Obama's latest faux pas

[bascule]

Don't see a thread for this yet, so...

 

Yeah, much ado about Obama calling middle Americans a bunch of gun toting bible thumping bigots, or something.

 

What's the deal? Everything he says is taken painfully out of context and blown completely out of proportion. Meanwhile McCain and Hillary are trying to make it out like they're actually in touch with Joe Blow.

 

Is it me, or is Obama just speaking his mind in a way unbecoming of a canonical politician?

[gcol]

I am all in favour of politicians speaking their minds in the hustings, a rare and noteworthy event.

 

But is it statesmanlike? It might have worked in the old days of gunboat diplomacy (or are they still here?) but when the dollar is weakening, the economy stumbling and your enemies can give you so much grief on the battlefield you soon realise you have bitten off more than you can chew then speaking your homespun mind with its racial, ethnic and class prejudices just ain't going to cut the mustard.

 

He would not last five minutes in face to face talks with the Chinese, with that attitude.

 

If his intention is to polarise the vote, I think he may have miscalculated the numbers

[Phi for All]

I like that he is less rehearsed and "focus-grouped" than Hillary, but Obama needs to bring voters together, not keep them polarized as we've been for the last two presidential elections. Labels are not a good way to accomplish diplomacy here or abroad.

[iNow]

Taken in context, though, he was talking to a small group openly and sincerely. He was trying to put a face on the bitter feelings held by many in this country, and his audience was a group not generally familiar on a personal level with that same embittered sentiment. It was captured by cell phone recorder, and exploded by the Hillary campaign into an issue beyond it's true importance.

 

I find completely misplaced the attempt to suggest that Obama is a polarizing candidate because OTHERS have tried to exploit this out of context quote for their own benefit.

[Pangloss]

I didn't have any problem with what Obama said, and it didn't even seem insulting to those people, way I read it. Relating to voters is one of his strengths, and it's supposed to be something we WANT in politicians.

 

I think what this sort of story is really about is people being concerned with how OTHER people are going to vote. My suggestion is that they focus on how they themselves are going to vote.

[Realitycheck]

I didn't have any problem with what Obama said, and it didn't even seem insulting to those people, way I read it. Relating to voters is one of his strengths, and it's supposed to be something we WANT in politicians.

 

I think what this sort of story is really about is people being concerned with how OTHER people are going to vote. My suggestion is that they focus on how they themselves are going to vote.

 

I agree with this and almost posted the same thing, but he really took things a bit too far when he extended it to gun-toting crazy stuff. It didn't really sound elitist, but rather out of touch with reality.

[iNow]

That's the thing about reality... It's subjective.

[Realitycheck]

Obama just speaking his mind in a way unbecoming of a canonical politician

 

and the drum beats go like this ...

[ecoli]

Didn't he say something like "people turn to things like guns and religion out of frustration." I don't see how that's controversial at all. I think this is something that Hillzoy and McBot are blowing about of proportion for their own benefit. Still though, it can't help on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary, coming out of the Jeremiah Wright incident.

[iNow]

Didn't he say something like...

 

Here's a good look at what was said (in full context):

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyDxHPC74X0

 

 

I think this is something that Hillzoy and McBot are blowing about of proportion for their own benefit.

Precisely.

 

 

Still though, it can't help on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary, coming out of the Jeremiah Wright incident.

The worst part is, it will probably work, much like the 3AM phone call ad.

[Realitycheck]

The remarks came at an April 6 fundraiser in San Francisco, when Obama said workers in Pennsylvania and elsewhere who have seen factories shut down "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them."

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-uscamp0413,0,4971659.story

 

Yeah, mostly just swift-boat action, except for the guns and bigotry part. He's accusing jobless people of being gangsters and bigots. Just a minor slip-up.

[bascule]

I think his point was that people eventually look upon their economic situation is hopeless and thus choose politicians based on comparatively petty social issues rather than looking for politicians who might actually improve their quality of life.

[Realitycheck]

I'm not convinced that either would be more effective than the other. I'm wondering why Clinton is considered a potential lame duck.

[iNow]

I'm wondering why Clinton is considered a potential lame duck.

 

It's called math.

[Realitycheck]

It's called judgement.

 

I see no reason why she would be any more divisive than he within their own party and why would Republicans be any less partisan on the issues that are really important to them? She is not a culprit, unless advocating universal healthcare is generally not in the country's best interest, but this is really off-topic.

[iNow]

It's called judgement.

