Stumble This | You should also watch “Barack Obama Welcomed To West Virginia” |
"Many blue collar Democrats are not ready for a black President."
tinyurl.com/4vu7r5
Comedy is for the laughable excuses provided by the way and for the values-over-substance decision making in action.
tinyurl.com/4vu7r5
Comedy is for the laughable excuses provided by the way and for the values-over-substance decision making in action.
Says the woman sitting on the porch in West Virginia. Priceless.
The problem is, I'm going to get it too.
"I don't agree with that."
I hate people who disagree with facts.
Sorry to stereo type. But this just shows how ignorant people from the south really are. They let years of racism blind them to the truth and well known facts. Laughable.
Go fuck yourself. Seriously. You're worse than they are with your bigoted stereotype based on 4 people's views. Not everyone is like that, but i doubt you care, you're already as entrenched in your opinion as they are.
I've an expression in french which is great, but dunno how it sounds in english : "People who generalizes are all douchebags"
Well, humanity is what it is. As we all know, most of people are afraid by what is different and don't like changes. And this, at all the levels of society in every single human community.
Still, I wonder what message this clip is trying to get across: 1) people in West-Virginia are ignorant, stubborn bigots who shouldn't be allowed to vote, or (2) we'd better nominate Hilary or we might get stuck with another Republican for the next 4 years.
Btw, I love the "we've got a right to know", but if anybody starts to explain I'm simply not going to agree with that and the I'm going to vote for Hilary because she can sing the national anthem better than anybody (between the presidential thing and the American Idol final coming up, US elections are so confusing).
Anyway, even if Obama did have some Muslim history, he left it behind so who cares. His church might be a disgrace, but he essentially disowned it recently so who cares. He has at no time implied the things that Wright preached were true. He never said the US made HIV and he obviously isn't a racist. If people want to encourage people not to vote for him, there is enough fodder in the issues themselves to work with. They don't need to dig around in the mud.
P.S. If you nominate Hillary, there's no way in Hell that any republican is going to cross the lines to vote for her. With Barak... not so.
Sorry to stereo type. But this just shows how ignorant people from the south really are. They let years of racism blind them to the truth and well known facts. Laughable.
Fighting ignorance with ignorance? Yeah, that'll work out REAL well.
As someone who has lived in both rural and urban areas, I've found in rural areas the a much larger reliance on community opinion, which generally leads to acceptance without questioning or really understanding why. Opposition is small, and in a community of a thousand if there are only like 10 people saying something opposing they're easy to ignore, when you get into an urban area there are many more opposing ideas floating around, and even if the percent of people expressing those ideas is just as small as in rural area, its still a large group of people. 1000 people isn't as easy to ignore regardless of overall population size.
So people in urban areas find their beliefs called into question more often, and thus are probably doing more to inform themselves than whatever the majority opinion is, while those in rural areas don't run into much belief conflict on a day to day basis, and thus are less likely to evaluate things, and just go with the flow of their community.
Taking Hillary as his VP would probably go a long way toward resolving the rift among democrats. I think Hillary's still running now just to force him to pick her.
I don't think that's a good idea for a number of reasons and the odds of it happening are a LOT lower than most people expect. I'd be glad to explain the reasons if you'd like, but it's a bit long and I don't want to go too far off topic here without need. Bad habit I'm trying to work on a bit
It might have been an option 6 weeks or more ago, but she went for it all instead of leaving herself some room and leverage and she's got nothing left now. He's got no reason to want her. Not even electability or bringing more people out to vote.
With Roe V Wade and so many other things hanging on the edge of a split court and one or two Justices old enough to retire or otherwise leave office in the next few years that'll bring many of the women who say they won't vote for him out in spite of themselves. Loss of that is a steep price for an angry gesture so most will probably show in the end with or without her. There's a bunch of other problems with arguments for her being on the ticket as well. She offers little really but baggage and controversy, the potential for conflict within the ticket.
