Democrats choose Obama to thunderous acclamation

Thursday 28th August, 08:03 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 128 Total Comments Show All

SezWho2 at 09:37 AM JST - 29th August

WhiteHawk,

I don't think I'm clinging to race. I think I'm trying to refute the claim that race is only an issue because "leftists" and "liberals" make it so. If you think it is not, you are welcome to your opinion. But I really do think that makes you the myopic one. Race is so obviously an issue that people are screaming that it should not be.
ColAmerica at 09:42 AM JST - 29th August

USAFdude- In my neighbourhood, the vast majority of folks are pledeging toe for McCain. I am an average guy, so are my neighbours, we represent the US.

THe truth is, whatever applause Obama received, there is so much racism inside some DEmocrats, that they will never vote for a black man.

This is sad, but true. Actually saw a report about is yeaserday on BBC World.
Betzee at 11:33 AM JST - 29th August

However, after 1776 I think one of the first things the Disloyalists did was to commission a flag. Symbols can be important in allowing agents of change to coalesce.

SezWho,

One of the few possessions from my early adulthood which I have not discarded is a Confederate flag I bought in Alabama. (It's packed away, I don't fly it.) People have been taken aback by it, but I thought it would be a cool thing to own since it was "Made in Japan." To me, it symbolizes not the Confederacy but the globalization of sourcing even for national symbols such as a flag.

Symbols can certainly mean different things to different folks. Obama clearly symbolizes a shift in generation, someone too young to have experienced the culture wars which are still a sore in the national psyche that may not fully heal until those who experienced them pass from the scene.

The problem comes when the electorate believes simply installing a specific individual in the White House will change the status quo of interest group driven politics in our nation's capital. Moreover, assuming the next president can fix whatever is broken promotes the view that easy, no-cost solutions exist when in reality they do not.
SezWho2 at 07:12 PM JST - 29th August

Betzee,

I couldn't agree with you last paragraph more, but I'm still not going to vote for McCain.

Of course Obama would not change Washington simply because he is Obama. If elected, I think it will be difficult for him to change Washington at all. However, I doubt that McCain will even be thinking about the necessity of change at all--since if he is elected he will have greater debts to repay.

I tend to see this as a kind of global warming parallel. I think we have very little time left in which to change the direction that we are going and that, in fact, we may have already passed a point of no return. Nonetheless I think it is necessary to "take the country" back from the special interest groups and to create a more congenial foreign policy.
USAFdude at 09:27 PM JST - 29th August

Ah, ColAmerica plays the non-existent race card again (in desperation, no doubt). Well, let me ask you this: Which party freely chose two candidates to compete for the nomination, neither of whom is a white male? The Democrats. Which party has thus weaned themselves from the "white guy comfort zone" and motivated it's members to look at the candidates' stances on the issues? The Democrats. Which party has led its constituents to educate themselves on the issues and choose the best candidate between a black man and a white woman? The Democrats.

Which party took the easy way out and nominated a white male so its constituents wouldn't have to consider the issues? The Republicans. Painfully obvious that the Democrats are the more progressive-thinking party where the true racists/sexist still (as always) reside with the Republicans. Checkmate.

BTW: "BBC World"? For a guy who calls himself ColAmerica, why do you even consider the views of non-Americans when it's conservatives such as yourselves who gloat over the fact that only Americans vote in our elections?
yabits at 09:54 PM JST - 29th August

THe truth is, whatever applause Obama received, there is so much racism inside some DEmocrats, that they will never vote for a black man.

Must be those "Reagan Democrats" we often hear about.
WhiteHawk at 10:02 PM JST - 29th August

SezWho2:

I don't think I'm clinging to race. I think I'm trying to refute the claim that race is only an issue because "leftists" and "liberals" make it so. If you think it is not, you are welcome to your opinion. But I really do think that makes you the myopic one. Race is so obviously an issue that people are screaming that it should not be.

But McCain's camp and supporters aren't bring race up, unless it's supporters who point out the old-school democrats who won't vote for a black man, as ColAmerica pointed out. The rest of the time it's brought up, it's brought up by Obama himself ("...and did I mention he's black?" -Obama, June 21, 2008), or his supporters, who typically mention that McCain is not only white, but also "old", or a "geezer".

SezWho2, the left is paying the price for wrapping itself in identity politics. Y'all are so caught up in labels and groups that any time a minority figure is a right-winger (Condi Rice, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, J.C. Watts, Michelle Malkin), the left can't wrap their minds around it. In the case of Malkin, she gets attacked with racist slurs (you should read her hate mail). Not only that, but the kneejerk defense to anyone criticizing Obama is to openly question whether they're a racist. I, like many, have pointed out Obama's lack of accomplishments (despite his potential), his lack of substance, his lack of executive experience, his lack of private sector experience, his proposals of policies that have failed for other leaders here and abroad, his past spending proposals, his future spending proposals, his past judgement errors, his false statements, his poor choice of associates, the actions of his staff and supporters trying to silence anyone mention his connections to terrorist William Ayers...

