Wrong to Vote Obama because...

[Dr. Shane]

I think most of us here would agree it is wrong not to vote for Obama because he is black (or half black). But is it wrong to vote for him just because he is black? Is that just as racist as not voting for him because he is black?

I am part of a multi-racial marriage and live in an area of Texas where white people are outnumbered nine to one. So I would kind of like to see a person of color get elected to the highest office in the land. I don't think I am alone.

[Bravus]

I do think it's wrong to vote for someone based on a simple issue of race or gender or any other single label, particularly for such an important job. But I also think it's unrealistic to pretend it's completely irrelevant. If I saw two equally qualified candidates, I'd be inclined to vote for the black or female or whichever-other-underrepresented-group person, because I think someone with a different perspective can bring new things to the job.

But I think there are enough really good, substantive reasons to vote for Obama, and enough really good, substantive reasons not to vote for McCain or Clinton, that race is really not that big a piece of the picture.

[John317]

/... But is it wrong to vote for him just because he is black? Is that just as racist as not voting for him because he is black?

I am part of a multi-racial marriage and live in an area of Texas where white people are outnumbered nine to one. So I would kind of like to see a person of color get elected to the highest office in the land. I don't think I am alone.

I think it would be foolish to vote for someone to be president because of the color of his skin. When I first saw Obama and heard him speak in Iowa, I was very interested, even excited, about him, and I seriously considered voting for him. But the more I found out about him and his positions, the more convinced I am that I can't vote for him.

But it is frightening to think of many millions of people voting for someone to be president mostly or mainly on the basis of the color of his skin. I would hope that wouldn't be the reason to vote either for or against someone. As far as I'm concerned, the only legitimate reason for voting to elect someone to be president is that, after comparing their beliefs, their character, their judgment, and their leadership experience, you honestly believe that they would make the best president.

That said, it is interesting to consider the fact that one reason our founding fathers instituted the electoral college system is so that there would be a way of changing a bad choice made by the uneducated, unwise masses who, they feared, could be easily swayed by a unscrupulous yet charming & persuasive demagogue.

The Federalists in particular did not trust the masses. I can see a little why. What would happen if the majority of the voters cast their ballots, willy-nilly, for someone merely because he had the most hair or because he was the most handsome or had the nicest voice, etc.? I'm glad we have a republican form of government and not a pure democracy. What if someone ran for president and won and only then was it discovered that he/she was aligned with the enemy? Or that he/she would be a danger to the country in some other, equally worrisome, way?

Believe it or not, this idea came to me, not in connection with Obama, but in connection with McCain's candidacy-- a man I respect and will probably end up voting for. The idea came to me because someone sent an Email to me the other day talking about how McCain is "the Manchurian Candidate," meaning that he was brain-washed by Russian KGB agents while a POW in Vietnam. It is being reported that there have even been specialists on the subject of brain-washing, who, after observing McCain during a congressional hearing on Vietnam POWs, have concluded that Senator McCain exhibits all the classic signs of having been brainwashed into taking the side of America's enemies.

Naturally I don't believe a word of it. Just sounds to me like the stuff of a potentially good political thriller, and I'm seriously hoping that fiction's all it is or ever will be.

[lazarus]

Black folks are have a lot of experience in NOT voting for someone because of the skin color. It is scary to think that in an Obama/McCain match-up that folks would vote for McCain because he's white!

[John317]

Black folks are have a lot of experience in NOT voting for someone because of the skin color. It is scary to think that in an Obama/McCain match-up that folks would vote for McCain because he's white!

I would agree with you that it would be a poor decision and certainly an unwise one to vote for either candidate, whether McCain or Obama, on the basis of race alone.

I believe the primaries and the polls have shown that there are a sufficient number of voters who would at least be willing to vote to someone of either race. It's a question now of whether they will be convinced by election day that they ought to cast their vote for one or the other.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

It is scary to think that in an Obama/McCain match-up that folks would vote for McCain because he's white!

