Obama – Small Town Voters Just A Bunch Of Bitter Immigrant Haters


Every friggin day Obama is showing us that he is one piece of work:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.

And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Oh, I see. Those small town types who enjoy their guns and religion and believe that illegal immigration should be…well, illegal are now just bitter people.

Now this is what you would call a stereotype. And one which Obama would be screaming about if a group were saying this stuff about blacks. But hey, its all good when your the messiah.

Question – Wasn’t Obama part of some religious group….A group that believed the whites infected blacks with AIDS on purpose. I recall hearing something about that but I’m not sure.


McCain response:

Asked to respond, McCain adviser Steve Schmidt called it a “remarkable statement and extremely revealing.”

“It shows an elitism and condescension towards hardworking Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking,” Schmidt said. “It is hard to imagine someone running for president who is more out of touch with average Americans.”


Hillary responds:

Hillary Clinton, jumping on Obama’s San Francisco comments on the bitterness in small-town Pennsylvania during a speech in Philadelphia just now, hit Obama hard:

Clinton said she’d seen in the media that “my opponent said that the people of Pennsylvania who faced hard times are bitter.”

“Well, that’s not my experience,” she continued. “As I travel around Pennsylvania, I meet people who are resilient, who are optimistic, who are positive, who are rolling up their sleeves. They’re working hard every day for a better future for themseves and their children.”

“Pennsylvanians don’t need a president who looks down on them. They need a president who stands up for them, who fights for them, who works hard for your futures, your jobs, and your families,” she said, implicitly casting Obama as an elitist.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

All he was saying was that people scapegoat others. What did he say that isn’t true?

Typical black politican!

And we CAN look up the quotes on You Tube. Yonason found these:

No, he was not talking about scapegoating. He was saying that because people are bitter about being left behind they cling to guns, religion or xenophobic behavior. The implication is that if they hadn’t been left behind they wouldn’t need guns or religion as crutches. If McCain had made remarks like this, the press would have been completely derisive.

Let’s see what they have “overlooked” about BHO:

1) A 20 year intimate association with a rabidly racist preacher who was a converted Muslim.
2) His association with Louis Farrakhan and his participation in the million man march. Farrakhan is also a rabid racist and anti-semite.
3) The fact that Obama is the most left wing senator in Congress.
4) Michelle Obama’s frequent anti-American comments and references to class warfare.
5) The fact that Obama’s father was a communist, to wit:

1965 paper written by Obama’s father, in which he advocates:

— 100% taxation

— communal farms / the elimination of private farming

— the nationalization of businesses owned by “Europeans” and “Asians”.

— “active” measures to bring about a classless society

Barack Obama has written in his autobiography that he organized his life around the ideals imparted by his Kenyan father, Barak H. Obama, a Harvard-trained economist.

But then Obama NEVER says anything wrong.

I read that he said this at his speech on Billionaire’s Row in SF last weekend. The regular folk don’t think like the monied, privileged and powered elite.

With our hosts indulgence:



He was ABSOLUTELY talking about scapegoating and every word he said was true. He didn’t say that everyone in a small town is a xenophobic bigot, he was saying that people WHO HAVE BEEN SCREWED OVER become resentful and look for people to scapegoat and things which make them feel better (guns, religion).

His father left him when he was two, so it’s irrelevant what his father said (not that I believe he ever wrote any of the crap in the first place).

He said this to a bunch of billionaires in San Francisco, of all places. It’s like one of those so called “unconscious” desires to fail you read about all the time. I mean, this is the kind of gross idiocy you expect from his wife.These comments mark the beginning of the end of Obama’s campaign for the presidency.

I’ve been waiting for this.
His true colors.

What about all of the EMPLOYED church going, firearm owners that happen to think that
undocumented workers ARE in fact illegal?
Ummm, wake up folks, US Citizens, for many generations, have loved God, owned guns
and had a negative opinion of law-breakers.

Can I ask why so many Americans are still behind Barack Hussein Obama?
He’s been in federal politics for how many years? 2?
Wake up America

Thanks Mike for putting up what Yonason found, very enlightening. As much as the media has touted “The Audacity of Hope,” there’s been pretty much no mention in the MSM of “Dreams of my Father,” which certainly seems to give far more insight into the twisted beliefs that BHO holds at his core; it almost has a Mein Kampf like quality to it with its overweening sense of persecution by “white” instead of “Jewish” bogeymen.
Ken, if his father left so little imprint on BHO’s life, why did he write an entire book called “Dreams of my Father,” instead of “Dreams of my Grandmother” about the woman that actually devoted her life to raising him? BHO embarked on a trip to Kenya to learn even more about his father, so I think that his father’s thoughts and beliefs are hardly “irrelevant” to the discussion at hand.

