PART 1 of 7
PART 2 of 7
PART 3 of 7
PART 4 of 7
PART 5 of 7
PART 6 of 7
PART 7 of 7
2008, American, barack obama, Christian, controversial, controversy, election, former pastor, human, humanized, interview, Jeremiah, mainstream media, media, MSM, out, pastor, patriot, patriotic, PBS, pundits, race, race relations, racial, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, speaks, Trinity, United Church of Christ, Wright
PART 1 of 7
PART 2 of 7
PART 3 of 7
PART 4 of 7
PART 5 of 7
PART 6 of 7
PART 7 of 7
ad, advertisement, barack obama, best, inspiring
Click the link above.
abc, anti-American, barack obama, cbs, CNN, Ed, Ed Rendell praises Louis Farrakhan, endorsement, endorses, Farrakhan, fox news, Governor Ed Rendell, Hillary Clinton, irony, Louis, Louis Farrakhan, mainstream media, MSM, msnbc, muslim, Nation of Islam, PA, Pennsylvania, praises, radical, Renell, speaks, speech
PART 1
PART 2
pastor, jeremiah wright, fox news, lies, msnbc, cbs, abc, nbc, barack obama, 2008, CNN, truth, Obama, Sean Hannity, MSM, presidential candidate, The Price is Right, mainstream media, associated press, misleads, The Fox is wrong, bravenewfilms, Fox attacks, George Stephanopoulos
abc, ABC News, barack obama, Charles Gibson, CNN, Debate analysis, George Stephanopoulos, Hillary Clinton, nbc, questions, scandal
This debate over debates had me curious. Was ABC’s debate really in a lowly class of its own? Or were Obama backers (inside the press and out) just being overly-sensitive? So I went through each of the four one-on-one contests between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, starting with CNN’s debate way back on January 31…
While the national MSM continues flogging the “Obama as out of touch” fabulation, every major Pennsylvania paper endorses him.
ABC News, bias, Bill Clinton, creepy, devil, Disney, George Stephanopoulos, George Stephanopoulos Hillary Clinton Bill Clinton ABC, Hillary Clinton, loyalty, relationship, Satan, support
Barack Obama cartoon cartoons Hillary Clinton funny too
Irish, perfect perfecting union, What if Senator Sen. Barack Obama was a white man USA U
What if Barack Obama was not Barack Obama, but Barry O’bama (or simply Barry O.), a tall, slim white haired white man with the same view points and charisma of Obama. Would there be a stir over his comments in San Francisco? Would his pastor have been vetted? Has scrutiny of a candidates Christian church happened in the last 30 years? Would the issue of his race or background (Irish in this case) even be an issue? Would he face issues with any voters of any ethnicity that say “I won’t vote for a white man?” Would anyone call him too white, or not white enough? Would the media discuss the “black vote”, the “black-brown divide”. Would there be an exit poll question about whether race mattered in people’s votes?
Would Geraldine Ferraro say Barry is only where he’s at because he’s a white male? Would Barry have to explain that while every US President in the history of the United States of America has been a white male, and every US Vice President in the history of the United States of America has been a white male, he is not privileged by his race? Would Jesse Jackson have been mentioned, or MLK vs. LBJ? Would anyone use the word “fairy tale”? Would he be called a kid or a boy? We already know how African Americans can strongly support white candidates, as they did for Bill Clinton’s Presidency, the “first black President”. So, gaining that loyally democratic vote would be very possible, while not being analyzed through racial lenses.
Would concerns over the voting habits of rural Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Latinos, seniors, or Floridians of Jacksonville be analyzed by race?
This isn’t to suggest that Obama has it so hard because he’s black. That simply isn’t true. He has alot of support from people of every age and ethnicity, and the excitement he’s generated both locally and abroad is also fueled by the uniqueness and historic nature of his candidacy because of race. Obama also has a freedom to speak boldly about racial topics that he would most likely lose if he were not black (whether that’s fair or not).
