This blog printed on 100% recycled electrons.
South Dakota received the coverage it deserved. We voted against our interest, again. Obama is from a prairie agricultural state. Clinton's a New York multi-millionaire pretending to be a populist (not unlike Bush from Connecticutt pretending to be a Texan). Obama supported biofuels and ethanol, the Farm Bill, the GI Bill, actually passed health care reforms in state and federal legislatures, and has more experience in elected office than Clinton.
...and...
South Dakota thumbed its nose at itself. It has a culture-deficit syndrome. Taken clockwise, ND, MN, IA, NE, WY, and MT voters all figured out that voting for Obama was voting for their interests. So, what's the matter with South Dakota?
What's the matter, indeed. When he spoke here in Madison, Bill Clinton talked about "people like you in places like this" recognizing that Hillary was the better choice for President. But the people most like us in places most like this said otherwise:
This New York Times map (which is cooler and interactive at their site!) shows that South Dakotans have to drive through two other states in any direction to get anywhere that gave Hillary a majority. (O.K., technically you could drive through North Dakota, cross into Canada, and get to Michigan or New York via Manitoba and Ontario, thus going through only one state and two provinces to get to Hillaryland.)"People like us in places like this" -- how come they're all a full day's drive away? Why was South Dakota such an anomaly in this election? Are South Dakota Dems really so rebellious that they would spurn the recommendations of George McGovern, Tom Daschle, Tim Johnson, and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin to vote for a candidate with little hope of winning? Does South Dakota have some anomalous concentration of idiots like Cheryl Chamberlain* who actually buy the Obama=Muslim, Koran=terrorism bull being spread by vile liars masquerading as defenders of the faith?
Bill Clinton tried to back his argument about Hillary's electability with lots of the New Math his wife was preaching. But a big chunk of South Dakota's American Indian population saw through it. So did all of our neighbors... and their neighbors. People like us in places like this put Barack Obama over the top and set America on a course to make good history. Let's hope South Dakota can catch up.
*Expect no apology, Cheryl. I try to avoid insult blogging, but anyone spreading such idiocy and making South Dakota look so grossly ignorant and hateful will receive my fullest scorn.
i guess it gust showes how much the MAJORITY of SD think of timmy tommy steffi and the biggest looser, george m
ReplyDeleteObama is a fraud. SD had the opportunity to see that and that is why we voted for Clinton.
ReplyDeleteIf the other states knew then, what they know now, they probably would have voted differently.
A silvery tongue does not make up for poor judgment and lack of experience.
And your right, how could anyone think that Barack HUSSEIN Obama could possible be a Muslim. Next thing you know we will be thinking that Malcolm X might be a Muslim.
We can't deny that there is widespread fear of Barack Obama out there. The one thing it all has in common is passionate irrationality -- a scary thing, indeed.
ReplyDeleteTerry, no matter how many times you infer that Obama is Muslim, it doesn't make it so. Malcolm X clearly claimed to be Muslim; Obama does not. And all this attention devoted to his very common Semitic-derived middle name is simply outright racism masked as patriotism. Yes, that's right. It's racist for you to make judgments about Obama's character based on his name.
ReplyDeleteThis article explains more...if you care to actually be informed, that is.
Oops, got my "infer" and "imply" mixed up. I hate it when I do that! Terry's implying here that Obama is Muslim.
ReplyDeleteThose in SD who voted for Clinton did so, I would assume, because they thought she was the better candidate, despite whatever failings and weaknesses she had. Implying that their votes were based on less-informed decision-making is a disservice to Democrats who were--and perhaps still are--as committed to their candidate as Obama's are to him. We Clinton supporters will come around, I hope, because we do need to rally around this candidate, but Clinton-bashing and Clinton-supporter bashing won't help that happen. Say it. Obama needs us.
ReplyDeletePerry,
ReplyDeletePerhaps before you infer a negative about Malcolm X you should really find out who the man was.
Me thinks your prejudices are showing.
Joesph G Thompson
I guess civility and graciousness in victory is too much to ask of the South Dakota Obama bloggers.
