You have to wonder what Clinton will do. She claims to have not watched the speech yet, which strikes me as a mistake. She also may make her own speech:

 

which strikes me as an even bigger mistake.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/18/po...ry3948776.shtml

 

Add in the news that Florida apparently won't revote, and Hillary's all of a sudden much worse off than yesterday. Which I didn't really think possible, but there it is.

If she were to try and make a speech on race, she'll get destroyed by the medai. She has NO street cred on race. She is a privileged white woman.

If she were to try and make a speech on race, she'll get destroyed by the medai. She has NO street cred on race. She is a privileged white woman.

I don't think it has anything to do with "street cred", and I don't think the media would lash out. I just think it will sound hollow. It's a copycat move, it's weak and desperate. And she's not a very good speaker, anyway. I've never, ever seen her speak even half as well as what I watched today.

 

Obama's the inspirational candidate, Clinton's the practical one. If she tries to become inspirational, she'll fail. She just doesn't have that ability.

You have to wonder what Clinton will do. She claims to have not watched the speech yet, which strikes me as a mistake. She also may make her own speech:

 

which strikes me as an even bigger mistake.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/18/po...ry3948776.shtml

 

Add in the news that Florida apparently won't revote, and Hillary's all of a sudden much worse off than yesterday. Which I didn't really think possible, but there it is.

She is now a follower... which falls right into the Obama campaign's playbook. I'll tell you, what you have witnessed over the last four days is nothing short of brilliant from Obama's campaign. It's almost like they wanted the flames of his pastor "fanned" so he could make this speech. Think about it. It falls right in line with him "taking back control" in basically three days time. Pretty interesting stuff, and now Hillary's following along.

 

I don't think it has anything to do with "street cred", and I don't think the media would lash out. I just think it will sound hollow. It's a copycat move, it's weak and desperate. And she's not a very good speaker, anyway. I've never, ever seen her speak even half as well as what I watched today.

 

Obama's the inspirational candidate, Clinton's the practical one. If she tries to become inspirational, she'll fail. She just doesn't have that ability.

Right on. I just posted the same sort of thing, a little differently, though.

If she were to try and make a speech on race, she'll get destroyed by the medai. She has NO street cred on race. She is a privileged white woman.

I saw a comment on CNN where somebody said since Obama grew up mostly overseas and was raised by a white mother that he has no connections to American slavery and isn't qualified to talk about racial issues... lol, people are so damn stupid and I guess they can make themselves believe anything.

 

In the same comment thread I saw someone say "where is this white mother Obama keeps talking about and why haven't we seen her? Obama is just another liar!" The thread closed before I could tell her Obama's mother has been dead for a long time.

She is now a follower... which falls right into the Obama campaign's playbook. I'll tell you, what you have witnessed over the last four days is nothing short of brilliant from Obama's campaign. It's almost like they wanted the flames of his pastor "fanned" so he could make this speech. Think about it. It falls right in line with him "taking back control" in basically three days time. Pretty interesting stuff, and now Hillary's following along.

So far, we've seen 2 of these "Major" type speeches from candidates this season...Romney on his religion and now Obama on the race issue. She has 2 issues that sort of hang over her campaign that she hasn't addressed in the same way...that she's a woman and that her spouse is a former president.

So far, we've seen 2 of these "Major" type speeches from candidates this season...Romney on his religion and now Obama on the race issue. She has 2 issues that sort of hang over her campaign that she hasn't addressed in the same way...that she's a woman and that her spouse is a former president.

Interesting point. One has to wonder...

 

This is a speech that needs to be run in its entirety on every news show this evening. It is THAT important.

This is a speech that needs to be run in its entirety on every news show this evening. It is THAT important.

Agreed. It's something everyone needs to hear whether they like Obama or not.

Agreed. It's something everyone needs to hear whether they like Obama or not.

See, and I think this speech transcends a single candidate. It's a commentary and HISTORY lesson on how we got to where we are today.

Chris Matthews on MSNBC said this video should be watched by every college student before they enter "the real world".

Ugh, CNN right now. This journalism is why TV sucks, and why a lot of newspaper articles suck. Hey, lets get an angry guy on one side who won't agree with any part of the speech, and one who loves the speech and have them yell at each other.

See, and I think this speech transcends a single candidate. It's a commentary and HISTORY lesson on how we got to where we are today.

