Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, December 3, 2009

Polls reflect U.S. racial divide

December 3, 2009

Advertisement

You’d think it would be a simple question: How popular is Barack Obama?

And you’d think it would have a simple answer: According to a recent Gallup poll, the president’s approval rating stands at 49 percent, the first time it’s slipped to less than half. Of course, Obama — you may have heard this somewhere — is our first African-American president and it is a reliable truism that when race enters the picture, “simple” leaves it.

Hence, when you parse the Gallup numbers more closely, you discover a not-so-startling divide. It turns out that among non-white voters (meaning in this case, African-Americans and Hispanics), Obama’s approval rating remains stratospheric. A staggering 91 percent of blacks and a healthy 70 percent of Hispanics approve of the job he’s doing.

Among non-Hispanic whites, on the other hand, Obama is cratering. Just 39 percent give the president a passing grade.

Richard Prince, a black journalist who writes an online column for journalists, headlined a piece on the poll findings as follows: “White Defections Drag Down Obama Rating.” Which is a fair reading, I suppose. But you could just as fairly headline it: “Non-white Support Inflates Obama Rating.”

We are not just arguing tomato to-mah-to here. No, the point is that the headline Prince didn’t use, like the dueling approval ratings themselves, testifies that race retains its power to shape — and misshape — perception.

Granted, that will be an obvious, even shopworn, observation to anyone with the slightest experience in this all-American conundrum. But it assumes added urgency when you consider that this perceptual gap isn’t measuring the impact of race on how we view this year’s trial of the century, but, rather, an actual president of the United States and, by extension, the state of the Union.

So one wishes, for our own sake, we could learn to see past our well-worn racial narratives. But racial narratives aren’t so easily put aside.

Not that this is the first time polling has quantified a racial divide. Far from it. This one, however, seems especially stark and consequential.

Again, we’re talking about a president — and there is a lot of space between 39 percent and 91 percent. But then, Obama has long been the unwitting catalyst for a raucous national discussion on the meaning and impact of race. Because he exists — and really, where race is concerned, he’s done little more than that — we find this discussion overtaking us everywhere from our newspapers to our televisions to our barber chairs.

Who could blame him if sometimes Obama himself feels like shouting that he’s not the black president. He’s the president. For all the good that would do.

The man made history and that history comes with a burden. More even than most presidents, he becomes a symbol, a lightning rod, a focal point — not simply for arguments over the economy, the wars and health care, but for all our tangled, contradictory and unresolved confusions and aspirations of race.

This is what we see quantified in that Gallup Poll. The difference in perception it documents serves as a reminder that for two people to see a thing in the same way, it helps to be standing in the same place looking in the same direction. And we black, white and brown Americans are not there yet.

From where I sit, Obama’s performance has been neither as execrable as the rating among whites would suggest, nor as walk-on-water miraculous as the rating among blacks and browns would have us believe. And that gap between them is less a measurement of a president’s performance than of a nation’s enduring irresolution.

The poll was meant to be a window. It became a mirror instead.

Comments

farfle 4 years, 4 months ago

There were two black guys who wanted to kick my A. Another black guy came and told me and he told me the story of the black jelly bean. He said that when white folk eat jelly beans they eat all the other colors and leave the black for last. When black folk eat jelly beans they always choose the black ones first.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

opposeobama (Anonymous) says…

"Hillary said she she would talk to our enemies with preconditions, while Obama said no preconditions would be necessary. Other than that, where did they take different positions?"

One that I remember off the top of my head was on healthcare. Amusingly enough, Obama was not in favor (at the time) of mandatory coverage, and placed his emphasis on bringing down costs. (According to FactCheck, Clinton's plan would have covered many more Americans, perhaps a difference of 15 million.) This, incidentally, was the major reason I said way back then that if I had to live with a Democrat, he would be the one I picked. Too bad it turned out to be electioneering instead of reality.

Obama also could (and did) point to the fact that he always opposed the war, while Hillary voted for it.

"that doesn't explain why Obama received more than 80% of the black vote during the primaries. Why didn't white Democrats react to that marketing as strongly? If not for black voters, Hillary would have easily won the Democrat nomination since she crushed Obama amongst white voters."

Okay, first of all, you're basing your entire argument on one event. You can't define a pattern from a single data point. After we've had five or six presidential elections between black and white candidates, maybe we'll know more, but until then you just can't make generalizations.

Hillary had, at one time, the biggest negative favorability rating among all the candidates, Democrat or Republican. Your question might just as easily reflect racism on the part of white voters, i.e. they were more likely to pick a candidate they didn't like just because she was white. I don't believe that either, incidentally, but the same data supports either position.

It's also possible, by the way, that there was bias, but not based on race. Obviously, it may have had a lot to do with gender. But there's also data to suggest age was a major factor, just as it was a bigger factor in the general election than race was.

But primarily (no pun intended) the difference was about personality and message, not skin color. Obama's message of hope and change played better among a voting block who has traditionally felt disenfranchised compared to Clinton's emphasis on experience, which was perceived as more of the same.

0

opposeobama 4 years, 4 months ago

notajayhawk:

"But seriously, I don't remember their positions being all that similar, unless you mean as opposed to the Republican positions."

Hillary said she she would talk to our enemies with preconditions, while Obama said no preconditions would be necessary. Other than that, where did they take different positions?

"bama ran a masterful campaign both in the primaries and the election, and did so by differentiating himself from his opponent(s), a key principle of marketing."