That kind of turns the topic on its head. The topic is whether it is wrong to vote for Obama because of his skin color - Not McCain because of his skin color.

I think many open-minded white men will vote for Obama just because he is black which will be a way of proving to themselves they are not racist and that they have an open mind.

[Bravus]

Ok, so flip the logic around a slightly different way: "it's wrong to vote for McCain because Obama is black".

[Dr. Shane]

I think that takes a simple topic and makes it complicated. I have heard talk in conservative circles that they are afraid many white men will vote for Obama just to show how open minded they are.

Is that morally wrong?

[Kountzer]

I don't think it matter who wins. I don't know much about McCain. I know he was a pow. I know that many on the right loathe him. I guess he's the lesser of 2 evils so to speak. It is either McCain or Obama, or Hillary.

As for Obama. I admire his charisma and oratory skills, and political wherewithal to get to where he is. I don't think universal health care will work. I also don't think u.s. troops will be coming home anytime soonr. I'm not a hawk by any stretch. I just think Iraw and afghanistan are bigger quagmires than vietnam. Can you imagine if the u.s. pulls out, al qaeda sitting up shop in baghdad with oil revenue and nuclear weapons in close proximity? Not a pretty picture.

The whold deal with his pastor didn't help any. If obama can put it all together and make it to the whitehouse, then it was just devine destiny. I'll probably vote for him, but I don't see it happening.

DB

[Planey]

Naturally I don't believe a word of it.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but from an outsider looking in, it seems to me that on these forums most posters take this attitude when it comes to stories about McCain.

But these same posters seem to latch on to any scurrilous tidbit about Obama.

Strange.

Graeme

[Bravus]

Quote:

I think that takes a simple topic and makes it complicated. I have heard talk in conservative circles that they are afraid many white men will vote for Obama just to show how open minded they are.

Is that morally wrong?

It's exactly as wrong as the many white men who will vote against Obama because he's black, which was the (not that complicated) point I was making. Yes, in an ideal world we'd be color-blind: but ask any black American who has been stopped in traffic for DWB (driving while black) how color-blind the country is.

So if those who are voting *against* racism help to balance out those who are voting *due to* racism, I'm not so sure that's morally wrong.

Still think voting on the substantive political issues and platforms of the candidates is far better.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

Naturally I don't believe a word of it.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but from an outsider looking in, it seems to me that on these forums most posters take this attitude when it comes to stories about McCain.

But these same posters seem to latch on to any scurrilous tidbit about Obama.

Strange.

Graeme

I don't know about those on this forum, but I know there are many whites outside the forum who believe these things about McCain. It's all over the Internet, and I have a cousin who served as a Marine in Vietnam, who recently FWD'd this stuff to me. He's my cousin so I don't argue with him about it, but I delete it after reading it. Like I say, I don't believe it.

You make a comparison between that and the information we have about Obama. There's one big difference. Obama even admits to these things and does not and cannot deny them. They go to the issue of whether Obama should be our president, so they are extremely important questions to ask and answer.

On the other hand, the things about McCain are people's opinions based on rumor and gossip. That is not the case with the things we're discussing as regards Obama. It's essential to separate facts from gossip and rumors. Fact: Obama stayed in Wright's church for 20 years, and only started separating from Wright after his connection to him started hurting Obama's run for the presidency. The American people have a right and duty to know if Obama thinks on those issues like Wright does. Time will tell. Hopefully it will tell before the November election. But this is the main question, that and whether Obama has good judgment. That also will be decided before we're through.

[Woody]

Obama make some extreme statements when he first ran for Congress. He is now trying to distance himself from these. Fox stated that he denied filling it out rather ... blaming an aide. But they now have his handwriting on it. This could be dangerous for him according to Fox.

I Tivo ed it but then lost it. So I will have to wait till they repeat it. Oh Boy ... is Obama in trouble?

Has anyone else heard of this?

[John317]

No, I hadn't heard. I haven't wached much news on TV for the last several days. I'll be interested in learning the details of this and finding out exactly what it is. Thanks.

