while everyone is debating if Obama is worhty of presidential run due to his skin tone no one has yet to mention what his platform is/ was and what he has done for the state of Illinois?
is political ability really that low on the priority scale for our politicians that we find it more important to talk about what color a candidate will bring to the office rather than what ideas?
while everyone is debating if Obama is worhty of presidential run due to his skin tone no one has yet to mention what his platform is/ was and what he has done for the state of Illinois?
is political ability really that low on the priority scale for our politicians that we find it more important to talk about what color a candidate will bring to the office rather than what ideas?
He hasn't even announced his candidacy--perhaps he will share a platform with us if and when he decides to run.
while everyone is debating if Obama is worhty of presidential run due to his skin tone no one has yet to mention what his platform is/ was and what he has done for the state of Illinois?
is political ability really that low on the priority scale for our politicians that we find it more important to talk about what color a candidate will bring to the office rather than what ideas?
He hasn't even announced his candidacy--perhaps he will share a platform with us if and when he decides to run.
I meant what was his platforn in his Senatorial run? what issues & causes has he supported/ been against, etc.
people are saying they'd vote for him here but they aren't saying why they'll vote for him other than he's black and he talks real good.
heres something for all those fools like me who look upon peoples records as opposed to their pigment
Sponsored legislation[/b] President George W. Bush signing the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act as bill sponsors Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Barack Obama (D-IL) look on.
Education[/b] In April 2005, Obama sponsored his first Senate bill, the "Higher Education Opportunity through Pell Grant Expansion Act", S. 697.[29] Entered in fulfillment of a campaign promise to help needy students pay their college tuitions, the bill proposed increasing the maximum amount of Pell Grant awards to $5,100.[30] Provision for Pell Grant awards was later incorporated into the "Deficit Reduction Act", S. 1932, signed by President George W. Bush on February 8, 2006.
Immigration [/b] Obama was a co-sponsor of the "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act", S. 1033, introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on May 12, 2005.[32] Obama also supported a later revision, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", S. 2611, passed by the Senate on May 25, 2006.[33] He offered three amendments that were included in the bill passed by the Senate: (1) to protect American workers against unfair job competition from guest workers; require employer verification of their employees' legal immigration status through improved verification systems; and (3) fund improvements in FBI background checks of immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship.
In December 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives had passed a parallel bill, H.R. 4437, which provides for enhanced border security measures, but does not address the broader immigration reform proposals contained in the Senate's bill. Congressional inaction on this legislation has become a heated issue in the lead-up to the 2006 midterm elections, with representatives of both major parties holding the other party responsible for the stalemate.
Transparency[/b] Obama joined with Senators Coburn (R-OK), Carper (D-DE), and McCain (R-AZ) in sponsoring the "Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act", S. 2590, to provide citizens with a website, managed by the Office of Management and Budget, listing all organizations receiving Federal funds from 2007 onward, and providing breakdowns by the agency allocating the funds, the dollar amount given, and the purpose of the grant or contract.[36] President George W. Bush signed the bill, also referred to as the "Coburn-Obama Transparency Act", into law on September 26, 2006.
Congressional delegations[/b]
Russia and Eastern Europe[/b] Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Committee member Barack Obama at a Russian base where mobile launch missiles are being destroyed by the Nunn-Lugar program.During the August recess of 2005, Obama traveled with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan. The latest in Lugar's series of Nunn-Lugar visits to the region, the trip focused on strategies to control the world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons, and weapons of mass destruction as a strategic first defense against the threat of future terrorist attacks.[38]
Lugar and Obama inspected a Nunn-Lugar program supported nuclear warhead destruction facility at Saratov, in southern European Russia.[39] In a diplomatic incident the Moscow Times reported as reminiscent of the Cold War, the delegation's departure from an airport in the city of Perm, at the foot of the Ural Mountains, was delayed for three hours when Russian guards sought unsuccessfully to search their plane.[40] In Ukraine, Lugar and Obama toured a disease control and prevention facility and witnessed the signing of a bilateral pact to secure biological pathogens and combat risks of infectious disease outbreaks from natural causes or bioterrorism.[41]
Middle East [/b] In January 2006 Obama joined Senators Bayh (D-IN), Bond (R-MO), and Congressman Ford (D-TN) for meetings with U.S. military in Kuwait and Iraq. After the visits, Obama split off from the others for more meetings in Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories. While in Israel, Obama met with Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom. A planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had been cancelled due to his recent stroke.[42]
Obama also met with a group of Palestinian students two weeks before Hamas won the January 2006 Palestinian legislative election. ABC News 7 (Chicago) reported Obama telling the students that "the US will never recognize winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel", and that he had conveyed the same message in his meeting with Palestinian authority President Mahmoud Abbas.[43] After the election, Obama said: "My hope is that as a consequence of now being responsible for electricity and picking up garbage and basic services to the Palestinian people, that they recognize it's time to moderate their stance."[44] Referring to Obama's comment, editorial columnist George F. Will coined the phrase "Garbage Collection Theory of History."[45]
Africa[/b] In August 2006, Obama left for his third official trip, traveling as a Congressional delegation of one to South Africa and Kenya, and making stops in Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Chad.
