Obama comment re guns and religion
- Thread starter pdxman
- Start date
To answer your question, Steve, I think the substance of the "comment" is: "lol I :can ..type:.. huh LOL."
Phil Ayesho
Superior Member
In speaking to some city folks, after having campaigned in Pennsylvania, he said the Rust belt folks cling to their guns and religion out of bitterness over their economic situation.
He is being pilloried for it... especially pilloried by Hillary...
While certainly not the most eloquent way he could have have expressed himself...
I tend to think he is right.
They ARE bitter over their economic plight. They do cling to religion. They do cling to their right to bear arms...
Its just so PC to say it out loud
A week ago he was a private fund raiser in San Francisco and was asked why he had a hard time connecting to blue-collar voters. Someone recorded the audio and it was released this Saturday. The full clip is already on the internet.
From CNN-
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. ...
![advertisement.gif]()
"And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not," he said.
"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,"
This is going to be worse for him than his preacher. There is some truth in what he said, but it is gonna to be soooo easy to take it out of context. This could be one of those moments in politics that changes the game completely.
From CNN-
"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. ...
"And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not," he said.
"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,"
This is going to be worse for him than his preacher. There is some truth in what he said, but it is gonna to be soooo easy to take it out of context. This could be one of those moments in politics that changes the game completely.
I'm not sure what pdx's point is. However, the comment Obama made at a fundraiser last week that Hillary and McCain are jumping on, out of context of course:
WRT working-class voters he's had difficulty courting, who he believes are angry and/or desperate because of their economic situation: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Which is true, to some extent. But great to see Hillary once again on-message with the Republicans in how she's spinning this.
Obama's further remarks, made yesterday in Indiana:
"There's been a political flare-up because I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois, who are bitter. They are angry. They feel like they have been left behind. They feel like nobody is paying attention to what they're going through. So I said, well you know, when you're bitter you turn to what you can count on. So people, they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community. And they get mad about illegal immigrants who are coming over to this country."
Again, I don't think he's wrong. Unfortunately acknowledging harsh truth can be difficult for a lot of people to hear, so its likely this is going to turn off some working class voters. The essence of his message however is that when they feel pushed against the wall, the working class sometimes back politicians for more subjective, base reasons instead of the candidate who actually has their economic best interests in mind. His challenge will be to overcome that.
WRT working-class voters he's had difficulty courting, who he believes are angry and/or desperate because of their economic situation: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Which is true, to some extent. But great to see Hillary once again on-message with the Republicans in how she's spinning this.
Obama's further remarks, made yesterday in Indiana:
"There's been a political flare-up because I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois, who are bitter. They are angry. They feel like they have been left behind. They feel like nobody is paying attention to what they're going through. So I said, well you know, when you're bitter you turn to what you can count on. So people, they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community. And they get mad about illegal immigrants who are coming over to this country."
Again, I don't think he's wrong. Unfortunately acknowledging harsh truth can be difficult for a lot of people to hear, so its likely this is going to turn off some working class voters. The essence of his message however is that when they feel pushed against the wall, the working class sometimes back politicians for more subjective, base reasons instead of the candidate who actually has their economic best interests in mind. His challenge will be to overcome that.
Most of what he says is the truth but the guns and religion parts were really bad choices for examples and speak directly to everyday conservative values regardless of economic times. He may have dismissed the Rev. piece but this one will haunt him through the general election. I have been a staunch supporter from the beginning but this one even had me stop and think. In the final analysis, if he does not nip this in the bud by admitting that guns and religion are not "crutches" and replace these bad examples with more appropriate and far-reaching ones as indicative of bad economic times, he may have just tossed his election down the toilet. :frown1:
D_Kaye Throttlebottom
Experimental Member
uncutguy37
Legendary Member
he is unelectable in a general election against McCain because of things like this and his former pastor, if the Dems want to win in Nov they had better pick Clinton
D_Kaye Throttlebottom
Experimental Member
Phil Ayesho
Superior Member
All any democrat has to do to beat McCain is to state he will get us out of the war, and NOT pursue further tax cuts to the rich.
