Obama calls small town Americans bitter

[hellokeith]

After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: lupi
I found this interesting.


In fact, this is a potential turning point for Obama?s campaign ? an episode that could be even more damaging than the attention to remarks by his minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, since this time the controversial words came out of his own mouth.

Here are a dozen reasons why:

1. It lets Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) off the mat at a time when even some of her top supporters had begun to despair about her prospects. Clinton hit back hard on the campaign trail Saturday. And her campaign held a conference call where former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, a Pittsburgh native, described Obama?s remarks as ?condescending and disappointing? and ?undercutting his message of hope.?


2. If you are going to say something that makes you sound like a clueless liberal, don?t say it in San Francisco. Obama?s views might have been received very differently if he had expressed them in public to Pennsylvania voters, saying he understood and could alleviate their frustrations.

3. Some people actually use guns to hunt ? not to compensate for a salary that?s less than a U.S. senator?s.

4. Some people cling to religion not because they are bitter but because they believe it, and because faith in God gives them purpose and comfort.

5. Some hard-working Americans find it insulting when rich elites explain away things dear to their hearts as desperation. It would be like a white politician telling blacks they cling to charismatic churches to compensate for their plight. And it vindicates centrist Democrats who have been arguing for a decade that their party has allowed itself to look culturally out of touch with the American mainstream.

6. It provides a handy excuse for people who were looking for a reason not to vote for Obama but don?t want to think of themselves as bigoted. It hurts Obama especially with the former Reagan Democrats, the culturally conservative, blue-collar workers who could be a promising voter group for him. It also antagonizes people who were concerned about his minister but might have given him the benefit of the doubt after his eloquent speech on race.

The irony of most of these statements is that if people would just take a minute to get off their jump to conclusions mats and actually listen to what he's saying, you'd see that he's courting those blue collar workers by describing the very things that have turned people away from politics. The idea that nothing actually gets done for the little people isn't exactly some nationwide secret. The fact that he uses examples of people clinging to things that are generally of less importance (not everything in politics needs to be subjective) is in no way elitist, it's truthful.

There are obvious and glaring large scale issues that need to be dealt with that a President can have a direct effect on. Focusing on gun control or lack thereof, focusing on providing gays equal rights or taking it away from them, etc. are secondary issues when compared to issues such as when the occupation of Iraq is going to end so that we're not setting records for our national debt levels, how will we stem an economic recession from occurring, how will we bring back prosperity to the US including the small towns out there. Many of the secondary issues that people focus on these days aren't even determined by the Executive branch. They are sent off to be determined through laws by Congress and further interpretation by the Judicial branch.

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

But that's what they mean to do - the anti-Obama folks aren't interested what the man has said, but only what they can take out it and believe he said.

Sadly, it has been the routine that the republicans have ran against the democrats over and over again.

I also find it strange that some of those people who support Hillary are so against Obama, when they both are quite close in ideology....

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

But that's what they mean to do - the anti-Obama folks aren't interested what the man has said, but only what they can take out it and believe he said.

Sadly, it has been the routine that the republicans have ran against the democrats over and over again.

I also find it strange that some of those people who support Hillary are so against Obama, when they both are quite close in ideology....

The thing that really gets me is that the same sentiment Obama is addressing has been discussed many times on P&N and if I remember correctly, most of the posters agreed that the politicians were focusing too much on "shock" topics as if they were garnering attention the way the media does. People complained that there was a lack of focus on the important issues affecting this country but as soon as Obama brings it up, it's now somehow elitist that people feel disenfranchised from mainstream politics. It's as if the sheer amount of reposts of the same information on P&N has diluted people's memories of their own past posts.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

But that's what they mean to do - the anti-Obama folks aren't interested what the man has said, but only what they can take out it and believe he said.

Sadly, it has been the routine that the republicans have ran against the democrats over and over again.

I also find it strange that some of those people who support Hillary are so against Obama, when they both are quite close in ideology....