Well, having grown up in a small town pretty much like the one Obama describes, I can say there’s a lot of truth in his words.

He didn’t say that some people were JUST bitter, he said that some people were bitter. The “just” was added by you to make the statement sound worse. That’s intellectually dishonest.

Obama’s father left him when he was little, so naturally he loves his father and Muslims in general, dedicates a book to his father and campaigns for his Sharia-imposing cousin in Kenya. He was raised by his white grandmother so he is naturally resentful of white people. The United States enabled his success, so naturally he wants to destroy the United States as it’s known today. That’s the reverse psychology behind Obama, the friend of our enemies and the enemy of our friends.

The only people I see that are bitter, are the Liberals that are bitter that they lost to the dumb Bushitler. I have never seen the good hard working conservatives or independents bitter, but if you ask any liberal about anything it always goes back to how bad Bush is screwing the country. Or of course the Liberals big nemesis, Corporations. You know the people that actually pay people a wage and make money in our retirement accounts.

I actually live in one of those small towns in Flyover Country. And most are not bitter, they move on and find jobs. it is called self-reliance and it is something Liberals have no clue about. the government has to do everything for them

So overblown. BHO was simply explaining what happens in small town america, or for that matter, in any area were people are impovrished or feel left behind. This is not a criticism of any race or class of people. It’s a understanding of what drives behaviour with the hopes of
being empathetic to points of views when everyone is positioned at the leadership table. You
can’t hope to lead a diverse group if you don’t have empathy for their plight or point of view.
The media seems to be taking a sound bite and not the full statement and therefore are making
this larger than life. In my humble opinion, I believe we need leadership that understands
what drives behavior so when ordinary people are position at the decision table, their are ears listening that have an understanding of their point of view…

“antipathy to people who aren’t like them”

He’s calling them racists. Really he’s literally calling them racists. He used Xenophobe next…most Pennsylvanians will have an immigrant father or Grandfather.

Okay, how the F*CK did you’re team foist Obama on the Dems? I’m convinced this was anticipated by the GOP.

I just heard Karl Rove say that with these small town comments BHO just lost any chance he had of winning in PA. As one who grew up in small town PA, I think this will not sit well with those “typical small town folks”. It comes off condescending and elitist.

John Mayer: As with Hillary Clinton or B.H.O. or John McCain for that matter we can’t know what is truly in their hearts. We can only observe them and look for patterns of behavior that provide the best indicator as to who they really are and what they believe.

We know Hillary is a liar. That pattern is well established and recently confirmed.

We are only know learning who and what drives B.H.O. This statement, combined with the “typical white person” remark when describing his grandmother and what he wrote in his books is presenting a pattern that describes him.

It’s not the pretty picture of hopeful change that B.H.O. and friends would like us all to believe.

He consistently makes America seem a very dark, angry place full of injustice.

That may appeal to the self loathing liberals who make up the base of the Democrat Party, but it’s not the view held by the majority of Americans who love this country and are damn glad to be born or live here.

John Mayer and Ken S.

Are either of you two folks from a small town? Somehow I doubt it, although you speak as if you have authoritarian knowledge of what it is like. Trust me. I grew up in a small town in West Virginia and your (and Obama’s) vision of small town life is complete horse pucky. Obama came to adulthood in an elitist environment that was devoid of any contact with the people he now talks down too. I also notice that you haven’t tried to refute any of the points made about Obama in my previous post. Intellectual cowardice or just indiscriminate thinking?

Yes, I’m from a small town and Obama was right on the money. There are people in my family and in my wife’s family who are embittered and resentful and who scapegoat others (especially anyone who isn’t white).

Dan, Obama never used the word “xenophobe.”

This is just another example of manufactured outrage. Obabam didn’t say small town peple are all bigots or “just” bitter. He was saying that layoffs and the exportation of jobsbreeds resentment and it does. He also didn’t say they were unemployed. People need to stop lying and twisting the words of candidates they don’t like. “Thou shalt not bear false witness.”