McCain wants to cut corporate taxes... already at an all time low, in half.
Republicans are con men... they do not care how much damage they do to the nation... as long as their corporate supporters get their huge stock payouts NOW.
A few billion dollars in the bank and who cares if the US goes down the toilet... Condos in Nice are nice.
Right now....the Bush administration, who has CLAIMED to lower taxes.... has , in fact, saddled every living American citizen with $16,000 of DEBT... per person.... to be paid off, with interest, over the next 20 years...
Even if it stopped tomorrow, By the time YOU pay off his idiotic war, you will have paid out $39,000 of your money.
Hows that feel? that your president has racked up that kind of credit card debt for you without even asking?
And McCain want to let corporations off the hook so the middle class can bear the entire brunt...
AND he wants to stay in Iraq indefinitely... his chance to reverse what happened in Vietnam... so expect that debt to rise.
Don't forget that the Wall Street bailout will also add to your debt... government failed to regulate financial markets... so they went wild... and when they failed THEY don't have to pay the bill, the middle class has to pay the bill.
PEOPLE.... ALL THAT MONEY WENT SOMEWHERE!
Actual cash drawn from actual banks in the form of loans... it went somewhere...
Into the pockets of a handful of powerful men.
You have to pay it back, with interest.
That means that that money was taken out of YOUR pocket ( in the future) to make a very few people obscenely rich ( right now)
Wake up
You are being robbed.
D_Kaye Throttlebottom
Experimental Member
b/c John McCain has more foreign policy experience and Obama has none right? So if the dems want to win, we should vote for Hillary, b/c she has foreign policy experience, with Bosnia and sniper fire (oops not so much) Kosovo (uhm...no borders were already open and she has no referential power to do so on behalf of the the US to NATO or the UN as the first lady)...and Ireland peace process - (telling that the nobel prize winners are divided on her contribution - one catholic supports her claim of being involved and the other protestant dismissed it as silly - so how lasting was her influence on Ireland peace involvement - if catholic nobel prize winner and protestant prize winner are still divided?)
Obama has moved beyond the pastor comments.
voters are concerned about jobs and the devaluation of the dollar that continues to raise the cost of gas - not religious posturing during this election.
HazelGod
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2006
- Posts
- 7,154
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 31
- Points
- 183
- Location
- The Other Side of the Pillow
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
That's a large part of his appeal to those of us fed up with the lack of trustworthiness in our executive leadership. Obama speaks the plain truth, with little regard for sugarcoating the language to protect people's delicate sensibilities.
That anyone would assert his honesty is offensive or politically damning speaks volumes about what a sad state of affairs we have reached.
There is no way to take his comments out of context. In fact people are taking them in full context and looking at them in relation to comments made in 2004 as well. In full context the statements are Elitist and out of touch.
In 2004 Obama was being just as elitist and out of touch. Obama essentially said that unsophisticated blue collar workers who had been forgotten by the preceding administrations were finding solace in their guns, religion and personal bias because the preceding administrations lacked an economic response to the problems in their daily lives. And that these unsophisticated blue collar workers gravitated to the party that at least gave them some sense of personal value by validating their interest in the second amendment, religious values, and immigration law and the like.
Hmmm, still sounds elitist to me. His explanation while stated differently still reeks of elitism. Middle America, America period is frustrated and angry that government isn't doing the things it should be doing to make this country stronger. We are economically in danger and militarily stretched to the limit. But to say that the struggling middle class is "bitter" and are 1 issue voters(or Simple Issue Voters -both negatives in his connotation because he lumped them with other negatives) is ludicrous. To add insult to injury Obama was answering why these blue collar workers were not receptive to his campaign and messege.
The struggling middle class who hope not to be struggling under the right President will still hold those same values...they will find comfort in their family traditions of hunting, religious foundations and strong personal beliefs for or against laws that affect their communities and the Nation.
By placing guns, religion, with antipathy for people not like them and anti-immigrant sentiment...it made everything in that sentence bad.
