Hillary Clinton giving advice to her door-to-door campaign workers in Philadelphia, April 19: "Well, I think, just knock on the door and say 'She's really nice,' or you could say it another way, 'She's not as bad as you think.'"
"Seventeen percent of Pennsylvania voters said they will either not vote if Mrs. Clinton gets the nomination or will vote for Mr. McCain; 25% said they will do likewise if Mr. Obama wins the nomination." (The Economist, April 26 - May 2, 2008)
If Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee, he absolutely must prevail in Pennsylvania -- the nation's sixth largest state -- if he hopes to win the election.
But the exit polls in the recent primary show that the Illinois Senator is unlikely to win the Keystone State.Consider the views of Catholic voters -- about one-third of registered Democrats -- in Pennsylvania. Of the ones who voted in the primary, six-out-of-10 say they'd vote for Obama in the general election. However, more than two-out-of-10 (21%) say they'll vote for John McCain.
Among white voters, almost one-in-six (16%) said that race had an influence on their vote. And of those, nearly one-in-twelve (8%-plus) said they would not vote for Obama in November.
When Gov. Ed Rendell make a similar observation months ago, he was condemned as uttering racially insensitive comments. Insensitive? Perhaps. Correct? Absolutely.
In the Pennsylvania exit polls, many Democrats made sarcastic references to Obama's "bitter" comments (about people clinging to religion, guns, racism, and xenophobia). Some of those voters joked that they were much too "bitter" ever to vote for Obama. Others, according to The Economist, accused Obama of "clinging" to a religious figure (Rev. Jeremiah Wright) notable for hating America and white people.
Especially in Rust Belt States (including Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, and Michigan), Obama has a real problem attracting white voters. According to the Senator's campaign managers, that's because the the voters don't "know" him. But whose fault is that? Many Caucasians are evaluating Obama on the principle that you know a man by the company he keeps. As long as that company includes Rev. Wright, terrorist William Ayers, and influence-buyer Tony Rezko, the electorate doesn't like what it sees.
Obama's problems run deep. For example, four weeks ago -- as the Wright controversy -- approached white heat, Obama delivered what his minders called "a major speech on race." I saw the entire speech and paid careful attention, but now -- less than a month later -- I can't recall a single phrase. Can you?
Important Message from Pennsylvania Republican Leader Rob Gleason: (Note: You can get on Rob Gleason's mailing list for information about PA politics by e-mailing him at: info@pagop.org
Chairman's Blog: Putting Together Winning Tickets
Primary Day was a great day for the Republican Party of Pennsylvania. While much of the media’s attention was focused on the contested Democrat Presidential race, our Party was busy watching the final pieces of our roster come together. The Republican Party of Pennsylvania had a great night, and is heading into the November election with a strong slate of candidates for every office from the White House to the State House.
Before Tuesday, we already had a strong statewide ticket in place led by our Party’s Presidential candidate Senator John McCain. John McCain has laid out realistic plans that address many of the problems our nation is currently facing, and is by far the best choice for Americans on November 4th. In addition, we have Attorney General Tom Corbett, State Treasurer candidate Tom Ellis, and State Auditor General candidate Chet Beiler rounding out our strong statewide Republican ticket. Our Party has endorsed these candidates and remains confident that they each have the experience and qualifications to best serve the people of Pennsylvania.
On Primary Day, we found out who will be running for some key Congressional seats here in the Commonwealth. First of all, G.T. Thompson, our former Centre County Republican Committee Chairman, won a highly contested Republican primary in the 5th Congressional District. G.T. is a incredible candidate and will provide the 5th Congressional District a strong voice in Washington, D.C. We also learned that Chris Hackett will be the candidate who will take on Congressman Chris Carney in the 10th Congressional District this November. Chris is a successful businessman and will hold Congressman Carney responsible for his rubberstamping of Nancy Pelosi’s liberal agenda. In the 12th Congressional District, it appears that Bill Russell was successful in garnering enough write-in votes to appear on the ballot against Congressman John Murtha. Russell is a veteran and is committed to running a hard campaign against Murtha.
The rest of our Congressional line-up consists of a strong slate of Republicans all across the Commonwealth.
