Barack Obama at a fundraiser in Pennsylvania has pointed out the influence of prolonged economic downturn on the psyche of the people. He elaborated, Pennsylvanians in regions that have been hit hard by a 25 year economic downturn were bitter. Here is what Barack Obama said (sorry the audio is poor):
Hillary Clinton took the opportunity and slammed Obama for his words, saying that the people she meets were “resilient” and “rolling up their sleeves” and Obama’s remarks were “elitist”. This is such major bullshit, even in CNN’s Situation Room she was slapped around by all three pundits unanimously.
See CNN:
This is the single most destructive campaigning within a party that I have ever seen. If she really counts on getting another chance in 2012, she’d better think again!
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
175 Comments
April 12, 2008 at 9:21 am
Hi EV – I’m getting tired of the “snippet” media. Just think if the Constitution and laws were applied only by “snippets”. Hillary’s attack strategy is beginning to turn people away. After her campaign’s attack on Governor Bill Richardson, she lost complete credibility from me. If she is the best that the Democratic party can offer, then I’ll be saying goodbye Democrats and hello Progressives.
April 12, 2008 at 9:42 am
Good catch EV and nice to read you here this morning Cat’s….My response….What do I do.?
On the short term gonna go hug the tree’s, plant some berries and run the dog….On the long term….See how it all shake’s out and decide what and who to vote for 6 plus month’s from now. If we are allowed that.
I hope you all are haveing sunshine and happy thought’s today…I know it’s diffacult considering the event’s going on in the world but we need to try….~Blessings~
April 12, 2008 at 10:50 am
Hi Witch1 – It’s a beautiful day here in SE Pennsylvania. I’m taking a break from campaign work and going to do yard work instead. Let the College kids knock on doors and make phone calls. There’s only a 4 point difference in the polls right now, Hillary being in the lead. We have 10 days to go and I think Barack can do it. I am the committee woman for my precinct and I will only be distributing Obama information. If the PA Governor Ed Rendell can endorse, then so can I. Hillary will have to find her own volunteers.
April 12, 2008 at 10:59 am
yea, well, barack let it get to him, somewhat… not too bad:
Obama Concedes Remarks Were Ill Chosen
The Associated Press – 1 hour ago
MUNCIE, Ind. (AP) – Democrat Barack Obama on Saturday conceded that comments he made about bitter working class voters who “cling to guns or religion” were ill chosen, as he tried to stem a burst of complaints that he is condescending.
Obama says he erred in comments on “bitter” voters Reuters
Obama Concedes He Misspoke Washington Post
April 12, 2008 at 11:03 am
[...]
The flap threatened to highlight an Obama Achilles heel _ the image that the Harvard-trained lawyer is arrogant and carries himself with an air of superiority.
The campaign has been quick to react, hoping to defuse any damage caused with working class voters that Obama needs to win over in upcoming primaries in Pennsylvania and Indiana.
“Lately there has been a little typical sort of political flare up because I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois who are bitter,” Obama said Saturday morning at Ball State University. “They are angry. They feel like they have been left behind. They feel like nobody is paying attention to what they’re going through.”
“So I said, well you know, when you’re bitter you turn to what you can count on. So people, they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community. And they get mad about illegal immigrants who are coming over to this country or they get frustrated about you know how things are changing.”
After acknowledging that his previous remarks could have been better phrased, he added:
“The truth is that these traditions that are passed on from generation to generation those are important. That’s what sustains us. But what is absolutely true is that people don’t feel like they are being listened to.
“And so they pray and they count on each other and they count on their families. You know this in your own lives, and what we need is a government that is actually paying attention. Government that is fighting for working people day in and day out making sure that we are trying to allow them to live out the American dream.”
[...]
http://www.wbt.com/news/details.cfm?ap_id=D900DDM80
April 12, 2008 at 11:20 am
notice how hillary is trying so very hard to temper her voice? make it softer and lighter? (from that cnn clip)
sounds FAKE when she does that…
it is amazing how she could twist obama’s words to come up with an “elitist” bent to it… amazing, not surprising…
April 12, 2008 at 11:32 am
I have to admit, it was good to see a little Hillary backlash on CNN over this increasingly ridiculous issue. I missed it originally so I greatly appreciate you posting the video.
I find it very unlikely that all Hillary has found in Pennsylvania are happy people who are not disappointed in their economy or how the government has handled it. Industrial states such as PA have been hit hard over the years with initiatives such as NAFTA and it is understandable if workers there feel frustrated, upset and even bitter about it.
I am ready for a leadership who is not afraid of talking about the actual state of things and taking on the issues. Haven’t we had enough pandering and political safe-speak? If we really want to move forward then we need to agree to be honest with one another. There are people who are disappointed and bitter, but there are ways to address their problems and we can start by having an open dialog about it.
Good post!
April 12, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Sorry, perhaps I need a hearing test, but I heard nothing elitist in Obama’s comments. All I heard was the truth, so does that make the truth elitist? When I close my eyes I swear I can’t tell the difference between Clinton and a Republican. Also telling is the similarity between Clinton and McCain’s comments. How very old school of them. Perhaps, after all, we are who we’ve been waiting for.
April 12, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Hi Jackson, welcome to the Zoo. You have a nice place too. I like the title
April 12, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Amazing how Clinton and McCain will take whatever little foothold they can and run with it. It seems to me that both are having an incredibly difficult time breaking off Obama’s momentum, and they’re worried about it. Anything to vilify him now.
What Obama said was more than true. People, I’m afraid, are just too sensitive these days. It’s as if the slightest thing will set Americans off. Sometimes people just need to see the deeper meaning and not be so shallow in comprehension.
April 12, 2008 at 1:00 pm
lonepair, welcome.
I am afraid, that both McCain and Clinton are doing too much damage here. If it backfires and people start to feel some kind of solidarity with Obama, it’s ok. If they start feeling fed up with the whole caboodle, Obama included, you may end up with McCain as a President (Hillary his running mate on a national reconciliation ticket – *gag*).
April 12, 2008 at 1:42 pm
LOL no, did you hear Barack’s comments about some people being ‘bitter’ and ‘clinging to religions and guns?’ …. If anyone’s bitter and clinging to religion its Barack clinging to his bitter pastor Jeremiah Wright,… and the media has reamed him for his comments,… And how is it okay to say, “Hillary gets slapped around” that’s offensive, please apologize for your choice of words, I would never say that about Barack,.. even though that’s what happened to him after his elitist out of touch comments. Talking about poor people you can tell he’s like reading from cue cards, and poorly. It’s anti-feminist rhetoric like this post that have switched me from supporting Barack back to Hillary.
April 12, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Ed,
It’s anti-feminist rhetoric like this post that have switched me from supporting Barack back to Hillary.
and coming from a woman, too…
April 12, 2008 at 2:50 pm
you democrats have promised to fill every political pot, how are you going to do it? most people are both liberal and conservative on different issues. i am tired of the people on the fringe left and right, i wish there was a candidate that took the middle road. and cnn is the most one sided network there is. obama has been given a free ride by the networks, and mss clinton is getting desperate, grasping at straws to counter obama.
April 12, 2008 at 3:09 pm
obama’s remarks were stupid an not well thought out…
they were elitist, bigotted, and unwarranted…
i was leaning toward him, but after that…he would be the last jerk that gets my support….
what makes this small town man bitter, is arrogant asses like barack, who think they are somehow above the rest of us…
April 12, 2008 at 3:16 pm
1localarky, welcome to TheZoo! I think if you carefully look at what Obama has to say he meets many standards. I am a dyed in the wool leftist and European too, we are the worst, you know
and I see him definitely as a man more in the center, not of your political spectrum, but of your society. And that’s not left, nor right.
April 12, 2008 at 3:18 pm
wordsseldomsaid, welcome to our blog. You are entitled to your views here and we welcome them, but try to keep it civilized, will you? Thanks.