ReplyDeleteA hint, Cory: all of the surrounding states, except for Montana, held caucuses at which Senator Clinton's base of support has always been underrepresented. Maybe 55% of South Dakotans thought Hillary Clinton was the best candidate. Maybe her showing would have been better in surrounding states if they'd had primaries instead of caucuses.
It amazes me that you continue to bash Hillary Clinton and her supporters, even as she prepares to suspend her campaign, endorse Obama, and urge her supporters to do the same.
It's stunning, and it's not indicative of the potential for change and unity that you say you see in Obama. This was your opportunity to be gracious, and probably to pull some Hillary supporters into Obama's camp in November. Instead, you're engaging in insults and end-zone dancing and it's really discouraging.
RE: Anna, the civilty road runs two ways. Look at Terry's post. Is anyone or has anyone atributed Clinton to being a Wicken? (or attributed that McCain is worshipping Mars, the Roman god of war)? Of course not. But where is it civil for others to attribute Obama with being that which he is not? Why are Clinton and McCain supporters silent when it comes to ending this uncivilty? Could it be they believe it? Or is there a character issue at work?
ReplyDeleteThe point of the post is voting in support of candidates and issues that support our state's interest, and not voting against our state's interest. As South Dakotans we should be dismayed and alarmed that voters think they have more in common with voters in West Virginia than they do with voters in all of our neighboring states. It does not matter whether the vote is lawfully done via primary or caucus.
The conern in the post is FAR, FAR, BIGGER THAN Obama. For too long SD voters have voted against their interest. As a Clinton supporter - you know that. That change in voter reflection is what the post was seeking. This fall it is likely and unfortunate that SD voters will select MaCain - and in so doing vote against their interest by supporting a person who voted against the Farm Bill, ethanol and biofuels and will not support the GI Bill. We all have to work together to change that, regardless of whether the president is Obama, Clinton, or Richardson.
Terry, stop lying. Barack Obama is a Christian, and lives out those Christian principles better than the many people who choose to spread lying propaganda about him. Jesus never spread lies about Caesar or Pontius Pilate. You, Terry, should stop spreading your smirking lies about the next President of the United States.
ReplyDeleteJN, I will say it: Obama needs every Democrat. Obama needs independents. Obama could use some Republicans. And we all need to vote on the basis of policies and truth, not the lies Terry and his ilk prefer to spread.
ReplyDeleteObama is a silver tongued orator and the media darling. Those are two of the main reasons he won the nomination. He has no experience that will fit him to lead the US. He has made many promises for change of this, that, and the other thing. How does he exactly intend to make these changes? What does he plan to change? How is he planning to pay for all his changes? The only way is by increasing taxes on you and me. If you want to pay more in taxes, fine, go right ahead. I pay enough already.
ReplyDeleteObama has attended a "Christian" church but one whose pastor espouses hate and racism, two qualities which are not in sync with true Christianity.
We really don't know much about Obama's true beliefs, other than he wants change, he wants income redistribution, he hangs around with people of questionable character, he votes "present" when presented with voting choices that might come back to haunt him.
I never liked the way Hillary got into the Senate from New York but was never truly from New York, and she had many ethical questions in her background, but I do think she would stand up for America against terrorists etc much stronger than Obama.
I am voting for McCain for many reasons, a main one of which is I prefer the type of Supreme Court justices that he will appoint rather than Obama. I do not agree with him on global warming, illegal immigration, ANWAR, but think he is the best of the three, which might not be saying much this election year.
I am a conservative and do not apologize for that. I favor a safety net for those who truly need it but not handouts to thsoe who don't. I favor a strong national defense. I want illegal immigration stopped. I am pro-life and in favor of a marriage amendment to the Constitution. I favor using our own God-given natural resources and not being dependent on foreign nations. I think America is a great country, am proud of America, and am tired of the anti-American rhetoric that comes mostly from the left in this country.
And I don't think it was very nice to put down SD voters because they chose Hillary instead of Obama. Your reasoning was yours, and you are entitled to it, but others have just as strong reasons for choosing Hillary. That's the democratic process and the reason for elections, everyone is entitled to his/her opinion.