Our candidates for Congress include: Mike Muhammad (1st CD), Mike Livingston (2nd CD), Congressman Phil English (3rd CD), Former Congresswoman Melissa Hart (4th CD), Congressman Jim Gerlach (6th CD), Craig Williams (7th CD), Tom Manion (8th CD), Congressman Bill Shuster (9th CD), Hazelton Mayor Lou Barletta (11th CD), Marina Kats (13th CD), Congressman Charlie Dent (15th CD), Congressman Joe Pitts (16th CD), Toni Gilhooley (17th CD), Congressman Tim Murphy (18th CD), and Congressman Todd Platts (19th CD). Our candidates for the State Senate and the State House are in place and we are confident that we can expand our majority in the State Senate and win back the State House.
In many ways, this election will be like a chess match between us and the Democrats. There is 189 days till Election Day, and our Party has its roster of experienced, qualified and principled candidates on the board and we are already hard at work developing the best strategies to ensure our candidates are successful this November. Meanwhile, the Democrat Party and their candidates can’t even begin putting together a strategy until they know who exactly will be leading their ticket. While the Democrats are stuck in a never-ending Primary election and squabbling over which candidate is more liberal than the other, our Party is focused on November.
Checkmate!
Showing posts with label Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Friday, April 25, 2008
NC GOP Right, McCain Wrong
I strongly support John McCain for the presidency of the U.S. I have done a great deal online – and off – to advance the cause of John McCain, and I will do a great deal more.
That said, I strongly disagree with McCain’s position that the North Carolina GOP should withdraw an Obama ad, one using Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American and anti-white comments to criticize two NC Democrats running for governor. Both candidates (Richard Moore and Bev Perdue) have endorsed Barack Obama.
John McCain has said “there’s no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don’t want it.” He also added that his knowledge of the ad was second-hand. In his words, “I didn’t see it, and I hope that I don’t see it.” Frankly, if he wants to condemn the ad, he should at least look at it.
John McCain is an honorable, decent man. In the case of the NC ad, he’s overstepping his authority. Yes, he will be the Republican standard bearer, but the North Carolina GOP is a separate entity, responsible for the performance of Republicans in their state.
Frankly, there’s nothing false or meretricious about the ad. Rev. Wright presented the sermon featured (the one where he says “God damn America”) as it appears in the ad. Obama has distanced himself in vague ways from what he calls Wright’s “controversial” remarks, but has not spoken in any detail about the issue.
In fact, Republican candidates around the country are holding Democrats to account on their support of Obama. In my own congressional district, GOP candidate Melissa Hart has repeatedly criticized her opponent, Jason Altmire, for not distancing himself from Obama’s so-called “bitter” comments. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is supporting such efforts.
As for McCain, he’s taking too much of a kid gloves approach to Obama, who misrepresents McCain’s position on a daily basis. Most disturbingly, McCain told MSNBC’s Chris Mathews that Obama’s “bitter” remarks were “elitist,” but that he wouldn’t characterize the Senator himself as an “elitist.”
I give up. Even Hillary Clinton, Obama’s fellow Democrat, has called him an “elitist.’ Frankly, an elitist is someone who makes elitist remarks and is guilty of elitist associations, and Obama regularly does both.
I sometimes fear that Senator McCain yearns for the good old days when the U.S. Senate was a “gentleman’s club.” In his chronic misrepresentations of McCain – for example, saying he’d like to fight the Iraq War for another 100 years – Obama is not exactly being a gentleman. In fact, he’s being a left-wing elitist, one detached from the realities of life in most of America.
In the campaign, Obama and his friends at MoveOn.org are going to throw the kitchen sink at McCain. Heck, they’re going to throw the stove, refrigerator, and dishwasher at McCain – not to mention the local landfill.
Senator McCain can not be under the illusion that he’s a latter-day Dwight Eisenhower running a contemporary version of Adlai Stevenson. Like the North Carolina Republicans, McCain must not overestimate the character of his opponent(s).
In the Gulf War, General Schwarzkopf said his approach would be to “hit the enemy in the face with a baseball bat.” Frankly, that’s a good description of what American leftists -- including Barack Obama – will try to do with McCain.
When you see a baseball bat coming your way, the best approach is NOT to turn the other cheek. Trust me, Senator Obama and his supporters are not to miss any opportunity to defame John McCain, and he’s better be ready for that.
Note: The material below describes in detail the controversy over the NC political ad.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/04/23/ap4926459.html
"We asked them not to run it," McCain told reporters traveling with him in Kentucky. "I'm sending them an e-mail as we speak asking them to take it down."