April 12, 2008 at 3:19 pm
If Barack can survive this, it is over. Thanks for sharing the video.
April 12, 2008 at 3:37 pm
fullbodytransplant, good to see you here. It’s amazing, that he was never really attacked for his policies, it was always said he was just words. Au contraire, it’s Clinton and McCain who are fooling around with words here. I think you’re right, if he gets his message from this event out and if the distortion doesn’t stick, yes then he’ll have them both beaten.
April 12, 2008 at 3:43 pm
I find it completely disingenuous and ballsy for any United States Senator, a member of one of the most elite groups in the history of mankind, would call another Senator an “elitist”. McCain, Clinton, and Obama are, by definition, among the elites in this country. So that’s a stupid thing for them to say.
Also, as Toobin pointed out, what Obama said was absolutely true! And that is hardly being discussed in all the “sound bite” politics. As Cafferty nopted, Obama wasn’t blaming these people for their plight, he weas blaming the last few administrations (Clinton’s included) for creating that bitterness by not living up to the promises they made these poeple to get elected.
Finally, isn’t it just possible that Sen Clinton is not talking to the same people that Sen Obama is talking to? Maybe that’s why she isn’t seeing the things he is seeing.
April 12, 2008 at 3:57 pm
If that’s all she’s got left in the tank, the Clinton candidacy is done. Kaput, over, plop.
April 12, 2008 at 4:26 pm
e, i see obama as about left of center as you can get. he a political man, period. these people will say anything to get elected. how are you going to pay for all the programs and pots that you have got to fill when you get elected. more taxes and big government. how much political experience does he have on both local and national level?. what has he done as a us senator? all he has is charisma. a good speaker, he is not god, where are the definate solutions to the problems of the nation? and if you think that the world is a safer world now because of the soviet breakup, you are wrong. have all those nukes been accounted for when the breakup happened. and the spread of nuk– tech to unstable government makes this world a very dangerous place.
April 12, 2008 at 4:35 pm
1localarky says:
and if you think that the world is a safer world now because of the soviet breakup, you are wrong. have all those nukes been accounted for when the breakup happened. and the spread of nuk– tech to unstable government makes this world a very dangerous place.
I couldn’t agree with you more on this. This is what happens if government is for a certain amount of time inexistent or dysfunctional.
I don’t quite understand Americans obsession with “big government” being beelzebub. Us Europeans see that differently. If government fails ( or if you drown it in a bathtub) you’re in trouble. No government, no banking oversight, no rules, see what it brought you? And this is just one instance. And do you have more liberties? Warrantless wiretapping or look at the post above on satellite spying, uh uh. Not more freedom just more risks.
April 12, 2008 at 4:45 pm
WOW, where did wordsseldomsaid, 1localarky come from?
April 12, 2008 at 4:48 pm
hb, hi! Long time no see! Great to have you around again.
April 12, 2008 at 4:53 pm
e, americans are used to doing their own thing, without someone looking over their shoulder. we are a new nation , we do not have the history or the built in culture of a thousand years, being a nation of many backgrounds gives us a feeling of being independent. we used to be self reliant but this is changing, as we start to look at government to take care of us from cradle to grave. all this takes money, i do not want spend more than half my income on taxes to support people that will just let the government take care of them. socialism makes a person , in my book, less hungry to better themselves. if people need help , than give it to them , but those that can work, should work for a living and not live off the system.
April 12, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Hi, HB. They are among our thousands of viewers today.
April 12, 2008 at 4:59 pm
1localarky, I’m in Europe and it’s getting on 2 a.m. I have to get my old behind in bed. Just a thought: Yes all this costs money, but how come that small government USA is next to broke with public debt soaring? I’m not talking about socialism here. I’m talking about good governance of a country, that’s what government is ideally. Nothing to be afraid of.
April 12, 2008 at 4:59 pm
1localarky,
The world you describe no longer exists — and it hasn’t existed for a long time.
There will always be slackers, 1localarky. If people are healthy and educated, I think you’ll find there are fewer and fewer slackers over time.
April 12, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I think you all will enjoy this latest article from Daily Kos, which rips into the media for this farce:
“Barack Obama Shows Disrespect For Rural Americans”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4/12/35450/1226
April 12, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Not being one for mainstream Communist News Network Squabble – won’t go there, however… it is rather elitist to call middle America ‘bitter’ from Hillsborough, one of the most affluent areas in the United States at a fund raiser. As if Obama didn’t already have enough ‘funds’ for this election. Additionally, he was prancing around the Bay Area with quite a snobby ‘holier than thou’ attitude (especially ‘them’ those middle American bitter ones)
April 12, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Hillary couldn’t look any more Republican if she was an elephant.
April 12, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Why don’t Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi DO anything??
April 12, 2008 at 6:09 pm
I live in the rural area surrounding a typical small town in Pennsylvania. Gee… the rod and gun club is a one mile down the road. We use to vote there while club members did target practice with guns and rifles that sounded like rockets right across the road from the voting location. Someone had the polls moved to a better location. And then there is the guy that lives across the road from me. He holds religious festivals at his house in the morning and then it’s target practice with his semi-automatic in the afternoon. Yes, Sunday is “guns and Jesus” day in rural/small town Pennsylvania. I see these people shopping at local stores and they all look so unhappy. Barack Obama was right on with his statements. It’s Hillary that has her head in the sand.
Elitist… who is the elitist here? Let’s compare tax records. Who recently scored $800,000.00 from Columbia? Who lent their campaign $5,000,000.00? Let’s compare checkbooks and then we can discuss who is the elitist.
April 12, 2008 at 6:15 pm
1localarky,
Actually there is no world government as old as 1000 years. Of record, the oldest seems to be England with the start of a Parimentary system in 1215 (Magna Carta) or 1066 (Hastings) when the French arrived. The Americas were settled about 15,000 years ago, so we do have a rich human history. Our oldest European city was settled in 1565 – over 440 years ago. You could cite the Vatican as an ancient force, but it is no more than a church haven until the 1200’s. The Romans established Trier about 2000 years ago in what is now Germany, but it is no longer a Roman settlement just as Mexico City is no longer an Aztec capital.
April 12, 2008 at 7:43 pm
coolsrulepronto – that link to Daily Kos was so funny. Thanks for bringing some humor to something stupid. It’s the “snippet” reporters and their “snippet” news.
April 12, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Talk about distorting a person’s words, Shame on Hillary and McCain.
April 12, 2008 at 8:07 pm
The word “elitist” doesn’t really cover the remarks made by Senator Obama to the social set of San Francisco at an exclusive fundraiser in the Ritz-Carlton on Nob Hill. “Socialist chic” ought to cover it nicely. Like his audience on that day, Barack Obama simply has been overschooled. He obviously thinks that glib stereotyping passes for astute social analysis. It’s reminiscent of the Neo-Marxists of 20-30 years ago, patiently waiting for their intellectual juniors to outgrow religion and tradition and other such pre-scientific superstitions.
Come to think of it, such people have been Barack Obama’s mentors since he was a child. What a damn coincidence!
Still, CNN hasn’t gotten a thing right in this campaign, and that moribund outlet isn’t about to start doing so now.
April 12, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Anyone else here ever seen Peter Sellers in the film “Being There”? I am SO sick of people over-analyzing and reading TOO much into every word uttered..
April 12, 2008 at 8:12 pm
to the one who asked..wordsseldomsaid came from his mommy…,
and hillary is right here…obama needs to retract his babblings…
rural and small town america has ALWAYS! held to guns and religion…that is nothing new….and his remarks aree insulting to all who hld religous views…even when they had jobs so the remark was stupid….there is no pretty name for it…it was misleading, elitist and wrong to say….
and maybe the reason america is against big gov….is it sees what the euro countries and wants no part of that…
who in their right mind would?…i have been there many times and take france for example…
in all my civility must tell you every place there smells like urine…now that is a role model to follow…
April 12, 2008 at 8:17 pm
wordsseldomsaid,
Bigotry is not tolerated on TheZoo. If you continue posting bigoted comments, you will find yourself in the spam bin.
