Anabolic Member
Ok,ok,ok, maybe McCain made a mistake by accepting Hagee's endorsement. True he wasn't his 'spiritual advisor', but what about the guy McCain did admit to being his 'spiritual advisor', Rod Parsely? His rhetoric is even more vile than Wrights. I don't see Hannity doing an in-depth investigation on him, or KFrost linking McCain's ideology to his. CAN WE SAY "HYPOCRISY"!
Member
1. Trickle down economics works, you don't build from the ground up. Additionally, it has also been proven that increased taxes lower government revenue and the inverse is true as well. So much for Democrat economics.Originally Posted by BgMc31
2. Crack epidemic? elaborate please. I pray to god you aren't going to say something that qualifies as "tin foil hat".
Anabolic Member
Check the stats my friend. Although America did have an economic upswing during the Reagan administration, the wealth gap between blacks and whites widened and blacks, as a whole, didn't experience the benefits of this economic upswing.
Crack epidemic was largely ignored during Reagan's administration until it began to affect white America. Whole swaths of urban communities that were once working class neighborhoods were dessimated by crack, but it wasn't recognized until late into Reagan's administration. Even still the whole 'Just Say No' campaign was a joke.
Member
I know economics and loosening the belt up top leads to better salaries, more jobs, faster growth, more investment in the future and more opportunities. This is a fact, without question.
I don't think Reagan intentionally ignored crack, but once it did start to creep out of the ghettos it became a more pronounced problem. At that time blacks were like 10% of the population in America. Only a portion of those blacks were using crack before it went prime time. I really don't see how that is the president's problem. Is he supposed to make sure no one does anything bad? He isn't santa claus, he isn't all knowing.
Additionally, it is not within the president's (intended) powers to make sure we aren't doing drugs. Clean up your own house, don't wait for someone to come do it for you.
Senior Member
.................
You believe this to be true and you told me to grow up…. Now that’s funny.
You are a cowboy hat wearing, gun toting, flag waving, kill em all and let god sort em out, laissez-faire republicans aren’t you?
Now your comments all makes sense now that we have a better perspective on your politics…. Yep, Yep Yee Hah!!!!
Ohh and two more things… Universal Healthcare for all and Live Better Work Union.
Vote Obama 2008!
Last edited by Fat Guy; 04-22-2008 at 08:28 PM.
I feel accomplished
IDK, ignore the crack problem and you're a racist...Make penalties tough and you're a racist puting the black man in jail.
As for Obama, I think he'll get more than a fair go at the presidency. If people want to vote on race, that's stupid but that's also what makes it America.
Last edited by Kratos; 04-22-2008 at 08:25 PM.
Anabolic Member
I'm not disputing trickle down economics works...in theory. But in theory communism works and we all know that when put to actual use, communism just like trick down economics doesn't work.
The problem with trickle down economics is it doesn't trickle down far enough. And poor economic times has a direct impact on drug/alcohol use and crime. Crack exploded in the inner city because of a depressed state of the economy in those areas. And so the president IS directly responsible and since he is the head of the country he should be responsible for taking care of his entire house not just the part that 'company' sees.
BTW, blacks at that time made up almost 15% of the population not 10% (actually census reports say 13%).
Member
.................
You believe this to be true and you told me to grow up…. Now that’s funny.
You are a cowboy hat wearing, gun toting, flag waving, kill em all and let god sort em out, laissez-faire republicans aren’t you?
Now your comments all makes sense now that we have a better perspective on your politics…. Yep, Yep Yee Hah!!!!
Ohh and two more things… Universal Healthcare for all and Live Better Work Union.
Vote Obama 2008!
Don't own a cowboy hat
Don't own a gun
Don't own a flag
Not a republican
next?
Senior Member
How about:
A fan of John Tesh or
A corporate shill or
A floating green turd in the punch bowl of life…
IDK you pick one
Banned
wow! race is definite going to be an inevitable factor in November. let's wait and see how it will unfold.
Dulce bellum inexpertis
Carlos&Others- I think it is naive to assume that the poll did not take into account the amount of people who would not vote for Obama based on the fact that he is black, and simply failed to indicate so. I would assume the people doing this polling take into account a certain percentage of people who are afraid to admit this to a pollster and have already factored that into the 8%. Of course, people with a racial agenda will always try to state things like "Man if its 8% and they admitted it JUST THINK how many people it really is."