I do happen to think it funny that Daschle, Johnson, and Herseth couldn't deliver the state for Obama. Maybe they don't have the clout they think they have!
Nonnie
Nonnie, Obama has said more publicly about how he came to his Christian faith and what that Christian faith motivate him to do than most of the people attending "Christian" churches in South Dakota. Give it a rest. Obama is a professed, practicing Christian. Drop that issue.
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing that you would dramatically defend Osama Obama today when you were blasting he and other Dems just a few weeks ago as a die-hard Kucinich supporter as if nobody else mattered. I feel most South Dakota Democrats favored Hillary's experience over Obama's and I also heard people felt Hillary brings Bill's experience back to the White House, which shouldn't matter, but it showed value that Obama didn't show. Terrorists are licking their chops, waiting for Obama to win in November.
ReplyDeleteAnd WHAT terrorist group would that be, pray tell. You have to remember, Obama is part-Irish (his mother). Could it be the Irish Republican Army is rooting for his victory?
ReplyDeleteUnless you have some honest-to-pete FACTS, and not some spam-like mass e-mail sent by someone who wears tin-hats to keep the CIA out of his brain, perhaps it's a good idea not to tarnish someone's name with half-truths and bold-faced lies.
I don't agree with what a lot of Obama has to say. That's fine, it's my right. I'll probably end up voting for John McCain or for the Libertarian Candidate Bob Barr. BUT I'm not going to get into this asinine "character assassination" simply because he has a funny looking name or because his middle name shares the same letters as "Mad Dog" Hussein.
You don't want to support Obama? Fine. But base it on his policies and ideas and NOT on some cockamamie (sp) B.S.
Frankly, I'm getting sick of this crap and the morons posting it.
Again on the Obamaphobia topic: The fact is, unfortunately, that a lot of people fear him because they think he lacks experience, that the terrorists will take advantage of him, and that he might have, somewhere hidden deep in his heart, a prejudice against white people.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe any of these things, because I see no evidence for it. In fact, the evidence I can see points in the opposite direction! As for his being an unknown, his positions and voting history are outlined in detail at
www.ontheissues.org
along with those of the other candidates.
As for his perhaps having ties to Islam, may I suggest that this could be a good thing? Knowledge is power! I have Sicilian relatives. What does that say about me? I like olive oil, that much I will admit. What else? My dad's first name is Joseph. But I have never tried to compare him to Stalin.
My chief concerns about Barack Obama (and Hillary Clinton, too) are that, with Democrats having control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency, there will be too little restraint on spending and taxation, leading to government that becomes bloated, arrogant, intrusive, and inefficient.
On the other hand, our current government has three of those defects already.
I don't necessarily mind paying somewhat more in taxes, if I get a reasonably good deal out of it. The trouble is, government sponsorship is all too often seen by large corporations as a free pass to rip off the public. Thus, fraud could become even more deeply institutionalized than it is now.
It sure would be nice to not worry, however, about ending up in Dickensian poverty if I should happen to choke on my next vitamin pill.
I believe Obama's heart and mind are exactly in the right place, especially for times like these. But I "fear" him anyway -- or should I say, I "fear" what might happen if he becomes President -- because I suspect that our government might become a pain in the posterior by saddling 95 percent of us with new taxes, new red tape, and little or nothing in return.
If we still had a Republican Congress, I would vote for Obama in a minute. But as things are, I still intend to vote for McCain, because he will at least put a lid on what could otherwise be runaway government expansion. Checks and balances, I think they call it.
I invite any input that will mitigate my "fears." Heck, I think Obama is cool. I like the guy.
Cory, I never said that Obama wasn't Christian. I did say that he attended a church that, as shown by tapes they themselves have for sale or give-away, does have racist rants that pass for sermons and are very un-Christian in their tone. That's all I said.
ReplyDeleteI still say he is where he is today because of a lot of factors, not all of which are reasons that he should be leader of the US. He was basically an unknown with a wonderful oratory ability and that propelled him to his first victory. Now that he is more known, I wonder if he would have won Iowa that handily.
