Resolved: Barack Obama Represents The Apotheosis Of "Tokenism."

Nega-Tips? (6.00 / 2)

"I'll hire half the working class to kill off the other half."-- Jay Gould, robber-baron  

---

by: konopelli @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 13:16:51 PM CDT

A sincere effort is always worth the trouble, right or wrong. (0.00 / 0)

Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 14:09:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

More bitching about color? (0.00 / 0)

Some of us occasionally forget about Obama's color.

Why is it so important to this particular poster?

Maybe if he or she bitches enough about "racism," then he or she can somehow pass off himself or herself as a heroic friend of black people everywhere...

Without actually doing anything for black people anywhere...

Except bitching.

 

From those who have not, everything will be taken, even the little that they have.  -Matthew 13:12

---

by: Jacob Freeze @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 22:21:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nobody is agreeing with the diarist, but reminding people of the race factor is important. (0.00 / 0)

The McCain camp has not yet employed the race card but it is offstage ready for use whenever his advisors see the need, probably closer to the election date, and after the debates so that McCain does not have to respond to charges of racism.

There is a Willie Horton out there waiting to be introduced to the "white" American public, possibly a (Black) Muslim with an Arab sounding name.

Just look at Republican presidential campaign history at least since Nixon.  



Silence is not an option. It merely helps to perpetuate human rights injustices.

---

by: shergald @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 10:04:54 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I can tell you weren't a debater. (7.50 / 4)

While you defined a term, you failed to make a prima facie case.

Obama clearly does not have "reduced capacity" and certainly is not "bland or inoffensive."  So he doesn't fit that aspect of the definition you cite.  

And, most obviously, you don't even attempt to address the basic issue that Obama's groundbreaking election victories are the very antithesis of tokenism.  In a real sense, Obama is far more of a groundbreaker than Jackie Robinson.  Robinson was selected by management of the Dodgers to break the color barrier.  Obama kicked the door down.

Everything you write seems horribly wrong.  

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 14:21:50 PM CDT

Obama wasn't selected by the Democratic Party leadership? (0.00 / 0)

Way back in 2004?  Then how the heck did he get to address that convention?  Is that the first door he kicked in?

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 16:46:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nope. (6.00 / 1)

Obama was selected by John Kerry.  And he EARNED that selection by (1) restructuring his 2004 campaign schedule for his Senate seat to campaign extensively with Kerry, earning goodwill and impressing the man who would pick the speakers, and (2) by working hard to capitalize on that groundwork by dispatching campaign workers to lobby for a speaker spot.  In short, Obama the politician got the speaking spot because he out politicked his competitors.  He kicked that door in.

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:41:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So... your Jackie Robinson analogy? (0.00 / 0)

Are you actually saying Robinson didn't earn the position?

C'mon now.  Kerry WAS Democratic Party leadership at the time, in that he was the nominee AND the "man who would pick the speakers" as you say.  For more than the two reasons you listed, he gave Obama the nod to address the Nation in primetime.  You want to give credit to Obama for making it happen; that doesn't change the fact that he was "selected" and if you don't think Kerry and his cronies weren't considering the impact of Obama's race when they made that selection, then I think you're being naive.

I will not dispute the notion that Obama wanted it and worked to put himself in position to be selected.  I imagine the great Jackie Robinson wanted to play in the big leagues, too.  He also worked hard and did what he could, but he could not cross the "color line" until Major League Baseball made their move.  It could be argued that he was initially a token hire (I will leave that to you cityduck, since you brought Robinson up in this thread), just as it can be argued that Barack Obama is a token minority candidate propped up by an ailing Democratic party in hopes that they can get otherwise smart people interested in the new "look" they have this election cycle (while ignoring the politics, naturally).

Anyway, back to konopelli's point.  I think he's on to something.

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 18:53:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Under your reasoning (5.40 / 5)

anyone who breaks a color barrier is a "token hire."  But that is not what the term "token" means.  A "token" hire is someone who is put into a position as window dressing and to preserve the status quo.  Obama is not, and never was, that.

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:00:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You're wrong about my reasoning... (0.00 / 0)

... as I am certainly not saying that only token hires break or have broken color barriers.  One young man who recently broke a color barrier in sports, James Stewart, did so based on his unbelievable skills on a motorcycle.  He will be representing the United States in the annual Motocross of Nations in England this October.  You can read about him at my blog, All Things Motocross.  

konopelli started this discussion with a wiki definition of tokenism, and I thought those were the ground rules, but let's take your definition, which I think is still somewhat close to the gist of the wiki def:

A "token" hire is someone who is put into a position as window dressing and to preserve the status quo.