Youngerlion. If you are in fact a Sociologist, I think you may have skipped over the communications&English courses because your grammar and composition skills are seriously lacking. Anyway, if you are going to try to talk race and actually know what you are talking about, then you may as well ACTUALLY know the terms you are trying to use. You referred to a number of things, none of which you knew the concrete definitions of. For instance, Color-Blind Racism, Status Continium, Marginal Equality and Marginal Inequality. The definition of Color-Blind Racism, is basically a situation where a person will deny that racism actually exists in a particular area, essentially saying there is no problem, turning a blind eye to it. I could elaborate further on this. When you speak to "unearned priviledges," you are talking about perpetual racism, or what you could referr to as the status continium. Whites in the past made legislation and other moves to ensure the perpetuation of white priviledge. Although this is true of the past, this is no longer a relevant theory. Many people today HAVE benefitted from the moves their ancestors made, but it is in no way shape or form their fault, their problem, or their responsibility to rectify the problem through any sort of reperations.
It's very easy for people to try and speak in terms of groups. The black vote, the white vote, the latino vote, the yellow vote, the gay vote, the senior vote. It really makes me sick to be honest. There is some truth to the fact that some people are way too racially oriented. We sit around worrying about WHY someone is going to vote for a particular candidate. Some people are going to get bent out of shape because they THINK that some other people aren't going to vote for Obama because he is black. Other people are going to get bent out of shape because they THINK some other people will vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black. I really just need to ask, who gives a fu*k in either case? Why are some of you people so concerned with the motivations of other people? In a truely liberal society people are free to make decisions and do what they like based on any motivations they might have. It is really none of your concern if someone doesn't vote for Obama because they're a card holding member of the KKK. Additionally, its none of your concern if someone votes for Obama because they're a card holding member of the Black Panthers. There is way too much energy exhausted on trying to place individuals into group based on any number of characteristics.
There are in fact legitimate instances of racism, prejudice, and stereotyping. Unfortunately, the number of instances pales in comparison to the number of morons that pull any one of those cards at the drop of a fu*king hat, ruining it for the people with legitimate greivances over such instances.
BgMc31- Im unsure of what you were referring to with the crack problem. If you are speaking about the unequal sentencing guidelines then I might be inclined to see your point. I thought for a second you might be implying that crack was introduced to the ghettos by the US government in order to "further subjugate the black man." Anyone who believes that need check themselves into a mental institution as soon as possible.
Anyway, it really should not be the role of the President to deal with drug issues in American cities. Those issues are delegated to other government agencies. The President needs to worry about setting foreign policy, ensuring we have sound currency, and the continuity of government. Other then that, the role of the President or government in general should be extremely limited. You know me, I'm a Republican(libertarian), I dont think that the government has any right legislating drugs or any other substance for that matter. As such, I think there needs to be a certain level of personal accountability among people. So long as people are being provided the same opportunities and are competing on an equal playing field then there should be no need to bitch about racism and other such things. Unfortunately, and shamefully, my conservative brethern have ignored the inequities that exist in society and turn a blind eye to the problems plaguing the country. There is no easy solution.
Dulce bellum inexpertis
Fat Guy- Fortunately for me, you are not qualified to make decisions on Universal Healthcare and economics which would have consequences for 350 million people other than yourself. If I'm wrong, then of course feel free to put your credentials on the table. Act of God has certainly brought his.
Universal Healthcare. This policy has a deleterious effect on society for a number of reasons. 1st, when you acquiesce the right to make decisions over your health to the government, you have essentially given up all freedom to big brother. A universal healthcare system makes the individual much less free and now previous aspects that the individual had autonomy from the state over, no longer exists. 2nd, when government gets involved in anything, they become horribly ineffecient. It is a rather simple equation when government takes over-"costs go UP, quality goes DOWN". The quality of healthcare is systematically driven down over time, while the costs continue to rise. This can be seen in many areas where government is involved, the Department of Motor Vehicles- these people cannot even issue drivers licenses correctly. 3rd, as costs continue to rise, this entitlement program must get money from somewhere, and for that they must either RAISE TAXES or PRINT MONEY, which in essence is RAISING TAXES. This means the government is forced to steal an ever increasing percentage of the American workers income. This is Socialism at its finest. 4th, as quality goes down, and the healthcare system becomes grossly ineffecient, situations like Canada and the US increase. People are put on extremely long waiting lists in order to get surgical procedures done. I could go on and on but I need some sleep...I'll continue this tomorrow...