More to issues, if Obama is elected, hang onto your wallets because he will be digging into them, all in the name of lowering taxes for the middle class. What does he consider middle class? His policies will cost me more, and I pay enough already. Get rid of the IRS and the income tax as it is now, institute a fair tax so if you spend, you pay. Then everyone pays. Those who buy more pay more.
Global Poverty Act, global warming, health care, gov't financing of college, ending Bush's tax cuts, more freebies to those who won't work, all of these will cost me, a middle class person. Believe me, it won't be lower taxes for this middle class person.
I still believe he lacks experience. As an aside, I wouldn't vote for Thune for president at this stage either, same thing, lack of experience, and Thune has had more actual experience than Obama.
Again, one of the most important reasons I am voting for McCain is because of the type and quality of judges he would appoint to the Supreme Court. I favor conservative judges, and this is a big thing since they are appointed for life.
Nonnie
Where can this Republican get an Obama bumper sticker?
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm all for vigorous debate and discussion from multiple angles of issues, I wonder if you might not be better served Cory by simply deleting comments by folks that obviously are not engaging in good faith argument.
ReplyDeleteThere's going to be more and more toxic junk on the Internet in the coming months driven by extreme right-wing xenophobia that claims Obama is a Muslim, a communist, a Manchurian candidate, etc. There's no point arguing with folks that post that stuff--they are either saying things they know are not true or are fools of such a colossal magnitude as to be almost unbelievable.
Brett
Jackrabit1, I think the phrase "licking their chops" in relation to terrorist organizations insinuates Obama may be a "dove" as he urges immediate withdrawal of troops which may be interpreted as weakness, fear or quitting the mission. I don't think it is intended to imply Obama is a terrorist. There is an underlying fear that an Obama presidency would invigorate terrorist growth worldwide and make us more vulnerable on US soil.
ReplyDeleteDave Kranz noticing the distribution of women over 55 versus young voters may say a lot about SD in reducing the race arguments, etc regarding Sen. Clinton vs Sen. Obama.
ReplyDeleteNative American areas have a very young population compared to the rest of SD with more than its fair share of older women well aware that there is a glass ceiling here in SD and a bottomless basement for them.
The choice in the general election however is not between Obama and a woman symbolic of smashing the glass ceiling, it is between Obama and McCain whose second wife came with a chunk of money.
Obama bumper stickers? Well, the campaign has cleared out its offices from the primary campaign, but I suspect you can get hold of some Obama loot at the national campaign website.
ReplyDeleteNonnie -- if you agree that Obama is a committed Christian, then where's the issue? I could probably follow Mayor Hexom, Commission Bohl, Representative Olson, Senator Sutton, or any of our other elected officials to their churches and find plenty of examples of unChristian statements and behavior among the parishioners and even the clergy, but that guilt by association doesn't render those elected officials unworthy of office.
Brett, I thought about not engaging, but for now the policy will be to hold such unChristian lies to the light and put responses on the record so those who might sincerely seek answers can find them and arm themselves against such propaganda.
ReplyDeleteCory, I seriously doubt if you followed any of the people you mentioned to their churches that you would find the openly racist rhetoric that exists at Trinity. I agree that no person, including clergy, is perfect; but being imperfect is a far cry from what we heard occurs at Trinity.
ReplyDeleteI can cite two examples that show Obama is a true politician.
First, he chose not to wear a flag pin and explained his reasoning. Fine, that's his right. But when it became politically expedient for him to wear such pin, he donned it. And now he even updated it to a larger US/Israeli lapel pin.
Same with his church membership. It was politically expedient to join Trinity when moving up the political ladder early on. He claimed close friendship with and mentoring by Rev. Wright, at the same time claiming he never heard any of these ugly speechs (I refuse to call them sermons). But when it was finally clear that it was truly politically expedient to leave the church, he did so.
Gifted orator and Pied Piper he might be, but he is also really just another politician.
Nonnie
Doug said, "The choice in the general election however is not between Obama and a woman symbolic of smashing the glass ceiling, it is between Obama and McCain whose second wife came with a chunk of money."
ReplyDeleteWhat does the fact that McCain's wife has money have to do with the election at all??
