Support NeoGAF

[Amir0x]

It has always been an issue Obama doesn't seem keen to face head-on. He was particularly non-committal about it during his 'race speech':

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

He acknowledges that anger over Affirmative Action is legitimate, but later in the speech explicitly implies that white people need to understand that giving African Americans these ladders will help future generations and benefit all.

If it's a legitimate anger, then why should I be happy if it continues?

For the record: I am firmly against AA, and it is a major issue that I look toward any candidate. Obama has always been for AA, and it's one of the biggest areas I disagree with him on.

 

[XxenobladerxX]

What is AA?

 

[siamesedreamer]

How could he come out against AA? He's the AA candidate.

That's the point though - if a black man can become president, then why is AA needed anymore?

 

[PhoenixDark]

It has always been an issue Obama doesn't seem keen to face head-on. He was particularly non-committal about it during his 'race speech':



He acknowledges that anger over Affirmative Action is legitimate, but later in the speech explicitly implies that white people need to understand that giving African Americans these ladders will help future generations and benefit all.

If it's a legitimate anger, then why should I be happy if it continues?

For the record: I am firmly against AA, and it is a major issue that I look toward any candidate. Obama has always been for AA, and it's one of the biggest areas I disagree with him on.

I'm against AA as well; AA should benefit people of lower income families, and shouldn't be based on race. Of course my parents and many other blacks who grew up during the civil rights era will vehemently disagree

 

[gkryhewy]

What is AA?

Alcoholics Anonymous. We're talking about McCain. Try to keep up.

That's the point though - if a black man can become president, then why is AA needed anymore?

So... people should vote against AA, and for obama to show how it's not needed. Others should vote for AA, and for obama to support a consistent cause.

BRILLIANT!

 

[scorcho]

That's the point though - if a black man can become president, then why is AA needed anymore?

i can't believe this line of logic is even being raised.

 

[XxenobladerxX]

Alcoholics Anonymous. We're talking about McCain. Try to keep up.

AA = affirmative action?

 

[thekad]

i can't believe this line of logic is even being raised.

Everyone knows siamesedreamer hates black people.

jk

Spoiler

not really

 

[gkryhewy]

i can't believe this line of logic is even being raised.

raised by a southern conservative.

 

[PhoenixDark]

That's the point though - if a black man can become president, then why is AA needed anymore?

What you're really saying is that if a black man can become president, racism must not exist, and if it doesn't exist there's no need for AA. Which of course is ludicrous. I don't support AA, but Obama becoming president wouldn't magically break the glass ceiling facing many black professionals in this country. Obama's presidency won't end the old boys network.

 

[npm0925]

I love this. Hardball is still devoting entire segments to Clinton's Bosnia lie.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I love this. Hardball is still devoting entire segments to Clinton's Bosnia lie.

wait they are still on that?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I love this. Hardball is still devoting entire segments to Clinton's Bosnia lie.

You know, I might argue that it's time we move on from this. After all, it was annoying watching all the Reverend Wright stuff getting played over and over again even after it had been thoroughly addressed. So, I would argue that Hillary should get the same pass -- that it's gotten enough airtime, and we should move on.

However, it really bugged me that her final say on the matter: "for the first time in 12 years, I misspoke," was never really scrutinized. It was really disingenuous to let her get away with that excuse when she clearly 'misspoke' several times prior to that. So, I say rock on Hardball.

 

[npm0925]

wait they are still on that?

Mainly because Hillary stupidly brought it up again. They say that 1.8 million people have watched the youtube clip today, showed Leno & Letterman joking about it, and showed the modified footage where she's firing a pistol. It could be her Dukakis tank helmet moment.

 

[Tamanon]

You know, I might argue that it's time we move on from this. After all, it was annoying watching all the Reverend Wright stuff getting played over and over again even after it had been thoroughly addressed. So, I would argue that Hillary should get the same pass -- that it's gotten enough airtime, and we should move on.

However, it really bugged me that her final say on the matter: "for the first time in 12 years, I misspoke," was never really scrutinized. It was really disingenuous to let her get away with that excuse when she clearly 'misspoke' several times prior to that. So, I say rock on Hardball.

I think we were actually done talking about it, but a couple of her aides just had an op-ed piece on it again.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I think we were actually done talking about it, but a couple of her aides just had an op-ed piece on it again.

