell me so.

Good point, I never thought about it that way. Just like black QBs and head coaches only about 10000 times worse. This could damage race relations.

 

[timschochet]

"Good point, I never thought about it that way. Just like black QBs and head coaches only about 10000 times worse. This could damage race relations."

This is the best argument against my original analysis that I have read so far. In a few terse, sarcastic and cutting words, Da Guru has effectively made a mockery of my entire theory and suggests that I'm either seeing phantoms or trying to get others to see them (I'm sure he thinks the latter).

Very impressed, Da Guru. Perhaps people really did express these concerns over the first Black coaches and QBs. If so, it makes my writings here seem trite and a little shameful. I will have to think about all of this more now.

 

[Heavy B]

Blacks do not evidence any diversity in political thought that can be quantified by polling of election results) - they are always a 85%+ locked-in vote for the Democrats.

What's the diversity in political thought about NRA members? Among white males that go to church every Sunday?

NRA mostly Liberterian or Republican. White male church goers are likely reasonably divided. This illustrates the point that among Whites there is significant diversity of political thought as evidenced in their votes that I linked in my earlier post. There are no groups among blacks that can be identified by their voting pattern. 90% of the time Black = Democrat vote. Whites split their vote pretty evenly down the lines of Dem / Repub in national elections. Obama currently leads or is very near Hillary in the white vote. I think this illustrates the diversity of political thought among Whites. As usual you've asked a leading question but provided no link, thought process, evidence or conclusion. What are your thoughts? Is is really possible that one political party can serve the needs of all Blacks all the time? And overall given the 70% illegitimate birth rate, high incarceration rate, low educational accomplishment and high government dependency rate of Blacks in America - are the Dems really doing them any favors?

 

[Heavy B]

But if the majority of African-Americans do respond to criticism of Obama in a racial way, what effect will that have? Will it become political taboo to criticize Obama? Will those of us who do have to constantly fear being charged with racism? (The way that certain people in the Michelle Obama thread were immediately charged with it). And if so, what dampening effect will this have on free speech in this country during an Obama administration?

you're worried now about free speech after 8 years of this administration and the neo-con movement?

Although it has nothing to do with this issue, you do raise a very good point.

He didn't raise a point. He asked a question without making a connection between your post and his question. So to ask again: What is the good point that he raised and what can you not say now that you could safely say in 2000?

Bomb on a plane.

Really, Tim.That's the best you've got? Don't you think that this falls under the "Fire" in a crowded theater thing?

Bomb threats were legal 8 years ago? Maybe the FBG attorneys can help us with this. I don't recall a time when bomb threats were permissible but perhaps I'm wrong.

Certainly saying "bomb" on a plane will get you a great deal more attention than it would have prior to the 09/11 attacks. You may even be arrested but ultimately you will not be brought up on charges unless it can be reasonably proven that you're connected to something sinister or unless instead of saying something like "this song is the bomb" you say "I have a bomb in my luggage".

In order to get on the plane you have to pass through at least two layers of security where signs are posted all over the place advising you that threats and comments about weapons will all be taken seriously.

If you are still stupid enough to make a bomb threat on an airplane then good luck to ya.

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

Your response is to someone else, not me.

You are correct, sir, and have my apology.

 

[Heavy B]

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

i don't think the purpose of his original post, nor my response to it, were confined to "gov't-curtailed" freedom of speech but then you know that already...

No. Actually I think that my posts were very fair game. We were hijacking the thread with a freedom of speech discussion and you mentioned your evaluation of the post 09/11 atmosphere w/ regard to those who were against the war. As you were using this as your justification for the neo-con comment that you had mentioned earlier I thought it was fair asking you to justify your stance and answer the question of basically "What can't you say now that you could say then?"Still waiting for an answer. But then you knew that already.

 

[bigbottom]

My concern is that African-Americans (and others) will regard all such criticisms, including the valid ones, through a racial lens. Unfortunately, there is precedence to suggest that whenever criticism is directed at a prominent Black person in this country, it has been seen as racist by many within the African-American community no matter how justifiable that criticism is (recent examples include Barry Bonds and Michael Vick).

Do African-Americans think Hillary's and McCain's criticisms of Obama are racist? I'm guessing no. I think perhaps you're not giving African-Americans enough credit. In fact, one could construe your basic premise as mildly insulting.(Haven't read the thread. My apologies if this has already been asked.)

 

[Homer J Simpson]

And if that's the best you have about government-curtailed freedom of speech then you have nothing.

i don't think the purpose of his original post, nor my response to it, were confined to "gov't-curtailed" freedom of speech but then you know that already...

No. Actually I think that my posts were very fair game. We were hijacking the thread with a freedom of speech discussion and you mentioned your evaluation of the post 09/11 atmosphere w/ regard to those who were against the war. As you were using this as your justification for the neo-con comment that you had mentioned earlier I thought it was fair asking you to justify your stance and answer the question of basically "What can't you say now that you could say then?"

Still waiting for an answer. But then you knew that already.

It's a totally unfair question since we obviously CAN'T SAY IT!We could have then, but we certainly can't now. Jeez, you trying to get someone thrown in Gitmo or what?

 

[johnjohn]

interesting

 

[phrozen]

interesting

Not really

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

interesting

Subpar effort here.

 

[flapgreen]

I think you might be on to something - I heard he's hired Stephan A. Smith as his press secretary.