You go on to say that's not Obama.  kono is saying it is.  I'm agreeing with kono and disagreeing with you (and I'm not even being an "archetypical angry black man" in doing so).  To me, Obama is democratic party window dressing, and the party certainly wants him to maintain their status quo.  

We don't have to say them out loud (and we won't), but we all know there are just some "things" that this black man cannot say or do and hope to win the White House in November.  But not to worry, he's Obama... he wasn't going to say them anyway... that's not who he is.

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 23:26:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Say Paul (3.00 / 1)

You go on to say that's not Obama.  kono is saying it is.  I'm agreeing with kono and disagreeing with you

OK.  Make the case.  I think this is a difficult argument because it's not so top down structured as the Jackie Robinson case:  it was Democratic voters who put Obama in here, not some Branch Rickey.  You may argue that all those voters are Branch Rickeys, but i think it would be a tough argument to sustain.

we all know there are just some "things" that this black man cannot say or do and hope to win the White House in November.

Imagine that!  Political realities which constrain a candidate for public office!  I never would have guessed.

Are some due to Obama's being perceived as "Black?"  Sure.  But i know this:  if John McCain ever wades into a crowd and knees a heckler in the groin, he will not attain the White House this fall.

An Italian candidate could not joke about taking out a hit on someone in his opponent's camp, or kneecapping a writer critical of his policies.

Yes, these are due to stereotypes.  yes, they fall most heavily on a first candidate of a group with a chance.  Had Hillary been the candidate, she would have had to face many of the same types of stereotypes, you know, the ones she faced during the primary.  And she, also, could not be seen as the angry woman candidate.  She would have had to walk a tightrope between seeming too soft because she is a woman and being a shrill bitch.

Welcome to real life.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 01:27:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

hey there, Madscientist (0.00 / 0)

This is kono's case, but like I said, I'm in agreement with his opening.  I'm no debater, but I'll take another swing.

First, let's leave Jackie Robinson out of it.  If we're going to deal with historical figures, better to compare apples to apples.  I'll leave that to you and others, though.

There's no question that Obama has been successful in winning votes.  But the voters had nothing to do with Obama being selected to give that star-making address in 2004.   To me, THAT'S where any claim of tokenism begins, not after Obama announced his candidacy.

That the fish respond to the bait says as much about the bait-choosing skills of the fisherman as it says about desperate hunger of the fish.

Oh, and I was much amused by your images of McCain and an "Italian candidate", but you couldn't be serious.  Everyone has to deal with political realities, right?  Well then deal with the political reality of tokenism.  Are you denying the practice exists in politics and business in total, or just in this case?

---

by: PaulWillis @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 02:39:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the reply, Paul (0.00 / 0)

I'm not arguing specific details.  What I wanted you to do, what i invited you to do was to make the case for what you say you agree with, that is, that Obama's candidacy, and, if he wins, his presidency, is an instance of "tokenism."  What do you and kono mean by that?  You are saying that Obama was put into his candidacy and his nomination "as window dressing and to preserve the status quo."

Now I believe that kono has some political baggage here that influences his wording.  that "status quo" is a Republican president who supports continuing operations in Iraq until certain conditions are met, while Obama as president would be a Democratic candidate who supports phased withdrawals relatively free of considerations on the ground in Iraq.  Kono might want to argue something like "the two parties are little different, and so...."  But I wold say that just looking at the reality, his definition fails for Obama just because he was put in to change the status quo.

I would also challenge the "window dressing" wing of the argument.  I say this even though I believe the Ferraro was not entirely wrong in saying that Obama was where he is (politically, running for president in this year) because he is Black.  And it does, in part, go back to that speech in 2004.

But to make the case for window dressing, I think you would have to ignore other realities about obama that got him that speaking engagement.  After all, it is highly unlikely that Kerry said, "find me someone who is Black to give the keynote."  I heard of obama several years prior.  There was excitement about him, but it wasn't just because he was Black.  There was not then, nor in 2004, nor now, any lack of Black possibilities as candidates or speakers.  

I used to joke that one thing Obama has going for him is that he doesn't rhyme.  I was pointing out just the things you are.