 

I see no reason why she would be any more divisive than he within their own party and why would Republicans be any less partisan on the issues that are really important to them? She is not a culprit, unless advocating universal healthcare is generally not in the country's best interest, but this is really off-topic.

 

I think we may have missed each other's points, anyway. In my response, I was alluding the fact that she statistically has only like a 5% chance of taking the nomination, which is why I thought you brought up the lame duck comment to begin with. Sorry if I misinterpreted your point, and if my response made little sense as a result.

[john5746]

I think the argument that extending the primary season will weaken both candidates is holding true. Both Obama and Clinton have been weakened. If you talk long enough, you will say something that will offend someone or something that is incorrect, etc.

 

the only thing that has become apparent is that Obama is human and that he recovers from mistakes better than Clinton, with help from the media, IMO.

[bascule]

Obama is human and that he recovers from mistakes [...] with help from the media

 

The thing about "the media" is they're also doing a great job of making much ado about nothing...

 

If you're saying that "the media" help Obama recover from media-sensationalized gaffes, then yes, you're correct... but they're ultimately solving a problem of their own invention.

[Pangloss]

I agree with both of the above posts.

 

I'm continuously surprised at the way Clinton and Obama are shown to be weakening against McCain. I can't tell if that's an honest public sentiment or something trumped-up by the media, but even if it's honest I can't say that I really understand it.

 

Maybe it's just that the political hobbyist in me doesn't understand people's lack of "stamina" for following this stuff.

[iNow]

Maybe it's just that the political hobbyist in me doesn't understand people's lack of "stamina" for following this stuff.

That seems to hit the nail on the head. I've spoken with a lot of people who say, "I wish they'd just shut up about it already and decide. I'm tired of hearing about it."

[john5746]

The thing about "the media" is they're also doing a great job of making much ado about nothing...

 

I wouldn't say nothing - for people truly in the middle, trying to weight pluses and minuses, well everything matters. Maybe a mountain out of a mole hill would be better.

 

If you're saying that "the media" help Obama recover from media-sensationalized gaffes, then yes, you're correct... but they're ultimately solving a problem of their own invention.

 

In my attempt to be brief, I didn't express myself as clearly as I should. I think Obama himself recovers better than Hillary, because he is more likable, IMO. But the talk shows are much less likely to make jokes of Obama than they are of Hillary from what I have seen. She also gets damage from Bill, who only makes national news when he says something controversial or stupid.

 

I think you made an excellent point regarding the media self-correcting. The media is huge and diverse, so sometimes its more of a segment war against one another, but usually its just reactions to feedback from themselves.

[iNow]

I'd be interested to hear how many people reading this are even aware about McCain's recent screw ups (again) where he several times has mispoken and confused Sunni with Shia? Not likely very many. You were too busy being distracted because Obama was getting attacked for commenting on how frustrated people in the US seem to be.

 

I know that a few people here, Pangloss included, are likely very much aware of the mistakes by McCain since he and I (and others) actively pay attention to such things. My bigger point, however, is how little coverage it's received in the media since the weapons of mass distraction were (not only) launched concurrently by the Clinton and McCain camps, but how the media has been reinforcing their effect.

[Realitycheck]

I'd be interested to hear how many people reading this are even aware about McCain's recent screw ups (again) where he several times has mispoken and confused Sunni with Shia? Not likely very many. You were too busy being distracted because Obama was getting attacked for commenting on how frustrated people in the US seem to be.

 

I know that a few people here, Pangloss included, are likely very much aware of the mistakes by McCain since he and I (and others) actively pay attention to such things. My bigger point, however, is how little coverage it's received in the media since the weapons of mass distraction were (not only) launched concurrently by the Clinton and McCain camps, but how the media has been reinforcing their effect.

 

Maybe he's getting Alzheimer's.

[Pangloss]

Is there any actual evidence of Alzheimer's? If so please post it. Rumors persist that Reagan showed signs of it before leaving office, and God help us if we have to deal with a sudden, obvious onset in a candidate before the election. Holy cow what a mess that would be. But I suppose it would be better than having it show up after he was in office. Let's hope we don't have to deal with THAT nightmare.

 

I agree with iNow's points two posts up, btw. It didn't really strike me as Alzheimer's, more the pressures of campaigning and traveling in the middle east. But he is considered a foreign policy and middle east expert (amongst politicians, at any rate) and I believe those statements will come back up after the Dems wrap up their nomination.