That may be. But that doesn't explain why Obama received more than 80% of the black vote during the primaries. Why didn't white Democrats react to that marketing as strongly? If not for black voters, Hillary would have easily won the Democrat nomination since she crushed Obama amongst white voters.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

notajayhawk, you get the smart dude award this morning. i like everything you wrote. and you take the time to back up what you write w/ facts and stats, as opposed to my unadulterated emotionally-charged posts (someone called me esoteric in another thread-- which took me a bit off guard considering i never thought what i said was very deep or so highly personal that only i understand it).

larrynative, hey, you have to admit that term women's lib is an effing relic and went out w/ double-knit polyester pants suits. i don't care if there is a website-- the broads running it are probably relics too! lol

sat, i don't know if this answers your question, darling, but i do think that the black community as a whole fosters some certain belief systems. i have noticed that my generation (X) has broken away slightly from some of them but not at a high rate. like i said, i don't know if that answers what you said.... i'm still caffeine deficient this morning and i am looking at a pile of papers that need to be filed which only rivals mount st. helen in height. blah.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

equalaccessprivacy (Anonymous) says…

"Obama's ratings say more about the people being polled than they do about the state of the world or of politics."

Um - except politics IS the opinion of the people.

"The huge variance in the popularity of Obama among different demographics and ethnic groups shows this."

Really?

How come 91% of African-American voters picked Dukakis?

0

equalaccessprivacy 4 years, 4 months ago

"The poll was meant to be a window. It became a mirror."

Pitts' last sentence pretty much sums up the point of his column. Obama's ratings say more about the people being polled than they do about the state of the world or of politics.To some extent, Pitts says, we all are projecting our own biases and confusions about race when we evaluate Obama's performance. The huge variance in the popularity of Obama among different demographics and ethnic groups shows this.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

Incidentally, Obama picked up only 7% more of the African-American vote than Kerry did. The gain among Latinos was double that (from 53% for Kerry to 67% for Obama). There was also a 6% gain among Asian voters, and a 12% pickup from other races.

opposeobama (Anonymous) says…

"How would you explain the fact that, after Iowa, Obama received more than 80% of the black vote in the primaries even though his positions varied little from Hillary Clinton's?"

Because he was running against Hillary, for Pete's sake!!!

[just kidding - I think]

But seriously, I don't remember their positions being all that similar, unless you mean as opposed to the Republican positions. Obama ran a masterful campaign both in the primaries and the election, and did so by differentiating himself from his opponent(s), a key principle of marketing.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

honeychild (Mel Briscoe) says…

"notajayhawk, you know what, you are right. because how many black folk were behind colin powell ..."

I have my moments. Then again, with the frequency of my posts, the law of averages is on my side.

At first glance I suspected something was wrong when I saw the exit polls. But when you look back:

88% of African-American voters voted for Kerry

90% of them voted for Gore

83% ('92) and 84% ('96) for Clinton

89% for Dukakis

91% for Mondale

83% for Carter (both '76 and '80)

African Americans have voted heavily Democratic for most of our lifetimes.

Now, as to why?

TomJoad1 (Anonymous) says…

"They vote for the democrats because the democrats give them money. Don’t make this more complicated than it is."

That's true, but sorry, it IS more complicated. I don't think anyone, Republican or Democrat, Conservative or Liberal, whatever, would disagree that as a group there is still inequity between people of color and Caucasians. It hasn't been that long, really, since the era of equal rights, and I'm not sure you can expect to make up for centuries in a matter of decades. The difference in opinion seems to be over what we should do about it. There are those who think demanding equal treatment is the solution, while others say affirmative action is needed, even if it amounts to reverse discrimination. There are those who think equal opportunity is the ideal when others think there should be some redistribution to make up for the inequities of the past. There are some who think less government would be good for everyone equally, while others say that doesn't work fast enough and social support programs are necessary. The two major parties are divided more over the solution than on recognition of the problem.

But as to your comment that it's "because the democrats give them money," we ALL vote for the guy (or gal) we think is going to choose the path that benefits US. Didn't conservatives vote for the one they thought would bring them more tax breaks and less government interference? Don't environmentalists vote for the one who pushes for ending global warming? Why should African-American voters NOT vote for an elected official that's going to benefit them? Is that really different than someone else voting a particular way because he wants a tax reduction?

0

Stuart Evans 4 years, 4 months ago

Where's Porch? He's been on here for 11 months preaching about Obama's above 50% poll numbers.

0

Olympics 4 years, 4 months ago

GOP: Still Anti-Minority or Still in Denial?

A federal judge ruled this week that tactics used by Republicans, which they claim are intended to reduce voter fraud, still equate to voter suppression and can't be used without a judge's permission. Republicans want cops to patrol polling places where minorities vote, take photos of those voters, and use lists to challenge their voter registrations. The RNC argued that, now that a black man is in the White House and black people have been elected to numerous offices, those tactics couldn't amount to voter intimidation. They said that scrutinizing minority voters—in the name of stopping widespread voter fraud calculatedly perpetrated by lower-income minority groups—should be unbridled.

In an opinion issued on Tuesday, Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise of Federal District Court ruled that the Republicans failed to show that conditions had changed enough to justify changing the agreement. “It does not appear that the R.N.C.’s incentive to suppress minority votes has changed since 1982,” Judge Debevoise wrote, citing statistics showing that most minority voters support Democrats. “It appears that the R.N.C. has been largely unsuccessful in its efforts to attract minority voters. Until it is able to do so, it will have an incentive to engage in the type of voter suppression that it allegedly committed in the actions that led to the enactment and modification of the consent decree.”

The judge dismissed arguments by Republican advocates that voter fraud is a growing problem, and said suppression of minority voters was a more serious issue.

0

kmat 4 years, 4 months ago

TomJoad - I made a comparison comment about religous zealots and Bush and got asked about it. So I answered it. Bugger off and don't read it of you don't like it.

Oppose - I don't think Obama got 80% of the white vote because there are still a lot of racists out there. Just read comments on this site to back that up. Even liberal Lawrence has a ton of racists. And Obama wasn't making up bullsh*t stories about being under fire in war zones. Hillary made herself look like a fool and paid for it.