The trip's Kenya segment merged policy and personal elements. Obama flew his wife and two daughters from Chicago to join him in a visit to his father's birthplace, the village of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Siaya District, located near Kisumu in Kenya's rural west. Newspapers reported enthusiastic crowds at Obama's public appearances.[46] In a public gesture aimed to capitalize on the celebrity and encourage more Kenyans to undergo voluntary HIV testing, Obama and his wife took HIV tests at a Kenyan clinic.
In a nationally televised speech to students and faculty at the University of Nairobi, Obama spoke forcefully on the influence of ethnic rivalries in Kenyan politics: "Ethnic-based politics has to stop. It is rooted in the bankrupt ideology that the goal of politics is to pile as much as possible to one's family, tribe or friends. It fractures the fabric of society", Obama stated.[48] The speech touched off a public debate among rival leaders, some formally challenging Obama's remarks as unfair and improper, others defending his positions.[49][50]
He underlined the importance of Africa. "Unfortunately, our foreign policy seems to be focused on yesterday's crises rather than anticipating the crises of the future," Obama said. "Africa is not perceived as a direct threat to U.S. security at the moment, so the foreign policy apparatus tends to believe that it can be safely neglected. I think that's a mistake...It's critically important to capture a sense of hopefulness," Obama said, "to give people in Africa and people outside Africa a sense that for all the strife and hardship that the continent has been through, the spirit of the people remains resilient."[51]
Political advocacy[/b] Speaking before the National Press Club in April 2005, Obama defended the New Deal social welfare policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt, associating Republican proposals to establish private accounts for Social Security with Social Darwinist thinking.[52]
Also in 2005, in a move more typically taken after several years of holding high political office, Obama established his own leadership political action committee devoted to channeling financial support for Democratic candidates. He has become an effective Democratic fundraiser and much sought after ally. According to an article in the Chicago Sun-Times, Obama participated in 38 fundraising events in 2005, helping to pull in $6.55 million for political issues and candidates he supports
Obama is among the first national politicians to actively engage the public through new Internet communication tools. In late 2005, he began p
odcasting from his U.S. Senate official web site. It has been reported that Obama responds to and has personally participated in online discussions hosted on politically-oriented blogosphere sites.
In May 2006, Obama campaigned to maintain a $0.54 per gallon tariff on imported ethanol. Obama justified the tariff by joining Senator Durbin in stating that "ethanol imports are neither necessary nor a practical response to current gasoline prices," arguing instead that domestic ethanol production is sufficient and expanding.
In June 2006, Obama campaigned against making recent, temporary estate tax cuts permanent, calling the cuts a "Paris Hilton" tax break for "billionaire heirs and heiresses".
Also in June 2006, Obama worked to broaden his party's political base, encouraging Democrats to reach out to evangelicals and other church-going people, saying, "if we truly hope to speak to people where they???re at ??? to communicate our hopes and values in a way that???s relevant to their own ??? we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse."
but i dont think anyone on this board knows enough about political demographics to claim that a black person could not be elected president.
I have no idea why you would say this.
It's been demonstrated repeatedly that white voters will defect from their party in order to avoid voting for a Black candidate.