Xenophobe is a fairly good description of “anti-immigrant sentiment”.

Also in Penn most people have a grandpa from somewhere like Wales or Germany or Italy or Poland.

btw I’m an immigrant and everyone has been quite nice to me in the various places i’ve lived in in the states. Americans actually like an exotic foreign accent.

I’d add that Democratic voters are also unusually pro-Immigrant as well.

So i’m not entirely sure where Obama is getting his info.

He was painting a chariacature of working class Democrats.

Jack V and Mike’s America…

It’s unfortunate that rational thinking does not seem to have value in this thread. I am not BHO, so I can’t speak for him nor read his mind. I believe the thought of Obama speaking down about people in “small town” America or even the statement “typical white person” is taken out
of context for exploitation. Again my opinion and you are welcome to have your own. There is
no evidence that speaks to him being a racist or an elitist. If you would like to point to his education or his economic status, then every candidate, for that matter, every president of our country, would fall into that category.

I think we do ourselves a dis-service when we ignore the complete statement and context in which it was made. Again, in my opinion, Obama was giving “clarifying statements” as to why some people in “small town” America may feel that way. This is no different than a sociologist giving an hypothosis on inner city kids (black and white) or the affects of poverty in America.

I would much rather have someone sensitive to how our why a group of people may feel their plot in life has impacted their ability to succeed. This person has a greater chance of crafting a meaningful solution that may help in correcting or setting a new course. Without that level of sensitivity, their words would likely fall on deaf ears.

It’s exciting that this presidential race has brought about a heightened awareness of race and gender in society. I just hope that we have matured enough to have a meaningful dialog and are accepting of the possibilty of change (Black or Female).

This is so outrageous I don’t even know where to begin. First of all, there are bitter people in all towns of all sizes all over the world. How can Barack fkn Obama just kick all those from small towns into his own stereotypical category?? I never really knew anything about this guy so I never jumped to any conclusions either way, unlike most who hopped right on the bandwagon. The more I learn about this guy, and the more I hear him talk the more disgusted I am with him. There’s really no way for him to rationalize these comments to come off as eloquent or perceptive. He’s supposed to be so articulate and obviously careful with how he chooses his words in this tight race, yet he says something like this, and we’re supposed to assume that he meant something other than what his words plainly say? So guns and religion are just things that bitter people ‘cling to’? Wow way to belittle the lifestyle and beliefs of people that grew up in small towns. They’re just clinging to these things because they’re bitter about something. They couldn’t be just good people who have genuine faith. It’s that they’re resorting to religion. They couldn’t just enjoy hunting, they’re resorting to clinging to guns because they’re bitter. They don’t agree with America’s laize-faire attitude towards our border security, which is a legitimate problem that many Americans are very concerned about, they’re just bigots because they’re bitter. He rationalizes their legitimate contempt for his political views by implying that it’s because he’s black that they don’t agree with him. Guess what, I’m not from a small town, but I’ve spent alot of time in small-towns, and farm towns, and most small-town people I’ve gotten to know are great, content people. I’m not bitter, but I agree with all these things except the guns. I’ve never held a gun, and I’m not into that, but I wouldn’t be so ignorant to assume that people who enjoy hunting do so because they’re bitter and cling to it. I’m not bitter yet I’m religious. If someone said my faith was based on me resorting to clinging to it because I’m bitter I’d have some pretty harsh words for them. I’m against America’s immigration policies yet have nothing against illegal immigrants. It’s not their fault for taking advantage of our lazy security. I’d probably do the same thing if I were in their position. Am I an anomaly? I don’t think so. I think I’ve heard enough from Obama to make up my mind now. HE’S the ignorant bigot.

