Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Signs of Candidacy in Trouble, by Bud White

by Bud White

The Democratic Party consists of two warring factions, and the precarious coalition that forms the Party is on the verge of splitting apart. Working class whites are not naive to Obama's shenanigans. They've watched as the Obama team has smeared perhaps the most racially progressive president in our history as a racist, and they've seen Obama ridicule their concerns, faith, and culture.

The Obama campaign would like the superdelegates to believe that African Americans will revolt if Obama is not given the nomination. The more likely outcome-and this has actually been quantified, is that working-class whites will go with McCain if Hillary is not the nominee.

This is not because working class whites are racist but because Obama represents a wing of the party which encourages the trashing of poor white people, lacks an economic focus for their needs, and excuses the racist and America-hating rants of Reverend Wright.

Obama's cold-hearted tacticians aren't using these tactics because they are concerned about the plight of African Americans. They are trying to scare superdelegates about racial issues and smear the Clintons.

READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE HERE



Display:


Serious Question (1.50 / 2)

If Bill Clinton was so racially progressive why did he fight to keep discriminatory laws in place and fight to make a discriminatory death penalty easier to carry out?


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:22:57 PM EST

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

Sure i can address this.  people who kill someone else deserve the death Penalty, period.  I guess i am one of he people who think when you kill someone you deserve what you get.  Tell me what you think the families of the people who lose a loved one feel about this.  My guess is they are SOMEWHAT upset that a loved one was murdered.

But i agree Bill Clinton is a bad man for think that murders should get the death penalty.

My guess is you think they should get a strong talking too.  We can just agree on this.

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:33:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 2)

Except of course not everyone who gets the death penalty is guilty and not everyone who kills someone gets the death penalty and the way it shakes out shows racial discrimination. Good try though!

Now perhaps you can move onto the racially discriminatory sentencing for drug laws and try to justify those.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:52:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

And is this Bill Clinton's fault too.???

Really can you name some murders who were put to death that were not guilty//?????

Good try.  Some people in america care more about murders than the victims.  I am not saying you but just some people.  We can agree to disagree but imho murders who get the death penalty get what they deserve.  If you want to defend them and not the victims that is up to you.

I dont use drugs so i dont know much about that but maybe we can give them a good talking too as well.  And we could maybe talk about the victims of drug related crimes.  The people who get robbed and mugged and raped.  But i can see you are not really interested in the victims of crimes just the ones committing them.

Good try through.

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:58:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

Uh yeah. You should do some research before you comment...


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:59:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

People are released from death row all the time because of their innocence. Fact of the matter is that flaws in the system allowed these innocent people to get on death row in the first place. It is only by a stroke of luck that many of these people get released. Is that good enough for you? Relying on luck and the kindness of strangers to not murder innocent people at the hands of the state? How confident are you that innocents never get executed?


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:06:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

No.  Simple question.  Name someone put to death who was not guilty.  And dont ask me to do some research.  I am not you student.

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:07:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

That's a really right-wing argument. The state has no incentive to reopen a case after a person has been executed.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:11:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

I understand.  Your answers is I dont know.  Nothing wrong with that.

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:20:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

You don't appear to understand at all.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:21:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 2)

Simple answer. No-one has ever been posthumously exonerated in the US after being executed (to my knowledge). But people have been posthumously exonerated after dying on death row, which is just as bad, in my book.

Take Frank Lee Smith, exonerated in 2000, who died of cancer after sitting on death row for 14 years
http://www.thejusticeproject.org/about/n ewsletter/the-criminal-justice-reformer- 2-8.html

4 people were exonerated posthumously, though I do not have more details at my fingertips, but the source would be the ACLU, and I'm sure they have more statistics lying around:
http://www.aclu-wi.org/wisconsin/death_p enalty/200604deathpenaltytestimony.shtml

That should be enough to get you started.


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:24:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html


by zerosumgame on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:14:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (1.00 / 2)

In fairness Clitnon did take time off the Campaign trail in 1992 to go back to Arkansas and Fry a retarded Black man, so I can see how some people would get the impression that Bill's a bit of a scummy opportunist on this issue.


by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:12:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 2)

Oh, you did not just come to a progressive website and argue that the death penalty does not disproportionately affect black men, did you?