If America has yet to overcome the differences in color how can we as a nation move forward? Look at these peoples faces. Look at the way they simply dismiss Obama, with no clear reasons given. They simply cannot and will not accept him. This is a sad and terrible thing. These people do not make stances based on information they take their stances on their gut reaction. They label him un-american. They say he has no experience. (hilarious considering none of the candidates have been presidents before)
This video makes me ashamed. I am saddened that our country cannot rise above such a trivial matter as the color of one's skin. I am embarrassed that our country is filled with so many un-informed, racist, and un-intelligent voters.
^ Lets hope it's a shrinking minority.
I whole-heartedly agree and am glad in my lifetime I am able to say we now have indisputable proof that that one-time majority is a continually shrinking minority: Obama is leading Clinton and there exists the real possibility he could win the seat as commander-in-chief of the free world.
Can you imagine that when just a few decades ago Black Americans didn't have the right to vote and were even segregated from the rest of America? This is an exciting time to be alive.
I went to college in the Appalachian mountains. Those folks have different knowledge there. They know engines, generators, growing stuff, distillation using a car radiator, (whoops, that could get me shot)
I grew up in the south, in a rural integrated community. My high school was 40% African-American. Then I moved to a midwestern metropolitan area where the races don't even interface at all. The whites all send their kids to private schools, leaving the African-Americans a decrepit, underfunded public school system.
The amazing thing is, the folks around here ask me "how could you stand living in the south with all that racism? So I always ask them, "how many African-Americans were in your graduating class?" Standard answer - "none."
And Doc_M is right, if you look at a regular US map, with counties shaded by Republican vs. Democratic vote in 2004, it's clear that urban areas vote predominately Democratic and rural areas Republican. One's not better than the other, they're just different.
City folk and country folk are different. They are equally uncomfortable in each other's environs. Just look at Mrs. Douglas from "Green Acres", totally out of her element. "Fresh air....Time Square..."
First of all I'd like to say West Virginia is not part of the south, so please don't pin them on us .
they're part of the west, right?
P.S. If you nominate Hillary, there's no way in Hell that any republican is going to cross the lines to vote for her. With Barak... not so.
Yeah, if there's NO way I can vote for Paul, then I'm definitely crossing over for Obama. Whatever it takes for Hilldog or McPain to lose.
Yup, that's right. MG just said he would register as a democrat.
That said, it's worth considering more quantifiable information like exit poll data and primary voting results rather than anecdotal evidence about West Virginia. No doubt many of you have seen the widely reported numbers that 2 in 10 white West Virginia voters said that race was an important factor in their vote, and more than 8 in 10 of them backed Sen. Clinton according to exit polls. (1) It's also significant that 7% of the total vote went to John Edwards who dropped out of the race back in January.
Yes, volunteers campaigning for Obama in West Virginia did experience racially motivated animosity, as they have in some other states. (2)
What's important to me is that Obama's prospects still look good for November. For those us who are supporting Obama's campaign, I feel it's wise to try to build consensus rather than fostering division.
References:
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/us/politics/14dems.html
Clinton Beats Obama Handily in West Virginia
2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/12/AR2008051203014.html
Racist Incidents Give Some Obama Campaigners Pause
We do want to build consensus and that's exactly why Clinton can't be on the ticket. If you think she's been vetted and can't bring new controversy take a bit of time to read the following article.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Hillary39s-woes-take-their-toll.4071541.jp
So far Obama hasn't touched her on most issues she's open on, she flung Wright and Ayers out there but he stayed more classy and that had a bit to do with why he'll win. She's still open to all of that and more though, so far it's been just amateurs and the press poking at her. The repubs will tear her up on that stuff and more. Most damage she's taken in the campaign has been self inflicted anyway and I don't see how she can possibly be vetted for what she insists on doing to herself.