Anabolic Member
This is the first time a woman or a black man has run for president. I think this is a great step forward for our country regardless of whether they win or even receive a large percentage of votes. Everything takes time and both of these individuals have made history regardless of their color or sex.
Banned
bgmc, please stop calling me names. I do not support McCain, in fact I hate him, you should know that by my previous post. It just so happens I hate all 3 canidates, I will probable write in my own name
Banned
+1 on that, look at detroit for just one example. Uniouns are lke a cancer, they destroy everything and then eventually have nothing left.
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
April 23, 2008 6:36 AMObama tends to win states that have either a) virtually no African-American population, and therefore minimal white-black racial tension; or b) states with an African-American population substantial enough (greater than 17%) to overwhelm the votes of the "racially motivated white vote."
Pennsylvania & the Persistence of the Race Chasm
A few weeks ago, I published an article in In These Times showing how Hillary Clinton has been winning states almost exclusively in the Race Chasm - states whose populations are more than 6 percent but less than 17 percent black. The results of the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania - a state whose demographics fall squarely in the Race Chasm - continue the trend.
I have hypothesized that the Race Chasm exists because of racial politics. Specifically, in states where there is almost no black population, black-white racial politics has little traction because it isn't part of the political dialect. In states where there is a very large black population, the black vote can offset a racially motivated white vote. But in the Race Chasm, the black vote is too small to offset a racially motivated white vote.
So how prevalent was race as a factor in voting in Pennsylvania? The exit polls suggest that when Gov. Ed Rendell previously said race would be a huge factor, he was absolutely correct. Specifically, page 4 and 5 of the CNN exit poll show a whopping 19 percent of Pennsylvania voters said race was an important factor in their vote, with Clinton winning almost 60 percent of that segment. Broken down further, 13 percent of the white vote said race was a major factor in their vote, with Clinton winning 75 percent of that group.
These are big numbers, especially considering the fact that these numbers only represent voters who are willing to admit to pollsters they are voting on race. The real number is probably much higher, because some voters may not want to disclose such taboo voting habits.
Let me reiterate something I wrote in my original Race Chasm analysis:
Clearly, race is not the only force moving votes. Demographic groups -- white, black or any other -- do not vote as monoliths. Additionally, the Race Chasm does not mean every white voter who votes against Obama nor every black voter who supports Obama is racially motivated.
However, considering the exit polling and the fact that Pennsylvania falls squarely in the demographic Race Chasm, it is clear that those who continue to pretend race is not a major factor in this campaign are deliberately averting their eyes from a very powerful force in the Democratic primary.
Exit poll data:
Race of Candidate Was...
Most Important: None
One of Several: 55% voted Clinton 45% voted Obama
Not Important: 53% voted Clinton 47% voted Obama
Was Race of Candidate Important to you
Yes: 59% voted Clinton 41% voted Obama
No: 53% voted Clinton 47% voted Obama
Whites Who Say Yes: 75% voted Clinton 25% voted Obama
Whites Who Say No: 58% voted Clinton 42% voted Obama
Blacks Who Say Yes: None
Blacks Who Say No: 9% voted Clinton 91% voted Obama
All Others: 52% voted Clinton 48% voted Obama
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/pri...dex.html#PADEM
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
~VET~ Extraordinaire~
+2 unions suck
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
Was Race of Candidate Important to you
Blacks Who Say Yes: None
People are saying Blacks are voting for Obama because he's Black. It looks like the polling data doesn't support the accusation.
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
~VET~ Extraordinaire~
but wasnt that the only group he won in pa? I'm asking not sure
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
No, that's not true. I posted a link to the polling data. He cut into Clinton's base a bit. He improved from Ohio with White men, and older voters. (Clinton's base.)
Obama wins Blacks, people below the age of 39 and people will higher education and income. I think young people and people with higher education and income have more exposure to racial diversity so race isn't as big an issue.
CNN polling data:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/pri...dex.html#PADEM
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
Anabolic Member
Kfrost, stop whining and read my post again! I didn't call you a hypocrit, I said you were guilty of hypocrisy. Which you are! You and other conservatives/republicans on this forum and in this country in general have all continued to lambast Obama for his association with Rev. Wright but you all have totally ignored McCains association with Hagee and Parsely. If you don't ignore it you attempt to explain it away as if it isn't a big deal. All I'm asking is if you are going to be critical of candidates questionable associations, make sure you do the same for all the candidates otherwie you are quilty of...HYPOCRISY!bgmc, please stop calling me names. I do not support McCain, in fact I hate him, you should know that by my previous post. It just so happens I hate all 3 canidates, I will probable write in my own name
Anabolic Member
Nice! Exactly my thoughts.
