Uneducated White people voting for Clinton are racist

note: I posted this on myspace and I am posting it here because i want more people to read it.

No, they are actually not any more racist than the rich white liberal who is voting for Obama.

I think poor people, who are often uneducated, are more in touch with the way racism influence the lower economic class. When you are a poor, you are more protective of yourself and your family, which usually shares the same ethnic background you have, and poor people, regardless of their race, often cling onto people of their own race to get by in their jobs, does the media ever talk about the race relation between Hispanic and black people among the poor communities or asian people and black people? I think some white educated liberals who call poor uneducated people racist are actually the most clueless of all, because while they can talk about historical oppression and slavery against black people through their university studies , they haven't actually lived though the racial tension and racism that occur among non white groups in poor communities.

This is the elitism people talk about rich liberals have and I think that's why Obama is not getting the "working class " vote.

I suspect Obama does really well in states like Oregon , Iowa, and the west is because there isn't that many black people there, and those white people are either really well off, or they just never had to deal with black people and compete for jobs for them because there are not that many black people to ever experience that racial tension on a real life basis. So they might feel more sympathy about black people from an idealist or even elitist view, while in states where huge amount of African Americans concentrate in urban districts , there are more face to face racist tension among different racial groups, and people vote more along racial line, regardless if they are black, white, or in the case of Hispanic or others, they are even more threatened by a black man because the poorer you are, the more insecure you feel about other racial group who is trying to fight for your job - and usually white people who are well off, are not even involved in this kind of fight and so they have no clue what the hell racism is on that working class economic level.

And I feel a lot of people don't get that, especially those people who post on myspace, a lot of them probably are well off white suburban folks who have not experienced racism on that economic survival level...

There's more...

Clinton or Obama

Living to make a differences versus Living to maintain a comfortable standard of living.

I have no doubts that in terms of social outcomes, Obama and Clinton are not at odds with each other. Both democrats would seek to make  this country a better place for everyone to live in than the Bush administration.

Their difference, to me, lies in their philosophical differences. It's not that Hillary Clinton is less liberal than Barrack Obama. I believe that Hillary Clinton represents the more authoritarian style of leadership. Politics, for Hillary Clinton, is about helping people to lead better standard of living; for Barrack Obama, politics is about helping and organizing people to make a difference.

It is not a surprise to find out that Hillary Clinton is more well versed in policy issues, because she is the type of leader who want to take charges of the issues she feel is important to the American People (after listening to them, of course). For Barrack Obama, what the "people" want is more important than deciding what issues he feel is important to him. So , he probably does not have a very detail or explicit plan to really do things any certain way , I believe his strength lies in empowering people to make a difference while Hillary Clinton's strength is her knowledge on many issues and providing a more stable form of governance that does not get sidetracked by fringe or radical movements.

The problem with more democracy is that it could promote mob mentality, as I've think is the case with caucus, a movement is by design, random and prone to surprises and even chaos, and this is what caucus is like , to some extent, and it is  not a surprise Obama is doing well in that kind of voting environment.

A primary is a more stable environment where people have to follow specific instruction and a narrow set of voting behavior, and mark their choices in private without disturbing or talking to anyone. Such orderly process is , not surprisingly, beneficial to Hillary Clinton.

Like someone has said, some of us live for the short term, some of us live for the long term, some of us are young, some of us are old, some of us are just starting our adulthood and striving to make a difference, finding their own identity in this crazy world, others are desperate to cling onto their orderly way of life (haha , do I sound like Obama) and hoping their jobs and pension will be enough to mark the senior years of their life.

Both candidates bring different things to the table, and that  is that.

There's more...

Something worse than the "bitter" comment.

Hi everyone,

This is my first diary entry. I was just browsing through youtube videos and i came across a speech Obama gave in S.F and while everyone must have been aware of the higly reported bitter comment made by Obama, he actually made a even more racially charged comment at the same event, which has been ignored.

In the video, Obama said "when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about the government, ..Now it is true when the speech is delivered by a 46 year old black guy named Barack Obama, that added to another layer of cynicism. "

So by that quote, he is saying that small towns Americans  are skeptical about voting for him because he is "black" and his name is "Barack Obama" .

This is the same guy that said if he loses, it wont be because of his race, blah, whatever.

Anyway's here the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__A7rlIE4 m4

There's more...


Advertise Blogads