April 12, 2008 at 8:23 pm
I think we should force Congress to pass a law that makes it illegal for candidates to speak at all during an election year. Further, all of their employment, financial, voting, and familial records should be posted on one website – run by a geek in his garage. That website would be the only place to find out information on the candidates and the information wouldn’t be colored by rhetoric or propaganda or lobbyist money or whatever. Just black and white this is what the candidate has done during their time in office – and their life. Pick which one you like best.
My guess is none of this trio would be voted in were that the case. Because none of them have truly done anything to affect change. And what they may have done that they claim affected change is easily offset by their political connections to big business, big money, big insurance, and big clouds of noxious malarkey, which have stopped them from doing anything of real worth.
When one of them passes a bill requiring the performance of solar cells increased to seventy percent efficiency – paid for by big business-, when one of them passes a bill to cut governmental payroll(aka salaries of individuals) by seventy percent, when one of them passes a bill banning the use of rBGH and requiring serious scientific study of GMO’s immediately – and halts the use of GMO’s in food stuffs until the independent studies are reviewed by independent (and non-US) scientific panels. When, when, when… That’s when I’ll vote for a candidate backed by a major party. Until then, I’ll vote for the candidate I think might actually try and change something, instead of pandering to a majority of mundanes.
April 12, 2008 at 8:24 pm
Well, what can I say?
The one who likes to slap
must be aware of being slapped, too.
April 12, 2008 at 8:52 pm
“Bigotry is not tolerated on TheZoo. If you continue posting bigoted comments, you will find yourself in the spam bin.”
you can call the truth bigotted all you wish…but know it will get you nothing but laughter from those who know what i say is true…
obama’s remarks were bigotted…
let me see….a few weeks ago, he gave us a spell on how we must …understand…black anger…
now small town america is bitter…
so the black man is angry and the poor rural white man is bitter, but obama walks around smiling…
sorry if the truth bothers you…
April 12, 2008 at 8:56 pm
ps…you know?..the way he walks around accusing all others of anger and bitterness…sounds like he might be struggling wiht that himself…
just something to think about…
April 12, 2008 at 9:08 pm
You can hide behind “truth,” but you are still a bigot. Laugh all you want with your bigoted friends.
Last warning.
April 12, 2008 at 9:37 pm
I see NOTHING bigoted in these posts of wordsseldomsaid, unless “bigotry” is taken to mean anything Zooey happens to find offensive, or with which Zooey happens to disagree defenselessly. If that’s what goes, the Zoo will become a WordPress pariah in short order.
Senator Obama’s remarks about religion alone are indeed offensive and quite hurtful, and he made them on more than one occasion. His supercilious ideas are also facile archaisms and rather unimportant as such, but that anyone would defend them IS both important and deeply disturbing, if not disturbed.
April 12, 2008 at 9:40 pm
I guess if that’s how y’all would like to represent yourselves and your views, it’s best to allow you to shine the light on it.
Proceed…
Neither one of you is a bigot….as far as I know.
April 12, 2008 at 9:55 pm
thanks hugo…look zooey…here is what i am saying…i took this from another blog…
but first,..don’t get me wrong…i love obama, but he really needs to say he misspoke, …if he has said it fine, but his remarks are wrong…they seem to imply he is attacking religion…but only the poor man’s religion…
but it is stuff like this that make me angry…look at this…
here is what hillary’s chief stratagist (goeffry garrin)said…
“* Said that while Hillary’s reputation “isn’t going to get any worse,” Obama’s “isn’t going to get any better”"
wow and that is all we have to offer…one who can do no worse and one who can do no better…
sheesh…where is kuchinich or whatever his name was…?…this is sickening…don’t you think it is crazy to have to settle for one who can’t get any worse and one who can’t do any better?…
is that all the party can offer?…
April 12, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Both the democrats and republicans have been bought out by special interests. Support Cindy Sheehan for congress.
http://cindyforcongress.org. I’ve come up with a May 11th money bomb for her campaign. I picked the 11th because September the 11th is the excuse that the Bush administration uses to violate the American people’s rights.
April 12, 2008 at 10:16 pm
wordsseldomsaid,
Thanks for clearing that up. I really didn’t think that was the direction you were going.
I agree. It’s despicable the way the candidates are pushed on us. We’re forced into choosing the lesser of two evils, or voting against someone.
It’s all the party will offer at this time, and there is zero time to do anything about a third party. The whole system is extremely frustrating. The way Kucinich, and other “lesser” candidates, were treated in the “debates” was unforgivable.
April 12, 2008 at 10:18 pm
I like Obama too, and wish him well. (I knew him briefly in college.) But he unmistakably referred to religious conviction as something with which he had empathy—I mean, think about that, Zooey!—exactly as though it were Depression Eating Disorder: a misguided but understandable crutch. This is the spiritual son of Rev. Jeremiah Wright?
No tinkering with recontextualization is going to undo American voters in Pennsylvania and Indiana and 48 other states having stared at their screens or read at their breakfast tables that the man chose to list religious psychopathy between violence and xenophobia as the resort of the “bitter”. I wish I were in touch with the man, because I’d tell him the same thing wordsseldomsaid is trying to get across: he’s got to retract. You just can’t paint lipstick on that pig of a speech.
April 12, 2008 at 10:23 pm
My interpretation of Obama saying he has “empathy” with those who have religious conviction, means that he has religious conviction as well.
The man didn’t say “sympathy,” he said “empathy.” Understanding the feeling, not feeling sorry for those who have it.
I think the man made himself clear — the rest is spin.
April 12, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Actually he didn’t say “empathy”, he evinced empathy, and that’s the problem that others are calling “elitist”—by which I think they mean simply condescending, only saying so wouldn’t fit into the Right-wing “elitist” narrative.
He’s clearly trying to explain the silly Little People to the sophisticated Big People on Nob Hill. That he empathizes with them means that he stands outside them, and tries to see things through their eyes and to serve as interlocutor to the rarified Bay Area mavens who know not of guns, church and fear of outsiders.
I’m not trying to spin it, Zooey, just trying to explain how it’s coming across to people who play the tape and read the texts. (Both the California texts and the Indiana texts, as evidently he was working from an evolving stump spiel as they all must do who have to give campaign talks several times daily for well over a year.)
To the extent that I’m biased myself, I’d make two disclaimers (I’m an anthro; we do that): I cringed in disbelief, and wished I hadn’t heard him acting so pretentious at the expense of others, as I’d prefer to think it beneath him; I’ve been listening for traces of the old ’80s-era Neo-Marxist tropes, so this extended pericope of his fit immediately into my thinking along those lines. Immediately, and also regrettably.
As I type this, he’s on air Standing Fast on That Which Is Beside the Point—in this case, the word “bitter”—so as to ignore the anti-religious bigotry and Second Amendment implications of his recent talks. He’s digging himself deeper. He’s got to stop, fix it, and move on.
I want the old Obama back!
April 12, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I believe in giving candidates the benefit of the doubt considering the number of speeches they give. But this speech by Obama really pushes the limits of a poor choice of words. He was stating the theory that people always need a scapegoat to explain their failures. That’s not the same as being frustrated with government policies that are hurting our economy and causing loss of jobs. I like most of what I’ve heard from Obama, but this is troubling. He seems to have a rather low opinion of the ability of the average American to understand and deal with the forces that shape our lives.
April 12, 2008 at 11:16 pm
“He’s got to stop, fix it, and move on.