"I don't know why they do it. Obviously, I don't control them, but I'm making it very clear, as I have a couple of times in the past, that there's no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don't want it," McCain said.
McCain said the ad was described to him: "I didn't see it, and I hope that I don't see it."
"Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan, who accompanied McCain, said he had left a voice mail message for state party chairwoman Linda Daves asking her to pull the ad.
McCain, in an e-mail to Daves, said he will draw sharp contrasts with Democrats. "
"But we need not engage in political tactics that only seek to divide the American people."
Asked about the ad during an appearance in New Albany, Ind., Obama said: "My understanding is that the Republican National Committee and John McCain have both said that the ad's inappropriate. I take them at their word, and I assume that if John McCain thinks that it's an inappropriate ad, that he can get them to pull it down since he's their nominee and standard-bearer."
"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean piled on, saying McCain should call the party chairwoman personally."
"If John McCain means what he says, he should call the North Carolina Republican Party chairwoman and tell her not to run this ad," Dean said. "Sending an e-mail and turning a blind eye as the state party ignores him is not leadership."
"North Carolina GOP spokesman Brent Woodcox said the ad will begin running statewide on Monday, a week before the state's crucial May 6 primary. The ad actually targets gubernatorial candidates Richard Moore and Bev Perdue, Democrats who have endorsed Obama."
That said, I strongly disagree with McCain’s position that the North Carolina GOP should withdraw an Obama ad, one using Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American and anti-white comments to criticize two NC Democrats running for governor. Both candidates (Richard Moore and Bev Perdue) have endorsed Barack Obama.
John McCain has said “there’s no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don’t want it.” He also added that his knowledge of the ad was second-hand. In his words, “I didn’t see it, and I hope that I don’t see it.” Frankly, if he wants to condemn the ad, he should at least look at it.
John McCain is an honorable, decent man. In the case of the NC ad, he’s overstepping his authority. Yes, he will be the Republican standard bearer, but the North Carolina GOP is a separate entity, responsible for the performance of Republicans in their state.
Frankly, there’s nothing false or meretricious about the ad. Rev. Wright presented the sermon featured (the one where he says “God damn America”) as it appears in the ad. Obama has distanced himself in vague ways from what he calls Wright’s “controversial” remarks, but has not spoken in any detail about the issue.
In fact, Republican candidates around the country are holding Democrats to account on their support of Obama. In my own congressional district, GOP candidate Melissa Hart has repeatedly criticized her opponent, Jason Altmire, for not distancing himself from Obama’s so-called “bitter” comments. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is supporting such efforts.
As for McCain, he’s taking too much of a kid gloves approach to Obama, who misrepresents McCain’s position on a daily basis. Most disturbingly, McCain told MSNBC’s Chris Mathews that Obama’s “bitter” remarks were “elitist,” but that he wouldn’t characterize the Senator himself as an “elitist.”
I give up. Even Hillary Clinton, Obama’s fellow Democrat, has called him an “elitist.’ Frankly, an elitist is someone who makes elitist remarks and is guilty of elitist associations, and Obama regularly does both.
I sometimes fear that Senator McCain yearns for the good old days when the U.S. Senate was a “gentleman’s club.” In his chronic misrepresentations of McCain – for example, saying he’d like to fight the Iraq War for another 100 years – Obama is not exactly being a gentleman. In fact, he’s being a left-wing elitist, one detached from the realities of life in most of America.
In the campaign, Obama and his friends at MoveOn.org are going to throw the kitchen sink at McCain. Heck, they’re going to throw the stove, refrigerator, and dishwasher at McCain – not to mention the local landfill.
Senator McCain can not be under the illusion that he’s a latter-day Dwight Eisenhower running a contemporary version of Adlai Stevenson. Like the North Carolina Republicans, McCain must not overestimate the character of his opponent(s).
In the Gulf War, General Schwarzkopf said his approach would be to “hit the enemy in the face with a baseball bat.” Frankly, that’s a good description of what American leftists -- including Barack Obama – will try to do with McCain.
When you see a baseball bat coming your way, the best approach is NOT to turn the other cheek. Trust me, Senator Obama and his supporters are not to miss any opportunity to defame John McCain, and he’s better be ready for that.
Note: The material below describes in detail the controversy over the NC political ad.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/04/23/ap4926459.html
"We asked them not to run it," McCain told reporters traveling with him in Kentucky. "I'm sending them an e-mail as we speak asking them to take it down."