The lion is hounded by jackals.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

Go ahead and call it so we'll have something to discuss in November. Another 'epic fail' to add to your repertoire?

This was a non-issue, as I expected. The newest Gallup shows Obama barely got a scratch from the 'bitter' issue. Clinton's desperation is as clear as glass right now, and the public sees it.

 

[Duddy]

Wow, Obama nailed it! Great job!!!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

And that does not mean the same ratios will hold true for a general election. Come on vic - you should know better...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

dp

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

But that's what they mean to do - the anti-Obama folks aren't interested what the man has said, but only what they can take out it and believe he said.

Sadly, it has been the routine that the republicans have ran against the democrats over and over again.

I also find it strange that some of those people who support Hillary are so against Obama, when they both are quite close in ideology....

The thing that really gets me is that the same sentiment Obama is addressing has been discussed many times on P&N and if I remember correctly, most of the posters agreed that the politicians were focusing too much on "shock" topics as if they were garnering attention the way the media does. People complained that there was a lack of focus on the important issues affecting this country but as soon as Obama brings it up, it's now somehow elitist that people feel disenfranchised from mainstream politics. It's as if the sheer amount of reposts of the same information on P&N has diluted people's memories of their own past posts.

Uh, what he said was not about the issues, it was suggesting that the things he listed were somehow only there/held on to when people are bitter. THAT is why it sounds elitist. The people I know who believe in those issues do so no matter what the gov't is doing/not doing at the time and no matter their own level of "bitterness". So yes, IMO, he's out of touch and his remarks came across as elitist...but that's not really surprising to me...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

And that does not mean the same ratios will hold true for a general election. Come on vic - you should know better...

Of course not those exact ratios, but it is an excellent indicator of which party has the momentum.

And CAD, you should know better than to cling to the Pubs after 8 years of GW Bush. After what his administration has done to strengthen the power, scope, and cost of the federal government, I'd think you'd see a liberal Democrat like Obama as a small government type. I know I do.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

And that does not mean the same ratios will hold true for a general election. Come on vic - you should know better...

Of course not those exact ratios, but it is an excellent indicator of which party has the momentum.

And CAD, you should know better than to cling to the Pubs after 8 years of GW Bush. After what his administration has done to strengthen the power, scope, and cost of the federal government, I'd think you'd see a liberal Democrat like Obama as a small government type. I know I do.

No, it doesn't necessarily indicate momentum. It does show some enthusiasm for candidates however.

I "cling" to no political party and no, obamarama is no where close to being a small gov't type. He's a liberal through and through, it's just he's been good at wrapping it in platitudes and hype that people lap up. I see NOTHING from bho that suggests he would shrink or stop the growth of gov't.
But none of this has anything to do with the topic - which is his condescending comments and attitude.

 

[Andyb23]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Many of you are twisting his words as if you're merely breezing over his statements looking for loaded words and then basically formulating a faulty conclusion. There's reading for summary and there's reading for understanding. It would seem that those who are calling Obama an elitist are reading for brevity and not for content.

But that's what they mean to do - the anti-Obama folks aren't interested what the man has said, but only what they can take out it and believe he said.

Sadly, it has been the routine that the republicans have ran against the democrats over and over again.

I also find it strange that some of those people who support Hillary are so against Obama, when they both are quite close in ideology....

I think a lot of Hillary Clinton voters are against Obama mainly because of his rabid fans. I know that on many blogsites like that one called the Daily KOS or the Huffington Post if someone posts anything thats not completely positive about Obama they all start ragging on you like theres tomorrow. I remember I posted a seemingly docile post questioning that Reverend Wright situation and Obama fans were yelling at me left and right calling me a racist and a republican. Its a real turn-off.

Even in real life a lot of Obama fans are very zealous. I remember in one of my classes some 35 year old woman asked me if I was voting for Obama and I said no and she called me a moron I was shocked.

Also Obama just seems to repeat everything Clinton says. I will admit he words it better but its fundamentally the same thing.