Anabolic Member
I'll add one obvious point: Government got us into this mess to begin with, which started with HMO's and the ERISA law in the early 1970's. Now that we're seeing the affects of quasi-socialized healthcare, we purpose more government intervention instead reversing our mistakes. The free market would have prevented sky rocketing healthcare costs and HMO's. History repeats itself! Learn from it.
Anabolic Member
Reduced government revenue results in smaller government, which is what conservative Republicans say they want. So . . . let's raise taxes, eh?
I feel accomplished
Just curious BigMc31 when the last time it was you took such intrest in a primary election? Does race factor in your decision to support Barrack?
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
Your question is funny.I know you directed your question to BigMc31 but I'm going to throw in my two cents.
Obama won 92% of the Black vote. From PA exit polling.
Was Race of Candidate Important to you
Blacks Who Say Yes: None
Maybe we support his platform and feel he is a better candidate than Clinton. I think 20-30% are anti Clinton votes. She was getting around 30% of the Black vote before her campaign started race baiting in South Carolina. It pissed people off. He's won 90% ever since.
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
I feel accomplished
I'm not saying all black people, just curious for bgMc31 if he is really honest if race is an issue.
I'm saying there is no advantage or disadvantage to being black as a candidate for president. Some voters are pulled in that might not otherwise vote..I gave directions to the polls to a black family that has obviously never voted before in their life and now they are voting in a primary. Some white people are bigots no doubt so you loose that vote, but most aren't. In fact I would say a lot of white Americans may gravitate to Obama because he is black. Black guy taking about someone knew and different and calling for change...and he looks like someone new and different.
In the end it's what the American people want so it doesn't matter. If the majority of the country wants Obama that's who we get regardless of why. You are free to choose what matters to you.
Obama was a little known, and Hilary a dominant force in the beginning of the primary's. Once Oprah got her big ass behind Barrack and he also became the candidate of MSN and Nbcnews. Black people then knew there was a viable black candidate for president, so I don't think your data is relevant. But, I'm for sure not calling all black people racist.
Last edited by Kratos; 04-23-2008 at 11:12 PM.
Dulce bellum inexpertis
Unfortunately thats just not true. The Electoral College see's to it that the "right" person gets put into office, and not the person that the American people necessarily elect. If the popular vote and the electoral college vote happen to coincide, it is just a matter of convienience.
Member
I'm sorry bro, I'm not buying it. Just like you aren't buying the 8% factor. It is just a little to convenient that Obama is getting ALL the black vote, considering Clinton was very very popular with blacks for a longggg time. Frankly, I find it a bit naive to not even question the motives behind it.Your question is funny.
Obama won 92% of the Black vote. From PA exit polling.
Was Race of Candidate Important to you
Blacks Who Say Yes: None
Maybe we support his platform and feel he is a better candidate than Clinton. I think 20-30% are anti Clinton votes. She was getting around 30% of the Black vote before her campaign started race baiting in South Carolina. It pissed people off. He's won 90% ever since.
Member
If you look at history and facts, you see that lowering taxes increases government revenue EVERY TIME, without question. Similarly, raising taxes always lowers revenue.
For example, if you raise the capital gains tax people are less likely to invest in ways that expose them to capital gains. Since there is less investment the government collects less, even though the rate itself is higher. If you lower the capital gains tax it encourages more people, more investment, more money which, in turn, creates more tax revenue.
Imagine if a gas station is selling gas for $4. They make 100 sales a day for $400. The place across the street is selling for $3, which attracts 200 sales a day. They make $600. It really is that simple.
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
So you're saying every Black person lied in the exit poll? They said race of the candidate was not considered.
I'll repeat:
The Clintons had the support of the Black community until South Carolina. If Black people voted for him because he's Black the numbers would have been higher in previous states. The numbers shot up in South Carolina after Bill Clinton and campaign surrogates started race baiting. His vote went to 80%. After Geraldine Ferraro's ignorant racial comments, his numbers went to 90%. That's why I said I think 20-30% are anti Clinton votes. I have Black female friends at work who voted for Clinton and now after everything her campaign has done and said they're donating money to Obama's campaign. The Clinton's have no one but themselves to blame for losing the Black vote. You piss people off, they will not vote for you!
