|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 8:53:55 GMT -5
Way back when, before there was an established democratic candidate, I got the chance to be a part in an educated political conversation. This conversation was between people that were obviously comfortable enough with each other to discuss race with out focusing on history.
So anyway, the point of the conversation was advancement. We all know history is being made with this election. First black man on a ticket. First woman on a ticket. Times are changing!
I focus this question to women, but invite men to respond. Which ticket do you feel will open more doors for the progression of the black woman?
The position of one of the conversation's parties, a black woman, was that while a black man in the white house will progress black people, it really isn't doing much to facilitate the progression of black women. Yeah Barak is black, but he's still a man. She felt that a vote for Hilary would do more for black women. Voting for Barak would further keep men in power.
So McCain pulls an okey doke and puts a woman on his ticket. It continues...
I would love to hear your insight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robelite on Sept 4, 2008 9:00:55 GMT -5
It depends on your leanings.
If the woman is pro-choice, supports sex education in schools (we can see that the 2nd runner up DOES NOT,) and is a strong advocate for women's rights, then the choice is obvious. Obama's views on these issues practically mirror Hildegard's so putting a woman on the ticket means nothing unless you feel that a woman's place is to be at home, barefoot and pregnant and makin' biscuits in the kitchen.
Which..if you ask me...it looks like Palin's husband wanted that for her.
|
|
|
|
Post by No Screen Name on Sept 4, 2008 9:08:10 GMT -5
^^^^^^basically what Robey said. ;D
It doesn't really matter what a person LOOKS LIKE, but how they affect public policy. Just because someone is sitting in the White House with a cooch doesn't mean she's going to affect public policy in a way that will benefit me or the country.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bunny Hop on Sept 4, 2008 9:09:00 GMT -5
I say the Black man. I just feel like when it's all said and done skin color will not change unless you have vitilago(sp?). A white WOMAN is great and all but she's still white.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Sept 4, 2008 9:44:08 GMT -5
The Civil Rights Movement, as sexist as it was, was about rights for all Americans. Yeah, we can say that it was a Black movement because most of the major players were Black and were expressing grievences from the viewpoint of Black people but in reality, the CRM guaranteed rights for women, minorities, poor, etc....
I say that to say this....
Palin is a conservative...period. Yeah, she is a woman but what does she do to press the agenda of women in this country. It would be like electing Ward Connerlly to be Vice President because he is black.
Regardless of what you may think about his experience, Obama has shown himself prudent in his decisions up to this point. He ran a race that destroyed the Clinton machine. He's avoided being baited into heated discussions about issues that don't matter. He has wonderful ideas on how to get American jobs back, insure that all Americans have access to healthcare, insure that the education provides adequate resources to teach kids and also brings a focus on family with the Fatherhood initiative.
Healthcare helps all Americans. Johs help all Americans. Quality education for EVERY students helps ALL Americans. Fathers in homes helps ALL Americans.
Drilling for oil helps.... **crickets** Tax cuts for the most wealthy helps...**crickets**
Trickle down economics helps no one but those at the top. We've proven that this system doesn't work. Tax breaks for corporations don't create jobs. Taxing capital gains doesn't stifle investment. People don't stop investing because their profits will be taxed at a higher rate.
