OBAMA makes racist comment on Philly radio

[Diesel]

Here's the whole quote.....

“She is extremely proud, and the point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person who, you know, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, there is a reaction that has been bred into our experiences that don’t go away and sometimes come out in the wrong way…"

If you're making a claim about racism being prevalent, then you have to show it's prevalence.

His context is the reaction bred into our experiences.

If you were to try to make a case for most men being sports fans...

And you were to make the statement that "AHF is a typical man, in that if Sports is on TV, he will probably watch it."

That's only a sexist statement if you deny the fact that most men are sports fans.

We're too busy playing the racism don't exist game to recognize that Obama didn't bring race into this campaign.

First he wasn't black enough.

Then he was a muslim.

Then he had a muslim middle name.

Then his pastor is a racist.

Now... He's a racist...

Next, he's going to be too black.

It's amazing. But the parts that amaze me is the fact that I have never seen any other candidate have to defend their pastor. Who exactly is Hillary's pastor? Who exactly is McCain's pastor? Who exactly is George W. Bush's Pastor? (and remember Bush ran as a conservative Christian)...

My point is that this whole question of race is the problem. I think Obama has some conservative views on the treatment of race and I think he's on the right track with that. But right now... He's deep under the microscope. Much farther under than Speed Boat or Vietnam records or anything like that. And every word that he utters at this point on will probably be manipulated or used out of context. Welcome to running for the President, Senator Obama.

[Admin]

The problem is that he used the word typical. That is an ignorant word to use when describing anyone because whether it's true or not it will make people defensive.

On the pastor thing, Obamas pastor brought this on himself with his remarks. I'm sure if the pastor for any of those people you mentioned make an ignorant remark in the middle of their campaign for president it would cause a major reaction just like this one. Obama shouldn't be held accountable for someone else's words but it's a natural reaction for people to worry when he has spent so many years of his life being taught by this guy.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

This morning he said his grandma was a " typical white person " because she gets worried when she see's black people walking down the same side of the street as her.

What he said is:

Quote:

---

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother -- a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Quote:

---

The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But

she is a typical white person who, uh, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know there's a reaction

that's been been bred into our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way and that's just the nature of race in our society. We have to break through it.

I don't think his statements are the same as your summary.

Actually, it's exactly like his summary without all the sugarcoating before or after. Here I'll show you...

Obama

Quote:

---

she is a typical white person who, uh, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know there's a reaction

OP

Quote:

---

This morning he said his grandma was a " typical white person " because she gets worried when she see's black people walking down the same side of the street as her.

What's the difference in the above two quotes?

The two quotes are the same, but you're ignoring the context (and thus, the point.) She's not afraid of blacks because she's white, and she's not "typical" (pejorative) of white people because she's afraid of blacks. She's white, and she's afraid of blacks. This is what our culture hath wrought.

The point is that Obama believes, as Jesse Jackson believes, as I believe:

the average (i.e. 'typical' .. not pejoratively used) white person in American society feels fear when he sees an unknown black person walking towards him on the street. (Replace black with Arab, or even Latino, and the point remains.)

First, does anyone disagree with this?

It's not racist against whites to point this out. If anything, Obama is condemning black culture when he said this, within the larger condemnation of the state of racial affairs in America. Jesse Jackson was far more clear with his condemnation.

[Admin]

No worries, just keep in mind what it says for the description for this forum - "music, movies, games, entertainment, etc. Light hearted, fun discussion"

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

And as we waste time with this foolishness.........

- The war in Iraq continues

- Gasoline prices are still making life difficult for the average American

- The borders are still unprotected

- The economy is still in a nosedive

- And countless families don't have health insurance

And yet the only people with real plans to fix those things can't even get nominated by their parties.

I'm considering seceding from the Union.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

The problem is that he used the word typical. That is an ignorant word to use when describing anyone because whether it's true or not it will make people defensive.

On the pastor thing, Obamas pastor brought this on himself with his remarks. I'm sure if the pastor for any of those people you mentioned make an ignorant remark in the middle of their campaign for president it would cause a major reaction just like this one. Obama shouldn't be held accountable for someone else's words but it's a natural reaction for people to worry when he has spent so many years of his life being taught by this guy.