[olger]

You mean about not wanting to punish his daughters with a child if they are promiscuous? That might be a hard statement to buff out.

[Planey]

I haven't wached much news on TV for the last several days.

Neither has Red. He's been watchin' Fox. Not the same as watching news.

Graeme

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

I haven't wached much news on TV for the last several days.

Neither has Red. He's been watchin' Fox. Not the same as watching news.

Graeme

Hey, that's not true. I switch back and forth between the news channels and I prefer Fox to CNN, which used to be my favorite. If you think Fox is bad, you ought to try the Spanish News in the US.

Speaking of news and who you should vote for, see this link:

http://www.newblackpanther.com/

[Kountzer]

Yhr new black panther party has about as much clout around here as you do John 3:17.

[Kountzer]

When I say around here, I'm talking about the real area I live in.

[John317]

Quote:

It is scary to think that in an Obama/McCain match-up that folks would vote for McCain because he's white!

That kind of turns the topic on its head. The topic is whether it is wrong to vote for Obama because of his skin color - Not McCain because of his skin color.

I think many open-minded white men will vote for Obama just because he is black which will be a way of proving to themselves they are not racist and that they have an open mind.

I think that would be a wrong and bad reason to vote for anyone. The only reason anyone should vote for a candidate is that they believe that candidate will make the best president and because they believe more in that candidate's policies than they do in the other one. To vote for either one due to skin color is not good for the country. That is like voting for the candidate with the best teeth or with the most hair. It just isn't relevant to being a good president.

Here is something that is very relevant:

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?...s+in+early+race

During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than his aides now acknowledge in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion – positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he’s projected during his presidential campaign.

The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group’s detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his 1996 bid for a state Senate seat.

Late last year, in response to a Politico story about Obama’s answers to the original questionnaire, his aides said he “never saw or approved” the questionnaire.

They asserted the responses were filled out by a campaign aide who “unintentionally mischaracterize(d) his position.”

But a Politico examination determined that Obama was actually interviewed about the issues on the questionnaire by the liberal Chicago non-profit group that issued it. And it found that Obama – the day after sitting for the interview – filed an amended version of the questionnaire, which appears to contain Obama’s own handwritten notes adding to one answer.

The two questionnaires, provided to Politico with assistance from political sources opposed to Obama’s presidential campaign, were later supplied directly from the group, Independent Voters of Illinois – Independent Precinct Organization. Obama and his then-campaign manager, who Obama’s campaign asserts filled out the questionnaires, were familiar with the group, its members and positions, since both were active in it before his 1996 state Senate run.

Through an aide, Obama, who won the group’s endorsement as well as the statehouse seat, did not dispute that the handwriting was his. But he contended it doesn’t prove he completed, approved – or even read – the latter questionnaire.

“Sen. Obama didn’t fill out these state Senate questionnaires – a staffer did – and there are several answers that didn't reflect his views then or now,” said Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for Obama’s campaign, in an emailed statement. “He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire at the meeting, but that doesn't change the fact that some answers didn't reflect his views. His 11 years in public office do.”

But the questionnaires provide fodder to question Obama’s ideological consistency and electability. Those questions are central to efforts by Obama’s presidential rival Hillary Clinton to woo the superdelegates whose votes represent her best chance to wrest the Democratic nomination from Obama.

Taken together – and combined with later policy pronouncements – the two 1996 questionnaires paint a picture of an inexperienced Obama still trying to feel his way around major political issues and less constrained by the nuance that now frames his positions on sensitive issues.

Consider the question of whether minors should be required to get parental consent – or at least notify their parents – before having abortion.

The first version of Obama’s questionnaire responds with a simple “No.”

The amended version, though, answers less stridently: “Depends on how young – possibly for extremely young teens, i.e. 12 or 13 year olds.”

By 2004, when his campaign filled out a similar questionnaire for the IVI–IPO during his campaign for U.S. Senate, the answer to a similar question contained still more nuance, but also more precision. “I would oppose any legislation that does not include a bypass provision for minors who have been victims of, or have reason to fear, physical or sexual abuse,” he wrote.