I think Palin is a gimmick. She is an everyday conservative mother who chose a profession in politics. Nothing special and she doesn't press the feminist agenda any further...as a matter of fact, she threatens to force it into backwards steps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robelite on Sept 4, 2008 9:46:53 GMT -5
Once again Cam, my "yella" profound frat...you are on point!  You know I love ya, brah! Particularly your 3rd and last paragraphs. I'd say that just about sums up this primary season, and the pageant girl's purpose for the right wing. |
|
happy1
OOA Interest
Posts: 129
|
Post by happy1 on Sept 4, 2008 10:01:18 GMT -5
Since Reconstruction, Whites have always been vulnerable to fear and loss of entitlement. The Ann Coulters and Sean Hannity's play to this fear, and Ms. Palin is the new standard bearer. The sad part is, I am not sure she knows this is the role she is playing, but by her appealing to "traditional middle america", she must know that that many citizens in the urban, deep south, western, and costal regions (blacks and latinos), do not connect with the average "hockey mom" image. Considering 7 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents, and until 2 years ago, the Republicans held the House, Senate, and White House, who is she trying to bring reform to? If they are so dismissive of a Black Man who went to Columbia, JD from Harvard Law, and was a professor as Chicago School of Law, plus his wife with Degrees from Princeton and her own law degree, then how could she or John McCain truly care about those of us who were not as lucky or fortunate to achieve as much? The country is no longer Apple Pie, Little League, and Hockey Moms. It is far more complex than that. Republicans have always been myopic in their vision, and the public eats it up.  |
|
|
|
Post by Robelite on Sept 4, 2008 10:16:57 GMT -5
Yep! ^^^
|
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 10:59:17 GMT -5
It depends on your leanings. If the woman is pro-choice, supports sex education in schools (we can see that the 2nd runner up DOES NOT,) and is a strong advocate for women's rights, then the choice is obvious. Obama's views on these issues practically mirror Hildegard's so putting a woman on the ticket means nothing unless you feel that a woman's place is to be at home, barefoot and pregnant and makin' biscuits in the kitchen. Which..if you ask me...it looks like Palin's husband wanted that for her. I feel you, but the conversation wasn't on the issues, more as on a black ( I hate when I see that) or a female. We weren't talking about the issues. It's kind of like when people say is the Country ready for a black man in the white house. We were not talking about who is more likely to win, so much as the future doors that would be opened because of a trailblazer. |
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 11:04:29 GMT -5
^^^^^^basically what Robey said. ;D It doesn't really matter what a person LOOKS LIKE, but how they affect public policy. Just because someone is sitting in the White House with a cooch doesn't mean she's going to affect public policy in a way that will benefit me or the country. I'm with you 300% percent, but lets be realistic here. We are all capable of making educated dicisions, but what about the people that vote for people because they think a candidate is cute. Unfortunately, there are way too many dumb people in the world. Ignorance is rampant. Yes, the issues should be what this race is based on, but you and I both know that there are many people out there that are going to vote with their party just because. My question is asside from what should really matter. There are people that are going to make their decision based on that they see. Based on that, which candidate will advance the black woman more? A white woman ( don't pay attention to her ridiculous stance on way to many issues) or a black man? |
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 11:13:40 GMT -5
I say the Black man. I just feel like when it's all said and done skin color will not change unless you have vitilago(sp?). A white WOMAN is great and all but she's still white. You and I are on the same page. The argument one of ladies was that a vote for Obama would still keep a man in the white house, basically continuing to hold women back! I think the Ultimate way to spearhead the advancement of black women, Michelle Obama for VP! Fist knock! |
|
|
|
Post by Robelite on Sept 4, 2008 11:35:28 GMT -5
It depends on your leanings. If the woman is pro-choice, supports sex education in schools (we can see that the 2nd runner up DOES NOT,) and is a strong advocate for women's rights, then the choice is obvious. Obama's views on these issues practically mirror Hildegard's so putting a woman on the ticket means nothing unless you feel that a woman's place is to be at home, barefoot and pregnant and makin' biscuits in the kitchen. Which..if you ask me...it looks like Palin's husband wanted that for her. I feel you, but the conversation wasn't on the issues, more as on a black ( I hate when I see that) or a female. We weren't talking about the issues. It's kind of like when people say is the Country ready for a black man in the white house. We were not talking about who is more likely to win, so much as the future doors that would be opened because of a trailblazer. Well, being an advocate for the extreme far-right that Palin is, it's almost obvious. How many blacks, particularly women do you feel fall on that side of the political spectrum? What you must understand is that for people like Palin..and the republicans in general, if they lean that far to the right in their political philosophies, it will be just a matter of time before they begin to go after the civil rights act, and if you think not having votes counted (as was the situation in FL in 2000,) imagine not having a vote to count! Don't be fooled by the "well, she's a woman so she understands," psychobabble of the right wing. She is part of that same constituency that will use the Bible to justify slavery. Don't fall for the okey-doke!!! |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Sept 4, 2008 11:44:48 GMT -5
See that's just it Eags... I don't think you can boil a candidate down to his/her race or gender and say that THIS is the key to the future. If it is only about race or gender - you are relying on gimmick-try. And Gimmicks do not change the course of our country - political ploys do not cause paradigm shifts. Every technical, social, and political revolution that's ever happened... has had at it's core IDEAS. Not race, not gender, IDEAS. THOSE are what open doors - not the race, gender, creed, or religion of an individual.
