I am pretty much agnostic. I don't see a lot of what you see here. I see basically a blogger who is biased, but not so much that he doesn't see that Obama my be our nominee so he's worried about a legitimate issue. You seem unable to admit that, and deal with its complexity accoridingly.
No - it just represents part of the support that's been implicit all along. We support you so long as black is only food coloring. Hence the comment about bi-racial. He's not like those nasty blacks. I diaried on this subject a while back- it's called the "magic negro"
Here's how it goes from an LA TImes Article:
"Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him."
Many of his supporters thought this was an attack him. It was actually an attack on the mentality that voters have. Unfortunately I do agree that i may not be possible for him to give a more complex view of himself because he hasn't laid the ground work for this until now.
That'st he question i've started to ask. Hopefully he want spend time trying to appologize for his background. that would be the worse mistake. To pretend there is something that he personally needs to apologize here for. What he needs to do- in my view- is to go on the offensive, and called the willie horton moment here what it is,, and then return to talking about unity,b ut also integrate finally and at last into that. Now whether voters will let him is a gamble, but clearly to me it was alwyas delusional to think race wouldn't be a wedge issue.
I actually liked Obama's background better. Maybe because I am african american but I didn't find the statements all that shocking. We live in different worlds. I come from a world where those kinds of conspiracy theories are a part of life. They come out of the frustration of white Americas indifference to the issues of black America. We are what Edwards was talking abot when he discussed the Two Americacs. That Obama is able to integrate this while still keeping a level headed is to respected. I do think this is interesting as to how it offers a peak into the psychology of this supporters more so than this will have any lasting impact. the fact is Obama was going to be the "black man" or Willie Hortoned no matter what he did. Anyone not realizing this is fooling themselves. When i see all this outrage about the issue being brought up, I can only conclude that they really did think some out race wasn't going to be used by the right to Southern Strategy him. To that I say, you shold hve know that going in.;
This story is going to go on regardless of whether Armstrong never writes another post on it. The real question is how do respond to it, not how to pretend it's not happening. On that front,. although Armstrong is biased, there is at least some effort in his post, if you read it, to talk bot that very issue.
Please come up with a new shtick. Attack the messenger is getting old. Actually say something, like others have here, about the polling data and about how its too early etc. But to merely complain that he's bringing it up is silly because that's what reality based people do. They bring up things even if its not what we want to hear.
Obama has never claimed to be post racial. But he has allowed his supporters to attribute that to him, which I have discussed else where, especially in my diary about "Obama, the magic negro." Which gets to the heart of thow this works out.
Despite what you say- the point of this post doesn't seem to be to tear Obama down, but to ask him to respond and respond effectively. Once again i find myself chatting posters who seem myopic. This isn't going to go away whether Clinton is in the picture or not. THis is about learning how to address issues. take it as an opportuntiy rather than a moment to shot the messenger. The later is not going to work over a long period of time.
PS especially his AIDS comemnts- its something you used to here a lot of African american community organizer type say. "Well you know they created AIDS to get rid of us" Its crazy to some degree, but its also a product of having to face so much indifference.
I agree about the politics. I have to say in reading the comments they are the kind of things one may disagree with, but if yo uare person of color, it's no all that surprising to hear people express. It comes out a lot of frustration and mistrust that's built up over time about how people can be so indifferent to what happens to people of color (a la Katrina where even after this we were still not allowed to talk about the racial element, etc), and I do admire the fact Obama wasn't willing to throw a friend under the bus. However, I do agree politically its pretty stupid. The guy said some extreme things. Sure, he may have had a point if it weren't said in such an extreme way, but he did. He should have denounced the extreme nature of his comments earlier, and said that he didn't want to complete toss a friend under the bus due to disagreeing with him. That would hav ehandled it, but I think the other poster is right above -t he problem with Obama and frankly his supporters is that they have a hubris about thinking they are above all of this nasty political stuff. i guess this will start to bring them to reality without assuming it's about portraying CLinton as evil. Although- I may be wrong. Youstill have those posting how this is about Clinton along this thread too.