I admire honesty in a politician, sometimes people need to hear the truth, no matter how unpleasant it may be.Turquoise wrote:
Considering how well that describes a lot of rural people, I'm sure it got under their skin.FEOS wrote:
It could also be viewed as implying that those people in those small towns aren't smart enough to realize the true causes of their woes, so they "cling to guns (2nd Amendment) or religion (1st Amendment) or antipathy to people...(they're racists)".
Yeah...not sure why anyone would get bent out of shape over that.
Again, I'm not saying it was a politically smart move, but it was honest.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Is Obama a worse public speaker than Bush?!
It also describes a lot of urban people. It was only honest in the sense that it's what he really thinks...not in the sense that it's accurate.Turquoise wrote:
Considering how well that describes a lot of rural people, I'm sure it got under their skin.FEOS wrote:
It could also be viewed as implying that those people in those small towns aren't smart enough to realize the true causes of their woes, so they "cling to guns (2nd Amendment) or religion (1st Amendment) or antipathy to people...(they're racists)".
Yeah...not sure why anyone would get bent out of shape over that.
Again, I'm not saying it was a politically smart move, but it was honest.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Most urban people that are ignorant or illogical cling to either political correctness, reverse racism, or loopy ideological groups (like PETA, Greenpeace, or assorted hippy/New Age shit).FEOS wrote:
It also describes a lot of urban people. It was only honest in the sense that it's what he really thinks...not in the sense that it's accurate.Turquoise wrote:
Considering how well that describes a lot of rural people, I'm sure it got under their skin.FEOS wrote:
It could also be viewed as implying that those people in those small towns aren't smart enough to realize the true causes of their woes, so they "cling to guns (2nd Amendment) or religion (1st Amendment) or antipathy to people...(they're racists)".
Yeah...not sure why anyone would get bent out of shape over that.
Again, I'm not saying it was a politically smart move, but it was honest.
Religion and guns tend to be rural focal points, not urban ones (unless you're talking about thugs with respect to guns).
Some of the most religious people I've met are inner-city. And many times, their kids have guns. Bottomline is that it's not an exclusively "small town" phenomenon, nor does it have anything to do with disillusionment or bitterness.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Here is a full transcript of his remarks.
It is true generally that different issues resonate differently depending on geographical location. Cultural issues seem to be of greater importance in rural areas (that I've observed). Gay marriage/guns/religion just isn't as big a deal in NYC, LA, DC, Chicagoland, New Orleans, etc. as it is in say far western Kansas.
How's THIS for poorly chosen words!
That doesn't mean Davis is racist, but how could he not know how this was going to be interpreted.
I interpret it as though he was saying that people get skeptical about politics when they feel they have no influence on certain issues (bread and butter issues if you will) and that manifests itself in those individuals voting on issues they feel they CAN control. Namely, cultural issues. Any individual American has more control over the culture around them than they do over more national issues like the economy or military deployments or the structure of the housing market. Likewise voters have a different calculus on certain issues. I don't necessarily need a gun because police will respond relatively quickly to an emergency call I make (plus I don't live in a high crime area). There are lots of people in the DC metro that support gun control (particularly the police) because of the crime situation in Southeast DC. Their reasoning is "why should I have to spend the money to buy a gun when the police should be patrolling my neighbourhood"?OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it's fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people feel most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre...I think they're misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to 'white working-class don't wanna work -- don't wanna vote for the black guy.' That's...there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it's sort of a race thing.
Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).
But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What's the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is -- so, we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama's gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we're gonna provide health care for every American. So we'll go down a series of talking points.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you'll find is, is that people of every background -- there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I'd be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you're doing what you're doing.
It is true generally that different issues resonate differently depending on geographical location. Cultural issues seem to be of greater importance in rural areas (that I've observed). Gay marriage/guns/religion just isn't as big a deal in NYC, LA, DC, Chicagoland, New Orleans, etc. as it is in say far western Kansas.
How's THIS for poorly chosen words!
You can't write this stuff...a white southern politician named "Geoff Davis"(!!) calling a black politician 3 years his junior "boy". Lollers...During his talk at Saturday's Fourth District Lincoln/Reagan Day Dinner in Boone County Davis, a Hebron Republican seeking re-election, made the following comment when questioning the national security credentials and experience of Obama, an African-American from Illinois:
"I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button," Davis said. "He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."