Well, I'm sure that forum-goers and people in the know continued to discuss it, but I don't really recall a lot of scrutiny in the mainstream media about "Hillary lying about Bosnia AGAIN." Now, I could be wrong about that, but it seemed like a lot of people were just willing to give her the benefit of the doubt after she admitted that she was wrong, and that it might come as a shock to some that she's human.

 

[artful_dodger]

I'm against AA as well; AA should benefit people of lower income families, and shouldn't be based on race. Of course my parents and many other blacks who grew up during the civil rights era will vehemently disagree

I disagree and think all companies should be completely, and 100% racially divided. Problem solved!

 

[Funky Papa]

I found this picture on Politico's main page.

Who is this Carville fellow and why does he creep me out so much.

 

[siamesedreamer]

Everyone knows siamesedreamer hates black people.

jk

Spoiler

not really

Thanks for keeping this out of the gutter.

Now go look in my posting history and show me where I've ever said anything racist. When you come back empty, you should be banned. Seriously, if that post isn't a personal attack, then I don't know what is. Of course it'll be completely ignored because I'm one of the few conservatives on this board.

You've ripped APF for not contributing to this board, yet you come with this? How about you put up or shut up thekad? You made a pretty bold statement. Let's see some proof that I'm a racist.

I don't support AA, but Obama becoming president wouldn't magically break the glass ceiling facing many black professionals in this country.

Wasn't really talking about that, but I can see the argument. FWIW, when I talk about AA, I'm mainly talking about AA in schools - specifically graduate school.

 

[artful_dodger]

you may remember me from such shows as...

 

[tanod]

I found this picture on Politico's main page.

Who is this Carville fellow and why does he creep me out so much.

The Karl Rove of Democratic politics in the 1990s.

 

[ToyMachine228]

The Karl Rove of Democratic politics in the 1990s.

And a Hillary Clinton supporter that has constantly insulted Bill Richardson for endorsing Obama, calling him a sellout, and saying it's a betrayal on par with the actions of Judas against Jesus.

 

[ralexand]

No way Barack loses 30% of AAs due to a stand against affirmative action. In fact its kind of a dirty word among AAs.

 

[APF]

And he is saying that there is no parallel because one is pure preference. The other is sabotage.

That's begging the question of course. Yest even so, your post is inaccurate, since preference leading to a perceived weaker candidate (who BTW could easily have been considered Obama in the early months) ie "sabotage" is still preference.

Everyone knows siamesedreamer hates black people.

jk

Spoiler

not really

That was a pretty douche move; 0 for two there guy.

 

[KRS7]

Voldemort's new disguise?

 

[Particle Physicist]

That's begging the question of course. Yest even so, your post is inaccurate, since preference leading to a perceived weaker candidate (who BTW could easily have been considered Obama in the early months) ie "sabotage" is still preference.

so. what you are saying is that the reasonings are exactly the same thing. and you seem to be trying to hint that they were voting for obama because he was the weaker candidate at that moment. am i getting this right?

 

[Cheebs]

What you're really saying is that if a black man can become president, racism must not exist, and if it doesn't exist there's no need for AA. Which of course is ludicrous. I don't support AA, but Obama becoming president wouldn't magically break the glass ceiling facing many black professionals in this country. Obama's presidency won't end the old boys network.

Yep.

Which is why Obama being our president doesn't solve racism.

If Obama is elected President, he didn't defeat racism. He will have won DESPITE racism. It isn't going away even if we have a black family sitting in our white house for 8 years.

England had a very popular female prime minister. Does that mean that they got rid of all sexual harassment laws in the work place because that glass ceiling was broken? Of course not.

 

[ari]

I love this. Hardball is still devoting entire segments to Clinton's Bosnia lie.

MSNBC is funny that way.

 

[Fragamemnon]

The Karl Rove of Democratic politics in the 1990s.

Karl Rove was way better than Carville ever was. As much demonizing as Rove got from liberals over the years, there's a good chunk of us who would have loved to have someone as versed and proficient at Atwater styled politics as he was.

Random thought: Rove's style of politics has a lot more substance than a lot of people want to admit. As much as people despise nasty negative campaigning, it often has way more substance than candidate image ads and "major policy speeches".

 

[Diablos]

Bahhhhh

I really think the Dems are going to lose. I keep on going back and forth in how confident I am, but right now, I REALLY think they are going to lose.

Of all the elections for them to fuck up, too. 2000 is an election that Gore basically had stolen from him, but he could have probably campaigned a little harder. Still, Florida (and the Supreme Court) favored Bush. 2004, despite how hard people were on Kerry, was 50/50 because people were still scared about terrorism and confused about the war. There is absolutely no reason why they should be having issues this year. And, if Hillary would just accept the fact that Obama has won more primaries and delegates, there WOULD be no issues right now. Instead, they are defeating themselves.