This is Sociology 101.
of course some white democrats will defect, that is not the issue. the issue is numbers and nobody on here has done a statistical analysis of the voting population and its willingness to vote for a black man. democrats are not all liberals. look at the south. the unions. a vote for a democrat doesn't always relate to personal views about equality and civil rights.
most people vote a certain way based on what that candidate will do for them as individuals. racists will (or might) vote for Obama if it means they will pay less taxes or get their kids better educations or not have their son in Iraq for 10 more years. race is and will always be a big issue...but so is sex and the people who have already done statistical analysis have obviously determined that Hillary has a legitimate shot of winning.
but i dont think anyone on this board knows enough about political demographics to claim that a black person could not be elected president.
I have no idea why you would say this.
It's been demonstrated repeatedly that white voters will defect from their party in order to avoid voting for a Black candidate.
This is Sociology 101.
of course some white democrats will defect, that is not the issue. the issue is numbers and nobody on here has done a statistical analysis of the voting population and its willingness to vote for a black man. democrats are not all liberals. look at the south. the unions. a vote for a democrat doesn't always relate to personal views about equality and civil rights.
most people vote a certain way based on what that candidate will do for them as individuals. racists will (or might) vote for Obama if it means they will pay less taxes or get their kids better educations or not have their son in Iraq for 10 more years.
Please be serious. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that the American electorate is simply too dumb or uninformed to vote based on personal interest. Why do you suppose poor white people vote for Republican candidates? Or well-off people voting for liberal canddiates, whose economic platform usually runs counter to their interests? No, Americans generally vote based on how the candidate makes them feel, and a Black candidate will make a lot of white voters feel uncomfortable.
race is and will always be a big issue...but so is sex and the people who have already done statistical analysis have obviously determined that Hillary has a legitimate shot of winning.
Get real. Nobody but Hillary actually thinks she has a shot at beating McCain.
Honestly I don't think democratic racism is likely to manifest itself in a 'i don't think i'll be voting this year'-type way; you forget that the liberal-minded voter always justifies his/her racism w/ the binary view of black people as 'good' and 'bad.' It would be up to obama and the dems to keep republican and conservative propaganda, and even conservative propaganda from inside the dem party, from undercutting obama's current status as 'black guy its ok to like.' I'll be the first one to say america is definitely still racist, and that a large portion of democrats maintain that perspective, but its more complex than simple rejection of black candidates; american people, even conservatives, are used to african americans in the highest levels of government at this point.
Honestly I don't think democratic racism is likely to manifest itself in a 'i don't think i'll be voting this year'-type way; you forget that the liberal-minded voter always justifies his/her racism w/ the binary view of black people as 'good' and 'bad.'
I certainly didn't forget that, because I don't subscribe to it.
The casual racist always justifies his/her racism w/ the binary view of black people as 'good' and 'bad' in terms of his everyday interaction with Black people.
I have no reason to believe that he subscribes to the same binary within the context of the voting booth, i.e., that he subscribes to the idea of the "good" Black president.
NEW YORK Gallup reports today that a new poll finds that 6 in 10 Americans believe the country is ready to have a female president, with more than that saying they would be willing to vote for one. The view of a president coming from some other minority groups is not so favorable.
"With Hillary Rodham Clinton the clear front runner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, it is natural to ask whether Americans are ready to elect their first female president," Gallup explained.
Sixty-four percent of Democrats said the country was ready for a woman in charge, compared with 54% of Republicans. About half of Democrats said the U.S. was ready to elect a black or a Jewish candidate, with Republicans coming in at 67% and 58% respectively on those questions.
But only a minority of American feel the country is ready for a Hispanic, Asian or Mormon president.
The vast majority of the public believes Americans are not ready for an atheist or gay or lesbian president.
While 6 in 10 whites believe the country is ready to elect a black, only 4 in 10 blacks feel that way.
Gallup notes, "In addition to Hillary Clinton's long-rumored candidacy, other possible 2008 non-traditional candidates include Bill Richardson, the Hispanic Gov. of New Mexico, Mitt Romney, the Mormon Gov. of Massachusetts, Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, who is Jewish, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- a black woman."
NEW YORK Gallup reports today that a new poll finds that 6 in 10 Americans believe the country is ready to have a female president, with more than that saying they would be willing to vote for one. The view of a president coming from some other minority groups is not so favorable.
"With Hillary Rodham Clinton the clear front runner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, it is natural to ask whether Americans are ready to elect their first female president," Gallup explained.