The feminist movement and the Civil Rights Movement weren't about evaluating an individual by gender or by race - it was about content. Do you see what I'm saying? You can't say which candidate will advance you more unless you examine their IDEAS. A candidate who shares your gender but has bad ideas could actually CLOSE doors for you
|
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 11:47:04 GMT -5
The Civil Rights Movement, as sexist as it was, was about rights for all Americans. Yeah, we can say that it was a Black movement because most of the major players were Black and were expressing grievences from the viewpoint of Black people but in reality, the CRM guaranteed rights for women, minorities, poor, etc.... I say that to say this.... Palin is a conservative...period. Yeah, she is a woman but what does she do to press the agenda of women in this country. It would be like electing Ward Connerlly to be Vice President because he is black. Regardless of what you may think about his experience, Obama has shown himself prudent in his decisions up to this point. He ran a race that destroyed the Clinton machine. He's avoided being baited into heated discussions about issues that don't matter. He has wonderful ideas on how to get American jobs back, insure that all Americans have access to healthcare, insure that the education provides adequate resources to teach kids and also brings a focus on family with the Fatherhood initiative. Healthcare helps all Americans. Johs help all Americans. Quality education for EVERY students helps ALL Americans. Fathers in homes helps ALL Americans. Drilling for oil helps.... **crickets** Tax cuts for the most wealthy helps...**crickets** Trickle down economics helps no one but those at the top. We've proven that this system doesn't work. Tax breaks for corporations don't create jobs. Taxing capital gains doesn't stifle investment. People don't stop investing because their profits will be taxed at a higher rate. I think Palin is a gimmick. She is an everyday conservative mother who chose a profession in politics. Nothing special and she doesn't press the feminist agenda any further...as a matter of fact, she threatens to force it into backwards steps. Hands down, when it comes to the issues, Barak is the man. When it comes to helping America, as a country, with our hesitation, Obama 08. But how much do you think Obama will open the door for a black woman to become president? Let's say Condelezza tries to run. If you platform was perfect, realistically, would she stand a chance, or would the stereotypes o fa ghetto, angry black woman prevail? |
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 11:49:17 GMT -5
I feel you, but the conversation wasn't on the issues, more as on a black ( I hate when I see that) or a female. We weren't talking about the issues. It's kind of like when people say is the Country ready for a black man in the white house. We were not talking about who is more likely to win, so much as the future doors that would be opened because of a trailblazer. Well, being an advocate for the extreme far-right that Palin is, it's almost obvious. How many blacks, particularly women do you feel fall on that side of the political spectrum? What you must understand is that for people like Palin..and the republicans in general, if they lean that far to the right in their political philosophies, it will be just a matter of time before they begin to go after the civil rights act, and if you think not having votes counted (as was the situation in FL in 2000,) imagine not having a vote to count! Don't be fooled by the "well, she's a woman so she understands," psychobabble of the right wing. She is part of that same constituency that will use the Bible to justify slavery. Don't fall for the okey-doke!!! <------not drinking the kool-ade. |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Sept 4, 2008 12:12:51 GMT -5
Well this is just my two cents. I will say the acumen as it comes to politics in this country on this board is very high. We must also note that most Americans black or white do not have the insightful vision that we share here.
Saying that most Americans go with the person that they identify with regardless of issues. I hear people saying its about the issues but it really isn't. If that were the case then Mitt Romney would be VP choice for McCain and not Palin.
Two examples, two parties, same result.
I will keep driving the Ronald Reagan point home. The economy, world relations, crime and drugs were all thorns in the side of America for the world to witness and see. Even still the American public was enamored with Reagan because they saw this man as "one of us". They didn't mind the hardship because many felt he was in the trenches with them even though I feel him being shot 3 months into his presidency set the tone for that sentiment.
Bill Clinton did more harm to black people than good with his policies and directives either personally passed or willfully inspired by him. But this mofo played the Sax on Arsenio, ate chitlins, had numerous HBCU Choirs at his speeches and visited many HBCU schools. All about perception. Nevermind the Prison Industry Complex boomed under him, Nevermind the unfair laws passed as it pertained to Pell Grants and Student Loans for Drug Offenders but turned a blind eye to Murderers and Child Molestors. I could go on. BUT yet and still this dude was seen as the first black president.
Most Americans don't care about the issues they care about who they relate to superficially be that race, gender, and culture. In Americans minds if they can find a connection they feel that the candidate would somehow stay true to the values that they both share.
Look at Bush he grew up an Oil Baby and stayed true to his roots.
Barack Obama in this instance has a double edged sword because the main reason most white Americans don't want to vote for him is that they feel as Eager's article stated they would lose special entitlement to black people, gays, immigrants and others. On the other hand he is fresh and new plus the foundation of this country wouldn't allow special entitlement for black people to happen. I feel he would be the only person that could truly get things done down the middle with reforms that could affect everyone is a positive way.