For what it’s worth, here is what he said:



John, your response is most civil and thoughtful, and for that I applaud you. I may not agree with your position, or ideology, but I commend you for keeping this a productive discussion.
Dan, if Obama’s rise to being within grasp of the Democratic nomination for the Presidency is a GOP conspiracy, they certainly didn’t consult me. I’d rather have a straight up contest between McCain and Hillary, versus putting a radical like Obama on the ticket, and take the chance that somehow he might get elected. While in a logical world Obama’s defamation of “middle America” and the “typical white person” might be enough to sink him utterly, and banish him from public life; here we are with Obama seeming to weather the storm in uncanny fashion. His ability to draw crowds in a virtually “messianic” fashion defies common sense…
So Dan, I would say if he scares you as much as he scares me, then vote for McCain in the event that Obama gets the Democratic nomination. You’re not the only one I’ve been having this conversation with actually; my mother (God bless her) has been a life-long Democrat, and my grandfather before her. Since my own change of thinking back in spring-summer of 2001, I have respected her “agreeing to disagree” when elections role around. I even readily accepted it when she voted for Hillary in the primary. But, if BHO gets the Democratic nod, then I’ll be darned if I’m not going to try and convince her to be a “McCain Democrat” in the fine tradition of “Reagan Democrats” as it were.
As far as a “heightened” awareness of race and gender (and I’ll thank Hillary for not dwelling on gender issues), I would contend that Obama’s appraisal is incorrect. It is precisely because the likes of himself, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton endlessly insist upon the “fact” that race is the most salient factor in our society that race relations continue to have a raw edge to them. Brave scholars like Shelby Steele and Ward Connerly are the real visionary pioneers in this matter.

question: why didn’t Barack make this statement about inner city minorities?
Is it because there are no guns in the inner city (let’s compare murder rates between city and rural)?
Is it because religion has no influence on inner city minorites (see also Rev Wright, Rev Jackson, Rev Sharpton, and others)
Is it because folks in the inner city have NOT lost jobs, HAVE been represented during the Clinton/Bush years, or some other fantasy?

Barack Obama states, “People don’t vote on economic issues because they don’t expect anybody is going to help them. You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years. … And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

Obama is out of touch, speaks from both sides of is mouth, and looks down on people that see things different than himself. This is how I got there.

First of all the people don’t vote on economic issues because Obama and the others in Washington don’t let the people vote. It will be decided for them by the elitists in Washington like Obama and big business. Obama will stand on the platform swearing to change these one sided Free trade agreements, then tell others (Canada) not to worry, its just the bitter little people complaining. That’s speaking from both sides of your mouth, back to the same old same old in Washington.

Second, the jobs are not just gone for “25 years now” they are leaving in droves since NAFTA and similar bills were passed. Two large factories in the past month have shut down in my small town of 10,000 in the past month alone. While hundreds of store fronts lie empty.

Third, we cling to our guns and religion because these rights are under constant attack from the politicians in Washington. As he speaks schools in this country ban prayer, the ten commandments, freedom of expression in artwork and freedom on speech regarding religion. But other schools freely preach Muslim, Buddhist, and Evolutionism. The other day a child was kicked out of his art class a school because a cross was in the painting. But a photo of piss in a glass is considered art in this country. As far as guns are concerned, banning guns would be like banning crack, once banned only the criminals will have them. A lot less homes are broken into and a lot less people are robed at knife and gun point because criminals don’t know whose packing. Its Obama’s constitutional right to have armed body guards, just as it’s my right to own a gun.

Fourth, Obama speaks of having a full dialog on the issues like illegal immigration. He says the small town people don’t really understand the issue. He states that we all need to get together and have this issue discussed. It looks to me that Obama thinks he already took care of this discussion for me and this country. No discussion required. This country already allows more legal immigrants in than most other countries world combined. The US is estimated to have 12-20 million illegal immigrants here in the country on top of the large legal number allowed. But big business and farmers say they don’t have enough. They need more cheep labor, more people to keep off the books, more people that don’t require insurance, and tax withholdings. Big business and farmers know that illegal immigrants don’t require medical insurance because politicians have mandated that American hospitals provide medical care to the illegals regardless if they can pay or not (give me some of that). While hospitals are going under, passing the costs to the taxpayer and the citizen in record numbers are going under trying to pay hospital bills. I say the American working people can’t survive uncontrolled outsourcing and in sourcing. We can’t compete in country of uncontrolled flooding of cheep labor.

What do I know Obama? I’m “just a typical white person.” You can call me Bitter and Small town too.

Obama spoke from the heart.

Obama has done a masterful job of dividing himself and his politcal future – which at one time could have included the Governorship of Illinois – is cooking like a roast in the hands of an Old School Irish housewife – very well done! Kingsford Quality.


It was a sarcastic joke. I’m simply f**king amazed that this guy is this close to the nomination of the Democratic Party. Kerry at least had a biography that included heroism.

So I was half joking about Obama being a plant.