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
I feel accomplished
ummm, I know...lets leave that alone for now.
I feel accomplished
c'mon Carlos...no black people care about seeing a black person in the office of president...cough cough bullshit. No way are 90% of black people voting on race, but to say the percentage is none, I just don't believe you believe that.
I feel accomplished
It is very likely we are past the peak of the curve. The bottom line of economics is that we can't provide more benifits and keep increasing govement spending if our economy isn't producing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
Member
I know this is completely anecdotal but I'm watching similar conversations on about 5 other boards (mostly automobile and sports related). Dead honest, in every board the biggest and most vocal Obama pushers are black guys. Do I think blacks lied in the exit polls? Yes, to an extent. Admitting you are voting for someone because he is black takes away from that person's accomplishments and blacks are very wary of being branded with getting something purely because of their skin color. I went to school with a bunch of black dudes (college and law school) who will never admit that being black had anything to do with their acceptance (even though they had sub par grades/LSAT's). At the same time, I know super rich white kids who will never admit that their daddy got them a job or got them into school. People in general, I guess, like to pretend they earned everything themselves even when they didn't.
You clearly have no problem assuming whites lied in their exit poll numbers, but all of a sudden believing blacks did is crazy? Come on man, let's be honest with ourselves. People tend to vote for people who look like them or who they feel comfortable/relatable to, period. Asians vote for Asians. Hispanics vote for Hispanics. Whites for for Whites. That is human nature, blacks are no different.
I'm fairly certain the black population of America aren't Marxist socialists, so I'm willing to believe there are other factors involved with the BO love affair.
Last edited by Act of God; 04-24-2008 at 11:23 AM.
Member
Benefits need to be cut, regardless. Universal health care will only sink us further. The federal government is supposed to collect federal taxes, provide armed forces, maintain infrastructure and not much else. They aren't supposed to educate our children, run our healthcare, etc.
Anabolic Member
I'm 34 and have always taken a great interest in politics. The 1st time I voted, I voted for Clinton. As a youngster I knew that Jesse Jackson wouldn't make a good president. And I thought the same about Al Sharpton. I support Barack because he would make a better president than Hillary or McCain. The reason being is McCain would just further the Bush doctrine, and Hillary is politics as usual. We need something different.
I know the next question, where do hillary and barack differ? Big difference is their healthcare plans. Hillary will demand that everyone have it, while Barack wants to ensure that everyone has access to good afforable healthcare. There is a major difference between the two. One is socialized medical care, the other is equal access.
I feel accomplished
I wasn't trying to pick on you BgMc, I'm just sure the percentage isn't zero. There is some percentage of black people who do care about race, I'm confident of that. I hate all the candidates this election.
Senior Member
With all the emphasis on the black/white voter split, I thought it would be interesting to look at why so many gay and lesbian voters don't trust Obama and are still supporting Hillary Clinton. (Appologies to Carlos.)
From Michaelangelo Signorile's website: "http://www.Signorile.com"
"Obama! Hillary! McClurkin! I finally figured it out this week while listening to the show. We're all still in High School.
See, Barack Obama is the adorable A-student who's the captain of the debate team AND the baseball team. We all had a raging crush on him. Every single one of us. And unlike the other popular kids, he would actually talk to us. He'd walk with us to class and talk to us about our favorite TV shows and music groups. And he'd defend us against the bullies, even the ones that were his friends.
His smile was just so beautiful and honest, and once in a great while we'd see what almost looked like a wink when he was talking to us. "He knows, doesn't he? Did he just wink at me? Oh my god, does Barack feel the same way I do?" It was then that we asked him out. He smiled, gave us a little uncomfortable laugh, then got up and walked away to say hi to his other friends, without ever answering us. He rejected us without having the decency to reject us. And he'd still nod hello to us in the hallway, though he seemed to go out of his way to avoid talking directly to us.
Barack had a Spring Break party when his parents were out of town. We didn't really expect to be invited, and we told ourselves that we didn't care, but we did. We cared, and we cared deeply, because we still loved him. Then we found out that he invited that jerk Donnie McClurkin to his party. Donnie McClurkin, who dumped us and spread all those nasty, awful rumors about us. As much as we hate to admit it, at that point something just snapped. We couldn't believe that he would invite Donnie, who had done such awful things to us! That was it, that was the last straw.