I agree with what you've said. Typical does put the people on the defense. However, his context was the racism that has been bred into our society.

Sort of like saying Obama's daughter is the typical teenager. She watches MTV and BET and participate in sleepovers with her friends.

Sure... it stereotypes his daughter and teenagers... however, is it wrong?

You've never heard of John Hagee huh?

I happen to like Hagee but he's McCain's pastor and he says a lot of inflammatory things.

However, McCain has never been linked that what Haggi says.

Now, Hagee has called the catholic church "The Great Whore," the 'apostate church"," the 'anti-Christ'" and a 'false cult system'.

However, how much has McCain had to defend his pastor??

The fact that Obama had to make a speech and was pressured to publickly throw his pastor under the bus and no other presidential candidate in history had to defend their pastors says alot!

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

And as we waste time with this foolishness.........

- The war in Iraq continues

- Gasoline prices are still making life difficult for the average American

- The borders are still unprotected

- The economy is still in a nosedive

- And countless families don't have health insurance

And yet the only people with real plans to fix those things can't even get nominated by their parties.

I'm considering seceding from the Union.

There's a union?

[Admin]

No, I don't know who Hagee is but what you are referring to him saying isn't quite the same type of thing that Obama is having to defend. Obama may become the first black (even half black) President in our history and race is going to play a huge part in his election chances and anything that someone close to him says that brings race into play will be something he will have to defend, even when it's unfair for him to have to defend. It's a shame that at this point in our history that race is still so huge but that's the facts. I suppose if Hagee said something about the KKK that McCain would have to shield himself from that although it wouldn't matter because it would kill his chances of being President.

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

The two quotes are the same, but you're ignoring the context (and thus, the point.) She's not afraid of blacks because she's white, and she's not "typical" (pejorative) of white people because she's afraid of blacks. She's white, and she's afraid of blacks. This is what our culture hath wrought.

The point is that Obama believes, as Jesse Jackson believes, as I believe:

the average (i.e. 'typical' .. not pejoratively used) white person in American society feels fear when he sees an unknown black person walking towards him on the street. (Replace black with Arab, or even Latino, and the point remains.)

First, does anyone disagree with this?

It's not racist against whites to point this out. If anything, Obama is condemning black culture when he said this, within the larger condemnation of the state of racial affairs in America. Jesse Jackson was far more clear with his condemnation.

Ignoring the context? The context is the same and it is clear as day. He made it crystal clear that a typical white person feels uneasy towards blacks. How can you read anything else into that? It was nearly word for word. Stop over-analyzing and simply read the quote. That's exactly what the OP said, and that's EXACTLY what Obama said. When someone says a race "typically" does something it is called stereotyping.

I guess you're not even arguing what he said, you're implying that it is true. Which is on a completly different level of ignorance as you are someone who obviously steroe-types entire races'. And for the record, I absolutly do not agree with his, your, and Jessies assesment that "most White America fears unknown black men walking towards them". I can not believe that there are people that actually would believe this. Much less admit it. Doesn't shock me the Jessie Jacksons of the world, but you? 2008?

White America may feel uneasy when they see a black man (or white man) with a hoodie on with his pants to his knees walking down the same street (arguable). But if a black man wearing a suit was walking down the street most of white america would not think twice about their safety. Most white americans don't fear black men. They fear criminals. BIG difference.

If he was condeming black culture then he should have added ..."as well she should have been uneasy because a typical black person would have mugged her. "

He wasn't comdeming anyone or any race. He generalized a whole race, intentional or not, that he's in no position to be generalizing at this point in the game. In light of his recent mistakes, it has to make one wonder what kind of decision making prowess he posesses. That's kind of an important trait for our country's leader don't you think? I do, which is why I am officially off the bandwagon. Great, that leaves no-one.

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The problem is that he used the word typical. That is an ignorant word to use when describing anyone because whether it's true or not it will make people defensive.

On the pastor thing, Obamas pastor brought this on himself with his remarks. I'm sure if the pastor for any of those people you mentioned make an ignorant remark in the middle of their campaign for president it would cause a major reaction just like this one. Obama shouldn't be held accountable for someone else's words but it's a natural reaction for people to worry when he has spent so many years of his life being taught by this guy.