Chris Matthews on MSNBC said this video should be watched by every college student before they enter "the real world".

While I agree that it was an important speech, and one worth watching... let's not get out of hand. This isn't "I have a dream" or anything at that scale. Its a strong reminder on some issues, and I am glad it was done. But let's not over dramatize here.

 

Ugh, CNN right now. This journalism is why TV sucks, and why a lot of newspaper articles suck. Hey, lets get an angry guy on one side who won't agree with any part of the speech, and one who loves the speech and have them yell at each other.

*cough* Clinton News Network *cough*

Edited March 18, 200818 yr by Athomeboy_2000

Larry Elder is the definition of the term Oreo... Hell I bet it has his picture next to it... He reminds me of that Chapelle Show skit about the blind black white supremacist.

Larry Elder is the definition of the term Oreo... Hell I bet it has his picture next to it... He reminds me of that Chapelle Show skit about the blind black white supremacist.

 

Why isn't he entitled to his opinion ?

 

Why are you lowering yourself to calling someone a race trader?

 

Are you white? If so, you might want to watch your words as, because as a white person you have no right to criticize a black man. Thats the theory behind why white people can't criticize Wright, correct?

Why isn't he entitled to his opinion ?

 

Why are you lowering yourself to calling someone a race trader?

 

Are you white? If so, you might want to watch your words as, because as a white person you have no right to criticize a black man. Thats the theory behind why white people can't criticize Wright, correct?

huh?

huh?

 

Seriously, that confused you? I don't know what to tell you.

 

 

Seriously, that confused you? I don't know what to tell you.

No, I understood you... I just don't know why you said it.

No, I understood you... I just don't know why you said it.

 

If you look at my post again, there is a section at the top with a quote. It looks like this:

 

Larry Elder is the definition of the term Oreo... Hell I bet it has his picture next to it... He reminds me of that Chapelle Show skit about the blind black white supremacist.

 

That is what I was responding too. Now which part of my post goes against that? He said the guy was just like a black white supremacist shown in a sketch. He also used a racial slur, oreo, when referring to the CNN guest.

 

Edited March 18, 200818 yr by mr_genius

Larry Elder is the definition of the term Oreo... Hell I bet it has his picture next to it... He reminds me of that Chapelle Show skit about the blind black white supremacist.

 

Why isn't he entitled to his opinion ?

 

Why are you lowering yourself to calling someone a race trader?

 

Are you white? If so, you might want to watch your words as, because as a white person you have no right to criticize a black man. Thats the theory behind why white people can't criticize Wright, correct?

This thread WAS civilized. There is no need to call anyone an "oreo", nor is there any reason for the laughable hyperbole that will only serve to enflame people. Tone it down please, lest other actions become necessary.

 

This thread WAS civilized. There is no need to call anyone an "oreo", nor is there any reason for the laughable hyperbole that will only serve to enflame people. Tone it down please, lest other actions become necessary.

 

There have been arguments on CNN that a white person has no right to judge a black church or a preacher at that church. I don't see how it is now laughable.

 

Why are you threatening to ban me?

Edited March 18, 200818 yr by mr_genius

FOX is already beginning the spin. Even though he said he never heard any racist / anti-america comments (even though he said he wasnt present at the SPECIFIC comments brought up over the weekend) he is now admitting to having heard them (which he said he didnt)

Edited March 18, 200818 yr by Athomeboy_2000

FOX is already beginning the spin. Even though he said he never heard any racist / anti-america comments (even though he said he wasnt present at the SPECIFIC comments brought up over the weekend) he is now admitting to having heard them (which he said he didnt)

If he said he never heard it, and then said it did, how is reporting that 'spin'?

There have been arguments on CNN that a white person has no right to judge a black church or a preacher at that church. I don't see how it is now laughable.

 

Why are you threatening to ban me?

You saying that no one is allowed to criticize black people if they aren't black. You said it, its hyperbolic, I pointed out that its inflammatory and doesn't add to the dialogue. If you heard it from some talking head, does that make it better?

 

And when I referred to further actions, I wasn't talking about banning anyone. I was thinking more like closing the thread.

 

If he said he never heard it, and then said it did, how is reporting that 'spin'?

He said he was not present for THOSE specific comments. He never said he hadn't heard inflammatory comments in the past. THe way Faux News said it was that even though he denied it, today he admitted it. Even though he never said that. It was how they framed it.