Honestly, Hillary right now is posing a bigger threat to the Democratic party than McCain. Does anyone else realize this? Unreal. Do the Clintons even see this? They're not stupid; they HAVE to know the risks they are taking by going all the way to the convention and letting the superdelegates decide. It's as if they'd rather have McCain win if they can't.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I have to admit, Slate's Hillary Deathwatch has been pretty amusing, and a good round up of news to boot.

http://www.slate.com/id/2187886/

Also: Richardson defends his endorsement of Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...040100885.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&hpid=topnews

Carville and others say that I owe President Clinton's wife my endorsement because he gave me two jobs. Would someone who worked for Carville then owe his wife, Mary Matalin, similar loyalty in her professional pursuits? Do the people now attacking me recall that I ran for president, albeit unsuccessfully, against Sen. Clinton? Was that also an act of disloyalty?

And while I was truly torn for weeks about this decision, and seriously contemplated endorsing Sen. Clinton, I never told anyone, including President Clinton, that I would do so. Those who say I did are misinformed or worse.

As for Mr. Carville's assertions that I did not return President Clinton's calls: I was on vacation in Antigua with my wife for a week and did not receive notice of any calls from the president. I, of course, called Sen. Clinton prior to my endorsement of Sen. Obama. It was a difficult and heated discussion, the details of which I will not share here.

I do not believe that the truth will keep Carville and others from attacking me. I can only say that we need to move on from the politics of personal insult and attacks. That era, personified by Carville and his ilk, has passed and I believe we must end the rancor and partisanship that has mired Washington in gridlock. In my view, Sen. Obama represents our best hope of replacing division with unity. That is why, out of loyalty to my country, I endorse him for president.

 

[APF]

so. what you are saying is that the reasonings are exactly the same thing. and you seem to be trying to hint that they were voting for obama because he was the weaker candidate at that moment. am i getting this right?

I asked to what degree that might be the case, and suggested there's not much distance between the two reasonings for Republicans to vote for either Dem.

 

[Particle Physicist]

I asked to what degree that might be the case, and suggested there's not much distance between the two reasonings for Republicans to vote for either Dem.

and you accuse me of trying too hard?

 

[APF]

and you accuse me of trying too hard?

Your responses here have been less than interesting; you both try too hard and don't try enough.

 

[ari]

Bahhhhh

I really think the Dems are going to lose. I keep on going back and forth in how confident I am, but right now, I REALLY think they are going to lose.

Of all the elections for them to fuck up, too. 2000 is an election that Gore basically had stolen from him, but he could have probably campaigned a little harder. Still, Florida (and the Supreme Court) favored Bush. 2004, despite how hard people were on Kerry, was 50/50 because people were still scared about terrorism and confused about the war. There is absolutely no reason why they should be having issues this year. And, if Hillary would just accept the fact that Obama has won more primaries and delegates, there WOULD be no issues right now. Instead, they are defeating themselves.

Honestly, Hillary right now is posing a bigger threat to the Democratic party than McCain. Does anyone else realize this? Unreal. Do the Clintons even see this? They're not stupid; they HAVE to know the risks they are taking by going all the way to the convention and letting the superdelegates decide. It's as if they'd rather have McCain win if they can't.

Obama actually supports hillary staying in until the convention.

I think it benefits the dems to be honest. Its nothing but Obama and Hillary coverage day in and day out and anything that arisen negatively would've surfaced any how. I think some of you are looking at this a little too hard.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

wait they are still on that?

Wait isn't Fox News still on Wright?

 

[Tamanon]

Wait isn't Fox News still Wright?

Hannity has a rotation going on with Wright, Farrakhan(OHMYGOD OBAMA WAS IN THE MILLION MAN MARCH HE HATES JEWS), Rezko, and Ayers.

 

[Diablos]

ari, that argument is fading fast though. Mario Cuomo made a good point on CNN yesterday. People are getting fed up with this. Every day that passes where Hillary and Obama can't make up their minds is a day they either a lose a vote to someone either staying home on election day, or possibly voting for McCain. The Democrats need to get their shit together, and Hillary needs to drop out. McCain is a formidable candidate and every day that Obama and Hillary bicker at each other is one where McCain can basically do whatever he wants (or, develop one hell of a strategy to win while the Democrats run in circles).