I agree with what you've said. Typical does put the people on the defense. However, his context was the racism that has been bred into our society.

Sort of like saying Obama's daughter is the typical teenager. She watches MTV and BET and participate in sleepovers with her friends.

Sure... it stereotypes his daughter and teenagers... however, is it wrong?

You've never heard of John Hagee huh?

I happen to like Hagee but he's McCain's pastor and he says a lot of inflammatory things.

However, McCain has never been linked that what Haggi says.

Now, Hagee has called the catholic church "The Great Whore," the 'apostate church"," the 'anti-Christ'" and a 'false cult system'.

However, how much has McCain had to defend his pastor??

The fact that Obama had to make a speech and was pressured to publickly throw his pastor under the bus and no other presidential candidate in history had to defend their pastors says alot!

Ok, stereo typing an age group is not the same thing as stereo typing a race.

How is it that Obama is getting the short end of the stick for having to defend his pastor? How many other candidates would even be afforded the opportunity to defend theirs if they talked about black america with such hate? NONE. Their presidential hopes would have ended right then and there.

I have officially stopped posting in this thread as some of your views absolutly baffle me.

I'll try and stick to Hawks threads from now on.

Wow. Just wow.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

Ignoring the context? The context is the same and it is clear as day. He made it crystal clear that a typical white person feels uneasy towards blacks. How can you read anything else into that? It was nearly word for word. Stop over-analyzing and simply read the quote. That's exactly what the OP said, and that's EXACTLY what Obama said. When someone says a race "typically" does something it is called stereotyping.

I guess you're not even arguing what he said, you're implying that it is true. Which is on a completly different level of ignorance as you are someone who obviously steroe-types entire races'. And for the record, I absolutly do not agree with his, your, and Jessies assesment that "most White America fears unknown black men walking towards them". I can not believe that there are people that actually would believe this. Much less admit it. Doesn't shock me the Jessie Jacksons of the world, but you? 2008?

Climb down from your high horse for a minute and be rational! There is a difference between accurately stating data and condoning racist beliefs.

The black murder rate is about 9 times that of whites. To believe that one of the two groups poses a greater threat than the other is not racist -- it is scientific. The causes of the disparities of the two murder rates can be argued ad infinitum, but the data does not lie. Certainly, the generalization breaks down if you compare one person to another, but taken as a whole, it is an accurate stereotype. The murder rate of men is ten times that of women. It is safe to say that men are more murderous than women. However,if you wanted to argue that melanin in the skin causes murderous rage, then you'd be a racist (as well as an idiot.)

Being aware of statistical likelihoods is normal; having emotional responses to that awareness is unfortunate, but reasonable. I am not arguing that people always rationally refer to data like the murder rate when making decisions of whether or not to cross the street, but if an overly large proportion the murderers you see on the news are black, culture takes its toll.

You continue to say that whites fear criminals, not blacks. In the United States, is a given black person more or less likely to have been convicted of a crime than a white person?

It would be absolutely racist for me to believe that the skin tone of a person CAUSES criminal violence. Whether or not I believe in the correlation has no place on the moral continuum: it simply exists. It is no more racist of me to believe that 2+2=4 than to believe that a black man poses a greater risk of violence than a white man. On the same line of reasoning, it is not sexist of me to believe that a white man poses a greater risk of violence than a black woman, or an albino Inuit woman.

I agree totally that Obama is an idiot for having said what he said, because it's tone-deaf. Saying that it's racist is a dramatic oversimplification of things.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

How is it that Obama is getting the short end of the stick for having to defend his pastor? How many other candidates would even be afforded the opportunity to defend theirs if they talked about black america with such hate? NONE. Their presidential hopes would have ended right then and there.

I have officially stopped posting in this thread as some of your views absolutly baffle me.

I'll try and stick to Hawks threads from now on.

Wow. Just wow.

