Desicritics Comments on Who's Sane About Obama's Middle Name?

Comment by kerty

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:41:05 EDT

Overwhelming % of Blacks voting for democrats could mean - That they do not like white-centric Gop party - That they identify with ideologies and policies adopted by democrats Blacks have been consistent about it throughout past elections. So if they vote again in like manner, it is not because Oabama is black, but because they feel policies of democrats are best for them. If majority of jews refuse to for a Nazi party, it would not make them racist.

Comment by kaffir

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:15:19 EDT

Guido, but blacks in America have voted in overwhelming numbers for the Democratic candidates in the past too, as compared to the Republican candidates. Methinks you are ignoring that trend from your analysis in your haste to attach a "racist" label to blacks deciding to vote for Obama this time in much greater numbers than 4 years ago.

Comment by Guido

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:12:09 EDT

Kerty#25, If McCain loses, it will not be because he's too far right. The conservative base has never lent their support and considers him a typical RINO (Republican In Name Only). While some will hold their nose and vote against Obama, others share your view that it's time to let the liberals ruin the day. Many ascribe to the phoenix strategy. That is the traits of real conservatism (some of which you mention) will arise from the ashes in the GOP, once Barack and the Democrats really screw things up. But Obama isn't CinC yet. I think your comments (for the most part) are on target. Ciao, Guido

Comment by Guido

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:57:44 EDT

SS#24 Not my stats. Google the subject and you'll get a range from 89 to 97 percent, depending on source and location. Either number tells the story. I didn't intend to suggest that all blacks were voting their race. But the numbers are undeniable as are the implications. Derogatory or not, the fact is a very large number of African-Americans are voting skin color. Justified? That's a judgment call. Condoning it in any form for one group or the other is a slippery slope I want no part of. It is racism and no amount of rationalization will change it. Ciao, Guido

Comment by temporal

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:53:04 EDT

adi: I was asked what Aditi meant in Arabic. I was asked in all seriousness why I was so sold on going to hell. Even as I tried to comprehend the question I was then shrilly reprimanded in the middle of a busy mall for not accepting Lord Jesus Christ as my savior. heheh! w/b *** it is all so Rovianesque but Karl is being trumped this time...by bloggers and citijournos... hence this brand of politics of fear and divide is not as effective as in the past

Comment by Morris

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 21:24:08 EDT

The fact that Obama has reached where he is now speaks for the country. So there are these racists wackos here and there. So what? Are we really expecting every one to be above all these prejudices? You got to be joking. These human failings and they are part of all of us more or less. Obama knows all those things. He knew what he was going into. That is why he can take it and still come out smiling and may even turn out to be the winner. Elections are always dirty games. I am sure in India too they are not any cleaner than in the US. I am not saying that it is good. But that is the way it is. I think the author paints the picture a lot worse that it is. If it was any where as bad as she says Obama would have been still a community councelor some where in Chicago.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:37:32 EDT

Correction......in #25 end of para 2.......This is NOT the year to be a republican.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:31:20 EDT

Guido There is no denying that conservatives have screwed up America big time. Their ideological dogmatism and 6 out of 8 years of absolute control over Washington has taken them too far to the Right as if people gave them a long rope and GOP took it to hang themselves. Conservatives consider military might, free trade, capitalism, fiscal discipline, limited government to be their natural turf, their ticket to power - but GOP has failed each of them. It is not lost on people that McCain offers more of the same failed conservative dogmatism and orthodoxy. That is why Obama's rhetorics of changes resonate so well with people. It is the year of rats. Any democrat would have won this race hands down. Obama's race has made it much closer race than it should have been. But worry not. People are likely to give Obama Hussain the same long rope, and democrats are most likely to grab it to hang themselves. If polls are to be believed, Democrats will control all 3 branches of government with nobody to hold them back for next 4 years. When economy is in tail spin, populism is likely to trump and take them to overreaching socialist remedies that would tighten a noose around government and economy. When economy needs restoring a robust wealth-creating engine, usa is most likely to restore a giant wealth redistribution machine instead. When capitalism, free trade, consumerism, financial sectors are undergoing meltdown, USA needs government intervention to boost them back to health, not an excuse to re-enact socialist welfare state. When welfare state for the economy is needed, welfare state for the classes is what it will get, prolonging the recession. It is populist, where only demagogues can thrive. We can already see the demagogory in public discourse about bailing out wall street vs bailing out main street. In foreign policy too, there will be big bumps. Sensing vulnerability of USA, new rogue regimes will emerge. McCain is making all these points quite eloquently. But people are not in a mood to listen to any republican. This is the year to be a republican. I personally feel McCain when checkmated by Democratic congress would provide an ideal political combination to wade thru difficult transition without USA getting bogg down to extremes of ideology. Need of the hour is pragmatism, not ideology. McCain has shown remarkable ability to blur ideology whenever pragmatism is needed. The same can not be said about democrats in congress or Obama, especially when there will be no pressure on them to show pragmatism, balance or restraints. I suspect, democrats will go too far and hang themselves by 2012 and GOP will have their chances to come back stronger. Best thing for GOP is to let democrats have a long rope.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:38:16 EDT

sorry but even if your math were correct (and I do not think it is) I do not think blacks voting for another black based on race is "racist" in the sense that you and I know it (the pejorative sense). I think it reflects the fact that african americans are sick of seeing people that do not really represent them in positions of power. I do not think it is racist for them to want to see that. It has been far too long coming, actually.