Also, Obama would be an idiot for acting like a crybaby and telling Clinton to go home, as it makes him look weak. Saying she can stay in for as long as she wants makes him look confident.

 

[ari]

Wait isn't Fox News still Wright?

they aren't dedicating FULL segments to it anymore....I think they are aware of overkill.

 

[Particle Physicist]

you both try too hard and don't try enough.

:lol how is that possible?

Your responses here have been less than interesting;

and yet, they somehow get your attention.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Obama actually supports hillary staying in until the convention.

I think it benefits the dems to be honest. Its nothing but Obama and Hillary coverage day in and day out and anything that arisen negatively would've surfaced any how.

Forget the media coverage for a sec.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

Hot off the presses: New numbers from the North Carolina Board of Elections show that, since the first of the year, more than 165,000 new voters have registered to participate in advance of the state's May 6 primary.

That puts the total of new registered voters in the state since January 2007 at almost 522,000. For comparison's sake, that's more than TWICE the amount of new voters registered during the same time period before the 2004 election.

Forty-five percent of the new voters since January are registered as Democrats, with about 30% unaffiliated and 25% Republican. About a third are under 24 years old.

Gary Bartlett, the director of the Board of Elections, says that the number of new registrants is "through the roof" and "absolutely, totally unprecedented."

"2004 was our bellwether year," he said, when previous records were broken by spikes in registration over the summer before the November election.

This cycle's numbers, he projects, will be three to four times higher.

Bartlett has already started instructing county election officials to start reconsidering the number of ballots, volunteers, and voting machines they will need on primary day.

Simlar results in nearly every state. That's the real benefit of the prolonged contest - more people are getting registered and getting involved. I just hope they all participate in the general as well.

 

[ari]

ari, that argument is fading fast though. Mario Cuomo made a good point on CNN yesterday. People are getting fed up with this. Every day that passes where Hillary and Obama can't make up their minds is a day they either a lose a vote to someone either staying home on election day, or possibly voting for McCain.

Its a sure bet that Obama will win the primary anyway, and i highly doubt that passionate democrats such as hillary supporters will vote mccain when the big day comes.

EDIT: I think Ghaleon proved my point.

 

[tanod]

Random thought: Rove's style of politics has a lot more substance than a lot of people want to admit. As much as people despise nasty negative campaigning, it often has way more substance than candidate image ads and "major policy speeches".

I agree. The more I've seen him write about politics outside of office, the more I see the guy's real expertise at it. He wrote an article in Newsweek basically outlining what the Democratic candidates need to do for the convention to make sure it goes there way. He has an amazing command of the nuts and bolts of politics.

Here's my understanding of the Bush White House:

Karl Rove = political genius
Rove + Dick Cheney = evil political genius
Rove + Cheney + George W. Bush = Clusterfuck of bad for America the likes we hopefully won't see ever again.

 

[reilo]

:lol

This Olbermann bit on Hillary's latest endorsement is fucking hilarious.

 

[Tamanon]

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/hillary-clinton-fired-from-wat.php

Wat?

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.

Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.

Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

I wonder if any of that is true at all.

 

[APF]

:lol how is that possible?

You try too hard to attack me, and try too little to have those attacks be of substance.

and yet, they somehow get your attention.

Well, that's the point of trolling me right?

 

[tanod]

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/hillary-clinton-fired-from-wat.php

Wat?

I wonder if any of that is true at all.

Wat?

 

[ari]

:lol

This Olbermann bit on Hillary's latest endorsement is fucking hilarious.

Is it me or does MSNBC is getting a little bit too obvious?

 

[tanod]

Is it me or does MSNBC is getting a little bit too obvious?

One person on MSNBC /= entire MSNBC editorial staff

 

[thekad]

That's begging the question of course. Yest even so, your post is inaccurate, since preference leading to a perceived weaker candidate (who BTW could easily have been considered Obama in the early months) ie "sabotage" is still preference.

Notice my qualifier of "pure."

1) They voted Obama because they simply preferred Obama as a candidate than Hillary. There is nothing to suggest otherwise aside from your own pointless speculation.

2) They are now voting Hillary, not to get a weaker candidate (though that would be a bonus), but to prolong the race so McCain can march to the GE unimpeded for a few months and the Obama/Hillary fight can get uglier. That is sabotage.

That is all I will say on the subject. I think even you could realize the difference.

That was a pretty douche move; 0 for two there guy.

You and siamesedreamer don't fake anger very well.

PS it was a joke