Sixty-four percent of Democrats said the country was ready for a woman in charge, compared with 54% of Republicans. About half of Democrats said the U.S. was ready to elect a black or a Jewish candidate, with Republicans coming in at 67% and 58% respectively on those questions.
But only a minority of American feel the country is ready for a Hispanic, Asian or Mormon president.
The vast majority of the public believes Americans are not ready for an atheist or gay or lesbian president.
While 6 in 10 whites believe the country is ready to elect a black, only 4 in 10 blacks feel that way.
Gallup notes, "In addition to Hillary Clinton's long-rumored candidacy, other possible 2008 non-traditional candidates include Bill Richardson, the Hispanic Gov. of New Mexico, Mitt Romney, the Mormon Gov. of Massachusetts, Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold, who is Jewish, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- a black woman."
I don't for a minute believe that people are honest about their prejudices when answering these sorts of questions.
I don't disagree with your assessment though I do think these kind of responses are notable and reflect - to a limited degree - a sign that attitudes have shifted over time. Whether or not American would REALLY be ready for a Black or female President will only get proven at a ballot box.
As for Guzzo: I don't think too many people here would disagree with you that one SHOULD use things like, say, a voting history or policy positions to factor in their choice of elected officals but in the world of realpolitik - i.e. the real world that we actually live - these things don't matter as much to voters as a basic sense of trust and connection.
I don't disagree with your assessment though I do think these kind of responses are notable and reflect - to a limited degree - a sign that attitudes have shifted over time. Whether or not American would REALLY be ready for a Black or female President will only get proven at a ballot box.
I don't dispute that a shift has occurred--if nothing else, white people now feel some pressure to lie about how they really feel. But I don't think the shift is nearly as great as people on SoulStrut would apparently like to believe.
As for Guzzo: I don't think too many people here would disagree with you that one SHOULD use things like, say, a voting history or policy positions to factor in their choice of elected officals but in the world of realpolitik - i.e. the real world that we actually live - these things don't matter as much to voters as a basic sense of trust and connection.
As sad as this is It just pisses me off and makes me wonder why anyone even bothers discussing politics.
Seriously why do we even have elections? We should just take the guy who wins the Viewers Choice Award for best male actor in '08 and make him our leader. VP goes to best supporting actor.
does anyone here honestly think america is ready for a black president? i would register to vote for any minority candidate but shit aint happening. the country needs to change a lot before we can even consider this
You protesteth too much in your cynicism. Esp for someone who has shown himself, again and again, to be ruled by political judgment that would be considered by many others to be less rational and more emotional.
Things like character and charisma matter to voters. I'm not sure how any of this could be remotely surprising to you.
You protesteth too much in your cynicism. Esp for someone who has shown himself, again and again, to be ruled by political judgment that would be considered by many others to be less rational and more emotional.
Things like character and charisma matter to voters. I'm not sure how any of this could be remotely surprising to you.
it's not but I'm a hot head asshole when it comes to the internets
I figured that out in the real world people who take the time to participate in voting and may want to know info on who and what they are voting on.
I don't think its that far of a dream, after all no one enters a fantasy sports league without studying the stats and players.
Maybe we should assign jersey #'s to the candidates?
If I was a gambling man I wouldn't bet on Obama to win, no question w/ our history and current status of gov't (one black dude in senate???) its not a safe bet by any means.
I don't think that my 'position' on Obama-for-prez, though, should be nearly as dire or pessimistic, and I think that this attitude is entirely self-defeating.
I went into the bathroom to brush my teeth the other night before bed. I came back into the bedroom where my girlfriend was reading the current Time magazine with Obama on the cover, only she was reading it in a way that it was hiding her face from the door when I walked in. Kind of a bugout to walk into a bedroom and find Obama smiling at you from the spot your lady was laying a minute ago. It was kind of comforting though, like he and I were just going to chat or something. I sleep in a california king, so there would have been plenty of room for the two of us with no uncomfortable assidents. Then she dropped the magazine when she heard me chuckle, and the dream ended.
Big_Stacks"I don't worry about hittin' power, cause I don't give 'em nuttin' to hit." 4,670 Posts
Special Ed,
I think intelligent, politically educated people of color would be skeptical about Obama's chances too.