I pegged him for an aristocrat months ago. I also wonderwd why the press had not gone after him harder before Iowa.

I do tend to think he’s being promoted heavily by MSNBC and ABC: And they have rarely been supportive of Democrats like Gore or Kerry–or Clinton (whom they clearly hate). So I am mystified by their current lurv for Obama.

What deal has he struck with GE or Disney?

John Mayer: You didn’t happen to work for Bill Clinton at some point or other did you? You seem to have mastered the art of obfuscation and denial.

I linked to the video yonason found of Obama in his own words, IN CONTEXT, from his books which are interspersed with Rev. Wright’s outrageous statements on video.

It’s up to people to decide for themselves whether these statements are racist or not. But something tells me that if a white man said or wrote anything even approaching this kind of garbage (Nappy headed hoes anyone?) John Mayer would be first in line to condemn it as racist.

Once again, Obam in his own words, in context:

The problem that John Mayer and the other apologists for Obama who never have an explanation, but always have an excuse is that they are enabling one side of this race issue to continue with thoughts, words and actions that they themselves condemn.

The real problem isn’t the government letting these companies outsource, they have to let them, it’s a large drawback of capitalism. Obama speaks of contempt for that as bitterness. However… The jobs that Americans then have to pursue due to outsourcing are not being protected by the government. That is a totally legitimate beef that victims of outsourcing should have. The longer our totally lax enforcing of our own laws to avoid illegal immigration continue, the longer troubles for victims of outsourcing will continue as well. Having approx. 16 million illegal immigrants in our country only helps those who hire them to gain profit. It takes away those jobs from people that are citizens of our own country that need them badly. All the resources that illegals consume (school, police, fire, and hospital) are paid for by the same people whose jobs are being taken away by them. Our government continues to do nothing to stop this huge problem, yet Obama averts attention from that issue because it favors his deranged agenda. Not only that, but he writes off the contempt these Americans have for a HUGE growing problem that the government seems to continue to ignore. He writes it off as bigotry. Says that people cling to “anti-immigrant sentiment” and “antipathy for those who aren’t like them.” Obama…. instead of writing off these legitimate concerns for a huge problem by insinuating that it’s purely bigotry, why not give them credo by telling it like it is. Oh that’s right, because you care more about your BS agenda. You’d rather have these Americans with concerns for our illegal-immigration problem as bigots so it fits in your deranged theory. Tell it like it is, and defend these people’s totally legitimate concerns that are based on the facts, not on bigotry.

>>They couldn’t be just good people who have genuine faith. It’s that they’re resorting to religion.>>

Of course. Religion is the opiate of the people, dontchaknow…!

And of course, that brings up another thought….why is _he_ religious? Or is he? Why did he attend Trinity Church for those 20 years – just bitter?

I, for one, find no surprise, nor particular offense in what BHO said. As Pat Hickey said, he “spoke from the heart”, and he reiterated what he genuinely believes.

That said, I don’t like what his “heart says. I don’t place overdue importance on his choice of ministers and nefarious associations, etal. I just choose to look at how their influence has molded his thoughts towards governance.

And that mold is obvious. Obama plays to, and depends on, an electorate of “victims” to win. Victims defined as those who feel wronged and persecuted, and their ills are always the fault of others. BHO lays out his vision for our future quite clearly with his “A Perfect Union Speech”. (Emphasis added by me)

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination – and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past – are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations.

It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the worlds great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brothers keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sisters keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

Unfortunately, what BHO means by “us” in the last paragraph excerpt is not private individuals, but government. Mandated charity as “keepers”. He pays no mind that when government is the middle man, siphoning off the top, the brothers and sisters get the short end of the stick.

BHO believes the dreams of his American “victims” came at the expense of white America. And to correct that, we owe them by pushing the minority agenda with affirmative action’esque social programs, and more wasted federal money thrown at a deplorable public school system, riddled with propaganda and revisionist history. The same school system who has molded our youth into a “gimme gimme for free” mentality, instead of stressing the joy and rewards for success from self accomplishment and hard work.

BHO is naive in foreign policy, and one who dreams utopia exists – achieved thru a more socialist America. And that, alone, is enough for me to fear him as POTUS. Hopefully, if either HRC or BHO implement their wallet draining programs upon election, the electorate will wake up to the reality and vote out the nanny Congressional purse strings midterms. I only hope whatever damage the DNC, in control of all branchs, do can be reversed.

