What a fucking douche: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/28/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6150964.shtml so for the rest of the time, he just sees him as a black man, not the president? What, were you expecting him to talk in jive and say "yeh massa" all night?
I saw those comments made by Matthews live last night. He said he was reticent to say what he was thinking because it was probably going to come out the wrong way. His intent was to say that in his mind racism played a large role in American life before the election of President Obama, and that no one was thinking about his race when he was speaking. He was trying to say that because of President Obama, we've moved beyond racism. I think it shows how little Chris Matthews thinks of the American people. I happen to think we're not a racist society.
and I think that many of the people that voted for Obama did so because he was a black man who talked without the "negro dialect" (as eloquently put by Harry Reid). IMO, there is more inherent racism within the Obama supporters.
I'd put it a little differently. I would say the number of people that voted against then-Senator Obama because he is half-black, even though they agreed with his policies is far, far, far less than the number of people who voted for then-Senator Obama because in their mind he would help absolve them of what they felt our country's original sin was--racism, even though they largely disagreed with his policies. In other words, his racial identity helped, not hurt, him.
I think they just though it was cool and hip to vote for a black person. Similar to someone saying they are green/eco-friendly, but only do so in one aspect of their life so others can see them being so (then getting in their 12MPG SUV by themselves)
Yep. This was the second word that came to mind while watching. The first word was: hypocritical. IMO, nothing summed it up better than two distinct moments: 1) Obama was on his soapbox talking about the need for "spend as you go" budgets, reducing the debt and deficit before it starts to hurt us really badly, etc, etc. At this point, much of the crowd actually started laughing at him. He looked so confused, it was hilarious. 2) Obama was preaching about the need to work in a bi-partisan manner, not trying to force bills through or create bills in hiding. Meanwhile, Pelosi is directly behind him, with her little smug smirk.
It's interesting you came up with "hypocritical" as that was the word I originally wrote. However, I decided to tone it down. Needless to say, I concur completely.
Like ABM mentioned, I love watching all the followers. They stare at their party leaders and stand up only when the leaders do.
I thought Obama did well. I thought the GOP response was good. I like that guy. And oh how bad I wanted to believe him when he talked about stopping the spending and reducing the deficit. But you just can't believe that, because that is their goal, to get you to believe it and elect them and then they spend and give a fuck less about the deficit until they are back out of office criticizing the dems. (And they refuse to admit that much of this debt is from the right) Oh well... Politics as usual. I was talking to my friend in Eco. yesterday, and we were talking about the deficit, and I made him laugh when I said "Both parties spend too much, the difference is Dems are pro's at it".
Let's be clear, massive government spending is not a construct of fiscal conservatism. Just because someone labels themselves a "conservative" doesn't mean they're following the dictates of limited government philosophy. President George W. Bush wasn't a fiscal conservative. Pretending he was one is just ignorance. If you want to vote for limited government, I'm not sure either of the two main parties is the way to vote.
Well, when he was elected I do believe many who voted for him thought that he was fiscally conservative. When we look back, obviously he wasn't. Cheney himself said, when asked about the borrowed money we are fighting our war with and continuing ridiculous tax cuts, that Reagan proved that having a deficit/debt is irrelevant. I agree no party is the way to go. But god damn how i'd like one of them to be.
Just like many believed Senator Obama would be a moderate? It's the responsibility of an electorate to understand the policy positions of the people for whom they vote. Any idiot could see that "Compassionate Conservatism" was just code language for Big Government With An Evangelical Emphasis. It's why I never voted for him.
Looking back, I really feel sorry for the speechwriters. I was talking to a friend of mine that worked in the Clinton White House and his impression was that the speech was fucked by the Massachusetts election results. These things are worked on for months and he's certain the centerpiece was to celebrate health care reform that was certain to have been passed. When Scott Brown was elected, not just the language had to be altered, but the entire theme. They only had a couple of weeks to completely reconstruct it.