"I don't know why they do it. Obviously, I don't control them, but I'm making it very clear, as I have a couple of times in the past, that there's no place for that kind of campaigning, and the American people don't want it," McCain said.
McCain said the ad was described to him: "I didn't see it, and I hope that I don't see it."
"Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan, who accompanied McCain, said he had left a voice mail message for state party chairwoman Linda Daves asking her to pull the ad.
McCain, in an e-mail to Daves, said he will draw sharp contrasts with Democrats. "
"But we need not engage in political tactics that only seek to divide the American people."
Asked about the ad during an appearance in New Albany, Ind., Obama said: "My understanding is that the Republican National Committee and John McCain have both said that the ad's inappropriate. I take them at their word, and I assume that if John McCain thinks that it's an inappropriate ad, that he can get them to pull it down since he's their nominee and standard-bearer."
"Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean piled on, saying McCain should call the party chairwoman personally."
"If John McCain means what he says, he should call the North Carolina Republican Party chairwoman and tell her not to run this ad," Dean said. "Sending an e-mail and turning a blind eye as the state party ignores him is not leadership."
"North Carolina GOP spokesman Brent Woodcox said the ad will begin running statewide on Monday, a week before the state's crucial May 6 primary. The ad actually targets gubernatorial candidates Richard Moore and Bev Perdue, Democrats who have endorsed Obama."
Friday, March 28, 2008
OBAMA AND ANTI-ITALIAN REMARKS
This weekend (Saturday and Sunday), I'll be posting about Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his anti-Italian remarks. As you may know, Rev. Wright blames what he calls the "Roman . . . the Italians" for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Does Barack Obama disagree with those statements? Who knows?
When he talks about the America-hating, race-baiting Rev. Wright, Obama chooses his words very carefully. He says he "disagrees" with the Pastor on several things, but he never identifies where his dissent lies. Somehow, no matter how despicable Wright's remarks are, Obama still continue to see him as his "uncle" and his "spiritual advisor."
Obama's refusal to disown and to repudiate this evil man calls into great question where the candidate stands on hate-speech.
When the time came for Obama to repudiate Wright and separate himself from the so-called "church," he instead turned on his Rhetoric Machine. He gave a speech about "race," a bunch of generalities that avoided any full repudiation of Jeremiah Wright.
Right now, the Obama campaign had placed a muzzle on wife Michelle, whose distaste for her country reflects the views of her long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. The pastor himself appears to be in hiding, unwilling to explain or apologize for his hate-filled sermons and publications.
Yesterday, I attended a meeting of Democrats (and at least one Republican, me) supporting the candidacy of a young man for the Pennsylvania House. About half the people there were Americans of Italian descent. They were aware of many of Wright's offensive statements, but were not aware that he had singled out Italians (Wright spoke of their "garlickey" breath) for condemnation. I didn't have the heart to tell them.
My wife is of Italian descent, as are our daughter and several grandchildren. Obama owes them -- and everyone else in Pennsylvania -- a full explanation, but I doubt it will be forthcoming.
Who exactly is Barack Obama -- and to what degree does he agree with his demagogic Pastor?
When he talks about the America-hating, race-baiting Rev. Wright, Obama chooses his words very carefully. He says he "disagrees" with the Pastor on several things, but he never identifies where his dissent lies. Somehow, no matter how despicable Wright's remarks are, Obama still continue to see him as his "uncle" and his "spiritual advisor."
Obama's refusal to disown and to repudiate this evil man calls into great question where the candidate stands on hate-speech.
When the time came for Obama to repudiate Wright and separate himself from the so-called "church," he instead turned on his Rhetoric Machine. He gave a speech about "race," a bunch of generalities that avoided any full repudiation of Jeremiah Wright.
Right now, the Obama campaign had placed a muzzle on wife Michelle, whose distaste for her country reflects the views of her long-time pastor, Jeremiah Wright. The pastor himself appears to be in hiding, unwilling to explain or apologize for his hate-filled sermons and publications.
Yesterday, I attended a meeting of Democrats (and at least one Republican, me) supporting the candidacy of a young man for the Pennsylvania House. About half the people there were Americans of Italian descent. They were aware of many of Wright's offensive statements, but were not aware that he had singled out Italians (Wright spoke of their "garlickey" breath) for condemnation. I didn't have the heart to tell them.