I'm sure plenty of others would be more than willing to eviscerate you on why the death penalty is flawed, and that our criminal "justice" system is very slanted towards putting black men in jail simply because they are black.

Please do some research on this topic. Here's a quick primer: How, exactly, do you know person A killed person B?


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:55:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

Really???  I said " that the death penalty does not disproportionately affect black men, did you?".  I guess i missed that.  Could you put up that quote since i cant seem to find that.  And in fact it looks like you just made that up?  But i will give you the chance to show some proof that i said that.  Good luck.

I am sure the victims of murderers will not be "eviscerating" me for these commits.  When 12 americans all agree that someone committed murder and that person should get death then that is how i know.  Perhaps you should read a little old testament to get a better idea of my views.

And one last thing.  I dont hold people in very high regard who knowningly twist and misquote my words to make a point.  And i am calling you out.

Where do i say "the death penalty does not disproportionately affect black men"..  Chip chip chip i am waiting???  

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:06:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 1)

Read above. Educate yourself.


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:25:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (2.00 / 2)

So for the record.. you're cool with a system that disproportionately executes black murderers vis-a-vis white murderers?

By the way, you wanted the name of someone whose death sentence was overturned after DNA evidence discovered his innocence?  How about Mr. Ray Krone, for merely one example:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002 /04/10/krone.htm

You really do not know what you are talking about.


by XoFalconXo on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:54:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

Not a direct quote, hence I did not use quotation marks. It is a derivation.

You support the death penalty as is. The death penalty disproportionately impacts black men. I assume you would not support the death penalty if it is not fairly and justly applied, since I assume you are a reasonable person. Therefore I assume that you are arguing that the death penalty is fairly and reasonable applied (ie: is not biased against black men).

Which part of that derivation is incorrect?


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:09:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

"why did he fight to keep discriminatory laws"

What laws are you referring to?


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:47:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

The application of the federal death penalty was expanded to include crimes not resulting in death, such as running a large-scale drug enterprise by Clinton's 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill. During Clinton's re-election campaign he said, "My 1994 crime bill expanded the death penalty for drug kingpins, murderers of federal law enforcement officers, and nearly 60 additional categories of violent felons."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinto n#Clinton_and_the_death_penalty
John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:02:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Serious Question (none / 0)

Drug sentencing specifically.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:19:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama (1.50 / 2)

Can someone find out who bud white is?  

david


by giusd on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:23:28 PM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (none / 0)

To be fair I think Bush is the most racially progressive president in our history and Clinton is second in terms of administration.  Its his only legit achievement.

But Clinton was all for minorities in his cabinet before having minorities in his cabinet was cool.


by DTaylor on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:23:43 PM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (2.00 / 3)

A lot of what you wrote is naive.

I don't think being " racially progressive " is determined by the appointments you make alone , I would think your policies are more important .

So unless you are suggesting Bush's policies were are better than Clinton's in terms of race relations and its impact on lives of minorities directly you are terribly off mark


Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.
by lori on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:30:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (none / 0)

Its not just in appointments the man has a point, race is one of Bush's few bright spots, I mean I think its safe to say that Clinton never would have had the guts to try and push immigration reform, he prefered to gut Democratic programs (welfare) to push his GOP-lite agenda.


by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:15:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

i totally disagree (2.00 / 2)

Bush's appointments of racially diverse people only served the political purpose of making him seem like he gives two shits about people who arent white.

Keep in mind those that he has elevated have been the most rabid people who fucked over our constitutional rights the most - Alberto Gonzales, john yoo, and condi rice (Latino, Asian and AA).


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:41:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: i totally disagree (none / 0)

When the guy who is friendly to minorities appoints minorities its an important battle victory.

When the party opposed to minorities appoints minorites the war has been won.

Bill was the ice breaker but History will smile on Bush in this his only achievement.

But I agree Bush has nothing else going for him.


by DTaylor on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (2.00 / 0)

Hmm... a reprint of an article from No Quarter. I'm sure this is a non-biased and honest look at the situation...


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:29:17 PM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (none / 0)

Really -- How low can you go?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:36:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what foolishness (2.00 / 0)

What a load of garbage. Obama encourages the trashing of poor white people? You really need to curb your remarks because that is absolutely not the case.