I want the old Obama back!”
amen and well said..my feelings exactly…that whole post was…great hugo!…
April 12, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Everytime Hillary does this, she’s digging her own grave a little deeper
April 12, 2008 at 11:32 pm
“Thanks for clearing that up. I really didn’t think that was the direction you were going.”
i know zooey …and i apologize because i do do that on purpose…(bwahahahaha…,i said do do)…
anyway…
i knew you would warm up to me after you got to know me better…big smile!…and i am glad we can find some agreement….
ps…my name is seldom, so if you want you can call me that…it is shorter than wordsseldomsaid or my other name, theseldomscene…
April 13, 2008 at 1:04 am
wss or tss (Thank God you did not choose aseldomselection as your handle),
We are a rowdy crowd with native opinions. We are distressed at the way that the current campaign is going. The progressive party should never pursue self-destruction as a policy. The current primaries may effect just that.
April 13, 2008 at 2:17 am
I would rather have the guy who told the truth than a person who hijacked it for her own personal gain, of course while she was “under sniper fire”.
April 13, 2008 at 3:34 am
Clinton is actually the ONLY DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE. Obama is masked Republican who tries hard to destroy the party. See what damage has he done!
April 13, 2008 at 3:59 am
Oh.We are all on the “Hillary should quit” bandwagon now?And the self destructing Democrat party rhetoric all because they(the news media) tell us we should be.
Ask yourself this,how else but with media sources do we form our political opinion?
How can we personally judge the situation when we no nothing but what they tell us of?
Oh yeah Obama is also a space alien!
April 13, 2008 at 4:24 am
I am very sorry I missed the reaction to Hilary’s pablum. Love it when that Jack guy puts the wood to some deserving politician. Look, we wind up electing the best liar. Looks like Hilary just isn’t the best liar this time around.
April 13, 2008 at 5:15 am
[...] about how divisive this democratic primary is becoming. The full post with some nice video is here. Once again, Obama is doing a good job of actually telling the truth about the situation. Well, [...]
April 13, 2008 at 5:22 am
Wayne A. Schneider says:
I find it completely disingenuous and ballsy for any United States Senator, a member of one of the most elite groups in the history of mankind, would call another Senator an “elitist”. McCain, Clinton, and Obama are, by definition, among the elites in this country. So that’s a stupid thing for them to say.
Not only that, but after all the times that Hillary has tried to shove things down the American peoples throats because she thinks she knows better. Before Iowa she was resolute on staying in Iraq. It wasn’t until she had her butt handed to her that she realized just how out of touch she was. And McCain? HELLO, son of a 4-star admiral, grandson for a 4-star admiral, attended USNA? Nope, he’s never been elite. He is getting senile or careless though with all his confusion over Sunni vs. Shiite lately.
April 13, 2008 at 5:27 am
Hi dw, welcome to The Zoo. Clinton would do and say anything to keep in the race. Look how she drinks beer, has pizza, drinks shots of whiskey and brags about hunting. Isn’t that a bit emarrassing? It reminds me of a docu soap thing we had on tv here. “I’m a celeb – get me out of here” In the latest installment one of them ate kangaroos testicles just to stay in the race.
April 13, 2008 at 7:11 am
Hillary deserved it. She is getting a mandate from the people to remain a US Senator, but she doesn’t get it yet.
Vote Obama!
April 13, 2008 at 7:18 am
She lied to us New Yorkers who gave her a second term in the Senate. She said she was not planning to run for the White House and that she wanted to serve the people of New York. So we gave her that chance. She won, and then relatively quickly, she made it known she would be running for president. She lied.
And I bet she doesn’t like to talk about Amy Poehler’s great impersonation of her telling Chris Matthews, “How the F%$K could anyone NOT know I was runing for president???”
April 13, 2008 at 8:12 am
Saw this post and followed it + comments (had heard the controversy, but hadn’t had a chance to see video, etc.).
Re: wordsseldomsaid,
Bigotry is not tolerated on TheZoo. If you continue posting bigoted comments, you will find yourself in the spam bin.
I found it amusing that all sorts of bigotry seemed to be tolerated from the majority opinion, but any dissenting voice seemed to be slapped down as quickly as Ms. Clinton.
In my opinion (and yes, I’m braced for the inevitable slap down from dissenters, as that seems to the the only way some people can feel good about their beliefs), all three candidates need a slap down, a wake-up call, and a constituency that learns to look at facts, explore options, and think for themselves instead of slavishly (good heavens! now I’m invoking slavery! slap me down! wait–I also mentioned heaven! slap me down again for good measure!).
Obama can’t do what he promises. Clinton can’t do what she promises. McCain can’t do what he promises. Perhaps, as voters, we have a responsibility to consider the nature of promises, the nature of news snippets, and our own very human natures (years of enlightenment not withstanding) that cause us to react as we do to dissenting opionions.
April 13, 2008 at 8:15 am
locavore4lore, I don’t agree with all you said, but I like your style! Welcome to TheZoo.
April 13, 2008 at 8:16 am
Whoops! Slap me down for leaving out the completing thought of 2nd paragraph from end. Should have read (following parenthetical sidebar) “slavishly following the tide of enthusiasm in either direction.”
April 13, 2008 at 8:23 am
Maybe locavore4lore likes the “slap down?”
April 13, 2008 at 8:23 am
locavore4lore,
In truth, no presidential candidate can do any of the things he or she promises, because we do not live in a dictatorship (despite what the current occupant of the WH believes). If we elect a president from one party and give control of the Congress to the other, very little of what that presidential candidate said on the campaign trail will have any meaning, because the opposition party will block those intiatives just for the sake of blocking them. Then they’ll claim the president is ineffective and you should vote for the other party, even though the reason the president failed to do what the people wanted was the opposition party’s resistance to the will of the people.
April 13, 2008 at 8:40 am
Since when is bitterness a character defect? I’m bitter and I have a JOB. I can only imagine how bitter I’d be if my job were shipped overseas.
April 13, 2008 at 8:56 am
bitterness is good, it’s what you are when you do reality checks, of course this is not the case for WASP priviliged like the Clintons and McCains. They prefer smiling happy people
April 13, 2008 at 9:00 am
Billary ain’t gonna be the Commander-in-Chief…
We need Change, its very important. Ron Paul offered this change. But now, its all up to Obama…
April 13, 2008 at 9:10 am
Commentspage is confused. Democrats and Republican are the same kinds of people, only with different stated “wedge issues.” They are false opposites. Don’t fall for it.
“Extreme rightwing” and “extreme leftwing” people are all FASCISTS. Different talking points, same result: Big Government and micromanagement in a culture of fear. Remember, Hitler was a socialist, just like Stalin and Mussolini. Hitler and Stalin were set up as false opposites too since there really isn’t much distance between National Socialism and World Communism. One is the pit stop on the way to the other.
Big Government can’t help but be evil because Big Government Types are CONTROL FREAKS (warrantless wiretapping, political persecutions, etc.).
The “nanny” of the Nanny State is huge, Germanic, authoritarian and has a name like Helga or . . . Hillary or . . . something. Even with the best of intentions Helga is 100% certain she knows better. The very premise is INSULTING. Thanks but no thanks.
Obama was never my first choice (I liked Kucinich and Paul, the only honest legislators inside the D.C. beltway), and Obama lost my vote for good when he proposed legislation to mandate tribute payments to the U.N. for global governance. Of the three European fascist dictators Obama is most like Mussolini. Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of his Obamba’s main controllers/supporters/advisors, which says a LOT.
It all comes down to a (Straussian) lack of faith in the ordinary human. Given viable and affordable choices people around the world tend to do right by their families and their communities, their countries, and yay, even the world as we become more and more wired/connected. Americans especially generous and open at both the local and international levels.
Bottom line: We don’t need no stinkin’ fascist police state. We don’t need nannies. We don’t need Big Brother. We don’t want “global governance” (code for the Orwellian New World Order). We don’t need no stinkin’ GLOBAL TAX. Enslaving (financially or otherwise) an entire population of decent people to control a relative handful of sociopathic outliers is inefficient, ineffective, and deadly (it always leads to war, no exceptions so far in history). Let the states decide how to deal with its outliers and leave everyone else alone.