My wife is of Italian descent, as are our daughter and several grandchildren. Obama owes them -- and everyone else in Pennsylvania -- a full explanation, but I doubt it will be forthcoming.
Who exactly is Barack Obama -- and to what degree does he agree with his demagogic Pastor?
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Obama's Misleading Pennsylvania TV Commercials
"I can no more disown him (Rev. Wright) than I can disown the Black community. I can no more disown him than I can disown my white grandmother." (Barack Obama)
Frankly, this is Barack doing the Okie doke, practicing deception. Rev. Wright is not synonymous with the Black community. His loony -- and hateful -- ideas are shared by SOME in the Black community but not even by a majority. There's no evidence the community believes that 9/11 was the fault of Americans, including the 3,000 innocent people killed. There's no evidence the Black community thinks the U.S. government "invented" AIDS in order to kill Black people.
Did Obama's grandmother share similar ideas? Obama never says she did. He brings her up apparently to justify his not disowning a hate-monger, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The grandmother, apparently a good human being, has nothing in common with Wright.
The grandparents seem to be people Obama can use to further his political ambitions. In his commercials, running now in PA, he speaks with reverence about the grandfather's service "in Patton's Army.” In his first book (Dreams of My Father), he describes the grandpa as marching around in the mud and never seeing real combat.
In his speech, he describes him grandmother as someone unnecessarily frightened of "big Black men" and given to making racial "stereotypes." But the book doesn't show that at all. She never even mentioned (apparently) that the man threatening her in one instance was Black. The grandfather supplies that detail.
In his commercials Obama implies he's proud of his grandma's war service on "a bomber assembly line." But in the book he calls her "Rosie the Riveter," a demeaning term.
Obama's TV commercials show him at what Gloria Borger called "at 30,000 feet." In other words, they contain pretty, conciliatory terms at variance with what Obama truly believes. He is "post-racial" in the same way that Britney Spears is a good mother. In the commercials, it's as if Rev. Wright -- and Obama's disturbing books -- never existed. We hear the most liberal -- the most ideological -- member of the U.S. Senate telling us -- unconvincingly -- how he will magically bring us together.
My frustration is that too many people hold Obama to very low standards. He's allowed to be inconsistent in what he says to us. His grandparents get criticized for holding less than enlightened views, but they get little credit for bringing up a grandson who went to Columbia and Harvard and became a U.S. Senator – and viable candidate for the presidency. Common sense tells us they must have done a lot of things right.
Is the media going to resolve the questions that remain about Obama? Don't be on it. They'd rather wave their pom poms in salute of a candidate who's supposed to be "post-racial," but seems to look at everything in life through a racial lens.
Question: Why did New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson endorse Obama, a step that James Carville called "an act of betrayal?" (Richardson lately said -- curiously -- "I am very loyal to the Clintons.")
Answer: Because he wants to be the vice-presidential nominee on an Obama-Richardson ticket.Like Senator Obama, Gov. Richardson is one of those individuals who desires to be on the public payroll forever, and so he needs the job. Also, he might help Obama some (but not a great deal) with the Hispanic vote in battleground states like New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado . . . and even New Jersey. Richardson doesn't have a Hispanic name (or appearance), and he's not especially well known outside New Mexico. In the Democratic primaries, Gov. Richardson often came across as clownish -- and incapable of generating more than a handful of votes. Also, he pandered shamelessly to the Far Left on Iraq, but that segment largely ignored him.
Would Richardson help Obama with Hispanics in Pennsylvania? Probably not, because The Keystone State has only about 390,000 Hispanics (including those too young to vote), less than 4% of the state's total population of about 12.5 million. Of course, in a very close election, Hispanic votes could make the difference. Right now, McCain has a strong lead in the Pennsylvania polls, but it's early in the electoral game.
Senator John McCain is generally strong with Hispanic voters, as he demonstrated in California, Florida, and Texas, and Obama generally has not done well with Hispanics (outside Illinois). He must do well with them if he wishes to win the general election, and McCain will not make that task an easy one.
Frankly, this is Barack doing the Okie doke, practicing deception. Rev. Wright is not synonymous with the Black community. His loony -- and hateful -- ideas are shared by SOME in the Black community but not even by a majority. There's no evidence the community believes that 9/11 was the fault of Americans, including the 3,000 innocent people killed. There's no evidence the Black community thinks the U.S. government "invented" AIDS in order to kill Black people.