Then again, the GOP in control of everything was also deplorable. Talk about blowing it big time. To go from no checks and balances with all GOP to the same under the DNC is no improvement. It is “change” we will all pay for dearly.

Obama the “uniter”!

So, there was no bitterness and no “clinging to religion” with the folks who blamed 9/11 on “America’s sin?” How about those who blamed Katrina on New Orleans’ “sexual sins?” Can we get a shout out to the Americans who invoke God’s name in gratitude for IEDs? How about those pious people who talk about the “sin” of abortion when they won’t lift a finger (or spend a dollar) to help a woman through an unwanted pregnancy? How about those religious leaders who castigate one sin while committing others themselves? How about the preacher who won’t open his church’s finances and whose Rolls-Royce limousine was a “love gift?” Have any of you ever seen a church split over some minor issue, with both sides pointing fingers and claiming the holy high ground?

Heck, my own denomination was founded on the bitterness that resulted from a decision that the money of slaveholders was unsuitable for supporting God’s missionaries, and it took us 100 years to figure that out and apologize for it.

It’s an unpleasant truth, but we cling to religion for many reasons, and not all of those reasons are honorable.

It’s true. These guys appear to be bitter, immigrant haters clinging to their guns and religion.


God Bless America and our troops. Stay safe guys.

Wes Morgan: How many of those people you cite are running for President?

Do you understand the difference?

These phony moral equivalence arguments just don’t add up.

Wow, Wes… some of your categories?

the folks who blamed 9/11 on “America’s sin?”…
those who blamed Katrina on New Orleans’ “sexual sins?” …
the Americans who invoke God’s name in gratitude for IEDs?…

All three sound like bonafide America haters, citizens or not. These views are shared by the enemy, Islamic jihadists.

Now I’m no fan of Obama… but I sure don’t believe this is the extreme class of “American victims” to which he wants to appeal. Or even close to those he was (badly) attempting to portray.

And if I’m wrong, and he does seek to enfranchise the radical disenfranchised… then this guy should get no where near the WH.

I personally have not read one snippet of anyone who believed New Orleans was ravaged by Katrina for “sexual sins”. Would take one oppressive religion to make that leap. But modern Christian churches?? Certainly not as the norm.

And that unwanted pregnancy scenario? Most Christian churches would be the ones to provide that very help. As well as family members, friends, etal. I sure hope you aren’t suggesting the taxpayers need to provide that help.

So I’m not sure your analogies actually support your final point… which I entirely agree with, BTW. There are probably many who cling to a religion for reasons that are not honorable. But I do not believe they are a notable segment of the US population. And certainly not thriving in large numbers in PA to be labeled as BHO’s “bitter” Americans.

Mike’s America writes: “John Mayer: You didn’t happen to work for Bill Clinton at some point or other did you? You seem to have mastered the art of obfuscation and denial.”

— No I did not. I simply believe that this is being taken out of context for gain at the expense of a very serious election that should be decided on issues not emotion. He was neither being racist or condescending. Again, his statements reflected a rationalization of what people feel when they are disenfrachised from a system they help to create. Would I want a leader who was thoughtful enough to listen from the perspective of the speaker? The answer, yes. Would I want a leader who listened from THEIR perspective? The answer would be NO.. Very dangerous.

Mike’s America writes: “I linked to the video yonason found of Obama in his own words, IN CONTEXT, from his books which are interspersed with Rev. Wright’s outrageous statements on video.”

— Rather than put snip-its in a well put together video psuhing certain views, why not encourage those you write to in the blog to read the book and conclude for themselves. I think
that would be more constructive than manipulating opinions via video clips. The video represents good marketing and “PR” work but should not be used to persuade voters. Please read the books and speaches for yourself. Then you will ensure that nothing is taken out of context.

Mike’s America writes: “It’s up to people to decide for themselves whether these statements are racist or not. But something tells me that if a white man said or wrote anything even approaching this kind of garbage (Nappy headed hoes anyone?) John Mayer would be first in line to condemn it as racist.”