Sadly some see that as a threat as well. Some want the poor to stay poor. The uneducated to stay dumb. The ignorant to stay blind.
This is American Politics
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Sept 4, 2008 12:18:18 GMT -5
"But how much do you think Obama will open the door for a black woman to become president?" I think he will open the door to possibilities. Having a Black man as president will let American know that it's ok to step away from the norm. Useless or pathological tradition is simply habit. We have to break the habit. If Palin is elected, she will simply be a token tag-a-long added to inspire women to vote. She is like a shiny fishing lure...(a bass spinner bait for your fishermen) She spins and skips across the water being shiny but not allowing the fish to really get a good look at her. Once they bite and find out that she's not real....it's too late. You're on the hook for 4 years. |
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Sept 4, 2008 12:40:14 GMT -5
Just as an aside... Soledad O'Brien look goowod! She's doing a lot for Black women  |
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 12:42:48 GMT -5
See that's just it Eags... I don't think you can boil a candidate down to his/her race or gender and say that THIS is the key to the future. If it is only about race or gender - you are relying on gimmick-try. And Gimmicks do not change the course of our country - political ploys do not cause paradigm shifts. Every technical, social, and political revolution that's ever happened... has had at it's core IDEAS. Not race, not gender, IDEAS. THOSE are what open doors - not the race, gender, creed, or religion of an individual.
The feminist movement and the Civil Rights Movement weren't about evaluating an individual by gender or by race - it was about content. Do you see what I'm saying? You can't say which candidate will advance you more unless you examine their IDEAS. A candidate who shares your gender but has bad ideas could actually CLOSE doors for you I think I need to do some more research because I was seriously under the impression that the Civil Rights Movement was specifically about race. I thought it was about black people standing up and demanding not to be judged by the color of their skin. Racism and sexism exist because people judge before examining content. And as educated as we are and as far as we've come, Racism and Sexism are still alive and well. It is raging through the veins of blatant red necks and it lived in the back of the minds of most everybody else ( don't believe me? Let a white person call you nigga and see how you react). It brings tears of joys to my eyes to see that finally, in the eye of the majority, it's being repressed, but don't get it twisted... gone, but not forgotten. It took 45 years from the date of the "I have a dream speech" to get a black man this far. How much longer will it take for a black woman to do the same? We got double negatives, double the weight of oppression. During Palin's speech last night, it became clear to my family and I that with all the issues, she (Palin) felt that this was a competition between blacks and women. I don't remember what she said but I remember my mouth dropping, thinking she just put it out there. "And among the many things I owe them is one simple lesson: that this is America, and every woman can walk through every door of opportunity." But is that really true? |
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Sept 4, 2008 12:57:06 GMT -5
Well this is just my two cents. I will say the acumen as it comes to politics in this country on this board is very high. We must also note that most Americans black or white do not have the insightful vision that we share here. Saying that most Americans go with the person that they identify with regardless of issues. I hear people saying its about the issues but it really isn't. If that were the case then Mitt Romney would be VP choice for McCain and not Palin. Two examples, two parties, same result. I will keep driving the Ronald Reagan point home. The economy, world relations, crime and drugs were all thorns in the side of America for the world to witness and see. Even still the American public was enamored with Reagan because they saw this man as "one of us". They didn't mind the hardship because many felt he was in the trenches with them even though I feel him being shot 3 months into his presidency set the tone for that sentiment. Bill Clinton did more harm to black people than good with his policies and directives either personally passed or willfully inspired by him. But this mofo played the Sax on Arsenio, ate chitlins, had numerous HBCU Choirs at his speeches and visited many HBCU schools. All about perception. Nevermind the Prison Industry Complex boomed under him, Nevermind the unfair laws passed as it pertained to Pell Grants and Student Loans for Drug Offenders but turned a blind eye to Murderers and Child Molestors. I could go on. BUT yet and still this dude was seen as the first black president. Most Americans don't care about the issues they care about who they relate to superficially be that race, gender, and culture. In Americans minds if they can find a connection they feel that the candidate would somehow stay true to the values that they both share. Look at Bush he grew up an Oil Baby and stayed true to his roots. Barack Obama in this instance has a double edged sword because the main reason most white Americans don't want to vote for him is that they feel as Eager's article stated they would lose special entitlement to black people, gays, immigrants and others. On the other hand he is fresh and new plus the foundation of this country wouldn't allow special entitlement for black people to happen. I feel he would be the only person that could truly get things done down the middle with reforms that could affect everyone is a positive way. Sadly some see that as a threat as well. Some want the poor to stay poor. The uneducated to stay dumb. The ignorant to stay blind. This is American Politics VP...I haven't agreed with much that you post about politics...but this was one of the best posts I've read in this section. |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Sept 4, 2008 13:22:08 GMT -5