Cheezuz. I swear, I’m writing in Ron Paul’s name in November or staying home.
April 13, 2008 at 9:18 am
Obama could have milked Hillary’s outright fabrication of her Bosnia “adventure” for all it was worth. He did not.
Hillary took the single word “bitter”, out of context and gave HER interpretation of what he meant.
I think that Hillary would be a better choice tham McCain but her campaign tactics disgust me.
April 13, 2008 at 10:01 am
They also trounced on John McCain.
I think that it is true that the people are fed up.
I mean, think about it: the government bails out Bear Stearns because of an economic “recession” (ooooh – the r word of death! LOL) and they don’t bail out the people that are actually affected by the crisis in a personal way?
Where are the jobs in small town America? Oh, yeah I forgot….they went to India…..
April 13, 2008 at 10:02 am
F**k India…
April 13, 2008 at 10:19 am
locavore4lore,
I couldn’t agree very much more, especially with your warning that there are not shortcuts for voters; we have to do our homework and hold the candidates’ feet to the fire—call them out, as it were. (We have a responsibility not only to each other to do that, but to the rest of the world too.)
As best I can tell all three candidates are liars. Hillary’s going to be the one left without a seat the next time the music stops, if only because so few people any longer believe a thing she says. Still, I’d hate to see the office go to the one who’s the best liar. How awful. (And how media-made can our minds be, to hang the thing on such a stylistic, voyeuristic and cynically counterproductive criterion?)
The People—Left, Right and Center—are as best I can tell completely sick of lies. The media likes to trot out the old chestnut about voters being turned off by negative campaigning, but as you say we should want more information, not less, even if it’s ugly and even if we have to dig it out ourselves. No, it’s the lying that turns people off. Politicians, like attorneys, prevaricate professionally and competitively. So what. That doesn’t change the fact that voters just now are not in the mood to humor any candidate who is not what she says she is. They demand a straight shooter—whether the demand is reasonable or not. So instead of electing the best liar, I think they’ll elect the one who lies the least.
April 13, 2008 at 10:22 am
For those who don’t like Obama for saying people were bitter, don’t vote for him. If you already voted in the primaries, oh well. All I can say is that if people in the rust belt aren’t bitter, then they aren’t paying attention.
If we are going to elect a leader based on splitting hairs of every speech we should just elect a hologram.
People need to make us their own minds. And each candidate defining the words of the other candidate is rather self serving. Maybe people should make up their own minds about how they feel on each issue instead of demaning that the candidate meet their every need.
April 13, 2008 at 10:25 am
Who doesn’t expect the candidates to lie? Are we that naive as a nation? All I ask is that they be aware of current technologies and not insult my intelligence by rewriting history.
April 13, 2008 at 10:35 am
Shayne, who here has said that politicians don’t lie? Why weave a straw extreme? And who said that the People are naive? And what makes you think that what’s offensive about Sen. Obama’s Nob Hill remarks is preeminently his use of the word “bitter”? Good grief. Have you been paying attention?
In his attempt at damage control a week after his Ritz-Carlton remarks, Sen. Obama did indeed pretend that it was his use of the word “bitter” which ignited the firestorm, but his pretense to that effect won’t wash. Too many voters have had plenty of time both to hear and to read his actual remarks, which are notable not so much for their diagnosis of bitterness as for their assertion that the bitterness leads smalltown bitter folk to take refuge in the triple pathologies of violence, religion and xenophobia.
Sorry, but that’s not only stupid and ill-advised, it’s a slap in the faces of a lot of us who vote.
April 13, 2008 at 10:39 am
Hugo, if that’s how you choose to interpret his comments that’s fine. I just don’t need people telling me how to interpret them. That’s what I’m tired of hearing.
April 13, 2008 at 10:39 am
hughvic is spoiling for a fight in his quest to be “right.”
You have your view on Obama’s use of the word “bitter,” and you’re entitled to it.
April 13, 2008 at 10:40 am
Jinx, Shayne!!
April 13, 2008 at 10:55 am
What weird tactics! And why be tactical at all? Must you zookeepers always lean on the ad hominem?
I don’t give a damn about his use of the word bitter. I care about your bizarre insistence that the media-generated sideshow about “bitterness” is what’s really objectionable about Sen. Obama’s insults and condescensions. And I’m not interested in a fight nor in persuasion (versus simple conversation and expression)—I just think that people should read or listen to what Barack had to say before they opine on what he had to say, which included the following controversial observations:
“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.”
You say that I have my idiosyncratic way of “choosing” to “interpret” these remarks. Now please tell us what your idiosyncratic, chosen interpretation of these remarks is. (And as far as I’m concerned, ignore the word “bitter” if you like.) Do tell us your opinion, please. “You’re entitled to it.”
April 13, 2008 at 1:39 pm
bitter? not bitter? who cares?
the underlying premise of the thing is that people are tired, fed up and just looking for a way out of this pit that the administration has thrown us in. We gave the Bush Admin some rope, and they hung all of us with it.
Seems to me that the Dems have a choice between two bowls of sh*t and the only difference is the smell.
April 13, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Three bowls actually including McCain.
April 13, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Exactly.
April 13, 2008 at 3:39 pm
this is a great blog anyway (90 comments and most of them in-depth)…
April 13, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Thank you, Marco Ciaccia.
April 13, 2008 at 5:29 pm
HUGO FOR PRESIDENT!!!..HUGO FOR PRESIDENT!!!…
and i think it is a horrible thing for people to say, just accept a lie and a liar and know that is the best we have…NO IT IS NOT…
HUGO FOR PRESIDENT!!!…
and there is no way to interprete what obama said except for how he said it…it was an assualt on all the poor who hold to religious views and there is NO way there could be another interpretation for it imo…don’t get me wrong…
i do appreciate the damage control i see his supporters here trying to give him…
and one last thing…
HUGO FoR PRESIDENT!!!….
April 13, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Are you going to tell us that out of the three candidates you believe Obama is the biggest liar? That is incredible.
April 13, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Give it a rest, wordseldomsaid.
April 13, 2008 at 6:10 pm
can you point out where that was said, or are you only capable of disingenuous remarks that hold no truth..and somehow think that is intellectual?…
April 13, 2008 at 6:12 pm
“Give it a rest, wordseldomsaid.”
n0o probelm…LOLOLOLOL…..
April 13, 2008 at 6:12 pm
wordseldomsaid,
What is your point? What, exactly, are you trying to get across — in clearly understandable english, please.
April 13, 2008 at 6:16 pm
but one last thing…this will not just go away no matter how far in the sand some here want to stick their own heaeds and scream bigot or any other name against those who point out the statement was dumb and unfounded..
the republicans WILL capitalize off of the statement and they my dear zooey, will NOT give it a rest no matter what silly names others wish to hurl…
obama has not lost yet, but he needs to really back track on this in more of a way than he is doing…
now…i am resting…
April 13, 2008 at 6:17 pm
How come nobody’s offered their quaint and chosen interpretation of Mr. Obama’s remarks upon guns and religion? Why foreclose further discussion until that at least someone has kicked in an opinion on the subject of what Obama actually said that caused such consternation?
April 13, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Different language? Or just a spelling problem..
April 13, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Who cares, muse?
April 13, 2008 at 6:22 pm
As I was saying, “What weird tactics! And why be tactical at all? Must you zookeepers always lean on the ad hominem?”
April 13, 2008 at 6:22 pm
hughvic,
Maybe if you were less condescending people would be interested in engaging you in a discussion.
I listened to the video speech — as a whole — and I found nothing to be offended about. It couldn’t hurt for Obama to clarify what he was trying to say, but I wasn’t offended in the slightest — and I live in frickin’ Idaho, where we all luvs us some guns and religion, and ain’t got no jobs.
Nitpick away, hughvic. We’re just getting the info out there.