I'm skeptical (and Black), and I do like his political views. While I am impressed by Obama as well, America is a racist, classist, and sexist country. But, I do detect some racial overtones in the dismissive statements about him, as if other bullshitter, self-serving White politicians aren't impotent and hypocritical. I find those sentiments to be rather arrogant and condescending.
besides the routine "he speaks so well" comments and time magazine articles, fat chance of ever seeing a minority on any level as prez...man, even a caucasian person with a minority mentality would not stand a chance of being elected.
now if you wanna chop off the bottom half of the states or just not include them in the voting process, that's another story...
I don't think the people who care about Obama's origins would necessarily be voting in his column in the first place...
I do--I think a lot of people that might otherwise vote Democratic would either stay home or vote Republican.
Not saying that that's a reason for him not to run, but I do think he should wait until he's had more experience in Washington and I believe that running now would significantly impact his prospects at a later point when he might actually be electable.
I agree with your latter statement. I think that Obama's testing the waters now. He hasn't made a commitment to run yet, and no wise candidate would do so this early in the race. I mean, it's going to be months and months before candidates start this process. Running and failing too early could be politically fatal; America can't stand political losers. Nixon was one of the few Presidents in the modern era that ran and lost before eventually winning later on.
As for your former statement, I think that we'd have to see first who Obama's opponent would be in that scenario. If it's a centrist-figure like McCain, then I think you're right.
For those (not FR) slow on the uptake, the obvious reason why Dems are excited about Obama is that he represents youth, hope, and a vibrance that makes the party forget cadaverous "hopefuls" like Gore and Kerry. I mean - the guy has charisma that hasn't been seen for the Dems since the days of The Squirrel Nut Zippers at the '96 Inaugural. Who else fits that bill? Edwards? I don't think so. Democrats need charisma to win in this country. GOPs need money and force and little else; they haven't needed charm since the mid-80s, and then, only briefly. Besides: voting for Hillary Clinton over a Republican would be like voting for eggplant over headcheese; both options taste bad, but the eggplant at least will be more socially responsible. Or something like that. So why not ogle the turkey-and-swiss for the moment and dream of better things to come?
Until then, Obama for Vice in 2008 (in my head).
Besides: none of us will be able to accurately gauge Obama's exact platform, or whatever, until at least a year down the line. Frankly, though: we all know what things the Republicans and Democrats stand for nowadays; it'd be folly to assume, say, that Obama would be for infanticide as a means of population control.
I don't know if American voters are petty & crazy enough to vote like this, but I can imagine people not voting for this dude just cause his last name sounds like someone who'd fly a plane into a national monument. If the guy running against him is named Hitlor or Stahlen that would be crazy funny.
besides the routine "he speaks so well" comments and time magazine articles, fat chance of ever seeing a minority on any level as prez...man, even a caucasian person with a minority mentality would not stand a chance of being elected.
Many African-Americans near me, if only jocularly, claimed Bill Clinton as "the first black President." Otherwise, I don't know what you mean by "minority mentality." Is that like "acting black?" You might want to re-think your position.
I don't disagree with your assessment though I do think these kind of responses are notable and reflect - to a limited degree - a sign that attitudes have shifted over time. Whether or not American would REALLY be ready for a Black or female President will only get proven at a ballot box.
I don't dispute that a shift has occurred--if nothing else, white people now feel some pressure to lie about how they really feel. But I don't think the shift is nearly as great as people on SoulStrut would apparently like to believe.
They feel pressured by anonymous pollsters calling anonymous numbers?
I think I might vote for a black man just because hes black.
I mean, unless he had some political position i was super opposed to, or i had serious questions about his charachter.
I like McCain too, and i wouldnt be mad at him in the white house, but if it came down to choosing between the two, id probably vote for obama. Mostly cause hes black.
Why? Cause we've never had a black president. And i think we need one. And i think he might have a better understanding of the sort of problems facing our society.. Just on the basis of him being a black man living in america.
Mabye thats an uneducated opinion, but im sick of old white dudes. Lets flip it up!
Comments
is political ability really that low on the priority scale for our politicians that we find it more important to talk about what color a candidate will bring to the office rather than what ideas?
He hasn't even announced his candidacy--perhaps he will share a platform with us if and when he decides to run.