Sat - maybe you should ask your questions about "common attributes, perspective, beliefs, and values of the African-American community" to the African community. I can only answer in general terms. I am a mix (if we're talking percentages, I'm about 15% black). I can tell you what my black friends say, which is the republican party supports racism. None of my black friends would ever vote republican.

0

Steven Gaudreau 4 years, 4 months ago

Honey, www.womensliberation.org Better call these ladies up and tell them they are outdated.

ps- My co-worker from Africa is offended by the term African American unless you were born in Africa, which may be your case. He is an African American because he was born there. If you were born in America, your an American unless we all want to start using stupid labels like I'm an Irish-American or an Italian-American. All Americans have heritage to another country unless you are an American Indian.

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Honeychild… “i don't even have to look beyond my own family and friends to see that no one expects a hand out just because they are black.”

That’s not what I said nor implied. I also don’t have to look beyond my own family to know not every African-American feels entitled to handouts (I have four nieces, who like Obama, are half African-American). However, ancedotal evidence a family or two doesn't lead to a single conclusion as to common, or general beliefs by a race.

My question was about what kmat thought (and you are invited to opine) African-Americans believe is common (not universal) attributes, perspective, beliefs, and values of the African-American community; such that would lead to the disparity Pitts describes.

0

TomJoad1 4 years, 4 months ago

"What some portray as "authentic black culture" is actually a relic of a highly dysfunctional white southern redneck culture. Such a dysfunctional white culture Sowell maintains, in turn derived from the ‘Cracker culture’ of certain regions in Britain, mainly the harsh English borderlands, origin of many 'cracker' migrants. Sowell gives a number of examples that he regards as supporting the lineage, including an aversion to work, proneness to violence, neglect of education, sexual promiscuity, improvidence, drunkenness, lack of entrepreneurship,… and a style of religious oratory marked by strident rhetoric, unbridled emotions, and flamboyant imagery."

-Thomas Sowell in Black Rednecks and White Liberals

0

opposeobama 4 years, 4 months ago

kmat:

"If you want my opinion on why Obama got 80% of the black vote in the primaries - it's the same reason I wouldn't vote for Hillary. I didn't like the way she was campaigning and the lies she told. Lots of people, black and white, respected and liked Obama for who he is. I would not have voted for Hillary or Edwards. I do think if Obama were white (remember he's half white) he would have still won the primaries."

Then why didn't Obama receive more than 80% of the white vote during the primaries? Are white Democrats more gullible than black Democrats? And didn't Obama tell quite a few whoppers during the primaries (his comments concerning Jeremiah Wright come to mind)?

And I do remember that Obama is half white, which should have been apparent from my comments above. If you believe Obama would have received more than 80% of the black vote during the primaries if he had been all white, you're deluding yourself.

"You hate Obama and it's clear. Move along now, nothing to see here."

Hate's a bit strong. But I strongly dislike anyone who ignores majority opinion and tries to force socialism/fascism down our throats.

0

TomJoad1 4 years, 4 months ago

You should read “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” for insight into modern "black culture"
It is written by a black academic.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

sat, i can't speak for all black folks (especially w/ me being a halfrican american), but i do know quite a few folks of that persuasion and none of them are looking for handouts or to label themselves as oppressed. in my family, we have quite a few members who are highly educated and have what most folks would consider to be nice-paying careers. i would venture to say that several of my family members (not myself, i might add) would fall under the "upper middleclass" category. all of these folks vote democrat. my uncle, who is a very distinguished looking older gentleman, retired military and in his 70s, drives a beautiful silver mercedes coupe and he wear a jacket w/ "obama" in embroidery. so nope, i don't think that assumption about black folks as a whole is accurate. i don't even have to look beyond my own family and friends to see that no one expects a hand out just because they are black.

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Kmat…

No offense, but you didn’t really answer the question. You talked about why African-Americans vote for democrats, but my question was - what do African-Americans believe are the common attributes, perspective, beliefs, and values of the African-American community.

Maybe they believe the purpose of government is to take from other group and give to their group (i.e. handouts for life). Maybe they believe they are still oppressed by the government. I don’t assume. It was an honest question.

But if you decide to respond, please don’t answer in general terms, like, they want freedom. Everyone wants that, what is specific to this group that they feel that sets them apart and makes them unique.

0

George Lippencott 4 years, 4 months ago

TomJoad1 (Anonymous) says…

They vote for the democrats because the democrats give them money. Don’t make this more complicated than it is.

Could there be some truth in this?? Mr. Obama is a Democrat. Democrats advocate for a more equitable distribution of goodies. Since the election, that has been an element of what is going on-my opinion. Data I have seen suggests that goodies are less available to minorities-perhaps they are benefiting from Mr. Obama’s efforts. Those who benefit are thankful and supportive. Those like Tom who feel the tax bite coming are not supportive. Is that a surprise? Is that racist? To me it is just politics.

Yes, I am not blind. There certainly are people motivated by race, religion, gender, ethnicity, geography, etc. May not be good but it is very human-and relatively well distributed across all those in these groups-again my opinion.

0

barrypenders 4 years, 4 months ago

kmat (Anonymous) says…

Barry - you are so ignorant.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. Your deduction reminds me of one of my H.S. teachers that referred to me in his English class that "the empty drum, makes the most noise". The other students got a good laugh over that.

Thanks for the memory.

Stimulus, and Posercare lives unprecedented

Darwin bless you

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Jonas_opines “Wonder if that has anything to do with how rarely you oppose conservatives using the same broad brushes that you do liberals?”

The difference is that I am a self-identified conservative (in most areas).

“I don't pretend neutrality. I know the direction and largely the degree that I lean, and I've said so at least one or two times before.” – jonas_opines

I must have missed that declaration. However, based on your comments, I think it is pretty clear which way you lean.