When I think of tokenism, I relate it to a specific example.  Way back iun the late 1960s in New York City, i saw an interview with a businessman on local TV.  At the time, there was beginning to be enforcement of EEO rules.  A white businessman was asked how this had effected his small business.  Here is what he said:  "I've always hired Blacks, even though many of my accounts would leave me if they knew I hired Blacks.  So, I would hire light skin Blacks and put them in the back of the office where they wouldn't be noticed.

"Nowadays, things are different.  I hire the darkest skinned Blacks I can, and put them right up front so that when the EEO people come in, I can point them out right away."

I think that Kerry and the Democrats were very happy to have a Black man from Chicago that they could invite to speak at the convention in 2004.  If kono and you want to work very hard to make something evil out of that, go ahead.  But I have seen nothing in anything you say that tells me that his candidacy is tokenism, or that his nomination is tokenism.

Once again, i invite you to make the case.

Incidentally, is Sarah Palin a token woman candidate?

And answer me this:  what would it take for you to accept that a Black candidate for president who was a serious contender and/or won his major party's nomination was not a token.

We may be disagreeing on how we read the partially filled glass.  For me, to say that his candidacy is a token candidacy, it would have to be nearly or all the result of tokenism.  It may be that for you, any hint of tokenism (like the convention speech in 2004) is enough to condemn the whole thing as tokenism.  If so, we are disagreeing about how to apply the term, and the more interesting question is about why we would do so.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 03:11:37 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oooh! I saw a question I can answer in the affirmative: (6.00 / 1)

YES. Sarah Palin IS a token woman candidate.

For the Republicans.

BUT...

I think they may have seen the light since her ascendancy. It's like I said about capitalists seeing no colour but green and no reproductive organs but dollar signs: The nomination of a woman re-energised that party, big time. I bet the token leads the way -- albeit TOTALLY unintentionally -- for an actual broken glass ceiling.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 04:09:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

All four candidates are mannequins in the nations presidential storefront... (1.00 / 1)

... and two of them are arguably tokens.  However, I have no desire to discuss the republican candidate.  Otherwise, thanks for the great reply and your polite invitation, Madscientist.  And for my insistence that, yes, Barack Obama is the lipstick on the face of the democratic donkey (to coin a phrase), I give you Jon Stewart:

Madscientist, I am intrigued by your italicized insistence that "There was not then, nor in 2004, nor now, any lack of Black possibilities as candidates or speakers." I wonder who you consider to replace Obama in this role.  Look, Barack Obama is uniquely qualified for this part.  He is pitch perfect, that's why he was selected.  And yes, his mixed-race heritage had a lot to do with his selection.  And his selection is supposed to signal to all of those "Black possibilities" that the dream is possible.  Not King's dream, not really, but their dreams of personally breaking through.  Tokens mollify the masses, am I wrong?

Back to what we really should be talking about, Obama's policies.  Which are unrelated to this thread sort of, but you brought it up. Not being a military strategist, I don't fully know, but from what I do know I would insist that "phased" withdrawals by nature take into account conditions on the ground.  If "... phased withdrawals relatively free of considerations on the ground..." is Obama's official position, at least make him publicly admit which "considerations" his adminstration would entertain.  

What works for me is the Green Party position on War: immediate withdrawal of troops and contractors, cut off all war funding, no war with Iran.  To that, Obama doesn't even come close.

---

by: PaulWillis @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 23:58:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, Paul (7.00 / 1)

I think you are resolved to see things in a particular way.  But just to respond a bit:

two of them are arguably tokens

Again, that is the issue in question.  Argue for the proposition if you think you can.  I've already given arguments for why I think the proposition is mostly false.

Madscientist, I am intrigued by your italicized insistence that "There was not then, nor in 2004, nor now, any lack of Black possibilities as candidates or speakers." I wonder who you consider to replace Obama in this role.  Look, Barack Obama is uniquely qualified for this part.

That was exactly my point.  A "token Black" needs only be Black.  The reasons for Obama being chosen to give the convention keynote address, the reason his candidacy took off after HE declared (you don't think he chose himself to run as a token, do you?), the reason he won the nomination in the primaries, all have more to do with Barack Obama than that he is Black.  Where his being identified as Black has hurt him and where it has helped him are interesting questions, to be sure.  As you remember, he's also "not Black enough," and also "not a Black man at all because his ancestors didn't come from West Africa and weren't brought here against their will by the slave trade."