I meant what was his platforn in his Senatorial run? what issues & causes has he supported/ been against, etc.
people are saying they'd vote for him here but they aren't saying why they'll vote for him other than he's black and he talks real good.
oh, you better believe it!!
Sponsored legislation[/b]
President George W. Bush signing the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act as bill sponsors Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Barack Obama (D-IL) look on.
Education[/b]
In April 2005, Obama sponsored his first Senate bill, the "Higher Education Opportunity through Pell Grant Expansion Act", S. 697.[29] Entered in fulfillment of a campaign promise to help needy students pay their college tuitions, the bill proposed increasing the maximum amount of Pell Grant awards to $5,100.[30] Provision for Pell Grant awards was later incorporated into the "Deficit Reduction Act", S. 1932, signed by President George W. Bush on February 8, 2006.
Immigration [/b]
Obama was a co-sponsor of the "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act", S. 1033, introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on May 12, 2005.[32] Obama also supported a later revision, the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", S. 2611, passed by the Senate on May 25, 2006.[33] He offered three amendments that were included in the bill passed by the Senate: (1) to protect American workers against unfair job competition from guest workers; require employer verification of their employees' legal immigration status through improved verification systems; and (3) fund improvements in FBI background checks of immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship.
In December 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives had passed a parallel bill, H.R. 4437, which provides for enhanced border security measures, but does not address the broader immigration reform proposals contained in the Senate's bill. Congressional inaction on this legislation has become a heated issue in the lead-up to the 2006 midterm elections, with representatives of both major parties holding the other party responsible for the stalemate.
Transparency[/b]
Obama joined with Senators Coburn (R-OK), Carper (D-DE), and McCain (R-AZ) in sponsoring the "Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act", S. 2590, to provide citizens with a website, managed by the Office of Management and Budget, listing all organizations receiving Federal funds from 2007 onward, and providing breakdowns by the agency allocating the funds, the dollar amount given, and the purpose of the grant or contract.[36] President George W. Bush signed the bill, also referred to as the "Coburn-Obama Transparency Act", into law on September 26, 2006.
Congressional delegations[/b]
Russia and Eastern Europe[/b]
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Committee member Barack Obama at a Russian base where mobile launch missiles are being destroyed by the Nunn-Lugar program.During the August recess of 2005, Obama traveled with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan. The latest in Lugar's series of Nunn-Lugar visits to the region, the trip focused on strategies to control the world's supply of conventional weapons, biological weapons, and weapons of mass destruction as a strategic first defense against the threat of future terrorist attacks.[38]
Lugar and Obama inspected a Nunn-Lugar program supported nuclear warhead destruction facility at Saratov, in southern European Russia.[39] In a diplomatic incident the Moscow Times reported as reminiscent of the Cold War, the delegation's departure from an airport in the city of Perm, at the foot of the Ural Mountains, was delayed for three hours when Russian guards sought unsuccessfully to search their plane.[40] In Ukraine, Lugar and Obama toured a disease control and prevention facility and witnessed the signing of a bilateral pact to secure biological pathogens and combat risks of infectious disease outbreaks from natural causes or bioterrorism.[41]
Middle East [/b]
In January 2006 Obama joined Senators Bayh (D-IN), Bond (R-MO), and Congressman Ford (D-TN) for meetings with U.S. military in Kuwait and Iraq. After the visits, Obama split off from the others for more meetings in Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian territories. While in Israel, Obama met with Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom. A planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had been cancelled due to his recent stroke.[42]
Obama also met with a group of Palestinian students two weeks before Hamas won the January 2006 Palestinian legislative election. ABC News 7 (Chicago) reported Obama telling the students that "the US will never recognize winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel", and that he had conveyed the same message in his meeting with Palestinian authority President Mahmoud Abbas.[43] After the election, Obama said: "My hope is that as a consequence of now being responsible for electricity and picking up garbage and basic services to the Palestinian people, that they recognize it's time to moderate their stance."[44] Referring to Obama's comment, editorial columnist George F. Will coined the phrase "Garbage Collection Theory of History."[45]
Africa[/b]
In August 2006, Obama left for his third official trip, traveling as a Congressional delegation of one to South Africa and Kenya, and making stops in Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Chad.