Did Obama's grandmother share similar ideas? Obama never says she did. He brings her up apparently to justify his not disowning a hate-monger, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The grandmother, apparently a good human being, has nothing in common with Wright.
The grandparents seem to be people Obama can use to further his political ambitions. In his commercials, running now in PA, he speaks with reverence about the grandfather's service "in Patton's Army.” In his first book (Dreams of My Father), he describes the grandpa as marching around in the mud and never seeing real combat.
In his speech, he describes him grandmother as someone unnecessarily frightened of "big Black men" and given to making racial "stereotypes." But the book doesn't show that at all. She never even mentioned (apparently) that the man threatening her in one instance was Black. The grandfather supplies that detail.
In his commercials Obama implies he's proud of his grandma's war service on "a bomber assembly line." But in the book he calls her "Rosie the Riveter," a demeaning term.
Obama's TV commercials show him at what Gloria Borger called "at 30,000 feet." In other words, they contain pretty, conciliatory terms at variance with what Obama truly believes. He is "post-racial" in the same way that Britney Spears is a good mother. In the commercials, it's as if Rev. Wright -- and Obama's disturbing books -- never existed. We hear the most liberal -- the most ideological -- member of the U.S. Senate telling us -- unconvincingly -- how he will magically bring us together.
My frustration is that too many people hold Obama to very low standards. He's allowed to be inconsistent in what he says to us. His grandparents get criticized for holding less than enlightened views, but they get little credit for bringing up a grandson who went to Columbia and Harvard and became a U.S. Senator – and viable candidate for the presidency. Common sense tells us they must have done a lot of things right.
Is the media going to resolve the questions that remain about Obama? Don't be on it. They'd rather wave their pom poms in salute of a candidate who's supposed to be "post-racial," but seems to look at everything in life through a racial lens.
WHY DID BILL RICHARDSON ENDORSE OBAMA?
Question: Why did New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson endorse Obama, a step that James Carville called "an act of betrayal?" (Richardson lately said -- curiously -- "I am very loyal to the Clintons.")
Answer: Because he wants to be the vice-presidential nominee on an Obama-Richardson ticket.Like Senator Obama, Gov. Richardson is one of those individuals who desires to be on the public payroll forever, and so he needs the job. Also, he might help Obama some (but not a great deal) with the Hispanic vote in battleground states like New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado . . . and even New Jersey. Richardson doesn't have a Hispanic name (or appearance), and he's not especially well known outside New Mexico. In the Democratic primaries, Gov. Richardson often came across as clownish -- and incapable of generating more than a handful of votes. Also, he pandered shamelessly to the Far Left on Iraq, but that segment largely ignored him.
Would Richardson help Obama with Hispanics in Pennsylvania? Probably not, because The Keystone State has only about 390,000 Hispanics (including those too young to vote), less than 4% of the state's total population of about 12.5 million. Of course, in a very close election, Hispanic votes could make the difference. Right now, McCain has a strong lead in the Pennsylvania polls, but it's early in the electoral game.
Senator John McCain is generally strong with Hispanic voters, as he demonstrated in California, Florida, and Texas, and Obama generally has not done well with Hispanics (outside Illinois). He must do well with them if he wishes to win the general election, and McCain will not make that task an easy one.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Barack Obama: The Invisible Man
Note 1: On Friday of this week, I'll be doing a piece about "political demographics" in the Keystone Stone. The title will be: "Can McCain Win Pennsylvania?" The answer is yes, but it won't be easy. I hope you'll visit.
Note 2: I have an analytical posting today (Wednesday) on another site: http://newjerseyforjohnmccain.blogspot.com/. It's titled "Can McCain Win New Jersey?" In fact, there are similarities between New Jersey (the ninth largest state) and Pennsylvania (the sixth largest state). If McCain can win both NJ and PA, he would have smooth sailing to the presidency. I hope you'll visit.
Photo: Obama, Not Totally Happy to See Jesse Jackson"Words crack and break . . . will not stay in place." (T. S. Eliot)
Here's what I wrote prior to Obama's Tuesday remarks on race: I expect the usual "deep baritone filibuster," loaded with self-serving rhetoric. Rev. Wright's anti-American statements are similar to many Obama heard -- and probably internalized -- in his years at Harvard (where Michelle also attended). He will talk about his "love" for America, but I fear the country he loves is one most of us wouldn't recognize. He will discuss how he "profoundly disagrees" with some of Wright's comments, but he won't discuss exactly which ones or why precisely he dissents.