Obama cannot explain away "Bitter" and lumping values with bias and prejudice...nor what was implied in both statements. In 2004 he was saying why "blue collar workers" gravitated to the other party. In 2008 he's saying why they aren't gravitating to him....Because Bitter Blue Collar Workers are too ignorant.
It was clear what Obama said.
If he was saying people are mad and need an administration to help them...he could have just stuck to his message of change...its been working for him. That's not what he said and his elitism came out and revealed who he really is.
Barack Obama -
You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them...And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.
And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
'Cling' to their values and traditions as a way to explain their frustrations? Cling to bias and prejudice to explain their frustration...that's why they aren't voting Obama? The Whole statement is just bad. Obama, supporters and media surrogates are trying desperately to change what Obama said but its clear what he said and what he meant.Obama's CLARIFICATIONS are unable to clear away the condescension, elitism and negativity of his statements.
D_Kaye Throttlebottom
Experimental Member
No, trust a lot of people are insulted that Hillary and McCain would rather paint a "sunny" face on not having a job and watching their jobs get outsourced to other countries for the last 25 years and while Bush and Clintons pontificate about economic restoration. McCain flat out told Michigan - their jobs were not coming back. Yet Obama is the elitist?
How about this video from 2004 where Obama says the same thing about how voters don't trust Washington to help their economy so they take comfort in their families and in their church and don't vote on economic policies of the candidates:
YouTube - Obama (2004) connects guns, religion, economics, and bitter
How about this video from 2004 where Obama says the same thing about how voters don't trust Washington to help their economy so they take comfort in their families and in their church and don't vote on economic policies of the candidates:
YouTube - Obama (2004) connects guns, religion, economics, and bitter
Obama is clearly an elitist by his recent comments and his 2004 comments solidify his elitist attitude. Americans don't "cling" to their values because they aren't getting help from the government. American values, traditions and religious foundations are not equal to prejudice and anti-immigrant sentiment. Obama is clearly completely out of touch.
If a Blue Collar worker chooses to oppose immigration law who is Obama to assume and assert that it is out of economic "bitterness"? Americans can be ready for economic change AND be for or against immigration, for or against owning a gun, and deeply religious. Why does Obama define Blue Collar Workers as prejudice and bias, lumping it all together? Obama's elitism is evident.
dong20
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2006
- Posts
- 6,058
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 28
- Points
- 183
- Location
- The grey country
- Sexuality
- No Response
First, who are you to assume it's not?
Second - This post isn't about Obama or Clinton, it's about people.
People will believe what they want to believe, the same as ever. That he could have chosen 'better phraseology' to avoid hurting some folks pride is undeniable. That there's underlying truth in what he said is equally undeniable.
Bitterness will exist among populations that have lost their traditional livelihoods for reasons they consider unfair, outside their control and especially if perpetrated by those who they can easily identify and 'label'. This is especially true of industries rendered obsolete. People don't like to be rendered obsolete. That some, many even will feel bitterness is inevitable.
In times of crisis and hardship many people tend to 'go home'. To deny this happens is naive, dismissive of basic human nature, terminally stupid and other things. Think about what was said, by both candidates in that context, not a purely political point scoring one. I think you'll reach a different conclusion. If you don't, you clearly don't understand people very well at all.
You understand what I mean by 'go home', right?
I assumed nothing. Obama did all assuming in his elitist statements.
The Underlying Truth Argument forwarded by Obama Supporters, Pro-Obama Pundits in reference to Obama's remarks is an attempt to rationalize Obama's Condescending and Elitist remarks. A rationalization does not and will not change what he stated.
Dong your statement on Bitterness and what people do in reaction to it is also Condescending and Elitist. You even go further to call people Naive who don't follow your way of thinking.
Truth in Obama's remarks? Far from any truth, the remarks are rather Obama's Elitist Opinion. Just because people are frustrated and Blue Collar Workers and Americans need the Government to provide economic solutions doesn't make Obama's remarks true. Obama's statements are
exactly as he stated them: Out of Touch, Elitist and Wrong.
Similar threads