“The last one is simple, the poster named one name, which you then changed to ‘the opposition.’” – jonas_opines

That one poster was the opposition, was he not? I described that general tactic (which is a common tactic of many liberals) which is the reason why I used the general term “opposition” instead of the specific individual against whom he was using it.

“Nope. I followed the train of the conversation, and so my guess was then confirmed by the source.” – jonas_opines

i.e. your preconception about an individual made you assume the comment was racially motivated. If that is true, then you could take any statement made by the aforementioned individual and claim it is a racist comment w/o any support. The term “novelty” has many definitions, and even using the one you suggest doesn’t preclude a non-racial conclusion. But when you ignore facts (or the absence thereof) and make assumptions based on your own biases, you go down a slippery slope. One must have logic or facts to support calling someone a racist, otherwise it is a red herring. Calling Obama a ‘novelty” in and of itself is not racist.

“You seem to make the assumption an awful lot these days that the one of many definitions, arguments, points etc. that you decide to stick with is the “main,” “most common” etc.” – jonas_opines

Yes, I am guilty of making the assumption that dictionary.com has a non-arbitrary system of choosing the order of placing the definitions. The most logical order being that the most commonly used definition is listed first. But I guess when I make an assumption about organization patterns of dictionary.com it is ridiculous and flawed 9even when it makes sense), but your assumption about Tom’s comment can’t be questioned…

“Kind of like you ‘don't respond to internet trolls?” Haha.” – jonas_opines

Are you suggesting I shouldn’t respond to you? I didn’t put you in that category, but if you are suggesting I do... ; )

0

TomJoad1 4 years, 4 months ago

Kmat, I don’t believe anyone cares what you personally think about Christians or religion or history. Keep your hateful rants to yourself. That is not what this discussion is about.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

kmat, maybe instead of just saying "christians" you should specify fundamentalist christians.

i'm neither... i'm a universalist so i don't feel offended by what you posted. i just thought that maybe that specification would help you to better get your point across.

.... just a thought, dude.

0

kmat 4 years, 4 months ago

Barry - you are so ignorant.

I don't equate race with religion. If you ever wonder why people don't take you seriously, it's because of your bullsh*t statements like this one.

This article and many comments on here are using race as the overwhelming reason why blacks support Obama. I don't agree. I think it's a democrat vs republican issue and I have stated that.

The comparison I did make was that if race is the main factor why blacks do support Obama, how is that any different than Christians supporting a president based solely on religion as conservative Christians did Bush? They overlooked all his failings and that he was ruining this country because they believed he was close to god. Those my sir, are brainwashed people.

And yes, I do think Christians are brainwashed (not only Christians, any people that rely on religion to control all aspects of their lives). I've stated that many times in past posts - no new news here. I will again say that I was brought up in a very strict Christian household, have studied the bible and ancient history in depth. I believe that anyone that truely believes there are gods out there that control every little aspect of their lives are brainwashed people. People use religion as a crutch. I prefer to stand on my own two legs and make my own decisions about life, not based off what people thought thousands of years ago when they had no clue how anything in this universe worked. Religion isn't progressive. Religion does discriminate. Religion causes wars. Religion keeps people from thinking for themselves.

You Barry, are the poser.

0

TomJoad1 4 years, 4 months ago

They vote for the democrats because the democrats give them money. Don’t make this more complicated than it is.

0

kmat 4 years, 4 months ago

Satirical (Anonymous) says…

Kmat… “…how is that any different than all the Christians that voted for Bush just because they they were brainwashed to believe he was a good Christian that talked to god?”

That is a valid criticism. People vote for individual who belong to a certain groups because they assume they have the common attitudes, perspective, beliefs, and values of that group. The next question is what did/do African-Americans believe were/are the common attitudes, perspective, beliefs, and values of what they considered to be a member of their group?


I think most blacks (I can't speak for blacks - only a little bit of my lineage is black) vote democrat because the republican party is overwhelming perceived (for good reason) to be white based and racist. It will take a monumental shift to get the black community to vote republican. The basic values and beliefs are that we are truely equal and should treat everyone, regardless of race, as equal. The republican party doesn't stand for equality. They tend to fight it.

0

kmat 4 years, 4 months ago

opposeobama - most blacks didn't REALLY get to vote until the 60's. That is what I'm referring to.

If you want my opinion on why Obama got 80% of the black vote in the primaries - it's the same reason I wouldn't vote for Hillary. I didn't like the way she was campaigning and the lies she told. Lots of people, black and white, respected and liked Obama for who he is. I would not have voted for Hillary or Edwards. I do think if Obama were white (remember he's half white) he would have still won the primaries.

You hate Obama and it's clear. Move along now, nothing to see here.

0

opposeobama 4 years, 4 months ago

kmat:

"Yes Moderate - the fact that blacks have overwhelming voted democrat since they were allowed to vote."

That's absolutely false. Blacks did not move into the Democrat camp until FDR.

I'll repeat my questions: Why did Obama receive more than 80% of the black vote during the primaries when there was little difference between his positions and Hillary Clinton's? If Obama were all white and John Edwards were black, would Obama still have received more than 80% of the black vote?

0

musbhiorlo 4 years, 4 months ago

the points made in this article were already obvious to most people. everyone relates more to things that relate to them. it is not wrong, it is not bad, it is what it is.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 4 months ago

"You like to pretend to be neutral, but you clearly get upset when I oppose liberals."

Wonder if that has anything to do with how rarely you oppose conservatives using the same broad brushes that you do liberals? Things you, for instance, write off in Cal Thomas columns as "politics as usual," but attack as logical errors and assumptions when they come from those more to the left. Nah, that couldn't be it.