With the court on the edge of spit decisions on everything from Roe v Wade to torture to how we can try and hold suspects and open seats likely in the next few years there's a lot at risk even before we consider the economy, the war, and so on. Most who claim they won't show now probably will when we come to it because the cost is too high for angry gestures, those who won't were just Limbaugh's chaos or too prejudiced to be any help anyway.
She'll bring us fewer voters than we think and for every one she brings she'd drive at least one more away, independent and crossover voters who like Obama and are looking for a change but don't like her or believe she's any part of change. She's probably dead weight or break even at best and that's before we even consider how she'll energize the repubs in both fund raising and voter turnout. They don't much like McCain otherwise, they are hoping for a reason to care and she's it.
Then there's personality, the VP's office isn't the back seat ride along that it used to be and you CAN NOT fire the VP, they are an elected official just like the President is. They can be impeached and convicted but not fired. Once in office the chances of her trying to run things her way from the VP office is too large and nothing about this campaign suggests she'll take a back seat to or stop for anyone once she sets her mind to it. It's a violent conflict waiting to happen.
It's a real bad idea, best chance the repubs have for a win. Either her alone or him behind her would have worked better, but not her behind him and not now, not after this campaign. He can do better and so can we.
Even my backassward state (MS) went to Obama. The 2006 census data for MS shows the state to be 60.9% white, 37.1% black. The Democratic primaries here went 61.2% to Obama and 36.7% Clinton.
Even if every black person in the state voted for Obama, that means at least half of us whities voted for him too (which could be about right since half the white population are inbred rednecks).
Well, the nice thing about the electoral system in most states is that you only have to declare a party during primary season, and can vote for whomever you please in the fall, so you can hide your secret shame and vote your conscience. I myself a longtime Democrat registered as a Republican (and my, has my junkmail gotten interesting since then) just so I could bump Ron Paul's profile up a smidge. I don't for a second believe in most of his libertarian ideas, but at long last we had a candidate who was forcing us to talk about REAL issues, based on silly little things like, oh, the Constitution.
As for the content of this video--sigh. As someone else said, the difference between racism in the North and South was that in the South, Blacks could live near whites, as long as they didn't get 'uppity', but in the North, Blacks could get uppity, as long as they lived nowhere near whites. What I'm seeing here is people reacting poorly to the unknown, people who believe that life is a zero sum game, that social justice for Blacks and Hispanics means less opportunities for whites. Someone needs to point out to them what Bill Hicks said so many years ago: Poor whites have much more in common with poor Blacks than they do rich whites, and rich whites do everything in their power to make sure neither side sees that. Before there was What's the Matter with Kansas, there was Bill Hicks, getting it right every time.
LATEST DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY RESULTS PROVE WEST VIRGINIA HAS MORE RACISTS THAN SEXISTS
Bullshit.
Well I guess FOX will be happy...
What a crock of shit
http://tinyurl.com/6rmnce
I especially liked the "we just don't know about him" excuse...For Fuck Sake he's all over the damn internet and TV. And they know so much about Hillary because why? Her husband fucked someone else while he was in office. Great. Love this country.
Its really annoys me when you hear people saying they will vote for McCain instead of ther Democratic Nominee because "He is Muslim"
It annoys me even more that the retort to this statement is "That's not true! He's Protestant!" rather than "So what if he was?". I don't give a shit if he's Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, Wiccan, Satanist, Hindu or atheist. If he has a 3-digit IQ and cares about the country, it's already a big step in the right direction.
In other words, base your vote on race.
Many sincere Dems do not, of course, but there are enough Dems nationwide that are voting based solely on race and gender that the results seriously matter to both Democratic candidates.
When these loyal WV Democrats DO vote based on race--just not the one deemed correct...........oops.
A sundown town was simple. Blacks were prohibited from being there after sundown, so none could live there, but they could still come during the day to be maids or laborers.
There were almost no sundown towns in the South. They were all in the North. Each areas were full of racism, just manifested differently.