To me, he's Barack Obama, Senator, candidate for president.  He has an interesting history.  If you think he's a token, make the case.

He is pitch perfect, that's why he was selected.

Now you are slipping off into wingnut territory.  No, I see no evidence that Kerry said, "get me a keynote speaker that is pitch perfect," and when they came back and said they had someone who also was Black, he said, "Whoa!  All the better!"

But I'm sure, from you "mannequin" meme that you think it's all run by the Illuminati or something, all a giant conspiracy.

And yes, his mixed-race heritage had a lot to do with his selection.  

And your evidence would be?  My bet is that it had nothing whatsoever to do with his selection.  Believe me, those who hate Blacks hate mixed race people just as much.  There would be absolutely no advantage to picking someone mixed race over someone not.  

Maybe there is some indirect case, we've heard it, that his history, including his being mixed race, his not being a part of any particular racial enclave, have helped to form a person who is more sensitive to those of different races or ethnicities.  And maybe that sensitivity has led to his success politically.

And his selection is supposed to signal to all of those "Black possibilities" that the dream is possible.

Again, where is the evidence?  Tell me who it was who "selected" him, who said, "We'll select him and that will signal to all of those Black possibilities that the dream is possible."  Remember, this is a different argument from that of whether people actually take that from his candidacy; you are arguing that someone did the selecting, and that that (or those) person(s) had this signaling in mind when the "selection" was made.

Tokens mollify the masses, am I wrong?

This is a form of Petitio Principii.  You are "begging the question" by assumning the truth of the proposition being argued.

What i would say is this:  I know of no studies right off hand that prove or disprove this proposition.  First, find me a token.  Do you think that Buckwheat mollified the masses?  When Bill Evans, the piano player, was working with Miles, did that mollify the masses?  (Miles, of course, would say that Evans was hired because he was a "motherfucker" and could play the piano, and had a great harmonic sense, and that his colour had nothing to do with it.)

from what I do know I would insist that "phased" withdrawals by nature take into account conditions on the ground.

Today, the various positions are closer together.  But in 2005-6 at the lowest point in the Iraq war, those like Obama who proposed a phased withdrawal wanted to withdraw on a timetable no matter what.  The reality of the fact that the military coulnd't just leave in 24 hours was recognized.  Obama's particular plan was to withdraw within a certain number of months no matter what, and then to leave troops someplace nearby so that they could return if something bad happened in Iraq.  The other common view was that we should leave when we had some confidence that there wouldn't be a complete slaughter of innocent civilians when we did.

immediate withdrawal of troops and contractors, cut off all war funding, no war with Iran.

Ah, the Ron Paul position on the Middle East!

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." -Voltaire
Ah, my dear Voltaire, doubt is an acquired and cultivated taste, like Laphroaig Whisky or fine truffles, and quite as exquisite.

---

by: Madscientist @ Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:32:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And on "reduced capacity"... (0.00 / 0)

... I want to note the context by revisiting the passage konopelli posted:

Classically, token characters have some reduced capacity compared to the other characters and may have bland or inoffensive personalities so as to not be accused of stereotyping negative traits.

In this editorial posted in the NY Times today (good Lord, I'm referring to the NY Times... yech), the writer notes Obama has a "reduced capacity" to vent all of his feelings, lest he appear to be the "archetypical angry black man who scares off the white vote. "

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 16:55:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My ASS. (6.00 / 6)

He has an INCREASED capacity to KEEP his feelings in check.

Jesus fucking christ.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:27:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hold on now, that a group would employ a "token"... (3.50 / 2)

... speaks badly about the group, not the person chosen to give the group a false air of inclusivity.  NO ONE is arguing that the man is not capable, MSOC.  But clearly he is hobbled by the notion that if he were to "uncheck" his feelings, if he were to "speak his mind" (so to speak), it would be bad news for his candidacy.

I shouldn't have to tell you that I think that concept sucks, but it sucks.

His "reduced capacity" to vent isn't about his ability to check himself, it's about the unfairness of a system that judges black male politicians differently than their white counterparts (Whoa, did I just play the race card?). You want to give him credit for playing along? Fine.  But at least recognize that the man is at the very least "inconvenienced" by some unwritten rules of a badly fixed game.

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 18:19:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Obama kicked the doors down?!? (4.00 / 1)

Nope....don't think so.  First of all, if there were any doors kicked down, it happened well over 40 years ago, during the heyday of the Civil Rights Movement, especially the early part of it, in the South.  