I think that Republicans are going to air these clips on TV endlessly when the election comes around.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

And that does not mean the same ratios will hold true for a general election. Come on vic - you should know better...

Of course not those exact ratios, but it is an excellent indicator of which party has the momentum.

And CAD, you should know better than to cling to the Pubs after 8 years of GW Bush. After what his administration has done to strengthen the power, scope, and cost of the federal government, I'd think you'd see a liberal Democrat like Obama as a small government type. I know I do.

No, it doesn't necessarily indicate momentum. It does show some enthusiasm for candidates however.

I "cling" to no political party and no, obamarama is no where close to being a small gov't type. He's a liberal through and through, it's just he's been good at wrapping it in platitudes and hype that people lap up. I see NOTHING from bho that suggests he would shrink or stop the growth of gov't.
But none of this has anything to do with the topic - which is his condescending comments and attitude.

Neither his comments nor his attitude were condescending. This is the truth. Which is that the American people have been lulled into apathy and distracted from doing anything about the issues that affect them most, while told to concern themselves only with minor issues and lies. Like the fact that Bush, even with a Republican Congress, has done more to accelerate the growth of government than any "liberal" (a word whose meaning you clearly don't understand BTW) could ever have dreamt of doing in your worst nightmares. And I see NOTHING from John Sydney McCain III that he suggests he would do anything to stop the acceleration of that growth, much less stop it.
And YET, you gloss over that as though it doesn't exist, and accuse Obama of planning to commit a crime which your so-called "conservative" party has in fact already committed. And expect us not to notice this pesky little disconnect...

Now, I ask you... who is being condescending? Oh wait... we're not supposed to concern ourselves with these matters, and just take your spoon-fed word for it...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Wrong, YOU may think these issues don't really matter and that these people have been "lulled" but that's exactly the condescending elitist thinking that we're talking about here.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: hellokeith
After seeing how divided dems are on their candidates, I'm just about ready to call the election won already by McCain.. and he'll win without me even voting.

You might want to check the primary tallies. The reason the Dems are so divided this cycle is because that is where the election is being decided. Thus far in the primaries, no one is voting Republican, while the Dems are seeing record turnouts.

And that does not mean the same ratios will hold true for a general election. Come on vic - you should know better...

Of course not those exact ratios, but it is an excellent indicator of which party has the momentum.

And CAD, you should know better than to cling to the Pubs after 8 years of GW Bush. After what his administration has done to strengthen the power, scope, and cost of the federal government, I'd think you'd see a liberal Democrat like Obama as a small government type. I know I do.

No, it doesn't necessarily indicate momentum. It does show some enthusiasm for candidates however.

I "cling" to no political party and no, obamarama is no where close to being a small gov't type. He's a liberal through and through, it's just he's been good at wrapping it in platitudes and hype that people lap up. I see NOTHING from bho that suggests he would shrink or stop the growth of gov't.
But none of this has anything to do with the topic - which is his condescending comments and attitude.

Neither his comments nor his attitude were condescending. This is the truth. Which is that the American people have been lulled into apathy and distracted from doing anything about the issues that affect them most, while told to concern themselves only with minor issues and lies. Like the fact that Bush, even with a Republican Congress, has done more to accelerate the growth of government than any "liberal" (a word whose meaning you clearly don't understand BTW) could ever have dreamt of doing in your worst nightmares. And I see NOTHING from John Sydney McCain III that he suggests he would do anything to stop the acceleration of that growth, much less stop it.
And YET, you gloss over that as though it doesn't exist, and accuse Obama of planning to commit a crime which your so-called "conservative" party has in fact already committed. And expect us not to notice this pesky little disconnect...

Now, I ask you... who is being condescending? Oh wait... we're not supposed to concern ourselves with these matters, and just take your spoon-fed word for it...

dayam...remind me never to piss you off mmmkay?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

http://www.slate.com/id/2188963/?from=rss Not a bad attempt although he concedes it really doesn't wash.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Wrong, YOU may think these issues don't really matter and that these people have been "lulled" but that's exactly the condescending elitist thinking that we're talking about here.