So now... Obama's presidential hopes lie into how well his pastor speaks about america? We're talking about his pastor. So, now... on the application for president we should have:

1. Age = over 35. (Check)

2. Able to inspire. (Check)

3. Able to lead (Check)

4. Able to keep your pastor's mouth shut at all times.

Let me ask you DSinner.

Do you have a pastor?

Can you control what he says on Sunday?

Would you want a pastor whom you could control what he said on Sunday?

Let me make this statement for you to be mad about while you're no longer posting in this thread..

IF you have a pastor who is a puppet for the people, then your religion is a sham.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Ignoring the context? The context is the same and it is clear as day. He made it crystal clear that a typical white person feels uneasy towards blacks. How can you read anything else into that? It was nearly word for word. Stop over-analyzing and simply read the quote. That's exactly what the OP said, and that's EXACTLY what Obama said. When someone says a race "typically" does something it is called stereotyping.

I guess you're not even arguing what he said, you're implying that it is true. Which is on a completly different level of ignorance as you are someone who obviously steroe-types entire races'. And for the record, I absolutly do not agree with his, your, and Jessies assesment that "most White America fears unknown black men walking towards them". I can not believe that there are people that actually would believe this. Much less admit it. Doesn't shock me the Jessie Jacksons of the world, but you? 2008?

Climb down from your high horse for a minute and be rational! There is a difference between accurately stating data and condoning racist beliefs.

The black murder rate is about 9 times that of whites. To believe that one of the two groups poses a greater threat than the other is not racist -- it is scientific. The causes of the disparities of the two murder rates can be argued ad infinitum, but the data does not lie. Certainly, the generalization breaks down if you compare one person to another, but taken as a whole, it is an accurate stereotype. The murder rate of men is ten times that of women. It is safe to say that men are more murderous than women. However,if you wanted to argue that melanin in the skin causes murderous rage, then you'd be a racist (as well as an idiot.)

Being aware of statistical likelihoods is normal; having emotional responses to that awareness is unfortunate, but reasonable. I am not arguing that people always rationally refer to data like the murder rate when making decisions of whether or not to cross the street, but if an overly large proportion the murderers you see on the news are black, culture takes its toll.

You continue to say that whites fear criminals, not blacks. In the United States, is a given black person more or less likely to have been convicted of a crime than a white person?

It would be absolutely racist for me to believe that the skin tone of a person CAUSES criminal violence. Whether or not I believe in the correlation has no place on the moral continuum: it simply exists. It is no more racist of me to believe that 2+2=4 than to believe that a black man poses a greater risk of violence than a white man. On the same line of reasoning, it is not sexist of me to believe that a white man poses a greater risk of violence than a black woman, or an albino Inuit woman.

I agree totally that Obama is an idiot for having said what he said, because it's tone-deaf. Saying that it's racist is a dramatic oversimplification of things.

In the context used, it's not racism. IN fact, the truth is that it's the truth that America is not ready to deal with obviously.

Until you have been a black man on the street and seen white women walk in fear, you can't understand what Obama is saying.

Until you have been a black man on an elevator and seen people grab their purses and bags, You can't understand what Obama was saying.

Until you have been a black man on the sidewalk and have seen white people locking their car doors... You can't understand what Obama is saying.

So given the opportunity to speak in that context... what's he supposed to say...

"My grandmother has never feared black people and neither have other white women?"

What lie do you want Obama to tell?

I applaud Obama for trying to keep this campaign about the issues and not about race. However, as I said before... People won't let him keep it just about issues.

[Admin]

What about when a black woman sees a black man on the street and clutches her purse? Or when a black man locks his door because of a large group of mexican men near his car when he is getting gas? Or how about an asian woman not getting out of her car to go into a convenience store because of a group of white skater kids? There are countless examples that involve every race so it's not like any particular race faces something that the others haven't seen, certainly not in this day and age. I have been in many parts of the world where I was hated for being white so I definitely know how that feels. It's just dumb for anyone to use the word typical because there is no such thing as typical among a race, sex, etc.