I don't pretend neutrality. I know the direction and largely the degree that I lean, and I've said so at least one or two times before. It would also be quite a mistake to suggest that I'm upset. The reason I usually jump on you for that is because it's when you're at your obvious weakest standing.

"What? To support what assertion? Against which individual? When did I imply a larger target audience?"

You answered all of those points yourself in the following paragraph save the last one. The last one is simple, the poster named one name, which you then changed to "the opposition."

"Oh dear, did you cherry-pick the definition that you thought was the most supporting while avoiding the one that you had to know was the intended one?"

Nope. I followed the train of the conversation, and so my guess was then confirmed by the source.

"Yes, how devious of me to pick the FIRST and most common definition."

You seem to make the assumption an awful lot these days that the one of many definitions, arguments, points etc. that you decide to stick with is the "main," "most common" etc.

"I don’t typically defend others’ statements and especially MoH so I don’t see a need to continue discussion on this topic."

Kind of like you "don't respond to internet trolls?" Haha. Anyway, glad to see that at some level you know that you're spinning too much to continue. It's. . . pretty obvious.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

"...I don’t typically defend others’ statements and especially Tom’s..." -Satirical

That hurts!

0

Leslie Swearingen 4 years, 4 months ago

I watched the primaries on PBS and gradually came to see that President Barrack Hussein Obama was by far the best one out there. I admire his coolness under fire, his willingness to listen to everyone before he makes up his mind. He does not make hasty decisions under pressure. If you show respect you will get respect and that is what is happening in the international community, I thank God every day that he is president.

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Kmat… “...how is that any different than all the Christians that voted for Bush just because they they were brainwashed to believe he was a good Christian that talked to god?”

That is a valid criticism. People vote for individual who belong to a certain groups because they assume they have the common attitudes, perspective, beliefs, and values of that group. The next question is what did/do African-Americans believe were/are the common attitudes, perspective, beliefs, and values of what they considered to be a member of their group?

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Purplekansas… “I'm not a liberal”

Sure…you just like to repeat weak liberal argument and claim racism whenever possible.

“I'm trying to rid my country and fellow conservatives of the shameful legacies of our wretched past when it comes to race.” – purplekansas

I am trying to rid my country and fellow liberals of crying wolf and claiming racism w/o sufficient evidence. You can’t change the past, you can only control the present by trying to shape the future. I could argue about every event you posted, but even if those events were all motivated by racism doesn’t prove your earlier argument and doesn’t prove Tom is a racist.

“but is awfully convenient that you picked out definition #1 for novelty, which was clearly not the appropriate definition given the context.” – purplekansas

Yes, how devious of me to pick the FIRST and most common definition. Mwhahahah….See my comment to jonas_opines on the same topic.

“Also, I was referring to posters, not to Pitts, the racist part is the bit about whites being the rational ones, the ones whose opinions are formed by deliberation and careful thought-processes and not race.”

No one claimed whites are the rational ones, and the statements you used to support that argument were also made by Pitts. Therefore, if you are correct, then Pitts is also a racist.

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Jonas_opines “Unlike the post you attacked, yours has a pretty specific political qualification there…”,.”

You like to pretend to be neutral, but you clearly get upset when I oppose liberals. While you are correct that purplekansas did not identify him/herself as liberal or conservative, I took the not so large leap in logic when s/he blamed African-Americans not supporting Republicans based on actions of democrats who later joined the Republican party. Additionally, claiming that something or someone is a racist without adequate support is a very common tactic by liberals. Therefore I didn’t have problem stating someone with two positions largely advocated by liberals, was a liberal.

“…and you know as well as I do that liberals don't have a lock on this.” – jonas_opines

Yes, but you don’t get people riled up when you blame everybody. And if you don’t get people a little riled up, then what would be the fun ; )

“I think you also know quite well that there is Plenty of evidence to support that assertion against the (individual) specific target, which I assume is why you put up the strawman of an implicit larger target audience.” – jonas_opines

What? To support what assertion? Against which individual? When did I imply a larger target audience?

“Oh dear, did you cherry-pick the definition that you thought was the most defensable, while avoiding the one that you had to know was the intended one?” – jonas_opines

Oh dear, did you cherry-pick the definition that you thought was the most supporting while avoiding the one that you had to know was the intended one?

However, even if Tom intended definition 3 doesn’t lead to only one conclusion, which purplekansas stated as Tom thinking only white people should run the country. So first you assume you know the definition, and even when I use your definition purplekansas’ conclusion doesn’t necessarily follow from the premise.

Purplekansas was making a ton of assumption based on his/her own passions and prejudices, and claiming racism to silence opposing points of view. I think people who do this cry wolf, which makes society less vigilant when real racism occurs.

Having said all that, I don’t typically defend others’ statements and especially Tom’s so I don’t see a need to continue discussion on this topic.

0

barrypenders 4 years, 4 months ago

kmat equates race with religion. Thanks for the heads up.

You also consider Christians as brainwashed. Are you ready for brainwashing questions concerning the Progressive Articulate treatment of African descendants in this country?

Stimulus, Pity-Guilt Propaganda, and Posercare lives unprecedented

Darwin bless you all

0

kmat 4 years, 4 months ago

Yes Moderate - the fact that blacks have overwhelming voted democrat since they were allowed to vote.

This shouldn't even be an issue.

And if blacks overwhelmingly supported Obama just because he is half black, how is that any different than all the Christians that voted for Bush just because they they were brainwashed to believe he was a good Christian that talked to god? they didn't pay any attn to what Bush actually did, they just had to vote for the guy that claimed he was close to god.

How about we focus on important things like the fact he's sending more troops (some of my friends) to Afghanistan and this crappy economy?

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

All I see is Obama $ Co. Inc. getting richer and Tom A. Shewmon getting poorer. I don't care if Obama or me or anyone on the face of the earth is purple polka-dotted, that IS the reason I don't like this president, and of course I utterly detest Pelosi and Reid and the entire far-left cabal running things now. God help us all. And I'm not sure what was in my post either that got it removed. The truth? Whatever. Outta here....play nice kids.