April 13, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Who’s calling you names, hughvic?
April 13, 2008 at 6:28 pm
maybe hillary c. and the current v.p. can go hunting together…
Stay on topic, or feel free to wander off. Admin
April 13, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Weird tactics? What are you talking about??
If you have a problem with what Barack Obama said, then it is of course, your problem.
I have no problem with what he said. I AM sick to death of every single word being over-analyzed and framed by whomever wants to attack. That, by all sides.
Its called politics.
Most people are smart enough to hear someone speak and come to their own conclusions about what they are trying to say. Most people..
Seems to me Hillary Clinton is scraping the bottom of the barrel this weekend, and still coming up empty.
Its called desperate measures.
April 13, 2008 at 6:33 pm
You’re not getting the “info” out there; you’ve been rather artlesslessly avoiding the “info” that Senator Obama asserted that small-town Americans embittered by job loss “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” Of COURSE you “found nothing to be offended about”—and had you paid $2,300 to hear Obama at the Ritz you probably wouldn’t even have noticed his chosen interpretation of small-town church-going—because his is the same as YOUR belief. Why then do you not come out and say so?
Do you really take the position that this blog exists merely to disseminate information? Do you then consider this site a part of the new press? Because if you are a part of the press, then you are entitled to special protections under the U.S. Constitution, and also are beholden to particular responsibilities. Is mere “info” your mission? Is that why you eschew open opinion and analysis of the news of the day? Or do you choose to edit our world for us?
“Nitpick”? Those wise cracks on Nob Hill have vouchesafed the Pennsylvania Primary to the Clintons. That’s nitpicking, is it?
April 13, 2008 at 6:35 pm
it is not that simple…it is not hugo’s problem, or my problem, or your problem…but after this demo. run is over, if obama is facing the re-pubic-ans(oh no, now that was bigotted!)..it will be his problem…
those guys will not stop and it will be everywhere…
April 13, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Now Zooey, where did you learn that disputatum ad hominem means name-calling?
April 13, 2008 at 6:37 pm
hughvic,
This particular post has had over 15,000 views since it was posted. I’d say we’re getting the word out there.
You do love to build a fucking strawman. Get over yourself, and go start your own blog.
April 13, 2008 at 6:39 pm
please do start your own blog hugo…and drop me a link for it…
April 13, 2008 at 6:39 pm
hughvic,
Since your first post here, you’ve been attempting to insult my intelligence. What’s your problem? Don’t like girls? Afraid of girls?
Don’t like me? Don’t like my blog? GTFO.
April 13, 2008 at 6:46 pm
oh because hugo disagee with you, he is a misogynist…
far out…it seems anyone who disagrees with you gets called names or slandered with question that contain less than honest implications….
April 13, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I don’t give a shit if hughvic disagrees with me. He is all worried about the ad hominem attack, but doesn’t mind engaging in the same himself.
Get back on topic. If you can’t do that, get lost.
April 13, 2008 at 6:51 pm
It would be easy to peg Hugo and WSS as typical Clintonistas. But I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt that they’re just looking for a fight. FYI, this isn’t the place we choose to do battle. But Hugo if you want to start that kind of site we’d be happy to engage you there when we’re in the mood.
April 13, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Thanks, Shayne. I have to go study.
April 13, 2008 at 6:55 pm
oh what about getting back on topic?…bwahahahaha…
just like hugo said…
April 13, 2008 at 6:57 pm
“It would be easy to peg Hugo and WSS as typical Clintonistas”
of course it would be…i mean, it has been shown time and again those here who are disagreed with can do is call names…then scream get on topic..
that would be nothing new…..
Trolling. Continue, and you will be spammed.
April 13, 2008 at 6:59 pm
I’d be curious to know exactly what Obama said that wasn’t true? What was it that was so terribly offensive or ‘elitist’? Will he be accused of being elitist ANY TIME he tries to bring up issues that affect most Americans who aren’t rich? And who is Hillary to sling that arrow? She is a hell of a lot more ‘elite’ than Obama..
I grew up in one of those small towns. I knew exactly what he was talking about. I wasn’t offended by him just pointing out things that are there. Just like race issues, everyone’s aware of the differences and the strong feelings that go along, but are uncomfortable talking about them.
Race and class issues (and differences) are things EVERYONE is aware of but nobody deals with out in the open in a straightforward manner.
Nothing in this country will change for the better until people are ready to acknowledge that they exist and decide to discuss them out in the open.
I admire Obama for being willing to tackle the more difficult issues holding this country back.
It is like the hungry and the poor of this country. People are more comfortable focusing on their own lives, pretending they don’t exist. They do, and something needs to be done to counter the disparity that creates the problem in the first place, and is growing at such a rapid rate. The more the number of people that are now falling into that ‘bracket’ grow, the more anger and bitterness that will grow.
It needs to be dealt with in a real way, not shoved under the carpet again, or have someone slap another tiny bandaid on a gaping wound.
There are lots of people in this country, with lots of different experiences or “realities’ of what it is to live in this country as an America. The experiences are definitely not all the same, as all the opportunities are not the same.
April 13, 2008 at 7:00 pm
And please lose the labels.. They are tiresome.
April 13, 2008 at 7:04 pm
whatever?…obama’s offensive remarks were pointed out and the ways as to how they are offensive….
yes there are many with different experiences…
which in itself shows obama’s remarks to be bigotted as he classified all small america in one lump…
so your points do nothing but point out the silliness in his statement…so…
thanks…
April 13, 2008 at 7:07 pm
“Trolling. Continue, and you will be spammed.”
if the truth hurts that bad…go for it…
You haven’t come near the truth. Second warning. Admin
April 13, 2008 at 7:07 pm
That’s a completely ridiculous statement, wordseldomsaid. You’re classifying all of America in one lump. You wouldn’t vote for Obama anyway, right?
April 13, 2008 at 7:12 pm
i am…?..how so?…i do not hold to religion because of unemployment but i am from a small town…
i do not even own a gun, though i think it is ok if a law abiding citizen does…
and all my neighbors have jobs….
and of course i know that is not the case for everyone…but he is the one who made no distictions….
and just so you know…no i would not vote for him, or anyone running, but i am one of the first ones to speak out that he should run for the oval office….before he decided to do so….
April 13, 2008 at 7:13 pm
“You haven’t come near the truth. Second warning. Admin”
“what is truth?”…pontius pilate..
April 13, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Zooey you couldn’t be more mistaken. Really. I haven’t intended to insult you in this matter; I’ve been trying right along to see what you think about the remarks that have dominated the headlines for two days running. Not about what we think about what Barack says about what Hillary says she thinks about Barack’s San Francisco remarks; what YOU zookeepers think about those remarks. You folks I know to be progressives whose views on religion differ from those imputed by the MSM to “small-town America” (whatever that is). I taught at church in a small town in Georgia this morning, so hearing what y’all think about this is interesting to me, and I thought it’d be informative too.
Why would you make me out to be a misogynist, Zooey? Where here do you find an ad hominem attack on you? (Not that even that necessarily would be misogynistic.) And why won’t you opine on those remarks which you don’t even find noticeable but which already have in all likelihood vouchesafed Pennsylvania to the Clintons? I mean seriously, why? I thought you’d all have lots of things, including fresh things, to say about it.
I warned you folks that it was going to get ugly with Barack because of his consistently socialist tutelage. You thought I was trying to tear the guy down. I wasn’t. It was merely trying to say that it’s going to get nasty and then nastier as he trots out the old tropes, so that supporters had best be prepared. As wordsseldomsaid points out, the nastiness has begun and it’s nobody’s fault but Barack’s for playing the religionist when it suits him and the anti-religionist when he’s among the social set of Bay Area progressives. How can you NOT have strong feelings about this? You’re not a coward. This truly baffles me.
You may find his remarks just grand, but Mr. Obama’s finding that the opium of the masses is a bitter pill indeed. And wait till we hear from the Clinton shop this very week. That would be the “nastier” part.