We yelled and cried and screamed and cried, and cried some more. And who did we go crying to? Our older sister, Hillary. Hillary understood. She knew heartbreak. She knew what it was like to be madly in love with someone and have them rip our hearts out and stomp on it, then smile and pretend it never happened. And while she'd never hang out with us in public - she took us aside and gave us a big hug and a pat on the shoulder and told us that it would be ok. She glanced around again to make sure nobody was looking, but that never bothered us, and it certainly didn't bother us in our time of need.
When we say we support Hillary because of experience, we're fooling ourselves. When we say it's because Baracka can't win big states, we're outright lying; we all know full well Barack Obama is capable of winning the big states against McCain. No matter what we tell ourselves and each other about why we're supporting Hillary, it's all a lie. We support Hillary because we hate Barack. And we hate Barack because we love him, and he will never love us back - and he proved it by being so insensitive as to befriend that jerk Donnie.
We say it wasn't a "dealbreaker" but the only way it wouldn't have been is if Barack had asked us out, which deep down we knew he'd never do. It was a dealbreaker. Many of us will never admit this, but Barack Obama makes us sexually uncomfortable. He reminds us all of "that boy" that we all have in our pasts, the one we will never forget, and more importantly, never forgive. Because in our hearts, we're all still in High School."
National Level Bodybuilder/Hall of Famer/RETIRED
Who is Michaelangelo Signorile??? I never heard of him. Must be a white gay thing.
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/h...y-problem.html
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Hillary's gay problem
My friend Phil Attey asks why Obama keeps mentioning gays and lesbians in his speeches - speeches he makes to the public at large, not just gay audiences - and Hillary never does. Phil writes:
Last month, a gay Philadelphian LGBT publisher raised the issue that Senator Obama, though often addressing LGBT issues and including us in his major speeches, was not granting his publication an exclusive interview. Senator Obama quickly addressed the issue and granted an exclusive interview to the national LGBT publication, The Advocate.
Tonight, following the Pennsylvania Primary, Senator Obama once again showed his commitment to our community by including us in his address to the nation. Senator Clinton, speech, once again, did not include us, and it brings up the issue that hers never do.
Phil is right. And he's not the only one to notice: http://www.washblade.com/2008/4-18/v...umns/12437.cfm
But Obama speaks movingly of gay equality, and not just before gay audiences. He has raised the issue among white farmers and in black churches, where the message is both unwelcome and needed.
Clinton, by contrast, rarely raises the issue on her own, never does so before unfriendly audiences, and seems reluctant even to say the word “gay.”
Obama “gets it” in a way that no previous candidate for president has. Part of this is generational, but it is nonetheless real.
Obama mentions us in his speeches, a lot. And yes, Hillary will say those are just words. But you know, Obama was willing to chastize his own community for their homophobia in a speech given on Martin Luther King's birthday in MLK's own church to thousands of black leaders. Those are words that matter. Here's to hoping that Hillary can find it in herself to utter the word gay (and even lesbian) in a setting that isn't limited to a gay audience.
One more thing, watch this interview Hillary did with the gay cable network, Logo. First, the issue comes up about her never using the g-word, and she does use it, once during an entire 5 minute interview with a gay station about gay issues, while mentioning "gay organizations." But notice how repeatedly in the interview Hillary hesitates and stumbles at places where you would naturally expect her to say the word "gay" - she doesn't say it - she kind of stops, doesn't say gay, then moves on. Watch the video for yourself. She's not comfortable saying the word. Obama is. I think that tells you something about how they feel about the issue inside. It's likely generational - he's in his 40s, my generation, she's 60. A transcript of the worst part follows the video, below - note particularly the question and her answer 1 minute and 2 seconds in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hep7iVSOswo
1:02 LOGO: "Your opponent, Senator Obama, regularly mentions gay people in his stump speech... You don't mention gay rights all the time in your stump speech, you do when you're in front of gay audiences, why is that?"
1:21 CLINTON: "Well I do mention, uh, from time to time, um, you know I don't mention, you know, everything in every speech that I give, but uh people, you know, know how committed I am and they know what I've done, and that I led the efforts uh to try and defeat the Federal Marriage Amendment, working with you know all of the major uh gay rights organizations, uh, so you know I'm gonna continue to not just talk about what I will do but demonstrate by my actions what I have done and will do."
Muscle Asylum Project Athlete
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