I think I need to do some more research because I was seriously under the impression that the Civil Rights Movement was specifically about race. I thought it was about black people standing up and demanding not to be judged by the color of their skin. Racism and sexism exist because people judge before examining content. |
|
|
|
Post by Bunny Hop on Sept 4, 2008 13:45:32 GMT -5
I thought Eager's question was kind of a "if you just had to pick one which would you pick" which is why I said what I said.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkngreen06 on Sept 4, 2008 14:12:49 GMT -5
Frankly Iagree with the sentiment that Palin being a woman is enought to vote for her. I would also go as far as saaying that Hillary being one isn't/wasn't enought either. To me both did not have the intrests of the majority of Americans at heart. Palin wants to further place our natural resources at risk (crsytalized in the Gulinai's speech by chanting"Drill Baby Drill" ) and by Hillary said NOTHING when Bill kicked Millions off of Welfare and other income support programs.
I think Obama represents a real shift in public thought & what a cross section of the public goes through.
and on another note but why is Obama a celebrity because people become excited and engaged in the politcal process? I would think that of all groups would be glad for the attention focused on what's going on. Especially when they claim to be the party of the average man,
|
|
|
|
Post by The Elect Lady on Sept 4, 2008 14:13:17 GMT -5
Well this is just my two cents. I will say the acumen as it comes to politics in this country on this board is very high. We must also note that most Americans black or white do not have the insightful vision that we share here. Saying that most Americans go with the person that they identify with regardless of issues. I hear people saying its about the issues but it really isn't. If that were the case then Mitt Romney would be VP choice for McCain and not Palin. Two examples, two parties, same result. I will keep driving the Ronald Reagan point home. The economy, world relations, crime and drugs were all thorns in the side of America for the world to witness and see. Even still the American public was enamored with Reagan because they saw this man as "one of us". They didn't mind the hardship because many felt he was in the trenches with them even though I feel him being shot 3 months into his presidency set the tone for that sentiment. Bill Clinton did more harm to black people than good with his policies and directives either personally passed or willfully inspired by him. But this mofo played the Sax on Arsenio, ate chitlins, had numerous HBCU Choirs at his speeches and visited many HBCU schools. All about perception. Nevermind the Prison Industry Complex boomed under him, Nevermind the unfair laws passed as it pertained to Pell Grants and Student Loans for Drug Offenders but turned a blind eye to Murderers and Child Molestors. I could go on. BUT yet and still this dude was seen as the first black president. Most Americans don't care about the issues they care about who they relate to superficially be that race, gender, and culture. In Americans minds if they can find a connection they feel that the candidate would somehow stay true to the values that they both share. Look at Bush he grew up an Oil Baby and stayed true to his roots. Barack Obama in this instance has a double edged sword because the main reason most white Americans don't want to vote for him is that they feel as Eager's article stated they would lose special entitlement to black people, gays, immigrants and others. On the other hand he is fresh and new plus the foundation of this country wouldn't allow special entitlement for black people to happen. I feel he would be the only person that could truly get things done down the middle with reforms that could affect everyone is a positive way. Sadly some see that as a threat as well. Some want the poor to stay poor. The uneducated to stay dumb. The ignorant to stay blind. This is American Politics It's truely amazing how easily the masses can be influenced. I read somewhere that Hillary KNEW she had the black vote because of the way black people responded to Bill. |
|
|
|
Post by Robelite on Sept 4, 2008 14:39:18 GMT -5
Still Eager, you and your family were dead on in that opinion, because I felt the same way!
Even the CNN talking heads (particularly David Gergen) alluded to the term "cultural war," and how it seemed that the li'l trailer park girl was attempting to launch one there last night. For someone who wanted to proclaim herself an "outsider" as far as Washington is concerned, she seemed to be just a bit too comfortable with her jabs at Obama...almost falling right into the "codewords" the racist wolf packs have used against him. I think she used the term "elitist" two or three times.