The evolution continued at least through late last year, when his campaign filled out a questionnaire for a non-partisan reproductive health group that answered a similar question with even more nuance.

“As a parent, Obama believes that young women, if they become pregnant, should talk to their parents before considering an abortion. But he realizes not all girls can turn to their mother or father in times of trouble, and in those instances, we should want these girls to seek the advice of trusted adults - an aunt, a grandmother, a pastor,” his campaign wrote to RH Reality Check.

“Unfortunately, instead of encouraging pregnant teens to seek the advice of adults, most parental consent bills that come before Congress or state legislatures criminalize adults who attempt to help a young woman in need and lack judicial bypass and other provisions that would permit exceptions in compelling cases.”

Both versions of the 1996 questionnaires provide answers his presidential campaign disavows to questions about whether Obama supports capital punishment and state legislation to “ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.”

He responded simply “No” and “Yes,” respectively, to those questions on both questionnaires.

But a fact sheet provided by his campaign flatly denies Obama ever held those views, asserting he “consistently supported the death penalty for certain crimes, but backed a moratorium until problems were fixed.” And it points out that as a state senator, he led an effort to reform Illinois’ death penalty laws.......

[John317]

Yhr new black panther party has about as much clout around here as you do John 3:17.

It is obvious that you do not appreciate the fact that the New Black Panther Party is supporting Obma. I can't blame you. It cannot bode well for him. But I'd hope the Panthers would have no clout whatsoever here on CA. Yet the fact is they are supporting Obama for some reason. Is it because he talks the same ideas? Or is it because they find that what he says is contrary to their teachings?

I know that Jeremiah Wright talks much the same, and I know that Obama sat at Wright's feet for 20 years. Black Liberation Theology is very similar to what the New Black Panther Party teaches. They have much in common. Both are very much influenced by Karl Marx. Both are far to the left. Now it will begin to come out that Obama is also farther to the left than people previously believed. Obama says many of the same things the New Black Panther Party teaches, and they realize this or they wouldn't be supporting him.

Obama only pushed Wright aside when he saw Wright was damaging his campaign. Otherwise Wright would still be right there beside Obama.

I don't see Obama as a viable candidate any longer as I once did. He is already a good ways behind McCain in the polls. I think the Democrats will be unwise to nominate him unless they want to lose by a pretty wide margin. If the election were held today, McCain would win easily, and the Democrats have to realize this.

[John317]

What kind of area do you live in? I live in an area that consists mostly of blacks and latinos. Mexican music and hip hop all day and far into the night here.

[Woody]

Quote:

During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than his aides now acknowledge in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion – positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he’s projected during his presidential campaign.

John thanks for finding this. My slip of the TIVO button erased it when I was watching FOX. But they felt it was going to be a big problem for Obama and I would agree.

I find this very disturbing. Thanks for posting it. We are slowly finding out about Obama.

[Woody]

Quote:

Obama only pushed Wright aside when he saw Wright was damaging his campaign. Otherwise Wright would still be right there beside Obama.

However ... you can't blame Wright for wanting to get his new 10,000 sq. ft gated commmunity mansion.

[Kountzer]

What kind of area do you live in? I live in an area that consists mostly of blacks and latinos. Mexican music and hip hop all day and far into the night here.

I live in a gated, working class enclave of about 25 houses. Lots of hispanics from Mexico, and Central America, 30 something hip hoppers. They hold down jobs, and blast rap on Thursday evenings. Doesn't bother me. Allegedly one of my neighbors is a recognized rapper. They say he raps with Snoop Dogg, for what that's worth. There is also a salsa band that practices in a garage every Thursday. There are poeple of Europen descent, and also Asians, that live the the greater neighborhood.

I could walk down the street and do a survey about who knows anything about the new black panthers, and what they believe, and I'd probably draw mostly blank stares.

DB