The trip's Kenya segment merged policy and personal elements. Obama flew his wife and two daughters from Chicago to join him in a visit to his father's birthplace, the village of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Siaya District, located near Kisumu in Kenya's rural west. Newspapers reported enthusiastic crowds at Obama's public appearances.[46] In a public gesture aimed to capitalize on the celebrity and encourage more Kenyans to undergo voluntary HIV testing, Obama and his wife took HIV tests at a Kenyan clinic.
In a nationally televised speech to students and faculty at the University of Nairobi, Obama spoke forcefully on the influence of ethnic rivalries in Kenyan politics: "Ethnic-based politics has to stop. It is rooted in the bankrupt ideology that the goal of politics is to pile as much as possible to one's family, tribe or friends. It fractures the fabric of society", Obama stated.[48] The speech touched off a public debate among rival leaders, some formally challenging Obama's remarks as unfair and improper, others defending his positions.[49][50]
He underlined the importance of Africa. "Unfortunately, our foreign policy seems to be focused on yesterday's crises rather than anticipating the crises of the future," Obama said. "Africa is not perceived as a direct threat to U.S. security at the moment, so the foreign policy apparatus tends to believe that it can be safely neglected. I think that's a mistake...It's critically important to capture a sense of hopefulness," Obama said, "to give people in Africa and people outside Africa a sense that for all the strife and hardship that the continent has been through, the spirit of the people remains resilient."[51]
Political advocacy[/b]
Speaking before the National Press Club in April 2005, Obama defended the New Deal social welfare policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt, associating Republican proposals to establish private accounts for Social Security with Social Darwinist thinking.[52]
Also in 2005, in a move more typically taken after several years of holding high political office, Obama established his own leadership political action committee devoted to channeling financial support for Democratic candidates. He has become an effective Democratic fundraiser and much sought after ally. According to an article in the Chicago Sun-Times, Obama participated in 38 fundraising events in 2005, helping to pull in $6.55 million for political issues and candidates he supports
Obama is among the first national politicians to actively engage the public through new Internet communication tools. In late 2005, he began p odcasting from his U.S. Senate official web site. It has been reported that Obama responds to and has personally participated in online discussions hosted on politically-oriented blogosphere sites.
In May 2006, Obama campaigned to maintain a $0.54 per gallon tariff on imported ethanol. Obama justified the tariff by joining Senator Durbin in stating that "ethanol imports are neither necessary nor a practical response to current gasoline prices," arguing instead that domestic ethanol production is sufficient and expanding.
In June 2006, Obama campaigned against making recent, temporary estate tax cuts permanent, calling the cuts a "Paris Hilton" tax break for "billionaire heirs and heiresses".
Also in June 2006, Obama worked to broaden his party's political base, encouraging Democrats to reach out to evangelicals and other church-going people, saying, "if we truly hope to speak to people where they???re at ??? to communicate our hopes and values in a way that???s relevant to their own ??? we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse."
of course some white democrats will defect, that is not the issue. the issue is numbers and nobody on here has done a statistical analysis of the voting population and its willingness to vote for a black man. democrats are not all liberals. look at the south. the unions. a vote for a democrat doesn't always relate to personal views about equality and civil rights.
most people vote a certain way based on what that candidate will do for them as individuals. racists will (or might) vote for Obama if it means they will pay less taxes or get their kids better educations or not have their son in Iraq for 10 more years. race is and will always be a big issue...but so is sex and the people who have already done statistical analysis have obviously determined that Hillary has a legitimate shot of winning.
Please be serious. It has been demonstrated repeatedly that the American electorate is simply too dumb or uninformed to vote based on personal interest. Why do you suppose poor white people vote for Republican candidates? Or well-off people voting for liberal canddiates, whose economic platform usually runs counter to their interests? No, Americans generally vote based on how the candidate makes them feel, and a Black candidate will make a lot of white voters feel uncomfortable.
Get real. Nobody but Hillary actually thinks she has a shot at beating McCain.
I certainly didn't forget that, because I don't subscribe to it.
The casual racist always justifies his/her racism w/ the binary view of black people as 'good' and 'bad' in terms of his everyday interaction with Black people.
I have no reason to believe that he subscribes to the same binary within the context of the voting booth, i.e., that he subscribes to the idea of the "good" Black president.
Well...as "hard" as poll numbers can be.