The list goes on and on. So how on God's Green Earth you can possibly suggest that I'm the least bit myopic is beyond me.

If it weren't for (Obama's) people "screaming" that race shouldn't be an issue in this er, race, would it even be brought up at all? I doubt it. Are there people who won't vote for Obama for any other reason because he's black? Yeah, there are. But in my part of the country (The South), it's democrats. The republicans wouldn't consider voting for a Marxist regardless of skin color anyway, so they're a moot point. And folks like USAFdude have conveniently forgotten things like the "draft Condi" movement, and the hope within the GOP that Bobby Jindal will run for the White House when he's tired of being governor of Louisiana.
Betzee at 10:10 PM JST - 29th August

I doubt that McCain will even be thinking about the necessity of change at all--since if he is elected he will have greater debts to repay.

I think it would take everything he has just to keep his head above water (while keeping the Republican base happy since he's viewed as not really one of 'em). The few times he's actually spoken about policy it's almost scary to listen; it's not clear he understands how Social Security works, for example. Then there are the problems on the Pakistan-Iraq border he referred to (when those countries don't even share a border).

I don't know whether it's an age issue, lack of intellect, or some combination but I sure don't want him in the White House.
SezWho2 at 11:40 AM JST - 30th August

WhiteHawk,

I think you were the first one to wade in with the charge of myopia. You seem to want to dwell on name-calling and characterization instead of just addressing the point at hand. But, if I may point out, if you were myopic, you might be the last person to see that.

Sure, the McCain camp brings race up. They were the ones who claimed, for example, that Obama had "played the race card" when he did not specifically refer to race at all. They continue to bring it up by keeping the discussion alive, claiming falsely that Obama and his supporters are making this election about race. Obama has not said one thing that McCain could not also have said with complete impunity.

Yes, race would be an issue in this campaign even if Obama did not bring it up. The difference is that it would be an issue which was unspoken and that it is unspoken is favorable to McCain. Obama correctly says that race should not be an issue. He is not asking people to vote for him because he is black. He is asking people to distance themselves from the issue of race and decide on other bases.

How does anyone have a problem with that?

By the way, you might refrain from addressing me as though I were a member of "the left" just because I disagree with you and support this or that candidate and this or that policy. It is far too cheap to pejorate anyone in that manner. Concentrate on issues, not on labels.
sailwind at 12:13 PM JST - 30th August

Sure, the McCain camp brings race up.

They sure do. They even had the gall to mention that Obama gave his acceptance speech on the very same date in history that Martin Luther King made his "I Have A Dream Speech" back in 1961. Oh, they were subtle about it, hid the reference behind a pithy congratulations ad that McCain endorsed and nobody believes was sincere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8v_ioN5SyBM

McCain.......Class act on this Ad, truly a class act.
FreedomOfSpeech at 12:20 PM JST - 30th August

sailwind; Sir i protest in the strongest terms!!!

McCain and his camp, never decide anything by looking at a person ethnicity. This is a proven fact.

You are providing red herrings. However, the loser Democrats, who feted Obama so grandly, are now running scared after the inclusion of Palin.
Nessie at 01:56 AM JST - 31st August

From the non-partisan Annenberg Politacal Fact Check

No. 1 and 4 are the most serious problems.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_obama.html

We checked the accuracy of Obama's speech accepting the Democratic nomination, and noted the following:

1 -- Obama said he could “pay for every dime” of his spending and tax cut proposals “by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens.” That’s wrong – his proposed tax increases on upper-income individuals are key components of paying for his program, as well. And his plan, like McCain’s, would leave the U.S. facing big budget deficits, according to independent experts.

2 -- He twisted McCain’s words about Afghanistan, saying, “When John McCain said we could just 'muddle through' in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources.” Actually, McCain said in 2003 we “may” muddle through, and he recently also called for more troops there.

3 -- He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of “working” families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain’s plan at 66 million and finds that Obama’s plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.

4 -- Obama asked why McCain would "define middle-class as someone making under five million dollars a year"? Actually, McCain meant that comment as a joke, getting a laugh and following up by saying, "But seriously ..."

5 -- Obama noted that McCain’s health care plan would "tax people’s benefits" but didn’t say that it also would provide up to a $5,000 tax credit for families.

6 -- He said McCain, far from being a maverick who’s "broken with his party," has voted to support Bush policies 90 percent of the time. True enough, but by the same measure Obama has voted with fellow Democrats in the Senate 97 percent of the time.

7 -- Obama said "average family income" went down $2,000 under Bush, which isn't correct. An aide said he was really talking only about "working" families and not retired couples. And – math teachers, please note – he meant median (or midpoint) and not really the mean or average. Median family income actually has inched up slightly under Bush.
DanManjt at 02:10 AM JST - 31st August

Nessie

You mean to tell me Obama is tweaking data?!?

OMG!!
Nessie at 09:03 AM JST - 31st August

Dan, just because everyone does it doesn't make it right.
DanManjt at 05:29 AM JST - 1st September

I never said it does.