I was merely seeking opinions, Zooey.
April 13, 2008 at 7:16 pm
See? Now I’m insulted because you failed to make those distinctions in your previous posts. You should have clarified immediately, maybe even apologize. Also, you should have an attorney follow you around at all times with a release form, just in case you fail AGAIN to make certain distinctions when you speak.
Let me guess, you’re not going to vote for “anyone running” because you’re not even in this country, right?
April 13, 2008 at 7:16 pm
which in itself shows obama’s remarks to be bigotted as he classified all small america in one lump…
Sorry, words, but if that’s what you believe you heard him say, then may I suggest you go back and listen again more carefully. He was not referring to “all small america”, he was specifically refwerring to the small towns where the jobs dried up 25 years or so ago and never came back, and the people in those towns were beginning to feel bitter because administration after administration (including the Clintons and the Bushes), made promises to get their votes, and never did enough to help bring the jobs back. It was understandable, he was saying, why some of those people would cling to their guns or religion or xenophobia (my word, not his) as a touchstone.
But he was not describing all of small town America like that, and if you believe that, then perhaps your news sources were mistaken.
April 13, 2008 at 7:20 pm
Hugo
April 13, 2008 at 6:36 pm · Edit
Now Zooey, where did you learn that disputatum ad hominem means name-calling?
This is seeking an opinion? Bullshit.
April 13, 2008 at 7:21 pm
“Let me guess, you’re not going to vote for “anyone running” because you’re not even in this country, right?”
no that is incorrect zooey….i am in this country…
April 13, 2008 at 7:32 pm
You’re not going to vote for anyone but you are so concerned about who others are going to vote for? I’m beginning to think you and Hugo are just two folks that we came here to get away from.
April 13, 2008 at 7:33 pm
“Sorry, words, but if that’s what you believe you heard him say, then may I suggest you go back and listen again more carefully. He was not referring to “all small america”, he was specifically refwerring to the small towns where the jobs dried up 25 years or so ago and never came back, and the people in those towns were beginning to feel bitter because administration after administration (including the Clintons and the Bushes), made promises to get their votes, and never did enough to help bring the jobs back.”
well wayne, what do you think makes him capable of making such a judgement, even if he was only pointing ot those whose jobs ever came back…?…
it was over the top to say such as he did, and it will not help him in the least….
April 13, 2008 at 7:36 pm
“You’re not going to vote for anyone but you are so concerned about who others are going to vote for? I’m beginning to think you and Hugo are just two folks that we came here to get away from.”
fine by me..think what you wish….lololol….
but we were on topic again and you are wanting to drag us off of it to discuss me and hugo…
but don’t worry…i will take the blame for it..big smile!…
April 13, 2008 at 7:37 pm
This is exhausting, Zooey, and I’ll leave you alone and let you study if you don’t want to opine, but you know very well that my 6:36 was in response to your loaded question to the effect that I was complaining of being called names here. “Who’s calling you names, hughvic?” Only you. And I don’t care, either.
I just want to know what you make of Barack’s changing stripes on matters religious and what you think his doing so will and will not cause to happen in the campaign and how he can put his best foot forward. There’s a tremendous shitstorm coming right soon, and I’m anxious about it. I do wish the man and his family well.
And I’ve said repeatedly that I don’t care if he’s an atheist as long as he identifies as one. Neither do I care if he’s an amateur liberation theologian, as long as he doesn’t identify himself as a devout man one month and a pathologist of the religious phenomenon the next. And the dichotomies go on and on like that, as I’m sure you know. Like most highly intelligent people he’s a complicated person, and easily mistaken for a self-contradictory one—especially when he’s bullshitting. I worked for Democratic leadership for 20 years and I don’t mind the BS, as long as there’s a core of self-honesty. But Barack is hiding his core for some reason, and I don’t get it. He’s a fine person. Honestly, I felt sure you and those here would have light to shed on these puzzlements, none of which is by any means unique to me.
April 13, 2008 at 7:41 pm
And Shayne what’s up with you? Why don’t you just tell us what you think about Barack’s troubles instead of what you think about the two of us doing the asking? I for one AM interested—and not in arguing about your views, but in hearing them.
April 13, 2008 at 7:45 pm
I will say this before I have to go to bed: For those new visitors who like to drop by and pose your questions, please understand that we may not always accept the premise or framing of your questions. So what some may see as “waffling” or “avoiding the question” is merely the result of a lack of common perception of the situations in question. Sometimes, the acceptance of the framework of a question implies the acceptance of other things derived from that other framework, and this is not always the case. We may agree on what needs to be done, but disagree on why it needs to be done. Or we may agree that something needs to be done, but disagree on what exactly would work best for the most people (or even if what’s best for the most people should be the goal.)
But we do welcome visitors and their comments, as long as they are within the guidelines of the site.
April 13, 2008 at 7:47 pm
hughvic,
I’ve given my opinion. We are aware of the coming shitstorm, we’ve been exposing the shitstorm for months.
If you feel like Obama is hiding something, then you’re probably right. Maybe he’s holding back on behaving like Hillary and McCain because no one forgives a black person for that kind of behavior they way we forgive white people.
You just love throwing out the insults, and then backpedaling. I don’t play that game. You’ve done it since your first post here, when the Zoo was fairly new. You’re not fooling anyone.
Like I said before, if you weren’t so damn condescending and insulting, more of us would be willing to discuss things with you.
April 13, 2008 at 7:50 pm
wordseldomsaid may very well share Hugo’s IPA . . .
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f204/hedonisticpleasureseeker/sockpuppet2.jpg
But then again what do I know.
April 13, 2008 at 8:03 pm
“If you feel like Obama is hiding something, then you’re probably right. Maybe he’s holding back on behaving like Hillary and McCain because no one forgives a black person for that kind of behavior they way we forgive white people.”
oh please…
April 13, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Zooey, thanks for your views on Obama. I bet you’re right, and I hadn’t looked at it that way. It’s something to ruminate on.
I don’t see the pattern you describe of hurling insults and then backpedaling. When the Zoo was new I was appalled by the anti-religious views bandied so casually, but I’ve observed a lot of astute stuff passing here and have checked in from time to time to take the progressive pulse.
I’ve had respectful conversations here, and am not interested in intruding. I do provoke when I’m trying to smoke out an opinion, and I do tend to lose my temper when attacked personally by those willfully misunderstanding my statements.
You made it clear to me a long time ago that you see value in homogeneous or intrapartisan discussion, and as I’m not a progressive I try to leave you to it. I don’t know what an “IPA” is, and I’m certainly no spy, if that’s what’s meant. (I reckon you do get those here frequently.)
It’s very difficult, my Host, to try one’s best to express one’s own best truth and still be misunderstood. It’s like drowning. I don’t wish it on anyone, especially not on my old divestment comrade Barry.
Thanks for your hospitality. Sincerely.
April 13, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Are you alleging there is no racism in this country?
April 13, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Don’t worry, hughvic, others see your pattern. Maybe self-awareness isn’t your strong suit.
I could be wrong, but insulting my (or anyone’s) intelligence may not be the best way to “smoke out an opinion,” unless you’re looking for an opinion about what a jerk you can be.
Just my opinion.
April 13, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Zooey, do you have any idea what a sophomoric smartass you are, and how cocksure snide? You can’t tell honesty from cant. Come November you’ll understand that.
You’re simply rude.
April 13, 2008 at 8:14 pm
“Are you alleging there is no racism in this country?”
oh of course there is racism…everywhere…i should know my best friend and family member is black and he thinks the black race is superior to all other races….we discuss it a lot at my blog….
but to call a stupid remark stupid, is not racism just because the man who made it is black…
April 13, 2008 at 8:16 pm
That’s the hughvic, we know! I knew you couldn’t hold back for long. You must be singing “I gotta be me!”