— Let’s distinguish between racist statements and explanation of a sentiment or behavior. What Imus said was racist. Does that mean that he is racist? I don’t have the answer because I don’t know him personally. In 2008, 2006 or 2007 at the time, given the progress we have made in America, I would beleive that he is not. What’s interesting is that my opinion does not matter and I am okay with that. However, that statement “Nappy headed hoes”, is a far cry from BHO comments explaining some of the sentiments/feelings in “small town america”. If you are specifically calling out passages from his book as racist, please explain which ones. It’s simple in my mind. This is not about race or gender. BHO is showing that as a leader, you have to understand your audience and their perspectives/view/feelings on various issues. He has shown and continues to show that he does and can by empathetic and sympathetic to this. I think what is at stake is that this is frieghtening to many. It is easier to cast someone as a racist rather than trying to see their point of view and then draw conclusions. What’s interesting is that he has not said anything racist, but rather, simply tried to awaken America to the thoughts driving people in Rural America, Inner City America, Middle Class America, Upper Middleclass America and Rich America. You can add ethnic origin to this as you like, but suffice it to say, income has a way of blurring racial lines.

Mike’s America writes: “The problem that John Mayer and the other apologists for Obama who never have an explanation, but always have an excuse is that they are enabling one side of this race issue to continue with thoughts, words and actions that they themselves condemn.”

— On the contrary, I would love for this to rise above race, as it should, and focus on issues. If we realize that void of color, we all want jobs, better education, access to capital, better roads, schools, healthcare, an opportunity for our kids and the list goes on. We begin to walk down the path of change. I make no excuses for any one. I simply want people to read for themselves and not be persuaded by threads that take statements out of context, video marketing clips to persuade voters for certain candidates etc. I look forward to issues coming to the table so I can see how candidates respond.

MataHarley, I chose those examples carefully. Those statements were/are made by, respectively, Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell, John Hagee, and Fred Phelps; all four are Americans, and all four are religious figures. (I could have easily added the statement of Jeremiah Wright, but those have been reported (and misreported) upon widely in recent weeks.) The first three are identified with conservative/Republican causes, but Phelps is a Democrat who once ran for public office; I made it a point to select from both left and right.

I also chose them for a different reason. Without knowing their sources, you said that they all sounded like “bonafide America haters.” Now that you know the sources, can you understand the discomfort many feel with politicians seeking/accepting political endorsements from these people? They corrupt both politics and the Church, but (in my opinion) they do more damage to the latter.

Mike, you asked how many of those figures are running for President. It should be noted that McCain actively sought (and, in Hagee’s case, secured) political endorsements from several of these people (no one would want Phelps’ endorsement); McCain went so far as to name Hagee a “spirtual guide.” I believe that Hagee’s endorsement was reported on this very blog, even as people were bashing Obama over Rev. Wright’s comments. It isn’t a “moral equivalence” argument, but rather a statement on the intersection between religion and politics (to the detriment of both). Personally, I don’t think that God has a party affiliation, and it disgusts me when others argue that He does.


Returning to the general point, I do know people who have thrown themselves into “something else” when they lost their jobs, suffered a medical setback or went through other personal trauma. For some (I live in Kentucky, after all) it was hunting and guns, others threw themselves into church (though, sadly, not necessarily faith – there’s a difference), the Internet filled the void for some, and still others turned to drugs and/or alcohol. Yes, there’s some bitterness in all of them; some people just rise above it better than others.

John Mayer: If we reprinted the ENTIRE book here, or linked to an entire sermon by Rev. Wright you would still complain that we focused on the parts which illuminate the “bitter” side of Obama’s nature. And if you want to start talking about reading assingments, I’ll prepare a list for you.

Both you are Wes have been unmasked as enablers of the kind of hate speech you wouldn’t tolerate for a second if the speaker or writer was a Republican.

And Wes, apparently you do NOT understand the difference between a supporter and a Presidential candidate. Read again what I said and think about it.

Continuing to push phony moral equivalence arguments undermines any valid point you may wish to make.

Mike’s America writes: “John Mayer: If we reprinted the ENTIRE book here, or linked to an entire sermon by Rev. Wright you would still complain that we focused on the parts which illuminate the “bitter” side of Obama’s nature. And if you want to start talking about reading assingments, I’ll prepare a list for you.”

— On the contrary. If you published the link to the entire speach or sermons, it would lend some credibility to your point of view. Void of that, your fishing for ears and eyes. By the way, I look forward to the list…

Mike’s America writes: “Both you are Wes have been unmasked as enablers of the kind of hate speech you wouldn’t tolerate for a second if the speaker or writer was a Republican.”