0

George Lippencott 4 years, 4 months ago

Just to raise a question? Could there be issues other than race that may contribute to the differences in support??

0

Flap Doodle 4 years, 4 months ago

Wow, mentioning Dear Leader's mother is a violation of the usage agreement?

0

purplekansas 4 years, 4 months ago

Actually, satirical,

I'm not a liberal. And far from trying to gain moral superiority, I'm trying to rid my country and fellow conservatives of the shameful legacies of our wretched past when it comes to race.

Why did Lynn Jenkins use the phrase Great WHITE Hope? Why did TEA party protesters carry signs that read: Obama's Plan: White Slavery? Why did they depict him as a witch doctor? Don't even get me started on the ridiculous Birthers.

but is awfully convenient that you picked out definition #1 for novelty, which was clearly not the appropriate definition given the context. This two would be more appropriate

  1. a novel occurrence, experience, or proceeding: His sarcastic witticisms had ceased being an entertaining novelty.

  2. an article of trade whose value is chiefly decorative, comic, or the like and whose appeal is often transitory: a store catering to tourists who loaded up with souvenir pennants and other novelties. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/novelty

Also, I was referring to posters, not to Pitts, the racist part is the bit about whites being the rational ones, the ones whose opinions are formed by deliberation and careful thought-processes and not race. Again, pointing to conservative Blacks was to illustrate that Black support is probably MORE about politics than race, but obviously not only. On this point, I do disagree with Pitts that race is not the biggest factor, though it looms large.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 4 months ago

You should try and wake up a little more, Satirical. You're really in poor form this morning.

"What a surprise, a liberal trying to gain moral superiority by claiming the opposition is racist, evil, etc., without any evidence."

Should I throw back your "goes both ways" that you tried to spring on me a few days back? Unlike the post you attacked, yours has a pretty specific political qualification there, and you know as well as I do that liberals don't have a lock on this.

I think you also know quite well that there is Plenty of evidence to support that assertion against the (individual) specific target, which I assume is why you put up the strawman of an implicit larger target audience.

"Novel = new. If you don’t believe me here is the actual definition: “state or quality of being novel, new, or unique; newness: the novelty of a new job.”

Oh dear, did you cherry-pick the definition that you thought was the most defensable, while avoiding the one that you had to know was the intended one? I think you must have, or you stopped reading 2 definitions too soon. Not a good showing, either way.

  1. an article of trade whose value is chiefly decorative, comic, or the like and whose appeal is often transitory: a store catering to tourists who loaded up with souvenir pennants and other novelties.

I'll pass on reposting the link. You can check from your own post if you want.

0

opposeobama 4 years, 4 months ago

mickeyrat:

"So what do these posts tell us? Well, “obviously,” whites are rational, reasoned, and would never allow race to factor into their perceptions, while blacks are… what? Slow? Not very bright?"

How would you explain the fact that, after Iowa, Obama received more than 80% of the black vote in the primaries even though his positions varied little from Hillary Clinton's? If Obama were all black and John Edwards were black, do you still believe Obama would have received more than 80% of the black vote?

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

Purplekansas… “asserting that Blacks support Obama based solely on race, contains the implication that Whites are the ones who count because they actually pay attention to the issues and know what's really going on. this is racism.”

So you also think Pitts is racist? Because his argument was that the disparage in approval rating among the respective races is, in part, due to each group supporting or disapproving of Obama because of his race.

“And clearly, Powell, Rice, and Steele examples prove that this is about politics and policy more than race.” – purplekansas

So again, you disagree with Pitts?

“It's worth pointing out that Tom views having a Black president as a 'novelty.' As in, we'll learn from this experience that only white people should run the country.” - purplekansas

What a surprise, a liberal trying to gain moral superiority by claiming the opposition is racist, evil, etc., without any evidence. Novel = new. If you don’t believe me here is the actual definition: “state or quality of being novel, new, or unique; newness: the novelty of a new job.” http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/novelty

Therefore, Tom’s claim that having a Black president is a “novelty” is 100% accurate.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 4 months ago

"Of course, strong support for Democrats by Blacks ~MIGHT~ have something to do with that whole Civil Rights issue back in the 60s when segregationist Democrats who opposed Civil Rights left the party to join the Republicans."

Perhaps. But the actions this admin has taken that are generally opposed are also presented as poor for the businessmen and middle class, and beneficial for the lower classes. I'm not quite sure why anybody would be amazed that the racial categories that comprise those demographics would hold to generally-different opinions regarding his performance. I'm pretty sure that you could make a pretty compelling statistical proof that those demographics are divided to a great extent by race, if you wanted to take the time and thought it would be worth it. (Which I don't)

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

purple, damn! you are one smart cookie! :)

0

purplekansas 4 years, 4 months ago

I'll second mickeyrat's post.

asserting that Blacks support Obama based solely on race, contains the implication that Whites are the ones who count because they actually pay attention to the issues and know what's really going on. THIS IS RACISM.

The phrasing in other reports of this racial polling divide demonstrate this dismissal of Black opinion as well, viewing this from the perspective of a white person, whose 'real' opinion was distorted by those interloper blacks who dared to disagree with them. And clearly, Powell, Rice, and Steele examples prove that this is about politics and policy more than race. Of course, strong support for Democrats by Blacks ~MIGHT~ have something to do with that whole Civil Rights issue back in the 60s when segregationist Democrats who opposed Civil Rights left the party to join the Republicans (see: Thurmond, Strom). Maybe.