That doesn't mean Davis is racist, but how could he not know how this was going to be interpreted.
If he had inserted the words "issues like" after "cling to" and changed "their guns" to "gun control" (see where I'm going here?)...it would've been crystal clear. But that's not what he said, and even in the context of the larger discussion, it can be interpreted either way.
I guess even polished, eloquent speakers can step on their crank in public...
I guess even polished, eloquent speakers can step on their crank in public...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
"Cling to" in the sense of placing those issues higher than say national security or economics when voting (remember those exit polls from the 2004 general election?)FEOS wrote:
If he had inserted the words "issues like" after "cling to" and changed "their guns" to "gun control" (see where I'm going here?)...it would've been crystal clear. But that's not what he said, and even in the context of the larger discussion, it can be interpreted either way.
I guess even polished, eloquent speakers can step on their crank in public...
If you feel that none of the possible contenders for your vote will have any effect on those important issues, why base your vote on them? If you're anti-war, somewhat of an economic populist, and anti-abortion and you feel neither candidate will do much on the first two (despite what they say) the 3rd becomes the deciding factor.
EDIT: All this is not to say that his phrasing wasn't clumsy and in-artful, but I don't think there was any malice in his words.
Last edited by Masques (2008-04-15 11:23:33)
I don't see anything wrong with what he said. Sometimes the truth hurts, and I'm happy to support someone who will tell the truth in a well-worded speech no matter how "offensive" the media claims it is. In fact, it's a long time since someone has spoken something like this...perhaps we are all so used to politicians saying the "right" things so as to appeal to everyone and not offend anyone that we don't know what reality sounds like anymore.
The truth is offensive. It is still the truth, so this should be considered a political triumph as opposed to political "suicide."
The truth is offensive. It is still the truth, so this should be considered a political triumph as opposed to political "suicide."
The way he has explained it certainly makes sense. But I think the reaction is reflective of people's genuine concerns about his voting record, both in the Illinois Senate and the US Senate.Masques wrote:
"Cling to" in the sense of placing those issues higher than say national security or economics when voting (remember those exit polls from the 2004 general election?)FEOS wrote:
If he had inserted the words "issues like" after "cling to" and changed "their guns" to "gun control" (see where I'm going here?)...it would've been crystal clear. But that's not what he said, and even in the context of the larger discussion, it can be interpreted either way.
I guess even polished, eloquent speakers can step on their crank in public...
If you feel that none of the possible contenders for your vote will have any effect on those important issues, why base your vote on them? If you're anti-war, somewhat of an economic populist, and anti-abortion and you feel neither candidate will do much on the first two (despite what they say) the 3rd becomes the deciding factor.
EDIT: All this is not to say that his phrasing wasn't clumsy and in-artful, but I don't think there was any malice in his words.
I find it humorous that this super-eloquent public speaker has misspoken so much of late, needing to explain his words after the fact. Maybe it is just the campaign wearing him down...but is it wearing down his ability to write proper speeches or is it wearing down his ability to not speak his true thoughts? And if the campaign is wearing him down this much, how will having the most stressful job in the world affect him?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
If he meant it as he has spun it after the fact, then I agree that there isn't anything wrong with what he said. But if he meant it as it actually came out (and not how he spun it when the public reaction was negative), then there are concerns.Marconius wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with what he said. Sometimes the truth hurts, and I'm happy to support someone who will tell the truth in a well-worded speech no matter how "offensive" the media claims it is. In fact, it's a long time since someone has spoken something like this...perhaps we are all so used to politicians saying the "right" things so as to appeal to everyone and not offend anyone that we don't know what reality sounds like anymore.
The truth is offensive. It is still the truth, so this should be considered a political triumph as opposed to political "suicide."
Too bad that he's a politician and we won't know for sure unless he gets elected.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
For once I'd like to see a politician who speaks the truth, not what he/she thinks will appeal to the lowest common denominator and will get them elected.I don't see anything wrong with what he said. Sometimes the truth hurts, and I'm happy to support someone who will tell the truth in a well-worded speech no matter how "offensive" the media claims it is. In fact, it's a long time since someone has spoken something like this...perhaps we are all so used to politicians saying the "right" things so as to appeal to everyone and not offend anyone that we don't know what reality sounds like anymore.
Tax
Health
Abortion
Guns
Its all pretty lame and we all know no-one can or will do much about any of them.
Fuck Israel
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Is Obama a worse public speaker than Bush?!