Racist? I'm not convinced. To which texts do you refer? Could you offer some specific examples? The comments I've heard in the media from Reverend Wright come in the context of commentary on the history of white oppression of black Americans. The only racist thing about that is that some white folks don't like hearing it.
ReplyDeleteTrinity UCC does use some black pride rhetoric. "Unapologetically Christian and unashamedly black," they cite as a motto. That's no more racist than St. Peter's Lutheran Church down by Orland conducting its services in Norwegian until the 1950s to preserve cultural identity.
The most racist thing I'm hearing is all these people cloaking their racism in false accusations.
True politician? Well, Obama can't win either way. He puts on the flag pin, and he's still a bad guy in the eyes of the people who were saying he's a bad guy for not wearing the flag pin. He leaves Trinity, and the people criticizing him for being a member still rag on him.
Even if you're right, Nonnie, about Obama's political machinations, you still don't have a voting issue. If your contention is "I won't vote for a true politician for President," you'll have to abandon McCain, too, who used to rail against the fundigelicals, until he really needed them to win the Republican nomination. Then he went seeking their endorsements... until of course it becomes politically expedient to distance himself from some of their bigoted, anti-Semitic, theologically indefensible positions. True politician, indeed.
So, is my next headline "Nonnie for Nader"?
Nonnie for Nader - good one! Actually years ago I did like him just because he was different. Also liked Jesse Ventura at first because he was a true maverick, but we all know how that went! McCain was not my first pick. Actually I liked Romney and still do. But like you, we have to settle for who wins the nomination and trudge onward.
ReplyDeleteI daresay if McCain or any such candidate had attended a church which routinely had a credo as
"unapologetically Christian and unashamedly white," and railed against Blacks in its so-called sermons, that candidate would be finished in two seconds and run out of town, and rightly so. It's the same thing in reverse about Obama.
Nonnie
Two baddnesses don't a goodness make.
ReplyDeleteIs there a "badness" in declaring oneself to be unashamed of being Christian and unashamed of being black? I'm not one for wallowing in race -- we are all much more than our skin color -- but my point is that the rhetoric over which Nonnie frets exists in a historical context that differentiates it from hypothetical mirror rhetoric coming from whites.
ReplyDeleteLet's live in the present. People are truly more than their skin color, and it's time all races realize that. You can be whatever you want. It's your personal responsibility (those bad words again) to make of yourself what you will.
ReplyDeleteMy hubby's ancestors were killed and/or driven out of Scotland and brought to this country as slaves essentially (even tho they were white!) Lots of bad things happened to lots of peoples' ancestors. That's in the past. We now live in the present. Get over it!
I daresay the Blacks in this country are quite glad to be living here now and not back in Africa. That is not saying it was right to enslave them and ship them to America, so don't accuse me of saying that. All I'm saying is that now, in 2008, the descendents of the original slaves are in all likelihood much better off than they would be presently living in Africa with its genocide, droughts, poverty, sickness, etc etc. So live in the present. What was done in the past was horribly wrong, but it's done and can't be undone. Now is now, and most people judge others not on their color or race but on their decency or lack thereof, their work ethic, etc.
That is why it is so disconcerting to hear the rants of Trinity church pastors. It does nothing to foster better race relations, or good feelings about Obama for having attended that church for 20 years and not protested these actions or quit the church before politically expedient to do so.
Cory, your point is well taken, and thanks for not noticing that I misspelled "badness." But I can't help thinking that there is some "badness" in the rantings of certain pastors. It's more than expressing pride in being Black and showing a strong faith in Christ. It's a hangover from the 1960s.
ReplyDeleteOf course, as a White Male, that is easy for me to say.
I think that Barack Obama himself is beyond reverse racism, and in fact would like nothing better than to see racism of all "hue gradients" come to an end. And that's what matters. Obama is the candidate, not Rev. Wright or anybody else.
The enslavement of the Blacks is a scar on this country's history that will never go away. The same can be said for what was done to the Native Americans. But we (largely White Males) can only focus on past sins for so long, and to so much of an extent, before that attention becomes a wound itself.