It’s all part of the Zooey charm. Thanks.
April 13, 2008 at 8:20 pm
You still have yet to say what about what he said made it stupid, or elitist, or offensive.. Please explain (minus the labels or buzzwords). Would it make it easier to hear Obama talk about these issues if he were green or purple??
I still see this as a tempest in a teapot. I think Hillary is scraping the bottom of the barrel, trying to create an issue where there was not one. She is desperate and time is running short.
In short, this is a non-issue that is being blown up to the point of ridiculous.
And, Zooey is not rude. I would go further and say that she has shown great restraint in dealing with your obnoxious baiting.
April 13, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Enough fun for me. I am off to get some sleep.
April 13, 2008 at 8:30 pm
far out…
“You still have yet to say what about what he said made it stupid, or elitist, or offensive.. Please explain”….
who hasn’t?…it has been said repeatedly here and everywhere through out the net…
sheesh…
April 13, 2008 at 8:34 pm
I asked you. Are you not able to come up with your own thoughts and express them? Or are you just taking on other talking heads’ talking points..?
April 13, 2008 at 8:38 pm
For some reason you all are too cowardly to do other than catbirding and potshooting. Zooey attacks before she is attacks, then attacks for being attacked back, then attacks when not being attacked. Meanwhile there’s no content. Nothing but attitude. I have never seen such intellectual cowardice as is on display here. It is cultish. You characterize people’s opinions with insulting adjectives and put-down nouns, but are NEVER explicit about WHAT statement you find objectionable or “obnoxious” or WHICH enframing of WHICH question you find arch or WHICH premise you find false. I would have to liken this blog to the now-popular metaphor of an “echo chamber” except that all one finds here are smug congratulations of each other’s ideological sameness and lots of hissing at outsiders who happen to bring opinions formed from actually thinking about something. It’s really an uncanny place. A sub-collegiate Kingdom of the Boors.
You are indeed better off sticking to quips and late-night talk-show snideries. Were you to attempt to express analysis or take positions, you’d surely be shown up as bitchy fools.
April 13, 2008 at 8:41 pm
yes i understand you asked me…
here..
quote from this thread..
“and hillary is right here…obama needs to retract his babblings…rural and small town america has ALWAYS! held to guns and religion…that is nothing new….and his remarks aree insulting to all who hld religous views…even when they had jobs so the remark was stupid….there is no pretty name for it…it was misleading, elitist and wrong to say…”.
quote from this thread…
“what do you think makes him capable of making such a judgement, even if he was only pointing ot those whose jobs never came back…?…”
quote from this thread…
“and there is no way to interprete what obama said except for how he said it…it was an assualt on all the poor who hold to religious views and there is NO way there could be another interpretation for it imo”
(rolls eyes)…try reading first…
April 13, 2008 at 8:42 pm
**yawn**
Looks like I touched a nerve.
Bye, hughvic.
April 13, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Words, you are still repeating back what others have said, but you have not expressed your own thoughts. Do you have any?
April 13, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Bye, Zooey.
April 13, 2008 at 8:47 pm
“Words, you are still repeating back what others have said, but you have not expressed your own thoughts. Do you have any?”
those are my quotes of me…and i heard no one but me say them…
April 13, 2008 at 8:58 pm
You’re right. My bad. I just realized that nobody here would have written those words (nor mis-spelled so many of them)..
April 13, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Night everyone. Too much fun for me..
April 13, 2008 at 9:18 pm
good night…
“(nor mis-spelled so many of them)..”
oohhh..pitiful…..lolol…
April 13, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Eggy says it very well here. This is how I feel.
April 13, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Again, as a son of the south and myself being born and raised in Texas, I had quite an experience with people dumbing down issues and platforms to the lowest common denominator. I see nothing offensive in a remark that merely states, when economic talk is deemed irrelevant, people’s votes will stem around some of the more basic elements of influence such as the church and the holding dear of comfortable and perfunctory aspects of life such as guns.
In my own short political life, I have seen the esteemed Ann Richards toppled from her gubernatorial bid by a complete neophyte, GW Bush, in Texas with his appeal to easing hand gun laws and implementing a state lottery. He recognized his audience and watered down the content of the race to fruitlesss, yet popular, issues such as the right to carry concealed weapons. People bought into it, and they bought into the lottery, despite credible studies showing its effect on the poor and impoverished. My fellow Texans were not able to see a bigger picture.
Why does so much of our own political dialog descend into abjectly polemical debates and heated exchanges of mindless rhetoric on issues such as abortion or whether we are to allow copies of the ten commandments in a federal building? Do these truly serve the pressing interests of our nation?
I believe we end up mired in these discussions as a result of our own individual failings at addressing actual meaningful issues such as the economy. We all can understand getting pregnant and so abortion is a basic issue we can all address, but an understanding of the economy requires more than just a familiarity of one’s own anatomy and a rudimentary understanding of cause and effect.
When we are incapable of elevating the political discussion we leave it to whither in the swamp of our collective understanding – a common tongue of the most basic issues, but perhaps not most relevant, and thereby most likely miss out on productive conversation.
Isn’t there some saying about the best argument against a democracy is a five minute political discussion between two eligible voters?!?
April 13, 2008 at 11:25 pm
nwmuse, I think what is elitist and offensive about Obama’s remarks is that he seems to suggest that the people who have lost jobs are so simple that they must lash out at innocent people (people who are different from them and immigrants) and that their reliance on religion is a reaction to their economic situation rather than a genuine faith. It’s not just that they are bitter, or frustrated, or angry at the government for causing and/or failing to remedy their economic problems. That’s totally understandable. It’s the idea that they react unreasonably to hardship that makes it sound as if he looks down on them. I don’t think that is what he meant, but it’s how it sounded to a lot of people.
April 13, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Sorry for the long run-on sentence in that last post. Must be time to turn in.
April 13, 2008 at 11:39 pm
I think that is crap avarie. I think you are looking for a reason to dislike Obama and wow…here it is.
April 13, 2008 at 11:45 pm
sabyen91, you’re mistaken. I’m voting for Obama. I remember a theory in sociology, many years ago, that sounded like what he said. I think Obama’s lead is small enough that it can still be blown and he needs to be careful.
April 13, 2008 at 11:52 pm
I think he misspoke. I think he meant to say that people will take advantage of the economic problems by using god and guns. And it is true. If the economy sucks and you are an incumbent you had better find a good wedge issue.
April 13, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Hillary is a moron. People who are hurting are not bitter? Really? I would kick her in her…
April 14, 2008 at 12:01 am
I agree. That’s why I said I don’t think he meant it the way it sounded. I was just trying to explain why some people thought it sounded elitist.
April 14, 2008 at 12:02 am
What would Hillary know about struggling? Well, except for her recent campaign. Errrr, it angers me. Elitist? Yeah, Hillary IS an elitist.
April 14, 2008 at 12:02 am
I apologize, avarie. I admit I didn’t read the whole thread. I am sorry.
April 14, 2008 at 12:07 am
No problem sabyen91.
April 14, 2008 at 7:19 am
Jackson, I read your comment, and then went to your blog and read your post “Obama’s ‘Bitter’ is Better than Her Better”. It was excellent and right on the money.
avarie, thanks for your response as well.
April 14, 2008 at 9:41 am
Well said Jackson. I started to write some of the same thoughts myself but not nearly as eloquently. But I deleted mine because I didn’t feel like engaging yesterday. Thanks so much for saying it though.
April 14, 2008 at 9:45 am
Everybody’s interpretation of what was said is based on a recording made by who? It seems like it must be a member of the Clinton campaign because they released it. And so the first interpretation of what was said is based on what they told us we should think about it. It will be unforgivable it Obama wins the nomination and McCain pulls up this audio gathered by the Clintons to use against him in the general election. Is it forgivable that Hillary considers her aspirations as more important than the party or the threat of McCain as president?
Comments are closed.