— It’s unfortunate that you feel that way. Hate speech is hate speech wether Replublican, Democrat or Independent. Hate speech has no political, racial or ethnic ties.. It simply has a point of view. To understand the source, you have to understand their point of view. This is precisely the issue at hand, simply understanding the point of view of the diverse people that make up the American populus. I don’t believe you have to be Republican, Democrat or Independent to understand that. It’s apparent that BHO is trying to do this but is being met with opinions and arguments that are stalling this effort.

Mike’s America writes: “And Wes, apparently you do NOT understand the difference between a supporter and a Presidential candidate. Read again what I said and think about it.

Continuing to push phony moral equivalence arguments undermines any valid point you may wish to make.”

— Can’t speak for Wes.

I look forward to the list.

Well Wes, I personally can say I don’t identify beliefs with the TV evangelists you mentioned, nor hold them up as icons. Hang, as a kid, I found the local southern Baptist church too oppressive. So it’s interesting you mention these men as the sources. I’ve always had a distrust of the big money TV evangelical enterprises… despite race or denomination. So I often place them into the same offensive category I place Rev. Wright.

Perhaps TV evangelists feel the decay of civilization brings these ills. The ol’ “fire and brimstone” pulpit is certainly not dead and – as in the case of these men including Wright – often viewed more as religious entertainment than doctrine. Those big tent gatherings provide an evening of energy anad emotion, but they are not the weekly church gathering. Hard to get that “ol time religion” via a TV screen, so religion is still rooted in community. Worship and attendence still takes place predominantly in local churches, synagogues, temples and mosques.

So I don’t see the majority of Americans believing this country’s “sins” (as opposed to those who blame foreign policy) bring on natural or terrorist disasters.

Mike’s A stresses that these evangelists aren’t running for office, thereby not applicable. You counter that it’s not much different than the media criticism of BHO/Wright ties.

In a way, you are both right. These ties with religious entertainment extremes exist, but do not define the individual and his actual religious beliefs. So they have little to do with my assessment of a candidate.

What *does* define their individual beliefs are their own words. BHO may not be “racist”, but he most certainly promises race favoritism (aka affirmative action style policies) in his governance. He made that abundantly clear in his “A More Perfect Union” speech. He also envisions a better country under increased socialism.

So I don’t care who he hangs out with, who endorses him, or what slip of the tongue he makes that brings the PC media machine alive – parsing words and applying perceived absolutes. BHO has told us in unequivocal terms how he wants to govern. He is a socialist making it sound very pretty via a booming baritone, flashy settings, and eloquent execution.

Unfortunately, this country is now filled with too many that want government support for all aspects of their lives because it’s too hard to support themselves. They are not bitter. They are lazy, unambitious and seeking the easy way out. That is the class of self-described victims of government that BHO and HRC seek as their electorate. And that is the decay of humanity I mourn the most.

Yo CURT! HELP!!!! :0) Wow… test test test. J

ust did a “submit comment” on this thread (before this one), and it’s GONE! Not here! Let’s see if this one gets here.

Boy don’t we all get spoiled with instanteous cyber technology. Sure miss it when it hiccups!

Mata Harley: I just checked the comment queue and couldn’t find anything listed as spam or awaiting moderation.

There have been some weird comment problems for a while now. Email Curt (address is on his profile) and let him know what happened.

John Mayer: Check with Wordsmith for a link to an entire Rev. Wright Sermon. He sat through one and concluded that there were enough cherries to pick from it that it amounted to a cherry tree of racism.

As for reading assignments: I prefer history. Last year I finished the six volumes of Winston’s Churchill’s history of the Second World War and his 4 volume “History of the English Speaking Peoples.”

If you want to know what the future holds, Churchill will tell you what has happened before and show you how it can and will happen again.

You won’t find any overt blundering racism as you might on every 4th page of an Obama book or a Wright sermon, just a solid understanding of right and wrong and how to combat evil when we confront it.

The second volume of Margaret Thatcher’s is also a favorite of mine. But maybe that’s because I’ve been privileged to see her in person on a number of occasions.

One other book I haven’t read yet, but would add to the list are the letters of Ronald Reagan.

I’ve also got former Secretary of State George Shultz’s rather long book sitting in the pile here. But that’s going to have to wait until I finish a few others first.