Ahhhh....Life goes on.

---

by: independentminded @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 15:07:20 PM CDT

If this was intended as a response to my post, (6.00 / 2)

you need to ask yourself:

"What door was cityduck referring to"?

Ponder your error ...

...  because the Civil Rights Movement 40 years ago was merely the continuation of a process that has led us to the point where a black man can be a major political party's nominee for the President.

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 15:13:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yup. The Civil Rights Movement was merely (6.00 / 3)

a part, although an important part, of the larger "black freedom struggle" that had been going on since at least the end of the 18th century.




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 15:17:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Token? - Hardly (6.33 / 6)

This post reminds me of a clip now running on the Onion.  We've made a great leap forward when a black man can be stigmatized as elitist and out-of-touch with the common man as compared to a white-haired old millionaire.

Where do these people come from?  Or get off, for that matter?  When did "elite" start meaing "bad?"

Canada - looking better every day.

---

by: Shinola @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:03:21 PM CDT

konopelli, you are ALSO an example of tokenism. (6.00 / 3)

I don't believe any of the other Front Pagers are as actively ANTI-Obama as you are, and yet, there you are.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:28:48 PM CDT

A token what? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:38:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Token anti-Obama Front Pager (0.00 / 0)

Um, I thought I said that.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 00:37:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Making me sick, by the way. (1.50 / 2)

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:28:59 PM CDT

You could think of him that way (10.00 / 5)

If you are an idiot or bigot but as Maryscott tolerates you, I'll just assume you are being provacative.

Why is Obama ahead? I think two white, 60 years old or so ill-educated, ill-informed, ill-paid, overworked, overtaxed, under-resourced (savings? health?) lower/working-class mass of MIDDULL MURKAN men said it best while I was out canvassing yesterday.

They declared undecided but as I started away one of them said "I don't much like your guy but at least he ain't a dumbass like McCain."

I changed them to leaning Obama....

Women and twenty somethings will elect Barack. You got any good recipes for crow?

"Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

---

by: durrati @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 17:45:57 PM CDT

Oh durrati (11.00 / 1)

you and maryscott get a gold star for keeping the light shinning.  The last couple of days have been rough.

I don't get why Obama isn't 80% in the polls.  Wake up America!!!

A friend wrote me:

I am so pissed about what is going on in this country that I had to reenter therapy for the first time in years.  When I unloaded to my shrink how unbelievable it is that this election is even close and how confounding it is that what seems logical and simple to me is just lost on so many.  I don't get it!  Her reply rang true.  She reminded me that the AVERAGE IQ is 100 points.  Therefore most people are unable to comprehend anything beyond very simple scenarios.   This is why they cling to being told what to do and are so easily manipulated.  It does not give me a lot of hope for the future of this country.  McCain is a joke and yet look at his support.  It is crazy. I find the idea that this urgent economic plan is being pushed through (using fear of course) to make sure that Obama can not implement universal health care or anything else he is proposing to be very interesting.

durrati and Maryscott's gold stars



It is a matter of life and death, see the documentary Food INC and vote no to corporate take over of our food every time you buy groceries  

---

by: Kathleen @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:00:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

it ain't as close (9.00 / 1)

as the pundits make it out to be, dear Kathleen.

Out here in the trenches you get a better idea.

Obama: 54.5%

Mcain: 43.5%

Barr/other: 2%

and it may be better than that....those Paulites are stubborn.

:)

Bet on it!

"Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

---

by: durrati @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:27:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I sure hope you're right, (6.00 / 1)

cuz he's gonna need additional elbow room to overcome the Bradley effect.




Lord of the Karmafishes

---

by: Karmafish @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:29:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I base my prediction on (9.00 / 3)

evidence I have seen in my own district which is pretty conservative... the numbers won't play that way here.

The Bradley effect is overstated; that was twenty years ago...a lot of obits since then.

I need to write an essay on what I call "the Obama effect" I think a lot of white folk will quietly vote for Barack.

We will see...

"Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

---

by: durrati @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:59:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We also have to factor in cheating (6.00 / 1)

because you know that is going to happen.

If he looses I think this country will fold in revolution.  I can't help feeling the poor guy is our last hope!


It is a matter of life and death, see the documentary Food INC and vote no to corporate take over of our food every time you buy groceries  

---

by: Kathleen @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 20:13:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Is this what you've got to fall back on? (7.50 / 4)

After years of (rightly) berating the two parties for failing to nominate a single minority, when it does happen....they're suddenly just throwing out a token black man?  C'mon now.  You're just looking for anything to bitch about at this point.