I don't for a minute believe that people are honest about their prejudices when answering these sorts of questions.
Perhaps because Black people take a more realistic view of the extent of white racism than many white people are willing to.
I don't disagree with your assessment though I do think these kind of responses are notable and reflect - to a limited degree - a sign that attitudes have shifted over time. Whether or not American would REALLY be ready for a Black or female President will only get proven at a ballot box.
As for Guzzo: I don't think too many people here would disagree with you that one SHOULD use things like, say, a voting history or policy positions to factor in their choice of elected officals but in the world of realpolitik - i.e. the real world that we actually live - these things don't matter as much to voters as a basic sense of trust and connection.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6286479
I don't dispute that a shift has occurred--if nothing else, white people now feel some pressure to lie about how they really feel. But I don't think the shift is nearly as great as people on SoulStrut would apparently like to believe.
As sad as this is It just pisses me off and makes me wonder why anyone even bothers discussing politics.
Seriously why do we even have elections? We should just take the guy who wins the Viewers Choice Award for best male actor in '08 and make him our leader. VP goes to best supporting actor.
You protesteth too much in your cynicism. Esp for someone who has shown himself, again and again, to be ruled by political judgment that would be considered by many others to be less rational and more emotional.
Things like character and charisma matter to voters. I'm not sure how any of this could be remotely surprising to you.
it's not but I'm a hot head asshole when it comes to the internets
I figured that out in the real world people who take the time to participate in voting and may want to know info on who and what they are voting on.
I don't think its that far of a dream, after all no one enters a fantasy sports league without studying the stats and players.
Maybe we should assign jersey #'s to the candidates?
I don't think that my 'position' on Obama-for-prez, though, should be nearly as dire or pessimistic, and I think that this attitude is entirely self-defeating.
I'm skeptical (and Black), and I do like his political views. While I am impressed by Obama as well, America is a racist, classist, and sexist country.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
now if you wanna chop off the bottom half of the states or just not include them in the voting process, that's another story...
believe in it.
Pooh-pooh to you guys.
I agree with your latter statement. I think that Obama's testing the waters now. He hasn't made a commitment to run yet, and no wise candidate would do so this early in the race. I mean, it's going to be months and months before candidates start this process. Running and failing too early could be politically fatal; America can't stand political losers. Nixon was one of the few Presidents in the modern era that ran and lost before eventually winning later on.
As for your former statement, I think that we'd have to see first who Obama's opponent would be in that scenario. If it's a centrist-figure like McCain, then I think you're right.
For those (not FR) slow on the uptake, the obvious reason why Dems are excited about Obama is that he represents youth, hope, and a vibrance that makes the party forget cadaverous "hopefuls" like Gore and Kerry. I mean - the guy has charisma that hasn't been seen for the Dems since the days of The Squirrel Nut Zippers at the '96 Inaugural. Who else fits that bill? Edwards? I don't think so. Democrats need charisma to win in this country. GOPs need money and force and little else; they haven't needed charm since the mid-80s, and then, only briefly. Besides: voting for Hillary Clinton over a Republican would be like voting for eggplant over headcheese; both options taste bad, but the eggplant at least will be more socially responsible. Or something like that. So why not ogle the turkey-and-swiss for the moment and dream of better things to come?
Until then, Obama for Vice in 2008 (in my head).
Besides: none of us will be able to accurately gauge Obama's exact platform, or whatever, until at least a year down the line. Frankly, though: we all know what things the Republicans and Democrats stand for nowadays; it'd be folly to assume, say, that Obama would be for infanticide as a means of population control.
Many African-Americans near me, if only jocularly, claimed Bill Clinton as "the first black President." Otherwise, I don't know what you mean by "minority mentality." Is that like "acting black?" You might want to re-think your position.
They feel pressured by anonymous pollsters calling anonymous numbers?
I mean, unless he had some political position i was super opposed to, or i had serious questions about his charachter.
I like McCain too, and i wouldnt be mad at him in the white house, but if it came down to choosing between the two, id probably vote for obama. Mostly cause hes black.
Why? Cause we've never had a black president. And i think we need one. And i think he might have a better understanding of the sort of problems facing our society.. Just on the basis of him being a black man living in america.
Mabye thats an uneducated opinion, but im sick of old white dudes. Lets flip it up!