As for the pastor thing, the problem comes from whether the things his pastor said are things that he routinely says or if it was just a one time thing. If it's something that was repeatedly said and Obama still called him his pastor then you have to question his judgment and his real feelings. It's not okay for any religious leader to make racist remarks and anyone who would continue to go to services lead by someone like that should not be President of the US. I'm not saying that is the case with Obama because I just don't know that to be true but if it is true then no way should he be President. The same way that if Hilary or McCain went to a church where the pastor made racist remarks or discriminatory remarks.

All in all though politics and the whole election process are a joke though because you can say or do one stupid thing in the heat of the moment or when you aren't thinking clearly and it can ruin your candidacy even if you are the best candidate.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

I have been in many parts of the world where I was hated for being white so I definitely know how that feels.

Hey, you don't even have to leave the USA to be feared (hated?) for your sex! Speaking purely anecdotally, there seems to be a growing belief that it is not safe to leave a child with any man, but it is okay for a woman to supervise.

[frosgrim]

The hyperbole around the "race" issue is just going to get more and more intense over the next few months.

McCain is going to walking on egg shells with either of the potential Democratic nominees. He will either come off as "racist" or "sexist" to some segment of the population depending on who gets the nod.

In terms of presidential candidates that got dinged for their religion- look at Kennedy, and/or Romney for examples. I am sure there are more. What about if a candidate claimed she or he was athiest?

For me, I would rather hear about:

Reducing presidential powers (return the Constitutional balances)

Protecting civil and legal rights

Getting out of Iraq

Getting the economey moving forward again

Health care

National debt

Education

All of those are extremely important to me.

I would also like to see a science friendly administration that will help fix the government organization where I work.

[Admin]

I can tell you with a fair amount of certainty that we won't be leaving Iraq in our lifetimes. We still have a presence in every country where we have had a major war and Iraq will be no different. While I hope we won't actively be at war there, I don't expect us to be pulling out and I fully expect this conflict will move into Iran in the coming years.

To me the biggest issues are education, health care, reforming the welfare system and national debt.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to matter who is in the white house since Presidents rarely do what they claim they will do while campaigning, for whatever reason.

[frosgrim]

Quote:

---

I can tell you with a fair amount of certainty that we won't be leaving Iraq in our lifetimes. We still have a presence in every country where we have had a major war and Iraq will be no different. While I hope we won't actively be at war there, I don't expect us to be pulling out and I fully expect this conflict will move into Iran in the coming years.

To me the biggest issues are education, health care, reforming the welfare system and national debt.

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to matter who is in the white house since Presidents rarely do what they claim they will do while campaigning, for whatever reason.

I agree we are stuck in Iraq in some capacity for a while (what ever happened to the "No nation building" promise?). Hopefully, we can get out of spending half a trillion dollars a year in Iraq. Getting to some sort of garrison function would help reduce costs and get the economey back in shape.

In terms of Iran. I don't see how we can get involved in a ground war. We have no troops left. A draft would have to be implemented. The consequences of that would be, well, interesting.

[Admin]

Whether war would be a ground war or not would be determined by the circumstances causing us to go to war with them. If they were to do something stupid like attempt to use a nuclear missile then I don't think we would hesitate to launch a nuclear counter attack and not make it a ground war. I hope that we don't go to war with Iran but at this point it sure seems like we are heading down that path.

A Korea type of garrison in Iraq would be nice but it's hard to see us being able to do that when the whole conflict of us being over there is so faith based for them and not a "logic" type of war like we have had in the past.

[frosgrim]

I can't imagine that Iran would do a pre-emptive nuclear strike. Their internal politics I don't think could withstand that, never mind the complete ahnilation of the country. From my understanding, and others may have a ton more information, the president of Iran is on shakey ground with their middle class and their economic conservatives. He may loose their next election. That combined with the U.S. changing presidents, might reduce the saber ratling.

In terms of Iraq, Dol you are a vet, right? If so, would a garrison that essentially defends the southern oil fields work? My thinking is that we try to control the south and let Mosol and Bagdad work themselves out. I just can't see how the US can keep funding the war effort in the current state. I guess the garrison would be a couple of divisions one armored and one air mobile, plus what ever air power is needed. The Navey would have to keep a carrier force in the area as well.

FWIW:

Even tough I am liberal, anyone who attacks us with Nukes needs to be eliminated perminately.