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:37:11 EDT

guido, your thoughts on this slice of surrelism:? ""CNN)— An interview Sen. Joe Biden did with an Orlando television station is making headlines Sunday, after the reporter asked if Sen. Barack Obama's now famous conversation with 'Joe the plumber' about 'spreading the wealth' made the Democratic nominee seem like he was adopting Marxist principles. "You may recognize this famous quote," WFTV Anchor Barbara West told Biden on Thursday. "From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs, that's from Karl Marx. How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"""

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:25:15 EDT

Guido, ""The presidential frontrunner racially represents 12% of the population. About 95% of that slice is voting their skin color."" if guido's racial logic (rather, lack thereof) is correct, i suggest americans should elect a composite president, ie. 12% Obama and the rest McCain and pale shades of palin and biden. genomics and biotechonology can make it possible. quite a specimen (namoona in "Indian") you guido!

Comment by Aditi

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:17:45 EDT

Guido, just becoz people are black and the candidate they choose happens to be black does not mean "they are voting their skin color". Very Limbaugh of you. You are assuming that they are voting for him solely for his skin color. And the King reference is only as relevant as your mention of Ferraro's comment. If Obama's mionority status contributes to his success then why didn't Hillary's?

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 17:59:34 EDT

He's back!!!! guido...

Comment by Guido

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 17:15:30 EDT

Aditi, The presidential frontrunner racially represents 12% of the population. About 95% of that slice is voting their skin color. If whites were guilty of racism as you suggest, Obama would still be living in Hawaii. That's not perception, its math. Farrero's comments taken in context suggest that Obama's minority status is PART of the reason for his success. Spinning her comments otherwise IS perception. The King reference is irrelevant; apples and oranges. Ciao, Guido

Comment by Aditi

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:26:29 EDT

Guido: One sees white people voting for a white guy, that is not racial preference but blacks voting for a perfectly capable black guy is? Maybe its all about perception, no? Offensive or not, I found Ferraro's comment quite amusing coz its only in the 21st century that one could claim that a black man was actually "lucky" to be black and that this alone was his ticket to political success in a predominantly white, sometimes prejudiced nation. :) Thats kinda like saying Martin Luther King was lucky he was black otherwise he'd never be a leader during the civil rights' movement.

Comment by Guido

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:59:12 EDT

Sorry about your not-so-pleasant American experiences. As noted, racism is everywhere and always will be. There is no defense for racism and nor should there be. But let's be fair. The polls show that the percent of blacks voting for Obama is in the nineties. If voting skin color isn't racism, tell me what is. In fact, there is a good argument that attributes his success partly to color. But of course you cannot make that argument without being ostracized. Just ask Geraldine Ferraro, who said this: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." She was attacked by her own party and had to resign from the Clinton campaign. Ridiculous to say the least. The Obama camp loves nothing more than to hear racist remarks; perceived or otherwise. And when they don't hear any, they manufacture their own by twisting unintended remarks. It only serves their purpose to stereotype McCain and the Republicans as racist hicks. Your essay does the same. No one with half a brain accuses Obama of being a terrorist. The issue is his judgment to associate with one. Only the ignorant or those appealing to ignorance will try to spin it one way or the other. Both parties are guilty of Macavelian campaign tactics. As voters, we can pick our camps without perpetuating the BS. Or not. Ciao, Guido

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 11:04:10 EDT

BTW, AN, Nice title!!!

Comment by commonsense

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 11:02:35 EDT

Vinod: ""The point I'm making is that prejudice, bias and racism are not restricted to the US of A."" a good point you raise and a point that is not often raised enough. we are (some of us are) sometimes so smug about racism is in "the west". it was not just the US where the japanese were interned during the second world war. when china and india went to war in 1962, the poor chinese (all indian citizens, living there for generations) were interned in horrible camps too. and ""desegregation"" in practice, between castes is still waiting to happen in many parts of our country. sorry AN, and the editors, we are drifting from the main topic, but not too dramatically!

Comment by kela

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:51:36 EDT

have you done a census ? lol i find there's more disgruntled miserable lesbos on the democrats side

Comment by kela

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:48:49 EDT

fuck you bhenchod

Comment by Aditi

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:47:35 EDT

chandra: I will have to respectfully disagree about your comment regarding the average democrat. my experience has been quite the opposite. there are always a few whackos on either side but republican whackos significantly outnumber those on the demo side.

Comment by kela

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:38:04 EDT

[edited]

Comment by kela

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 10:31:39 EDT

I know of friends who wouldnt get accomodation in delhi's Birla Mandir becuase they were not hindus

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 08:12:27 EDT

racism is a problem just about everywhere, period. It is not confined to the US or India or... parts of countries are better than others. here in DC there are pockets where things are better for some and worse for others. immigrants from europe and asia are treated well here. hispanics sadly have massive issues in the suburbs, and DC is affectionately known as "chocolate city" so if you are white in the DC public school system, you are a minority. chandra... biden is a special guy. you cannot judge everyone by him. he is brilliant when it comes to foreign policy, but on a daily basis he is prone to saying some pretty, errrrrrrm, unusual things. even we wish he would learn how to self edit. but at the end of the day his gaffes are much less serious than caribou barbie's

Comment by Chandra

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 00:32:56 EDT

Vinod Not if you are on a company lease and your company is a major brand