The point of this post is to consider what we believe to be “controversial” and ask why we think that way? Is it controversial because of what was said, or is it because of who said it? Jesse Ventura, in a CNN interview with Larry King, compared America to Nazi Germany. That is immensely more controversial than anything Obama has ever dared to say, but where was the outrage? Who called Jesse anti-American, or racist, or anti-Semitic? John McCain voted against MLK’s birthday, and pretty much supported South African apartheid early in his career. Obama has never done anything like that, but he is called racist (by some) for parsed words about his grandmother? (taken out of context of course)
If we are going to move towards perfecting our union, we have to embrace fairness and rational, unbiased thinking. We have to uphold morals and values, in other words, that don’t set a higher standard for those of a different hue. The Golden rule demands that’s what we do, treat others as we would like to be treated. And part of that is to seek to see things from someone else perspective. Empathize, that is.
As we seek to understand others, and be understood ourselves, and as we reject mischaracterizations, lies, deceits, and distortions of truth, we will heal and strengthen our nation. And, I am excited to say, for many in this election, we are doing just that. Let that trend continue.
One of the most refreshing things about Barack Obama is his fearlessness when it comes to voicing a hard truth. It’s an ice cold glass of unsweetened lemonade: hard to swallow, but unmistakably pure. The truth is, if you aren’t bitter, you’re probably voting for someone who is going to give us more of what we’ve been getting all along.
Barack Obama bitter bitterness comment remark elitist m
THIS is the context in which Obama’s statements have been reported as “controversial:
What is controversial about that? What about that shows elitism? Can you honestly say that you are taken aback and completely offended by this video (above)?
As of late, the media (CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, etc.) has been trying to stir controversy over Barack Obama making the (true) statement that people in Pennsylvania (and the rest of America) are bitter. So, they are now questioning whether that makes him an elitist. Naturally, John McCain & Hillary Clinton, both of whom trail Obama in the polls, pounced on this opportunity to see if they could lower Obama’s support. So this story is all over the news now. However what is not all over the news is:
And on and on and on.
The media rarely picks up on any of this. Yet they find ample time to report on whether Obama said people are bitter in San Francisco, whether he drank orange juice over coffee, whether was a pro at bowling and so on. In contrasts, Obama speaks on these issues all the time on the campaign trail. They are part of his stump speech and he often addresses them in town hall meetings and question/answer sessions.
So who is out of touch, and who is in touch?
Looks like we not only need a change in Washington, but we also need a change in news media.
Edit:
This CNN panel is pretty good about things usually. And, in fairness, I think they got it completely right this time.
America, barack obama, Bill O'reilly, catholic, conservative, conservatives, controversy, defend, defends, fox news, good defense, interview, Karl Rove, lies, Martin Luther King, media, Michael Pfleger, MLK, prejudice, racism, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sean Hannity, white
2008, American, barack obama, Global, inspiration, inspirational, international, Obama, speech, USA, video, Will.i.am, Yes we can
babies, babies for Obama, baby, barack obama, endorse, kids
Bald Eagle 08 is an American site about politics and social issues
Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: DePo Masthead by Derek Powazek
Barack Obama Jimmy Carter Al Gore bitter Hillary Clinto
The REAL reasons for the Obama “bitter” so-called “controversy”
In barack obama on April 13, 2008 at 10:55 amHere’s the quote at the heart of this “controversy”
The comments made by Sen. Barack Obama in San Francisco were made a week ago, so why is it they’ve only caused a stir now?
First, national gallup polls have shown Obama significantly ahead of Sen. Hillary Clinton for a while now.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106432/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Leads-Clinton-49-42.aspx
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/24082568#24082568
It is in the best interests of the media to keep this story going as long as they can because it boost their views. Controversies, however negligible, gain viewership, and the media therefore exploits whatever it can whenever it can (to the degree that they can get away with it) because it’s good for their business. As for Clinton and McCain, they both trail Obama and are on the look out for anything they can find to bring him down in the polls. The truth is, there’s so little dirt on Obama, that they have to magnify statements like this, or the fact that Obama drank orange juice over coffee, to try to show why he should not be our next President.
Second reason this is getting covered is that Obama is doing better in Pennsylvania than he was expected to. He is closing the gap, and a few pundits have even predicted an upset in Pennsylvania. If Obama wins, the race is virtually over.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_primary-240.html
And the last reason this story is getting covered is because former vice president Al Gore and former president Jimmy Carter have been in talks about coming out together to ask Hillary to drop out of the race for the good of the Democratic Party. This is huge news, but would help to end the battle the media is profiting off of covering, it would help viewers focus more on John McCain (who has largely been getting a free pass), and it would help take Hillary out of the race.
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/It39s-Obama-stupid-Carter-and.3976738.jp