Now, in comparing this girl to Hildegard...well. I've made it no secret that I lost respect for Sen Clinton during this campaign, but let's get real. This li'l klondike kitty couldn't press one of Hillary's pant suits! And to see the repubbas falling all over themselves with that attack speech of hers, well, let's just say that had that been Hillary blasting them in that same manner, she'd have been called a "bitch" before she even finished speaking!
Just another double standard of the extreme right wing lunatics.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Sept 4, 2008 15:45:55 GMT -5
Still Eager, you and your family were dead on in that opinion, because I felt the same way! Even the CNN talking heads (particularly David Gergen) alluded to the term "cultural war," and how it seemed that the li'l trailer park girl was attempting to launch one there last night. For someone who wanted to proclaim herself an "outsider" as far as Washington is concerned, she seemed to be just a bit too comfortable with her jabs at Obama...almost falling right into the "codewords" the racist wolf packs have used against him. I think she used the term "elitist" two or three times. Now, in comparing this girl to Hildegard...well. I've made it no secret that I lost respect for Sen Clinton during this campaign, but let's get real. This li'l klondike kitty couldn't press one of Hillary's pant suits! And to see the repubbas falling all over themselves with that attack speech of hers, well, let's just say that had that been Hillary blasting them in that same manner, she'd have been called a "bitch" before she even finished speaking! Just another double standard of the extreme right wing lunatics. |
|
|
|
Post by water on Sept 4, 2008 17:21:56 GMT -5
Palin is better  she will be our first female president especially if she HELPS Sen McCain with the oil issue. |
|
|
|
Post by coldfront06 on Sept 4, 2008 17:53:20 GMT -5
I was thinking the other day about how this is the first presidential election in OO History. I've been around for 3+ years, and on most days, it seems like there is nothing new to talk about. But the election coverage has really carried the board. I enjoy reading all the opinions and its adding more excitement to the election. I always log on to OOA to see what others think about the recent developments.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Sept 4, 2008 17:56:13 GMT -5
Still Eager, you and your family were dead on in that opinion, because I felt the same way! Even the CNN talking heads (particularly David Gergen) alluded to the term "cultural war," and how it seemed that the li'l trailer park girl was attempting to launch one there last night. For someone who wanted to proclaim herself an "outsider" as far as Washington is concerned, she seemed to be just a bit too comfortable with her jabs at Obama...almost falling right into the "codewords" the racist wolf packs have used against him. I think she used the term "elitist" two or three times. Now, in comparing this girl to Hildegard...well. I've made it no secret that I lost respect for Sen Clinton during this campaign, but let's get real. This li'l klondike kitty couldn't press one of Hillary's pant suits! And to see the repubbas falling all over themselves with that attack speech of hers, well, let's just say that had that been Hillary blasting them in that same manner, she'd have been called a "bitch" before she even finished speaking! Just another double standard of the extreme right wing lunatics. CODE WORDS is right. They kept saying this is the MOST important time in our lives. This is such a time of uncertainty, we CAN'T let this go without having someone who's been through crisis...blahbity blah blah blah... First, this is so important because ther might possibly be a BLACK man running the country! Go ahead and say it, don't be scurred! The time of uncertainty is because your posterboy Bushy put us in an unsubstatiated war in Iraq. Giuliani had the nerve in his speech to say, The Democratic leader in Congress said that the 'Iraq war is lost...' Well my friends, if we lost then who won? Bin Laden? The terrorists?" EXCUSE ME? um, haven't we established that Bin Laden is/was NOT in Iraq? Isn't Bin Laden who the military should be pursuing? how does pulling out of a bad misled decision in a war in Iraq translate to Bin Laden wins? And the freaking crowd went wild and booed....Seriously? Seriously Folks? And, growing up in a single parent home, I'll tell you...that's crisis. That's something to deal with, seeing it first hand. In many ways, unless you're privileged, which he wasn't, it forces you to mature much more quickly than your peers. Being a BLACK man on the national stage for so long, and forming a movement against the establishment, that's stress and causes crisis. I think he's been through some crises. |
|
|
|
Post by Mrs. Eyes on Sept 4, 2008 18:28:15 GMT -5
I for one as a woman feel insulted that the Republican party chose a woman as the VP to sway more female votes.
If your party wasn't trying to reach me before, why try to use a woman to reach me now. That's pathetic.
The issues are clear, Palin does not practices what she preaches. Period. So with that being said, I'm going to go with Obama, because he is about the issues he talks about, Palin, not so much.
|
|
You know I love ya, brah! 
she will be our first female president especially if she HELPS Sen McCain with the oil issue. 