It's worth pointing out that Tom views having a Black president as a 'novelty.' As in, we'll learn from this experience that only white people should run the country. I find that disturbing and it appears related to the Lynn Jenkins Great WHITE Hope attitude that infects at least a good chunk of the Republican Party today.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

i will admit that, when i am filling out some forms, i am now able to select the "2 or more races" box. i truly do appreciate that. it is so asinine to think that in 2009 i have to choose a race. it took 3 races to make me, so why can't i claim all 3, call myself multiracial and no one take issue w/ that?... one thing i do know for sure is that it doesn't matter how anyone else categorizes you, its how you see yourself that matters. for those "halfrican americans" who are comfortable w/ being considered black or chinese or samoan, etc etc, more power to them. its all about personal preference.

0

Satirical 4 years, 4 months ago

I think it is offensive that Obama is constantly referred to as African-American. Obama is no more African-American than he is Caucasian. He is bi-racial, and not recognizing that reasonably offends some bi-racial individuals.

Our country is becoming more and more bi or tri-racial, which I think we need to start recognizing, rather than continuing to put square pegs in round holes. Why can’t bi-racial individuals be recognized for their achievements? This is an effort to lift up one (African-American) race to the exclusion of another (bi-racial). Pitts is racist against bi-racial individuals.

0

TrooGrit 4 years, 4 months ago

Oops, I meant "white conservatives" (my proof-reader is broke!)

0

TrooGrit 4 years, 4 months ago

Leonard Pitts is a joke. It's always about race with him, this is about the umpteenth time he's brought up race in a column of his. His pandering on issues of race has gotten to the point of being sickening. I won't read his tripe any more. It is what it is, the simple fact is non-white conservatives will not find Obama appealing, and shock it's not about race. Good grief!

0

Revenio 4 years, 4 months ago

In other news, 95% of African Americans support secretary of state Lil Wayne.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

woah! i got a comment deleted. maybe its because i'm kind of nice to tom. lol ;P

0

mickeyrat 4 years, 4 months ago

From an earlier post: "We all know 90 some odd percent of blacks voted for Obama, knowing virtually nothing about him except he's black."

Of course, it would be just as easy to make an unfounded and denigrating assertion of the reverse, like "We all know 90 some odd percent of whites voted for McCain, knowing virtually nothing about him except he's WHITE."

Later, we read that "Obviously, whites are judging Obama on his poor performance. Blacks are only taking his race into account."

So what do these posts tell us? Well, "obviously," whites are rational, reasoned, and would never allow race to factor into their perceptions, while blacks are... what? Slow? Not very bright?

Time and again, Pitts makes a point, and posters on this forum provide the proof of it.

0

rbwaa 4 years, 4 months ago

Do you think Michael Steele would get a 91% approval rating from blacks?

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

canyon_wren 4 years, 4 months ago

snap--that reminds me of a cartoon I saw recently which pretty much speaks to this column: It showed someone saying "I'm not racist--I don't like his white half, either!"

0

Flap Doodle 4 years, 4 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

jaywalker 4 years, 4 months ago

"The points he made in the article. Did you read it?"

Haayuk.

Yeah, that's what I thought. I didn't read any either.

0

Revenio 4 years, 4 months ago

“Polls reflect education divide”

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

canyon, i do support the prez-- no, i don't co-sign everything he does but i do want to go on the record that i did, in fact, vote for him and that i think he is doing an okay job. i am not one of those politically inclined people though. i do follow it to an extent but i don't think as much as folks like tom, barry or larrynative does...

anyway, all of that being said, i actually do agree wholeheartedly w/ your last post.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

larry.... did you really use the term "women's lib"? LOL wow... 1974 called and said it wants its terminology back. ;P

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 4 months ago

"Like what?"

The points he made in the article. Did you read it?

0

canyon_wren 4 years, 4 months ago

The only thing good about Obama being elected was the fact that he IS black--it was inspiring to "people of color," as the expression goes. It matters not to most of them that he is doing a terrible job--and is either unable or unwilling (or both) to "come through" for them in the way they anticipated. Honeychild's comments about Colin Powell and Condaleeza (sp?) Rice were very true. Obama isn't the only black in this country to have accomplished anything significant--just the only one with HIS particularly questionable coterie of support.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

larry, dude, i never said that black folk don't know who the hell colin powell is! who doesn't know this guy? i think you missed my point... maybe i worded it wrong....

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

Your spin is useless. We're talking about who >>>blacks<<< voted for here.....all 96% of them. When they realize they're no better off in a couple years than under big bad evil GWB, maybe that'll drop to 94%, who knows. My guess is blacks will not turn out in any way in 2012 like they did last November......if Obama even gets the nomination. It was a novelty.

(laughter)

0

Steven Gaudreau 4 years, 4 months ago

Honey, I would assume that a high % of black or white individuals polled would even know who Powell is or what race. Have you not seen the live polls on the street where a majority of Americans do not know who the current V.P. is or where the state of Maryland is located? Almost 100% know who Obama is and that he is black. Any non right winger who is black is going to say he is doing a good job because the man is black. Understandibly, no black person or white Liberal wants to see the first black president be a failure. Don't you think that if H. Clinton was President every women's lib advocate would not be saying she is doing a great job even if she was doing nothing at all. If anyone does not think this is true, you live in a little bubble with your head buried in the sand. Die hard lefties and liberals are the same way just as the crazy rights still back Bush. A large % vote and care about their party more then the nation as a whole regarless who their poster boy of the year is and what they are doing or in Obama's case, not doing.

0

monkeyhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

Free money from Obama's stash

"ROGULSKI: Why are you here? WOMAN #1: To get some money. ROGULSKI: What kind of money? WOMAN #1: Obama money. ROGULSKI: Where's it coming from? WOMAN #1: Obama. ROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it? WOMAN #1: I don't know, his stash. I don't know. (laughter) I don't know where he got it from, but he givin' it to us, to help us. WOMAN #2: And we love him. WOMAN #1: We love him. That's why we voted for him! WOMEN: (chanting) Obama! Obama! Obama! (laughing)"

http://rgcombs.blog-city.com/free_money_from_obamas_stash.htm

0

jaywalker 4 years, 4 months ago

"As usual, Pitts's observations are good ones..."