Also, I wrote the following yesterday to an important Black conservative, Lloyd Marcus, whom you'll hear a lot more about on this site: I believe in his speech Obama is going to do what he called recently the "okie dokie," an exercise in deception. In his first book, he talks basically about being ashamed of his (white) mother, whom he should be portraying as the heroine of his life story. Brought up by a white mother and white grandparents, he will somehow proclaim his expertise about the "Black experience in America." In short, he'll talk out of both sides of his mouth.
The notion that Obama "had no idea" what America-hating Rev. Wright was up to is the candidate's version of "the dog ate my homework." He's a little bit like novelist Ralph Ellison's "Invisible Man." We don't know him -- or know what he believes. We fear he may share many more beliefs with Wright than he lets on.
His wife Michelle, who apparently has spent her entire adult life being ashamed of her country, is a typical Princeton/Harvard graduate, convinced of her superiority to her countrymen and countrywomen. Her point seems to be: How can she be proud of a country which isn't run by people (Ivy-League graduates) like them? The general view is: "America is a terrible place, but if I ran it, the country would be a much better one."
Here's how Shelby Steele, of Stanford's Hoover Institution describes the "Obama phenomenon":
". . . Now, the floodlight of a presidential campaign has trained on this usually hidden corner of contemporary black life: a mindless indulgence in a rhetorical anti-Americanism as a way of bonding and of asserting one's blackness. Yet Jeremiah Wright, splashed across America's television screens, has shown us that there is no real difference between rhetorical hatred and real hatred.
"No matter his ultimate political fate, there is already enough pathos in Barack Obama to make him a cautionary tale. His public persona thrives on a manipulation of whites (bargaining), and his private sense of racial identity demands both self-betrayal and duplicity. His [Obama's] is the story of a man who flew so high, yet neglected to become himself."
Steele is suggesting that one reason we don't know Obama is that he doesn't know himself. Coming from faith and community traditions of Black separatism, he claims to be the man who can transcend racial polarities. He wants to become President of a country that his pastor and his fellow congregants abhor. It makes no sense.
What Shelby Steele means by "bargaining" is that Obama is making a trade with white people: in exchange for their votes and money, he'll enable them to feel good about themselves. Basically, he'll allow them to assuage their guilt over past racial sins by a single act: supporting his candidacy.
Obama is now engaged in a desperate balancing act: his long-time minister and his wife both despise their native land, America. Whether Obama disagrees with them remains uncertain.
Again, he's the Invisible Man, someone we'll never be able to pin down on his beliefs. He will "disagree" with Rev. Wright, the man who claims the U.S. government "invented HIV" to kill Blacks, but he will not disown him, as he should. The most liberal member of the Senate, Obama claims to have a special ability -- one never demonstrated -- to reach across the aisle and bridge political divides.
Is he just lying to us? Or is he truly uncertain of the contrast between what he says and what he does?
Again, we don't know Barack Obama -- and we probably never will. That's the real message of Tuesday's speech.
STATEMENT BY JOHN MCCAIN ON TIBET
For Immediate Release
Contact: Press Office
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
703-650-5550
For Immediate Release
Contact: Press Office
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
703-650-5550
ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today issued the following statement on the situation in Tibet:
"The unfolding tragedy in Tibet should draw the attention of the entire world. I deplore the violent crackdown by Chinese authorities and the continuing oppression in Tibet of those merely wishing to practice their faith and preserve their culture and heritage.
I have listened carefully to the Dalai Lama and am convinced he is a man of peace who reflects the hopes and aspirations of Tibetans. I urge the government of the People's Republic of China to address the root causes of unrest in Tibet by opening a genuine dialogue with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama.
Reports of shutting down YouTube and confiscation of SIM cards are disturbing and reports of multiple deaths are far more so, especially in a year when China is preparing to host the Olympic Games.
I urge the Chinese authorities to ensure peaceful protest is not met with violence, to release monks and others detained for peacefully expressing their views and to allow full outside access to Tibet."
Note: If you'd like to get up-to-date releases and news from the McCain Campaign, please e-mail Patrick Hynes at: phynes@calypsocom.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