Oh BS. You're basically saying that the American people need to mind themselves to issues like guns and abortion and pay no attention to the greater economic issues and/or how this country is being managed.
Of course those issues matter, but not so much that the larger issues should be ignored. And yet, that's exactly what you're telling people to do. Play with their toys and pay no attention to the crooks behind the curtain. So if anyone is being a condescending elitist, it's you.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

No, I'm not saying they should ignore that, but it sure is condescending/elitist for YOU or obamarama to suggest you know what is more important for them.

 

[OrByte]

given everything ELSE that is going on in the country it doesnt take an elitist to guess that guns are kinda low at the bottom of the list of important things we need to solve.

but then again you can harp on the issue to try and slam a candidate...but it is rather transparent.

 

[Coldkilla]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Fern
IMO, this bruhaha over nothing (bittergate) is proof that the Dem primary has gone on for too long.

I can't believe this thread about so much "nothing" has gone on for so long. And now I hear Obama (a mixed race kid from a broken home) is an elite, and Hillary (Dad was a successful attorney, she went to Yale, and then lived in the Governor's mansion while spending time on the Board of Directors of Fortune 500 corporations, the on to the White House and being a Senator) is not an elite. Only she understands blue collar working people and is their savior. What a load of bullshit.

I'm hearing that people at her rallies are booing when she brings up bittergate and elitism. Good for them, and the above paragraph is my way of booing at this issue in P&N.

I've just read rumors that Gore & Carter are working together to end the Dem primary. This BS is starting to make me agree with that.

Fern

Yeah, I'd hate to be stuck living in hawaii with rich grandmum and then heading to harvard. :roll:

Yea, living on foodstamps is hard too.... getting scholarships is hard too... just paying off his school loans within recent years is hard too.... STFU... uneducated people...

 

[trenchfoot]

*sniff*sniff*.......whew! smells like the fetid stench of fear is hanging in the air in here.

so, obama is that much of a threat huh? ok.....what ,exactly, does he threaten that some would go after him with such fear, ferocity and pettiness?

is that the full extent to which his attackers can assault him with? with fear induced pettiness? that's it? that's all? lol

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
No, I'm not saying they should ignore that, but it sure is condescending/elitist for YOU or obamarama to suggest you know what is more important for them.

And that's basically where people differ. This 17 page long thread is basically one group saying that certain issues are more important than others is elitist and the opposing group saying it isn't. Spectacular.

 

[AAjax]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: RY62
Obama can kiss my lilly white, small town, gun totin', Bible thumpin' ass. :laugh:

Seriously, this guys pretty disconnected from rural America as I see it. I am small town and I've lived in small towns all across America. The way I see it, the things he's saying we cling to because we're bitter are just parts of who we are.

We're not bitter or frustrated. We know it's an election year and most of the doom and gloom is being fabricated by people who have a political agenda. We aren't looking for the government to take care of us. We're happy to take care of ourselves and help our neighbors when we can. We always cling to our religion, in good times or bad. We know we can always trust in God and no politician can live up to or come between that.

Our guns are important to us and always will be. It's a part of our heritage. With our guns, we know we can defend ourselves and provide food for ourselves when neccesary.

We don't have antipathy towards people who aren't like us. We're generally friendly and respectful towards all decent people but quick to condemn those that cause harm to others or disrespect our laws. We aren't anti-immigrant but we are anti- (illegal) immigrant. We'll welcome immigrants that want to legally integrate and become law abiding, tax paying, productive members of our society. (We would like it if they'd at least try to learn English)

No, we're not bitter. We know Obama is just another, full of shit, disconnected politician who'll say and do whatever he thinks he needs to get elected. In the end we'll still be here making the best of what each day brings and giving thanks to God in our optomistic, small town way.

And you speak for all of them you ass? Or even a preponderance of them?

Dose Obama speak for all of them? Truely what dose he really know about any of them? Or even a perponderance of them?