Like what?

"And Tom, McCain had more than 17-18 million casting votes for him based on the color of his skin."

Really looking forward to how you back that assertion up.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

^^^^ okay, i've made the same point, beobachter, several times in this joint and every time i get "honeychild, are you serious?!" um.... yeh.... duh.... i'm effing serious. there were skads of white people who voted for the white person. doesn't make it right for black/brown folks to vote for obama just because he is black/brown but the people who note that fact over and over are usually so dismissive of the mccain = white thing.

0

DarkGhost 4 years, 4 months ago

“Poll reflects education divide.”

0

beobachter 4 years, 4 months ago

And Tom, McCain had more than 17-18 million casting votes for him based on the color of his skin.

0

DarkGhost 4 years, 4 months ago

This is like voting David Duke into the presidency and claiming blacks are racist because they don’t support him.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

What's to understand bozo. I said, it is what it is.....big deal. Pitts needs a job, I do understand that. Blacks thought they were getting free homes and that McCain (or Palin) was Obama's running mate. They were readier than ever before in their lives to cast that vote last November. Obama was afforded the luxury of having 17-18 million totally clueless voters casting their ballot for him based on the color of his skin.....can't get much more racist than that, can you?

0

DarkGhost 4 years, 4 months ago

The racism lies in the 90% stat. And stupidity I might add.

0

Mel Briscoe 4 years, 4 months ago

notajayhawk, you know what, you are right. because how many black folk were behind colin powell (i don't think black people DISliked this dude but they weren't wearing any colin powell shirts or beating a path to his door to have him speak at events either) or, even moreso, condie rice? (now, i can't speak on behalf of an entire populace but i would venture to say that black folks didn't dig this chick. period.) i mean, how many times did essence magazine (the black version of glamour) have this chick on their cover? none. zippo.

0

opposeobama 4 years, 4 months ago

Gallup found similar percentages amongts blacks and whites concerning the OJ Simpson verdict. We all know that OJ murdered his wife and Ron Goldman. However, 78% of blacks agreed with the "not guilty" verdict. Obama could murder a white woman on national television, and his approval rating amongst blacks would drop maybe 2 or 3 points.

Obviously, whites are judging Obama on his poor performance. Blacks are only taking his race into account. If Hillary had been elected president and had the same record as Obama at this point, I doubt that her approval rating amongs blacks would be anywhere near 91 percent.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 4 years, 4 months ago

As usual, Pitts's observations are good ones-- and also as usual, the usual suspects knee-jerk all over themselves because of their inability (or is it refusal?) to understand it.

0

barrypenders 4 years, 4 months ago

This sounds like more Pity-Guilt Propaganda from a guy that never gets a break. How do Somali's treat others? How do other races around the planet feel about the Pity-guilt Propaganda offered in this country?

Stimulus, Pity-Guilt Propaganda and Posercare lives unprecedented

Darwin bless you all

0

imastinker 4 years, 4 months ago

Is he claiming that I'm racist for not liking Obama or is he claiming that blacks are racist for liking him only because he is black?

I'm afraid I know the answer and I expected more from him. His columns have improved a lot in the last few years and I agree with him more often than not lately.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

You do read Cal's BS though beoB, just like I read Pitt's BS. That's why where all here. Discussing the important issues of the day. Wonder what Comcast acquiring NBC Universal will mean for The Messiah? Will they campaign for him?

0

beobachter 4 years, 4 months ago

Then don't read them, just like some of us refuse to read Cal's BS.

0

Tom Shewmon 4 years, 4 months ago

It is what it is, Mr. Pitts. The corrupt liberal media could not/can not make it thru the day without mentioning somehow, in some way, Obama's race. We all know 90 some odd percent of blacks voted for Obama, knowing virtually nothing about him except he's black-----big deal. Well, they knew possibly that big bad Fox News was after Rev. Wright and a posse of other Obama radical associations while plane loads from the corrupt liberal media were in Wasilla and Juneau investigating Palin's expense reports, place of residence, family vacations, hairdoos and wardrobe acquisition. It was as though the corrupt liberal media thought all flights to Chicago had been cancelled.

(laughter)

0

farfle 4 years, 4 months ago

Leonard Pitts is the racisct

0

jumpin_catfish 4 years, 4 months ago

Pitts is just silly, his columns are just not worth reading anymore.

0

notajayhawk 4 years, 4 months ago

There's a very simple reason why African-American voters support Obama more than white voters, the same reason why they supported him so heavily in the election.

He's ...

he's ...

he's ...

he's a Democrat!

0

Brent Garner 4 years, 4 months ago

During the election campaign I heard time and time again how black voters were voting for Obama solely because he was black without any regard to what his policies--as if he ever really articulated any--were or what he stood for. Their sole requirement seemed to be that he was black like themselves. Yet, somehow, that was not considered racist--it certainly should have been if you were a non-black running against Obama. Now Mr. Pitts wants us to believe that because black voters still support their "black-like-me" person and non-black voters are deserting him that somehow racism is involved. Perhaps he is correct but not in the way he thinks.

0

jaywalker 4 years, 4 months ago

"Because he exists — and really, where race is concerned, he’s done little more than that — we find this discussion overtaking us everywhere from our newspapers to our televisions to our barber chairs."

Huh. And that's with you realizing you're leading the way on the "overtaking", right, Leonard? And while I don't agree with either of those poll numbers it should be easy to recognize that the 39% is a heck of alot closer to reality than the ridiculous 91%.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.