And actually, there's a LOT to bitch about when it comes to Democrats generally and Barack Obama in particular.  But this isn't one of them.

---

by: John Brown's Body @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 18:05:25 PM CDT

Your All a Bunch of Liars at MLW (2.83 / 6)

It's amazing how so many of YOU have probably never visited Obama's web page where he says he's PRO ISRAEL...period, and PRO CAPITALIST...put those two things together and what you have is more George Bush.....just a little lighter that's all.

If you are PRO ISRAEL...you are Anti Arab....Israel treats the Arabazoids as less than human...and how can you not KNOW that by now.

If you are Pro Capitalist ....that means you are for letting the "markets" decide whose a winner and who is a loser and and means you are for no...or minimal government involvement in regulating the economy...

But of course they are letting the government "attempt" to regulate the economy by creating a social welfare state for corporations only at the expense of the Americanazoid people....the commoners...the riff raff...the sub species who exist below the feet and intelligence of the rich...

And Obama supports this 700 billion bail out package which will mushroom to double that and then the government goes bankrupt and all you Obumbah and Obombah supporters who engineered his absurd candidacy by supporting liars instead of TRUTH TELLERS like Nader or McCkinney or even Howard Dean...all of you will wonder why "politicians" always dissapoint you...

It's becuase you ALLOW THEM TO...because in the end they reflect who YOU ARE....LIARS.

Stu Piddy....a free range human

---

by: Stu Piddy @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:03:46 PM CDT

You are well-named. (5.00 / 3)

So you have to be an anti-Israel communist to NOT be George Bush.

Thanks for that insightful insight.  Way to see the colors of the spectrum.  Go make yourself part of the "solution" for the past eight years by voting for Nader.  Yeah ... that's a good idea.  That way you can claim you aren't Stu Piddy ... er ... stupid ... like the rest of us.

---

by: cityduck @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:08:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

CityDuck Wants the Government to take his Money from Him (9.00 / 1)

"colors of the Spectrum"

1 million dead Iraqi's
A war that was based on Lies
A depression to boot....

And you think this is shades of grey?...That it's all
"very Complex".....

And Obama and Mccain ...neither has attacked George Bush for starting a phoney war....quite the contrary ...they want to "win" the phoney war by killing more...REAL people for no reason other than dummy downed Political reasons.

Neither is making a connection between the DEPRESSION and the WAR...it's unrelated...it has to do with the REAL ESTATE Market....that's BULLSHIT...It has to do with DEREGULATION of Corporations and the spread of Capitalism by Force throughout Russia and China and in case you haven't noticed the RUssian stockmarket has lost about 50 percent of it's value and they are headed for a Depression like the rest of the world.

This is a world wide event. Torture, Capitalism, Invasion of Nations, State Security are WORLDWIDE EVENTS.

So now you guys....listlessly allow the government to "save" the corporations for what purpose?....So that they can take over YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!

They are going to TAKE YOUR MONEY....YOUR PROPERTY....YOUR PENSIONS....YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE....Take it Away from you....

The Democrats and Republicans don't care about you unless you are a contributor.....otherwise your NOTHING.

Voters are "things" to be manipulated....

You guys are never going to catch on...

You like being lied to. You are lying to yourselves and to everyone around you. It's what you know. It's what your comfortable with.

I hate liars, personally.  

Stu Piddy....a free range human

---

by: Stu Piddy @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 19:52:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

well, that was refreshing... (1.00 / 2)

... thanks for that reminder, Stu Piddy.  But let's give our friends a little bit of a break.  They're tired of the last 8 years of powerlessness, they're tired of being on the "losing team", they're tired of having their dreams dashed time and time again... so it's easy for me to understand why they're choosing this course.

I just wish they knew the course was chosen for them.  The fear of losing this most important of horse races is overwhelming, and the choice is obvious... isn't it?

It should be.

On second thought, I've seen you get trashed pretty good here, so forget about that "giving them a break" bit..!

---

by: PaulWillis @ Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 23:39:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Lighten up, Francis. (0.00 / 0)

You're so overwrought your spelling resembles that of a right wingnut.

Think about it.

--7.88, --6.56      If I can't rant, I don't want to be part of your revolution.

---

by: Maryscott O'Connor @ Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 00:38:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]