Democrat paradox? "Vote for Obama because he's Black."
Hillary lead Obama even among black voters in most of the leadup to the campaign, it was only when the "fantasy" and other comments were made in South Carolina early on in this thing that people started to turn to Obama. I doubt that's when they first noticed he was black. Personally I saw little difference between the two until after the race was on so I didn't much like either, what made my choice was pretty simple. I'll offer you the words of a Conservative icon for why.
The Democrats have firm principled beliefs. What motivates most Republican leaders? Nothing except a craving for power. What do Republicans offer voters? Nothing except “Elect us because we’re not Democrats.”
That's a quote from a recent article written by the man known as the "funding father" of conservative causes and one of the biggest movers behind repub mass mail efforts, he and those like him fed and grew the party over recent years. I don't really agree that dems have firm, principled beliefs, but they do talk them. Now if only they'd vote that way too I might start to believe it. It's the public impression these days though.
http://ultimatejohnmccain.com/blog_post/show/17?eid=35f115ef74d62ec3303825bab766831c
The reason Barrack is doing better than her is the same reason dems in general are doing better than repubs these days. Hillary decided to campaign as if she were the repub and Obama the dem and she did it in the Democratic primary. The nation as a whole has turned away from that type of politics, she was 5 or 10 years too late for that type of strat to work like she wanted it to and just didn't notice that the nation was changing under her. Not quite ready on day one this time.
If she had campaigned with some class instead of aggression she'd have had the nomination handed to her on a platter and Obama would be the VP maybe, instead we heard insults about him from day one and claims about "ready on day one" she couldn't live up to about her. Built up those expectations herself then didn't live up to it. She threw it away, nobody took it from her.
No more capable of leading a country than he is a horse on a rope to fresh water.....
Clinton and McCain worry me more, him due to policy and her because she seems to believe that the ends justify the means and she can't admit to or adjust for being wrong, we just had a President like that. I worry about what Obama will do, but I know what they'll do. Doesn't leave us with a hell of a lot of choice. I wouldn't mind a third party to shake things up a bit, a bit more room for people like Paul and Kucinich.
It's certainly not my personal preference for a Clinton vice presidency.
My point about consensus is more this; for those of us who are supporting Obama, painting the bulk of a voting population of a given state in a negative light, (even states that can be expected to be solidly McCain's in November) isn't in our best interest. While we might safely prognosticate that West Virginia is a lost cause for the Democrats in November, alienating voters there who might become Obama supporters after the convention is foolish. We want every vote we can get. People have families and friends. Those relationships do cross state lines.
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Ridiculing and shaming people who disagree with our preference of candidate isn't a good strategy for winning.
As the Obama campaign's general election strategy has begun taking shape, we've seen that the impressive 'National Voter Registration & Mobilization Drive' operation, 'Vote for Change', is operating in all 50 states, not just those states that are widely anticipated to be blue states and battleground states come November.
I understand being angry and disgusted at the ignorance and racism displayed in this video that exists in WV and elsewhere. It upsets me as well. It's just my silly little hope that more people will look at the bigger picture. But then I'm a dreamer.
Texas is another longshot that's worth some work. Not as "Red" as some think, it was almost purely Democratic up until about the time Bush became Governor. He was only the second repub in that office since reconstruction and first reelected, they held the grudge for the civil war and carpetbaggers here for quite a while. Lots of firsts for repubs happened during those years here. With some work it could be blue again, just conservative southern blue. Got a chance to get Cornyn out this year to start with.
This is why the entire world classified you as ass backwards hillbillies who marry their cousin.
You'd be better off leaving Iraq, and killing these fucking hillbillies.
The few morons will ruin the nation as a whole.
based on that comment, I'm willing to bet that all the people interviewed in this clip are smarter than you.
BTW, who's flabbergasted that Nader isn't running?!? I thought that was the one constant in my life!
So all of you Paul sifters, start looking at barr if you still think there's hope.