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:38:58 PM EST

Re: what foolishness (2.00 / 2)

You don't think his comments at a private function in SF were demeaning to low income white voters? Clinging to their guns, religion....etc.


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:49:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (1.33 / 3)

Frankly, no, I thought they were accurate.  Furthermore, I have utter contempt for backwards, Bible-thumping gun nuts, so I could care less about what they think is "demeaning."  They are what is wrong with this country.


by XoFalconXo on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:58:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (2.00 / 1)

I think that's a hateful comment, and if you said it about any other race than whites you'd be banned. But somehow--in a very elite segment of the "left"-- it's OK to be racist against whites. And you wonder why Dems lose elections.


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:15:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (2.00 / 1)

A.  I didn't reference whites, you did.

B.  I am very much white myself.

So, a little projection there, eh?


by XoFalconXo on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (none / 0)

I thought we talking about Obama's comments in SF???


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:35:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (none / 0)

Obama didn't reference whites either, so...


by XoFalconXo on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:36:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (2.00 / 1)

He certainly did. Listen to the tape again. To paraphrase, Obama said: A message of hope coming from a black man, antipathy towards people who aren't like them..etc, etc, the point was painfully clear. Why would he point out his own race? His point was obvious, and it went down well with the chardonnay.


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:51:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (none / 0)

Were you there?

Hard to imagine one of the most religious candidates the democrats have ever run being hostile towards religion, but you white-wine sipping Clinton supporters know best.


by Mostly on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:26:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (none / 0)

I agreed with the bitter remarks. And no he wasn't demeaning poor whites when he said them.


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:16:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (2.00 / 1)

Give me a break. Of course we was.


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:36:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: what foolishness (none / 0)

I don't feel particularly demeaned.


by Mostly on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Good read (2.00 / 1)

There are a few lines that are a bit over the top, but I agree with the vast majority of what you've written.  I said on the night of the PA primary that the Obama campaign & surrogates were going to crank up the race issue big-time.  It took less than 4 hours - "bradley effect" articles were out and it began snowballing from there.

That is the irony of this whole controversy surrounding Wright - it was the decision of Barack's campaign to plunge us into a trench war of racial politics.  Now what remains to be seen is whether the benefits from that decision outweigh the consequences.


by bobbank on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:40:08 PM EST

Re: Good read (none / 0)

So if he had a Caucasian priest who hated gays and Catholics things would have been the same?


A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin
by hootie4170 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:05:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good read (none / 0)

I don't really understand the point of your question.  If he considered some gay-basher to be his mentor for 20 years yes I think it would raise the same sorts of questions about his judgement.  Is that what you are asking?


by bobbank on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:46:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Interesting read, agreed. (none / 0)

first of all by pointing out a pattern, that is something to watch for.  I was rather amused at the mention of certain blogs and bloggers....

I am not sure this "plunge" is intentional...I believe it is uncontrolled....

In another diary today, Joel Klein--one of the people's opinions cited by the article- came out essentially to "not go there"....and Klein is no friend of HRC's.  


by 4justice on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:38:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This isn't No Quarter... well, usually (1.50 / 2)

Great.  More NoQuarter bullshit.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:44:48 PM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer (2.00 / 2)

First of all calling Reverend Wright american hating is a very naive statement. If he were so American hating, why was there no rioting or marching on the streets of Detroit when he gave the keynote speech, at the NAACP Fund Raiser last night. Are you also calling The NAACP an American hating organization? Secondly, I seem to remember A formerly racially progressive President, pulling the race card in some of his speeches and interviews, oh, and wasn't that Hillary Shill, Geraldine Ferraro playing the "Race Card". All denounced by the candidate Clinton, of course.


John McCain: Everyones nowhere man
by johnny sexton on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:45:18 PM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer (2.00 / 1)

Wright is a relatively trivial digression but it's throwing the spotlight on a wider problem namely winning the support of core working class and middle class dem voters who could become attracted to a McCain candidacy. No one in a million years is going to convince me Bill and Hillary Clinton are racist as they've been pilloried by the Obama campaign. You know it's pure politics as well as I do. The unforseen consequence of this strategy by the Obama camp is that it has alienated the Democratic core constituency which was always potentially soft if McCain was the candidate. That's what's happening now. All this Wright stuff is the symptom not the cause.    


