In 2005, Obama said of himself the same things that Gerry Ferraro said about him:
Obama acknowledges, with no small irony, that he benefits from his race.
If he were white, he once bluntly noted, he would simply be one of nine freshmen senators, almost certainly without a multimillion-dollar book deal and a shred of celebrity. Or would he have been elected at all?
This is outrageous, and racist. Right?
Will Obama demand his own resignation?
Or will he say, "I can no more disown Barack Obama than I can my bigoted, America-hating lunatic pastor"?
[Update a few minutes later]
Hitchens, on Obama's political cynicism:
"If Barack gets past the primary," said the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to the New York Times in April of last year, "he might have to publicly distance himself from me. I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen." Pause just for a moment, if only to admire the sheer calculating self-confidence of this. Sen. Obama has long known perfectly well, in other words, that he'd one day have to put some daylight between himself and a bigmouth Farrakhan fan. But he felt he needed his South Side Chicago "base" in the meantime. So he coldly decided to double-cross that bridge when he came to it. And now we are all supposed to marvel at the silky success of the maneuver.
You often hear it said, of some political or other opportunist, that he would sell his own grandmother if it would suit his interests. But you seldom, if ever, see this notorious transaction actually being performed, which is why I am slightly surprised that Obama got away with it so easily. (Yet why do I say I am surprised? He still gets away with absolutely everything.)
Looking for a moral equivalent to a professional demagogue who thinks that AIDS and drugs are the result of a conspiracy by the white man, Obama settled on an 85-year-old lady named Madelyn Dunham, who spent a good deal of her youth helping to raise him and who now lives alone and unwell in a condo in Honolulu. It would be interesting to know whether her charismatic grandson made her aware that he was about to touch her with his grace and make her famous in this way. By sheer good fortune, she, too, could be a part of it all and serve her turn in the great enhancement.
More and more, it is clear that this is 2008's Bill Clinton of 1992, in the way that he is treated by the press and his acolytes. We aren't supposed to be judgmental about his mendacity and ability to spin and prevaricate. No, we're supposed to admire how good he is at it.
I guess him saying this about himself would be like him calling Al Sharpton on the phone,
"...YO, my "N", wazzup?!!!?"
It's cultural when they do it, it's just hatred and racist if I did it.
Well, that depends. For you, it might also be cultural.
"You often hear it said, of some political or other opportunist, that he would sell his own grandmother if it would suit his interests. But you seldom, if ever, see this notorious transaction actually being performed" - not to say I get an actual tingle in my leg when I read prose like this. But.
What's also interesting is that when Hillary lies, she fails at it so badly. There's always that cackle.
anon,
not for me it wouldn't be cultural to call or use the "N" word to Al. Now then again, if a typical NASCAR fan called and said,
"Yo peckerwood, wazzup!!?"
Now THAT, would be cultural. Especially if they called me and said, "...you old knucle draggin, slow talkin, no drivin, NASCAR lovin, redneck, peckerwood, pervert, WAZZUP!!?"
Here's an example of the HRC liar's cackle. It's hiding behind her words and then it forces itself through her teeth. She tries to cover up the cackle, with continued speaking.
I'm viscerally afraid of Obama's "change" and the hero-cult which is struggling for it. But Hillary is just SUCH a slug...
I was happy to read Hitchens' ever-entertaining and clever work, although I think he's missed the boat on this one. Hitchens accuses Obama of betraying Wright, his grandmother, and his "base", and he accuses Obama of painting Ferraro as a bigot. This would be damning evidence of political duplicity if true, except that Obama didn't do any of those things; not in the video I watched.
Instead, he excused the racist words of almost everyone. He called his fellow congregants misguided, by justified in their anger. He even excused the racism of white people. He certainly didn't smear Ferraro, who got about 5 seconds of mention in a 37-minute speech.
Later on, Hitchens decries Obama for falsely pretending to be more religious than he really is. The thing is, since Hitchens despises religion as much as I do, I'd think he'd welcome a candidate who pays only lip service to religion, and acts in a secular way. Perhaps he'd prefer a proud non-believer courageous enough to admit his atheism, and totally unelectable because of it, to a moderate secularist who panders to the 90% of the country who are theists, but I'll take what I can get.
Walter Williams puts everything in such a clear perspective.
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/08/IsObamaReadyforAmerica.htm
...From its beginning, the church has made strenuous efforts to help black Christians overcome the shame they had so long been conditioned to experience...
So, once again, instead of living in the modern era where many blacks, such as Walter Williams, point out that the Civil Rights war has been won, Wright and this professor choose to cast blame and live under the heavy yoke of oppression. To help achieve the dream of a united people, one must first stop segregating. This is what Wright does, he segregates to keep his people fired up about injustice.
...Images of Wright's strident sermons, and his anger at the treatment of black people in the United States, appear constantly on the Internet and cable television, part of the latest controversy in our political-campaign season...
Its also part of the hypocracy of preaching a united people and still screaming about the treatment of one race. That further divides.