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:34:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer (2.00 / 1)

The "United States of KKKA" ??

Sounds pretty hateful to me. I don't know anyone in the Klan.


by JFK464 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:52:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer (none / 0)

I'm pretty sure that remark was a reference to the History of this country, which while it has been a relatively steady progression, has been rather shall we say one-sided in its racial power dynamics.


by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:19:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting (2.00 / 2)

The liberal blogs including this one are full of the racial blackmail ploy essentially we'll take our ball home if you don't give him the nod. This is nihilism pure and simple and it's somewhat in the heat of the moment but it must be apparent now that he is going to have a huge problem with middle and blue collar voters in the fall. I don't know where this is going to be honest although I'm as certain as I can be if he gets the nod he'll lose. If this happens there is going to be a huge blowback from the mainstream of hte democratic party while she'll be sitting pretty as the de facto leader of a party that will almost certainly strengthen its position in the house and senate. His political career will largely be over or at best limited to long term attendance as a senator. A shared ticket with her at the top is the best solution.      


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:29:18 PM EST

first time noticing (none / 0)

today even a change in Obama's language...perhaps accepting he has made mistakes on the campaign trail.  Paraphrasing "...if I lose it will not be because I am black, it will be because I made some mistakes in my campaign..."He also said in a speech today in NC that "no doubt the democratic party will be united in the fall to defeat McCain..." (also paraphrasing)

So maybe even he sees his nomination might be in jeopardy right now?  And that a shared ticket would be the best option?


by 4justice on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:48:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: first time noticing (none / 0)

He might have to have Hillary as a VP now I will admit.


by Socraticsilence on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:20:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: first time noticing (none / 0)

Once again a woman has to take a back seat to a FAR less qualified man. Puhleeze! Talk about people being ticked off...


by rossinatl on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:44:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If she has less delegates (none / 0)

then second place is what she earned...


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:08:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: If she has less delegates (none / 0)

If it was based on resume alone then we'd just keep electing George W. Bush.


by Mostly on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:31:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: first time noticing (none / 0)

a) he's had more time in elected office than she has,

b) she raced ahead of men far more qualified than she is, specifically because she got

c) voters, who decide this stuff.


by Mostly on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:30:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (none / 0)

"Working class white will go with McCain if Hillary is not the nominee."

This has been the core of every, and I do mean every, argument for Hillary Clinton's candidacy since it became clear that she couldn't catch up with Obama in delegates.  Yet no one has accused her of racial blackmail.   I don't think it would occur to most people to do so, unless they were obsessed with race - which the NoQuarter crowd most definitely is.

Anyway, "Bud White" needs to keep his propaganda straight - race-baiting is either a sign of a candidacy in trouble, or a brilliant but devious ploy to win the black vote in South Carolina, without which Obama would surely be nowhere.  Depending on the week.


by Mostly on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:36:16 AM EST

Re: Obama Turns On the Race-Baiting Wurlitzer: Sig (none / 0)

What else can White America do for Black America?  

We have done and given all we can.  It is up to the "Black Community" to now finish the job on their own.  It's time they stop separating themselves from America.  Start thinking of themselves as AMERICANS rather than Black Americans or African Americans.  And start speaking English.

Jeremiah Wright's complaint that we are attacking the "Black Church" is another point.  I thought it was the Christian Church.  I didn't know Jesus divided the church between black and white.  I never read that in the Bible.

This election was not about race but Obama chose to make it so.  He started by parading with Oprah in the first days.

We have given all we can and I personally feel no "white liberal guilt" about things that happened one or two hundred years before I was born.

I have been a white liberal Democrat all my life.  

I don't have a racist bone in my body.  But if someone thinks I'm a racist because I chose not to vote for a man that thinks it's "his time" or that I OWE anybody anything, there is nothing I can say.

Well, we OWE him nothing. We OWE no particular "community" nothing.

I love black people, I love white people -- I just love people and I am sick and tired of the division.

Maybe it's a good thing that Obama chose now to demand his "entitlement".  Get it out in the air.  Bring it to the light.

It's time for the free ride of the past 40 years to come to an end.  There is no affirmative action for the presidency.


by wblynch on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:44:09 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.