See if you can comment on what he says instead of who he is.
"White America is maturing," Jackson said. "To see Barack win in Idaho and the Northwest states, we see white America overcoming what I call color and gender shock."
Jackson continued: "Blacks often vote for whites. But seldom do whites vote for blacks across the line. But they're doing so now and that is a good sign. They're moving from racial battlegrounds to economic common ground and on to moral higher ground."
(though he don't always make it easy, I know...)
"I have an appreciation for and communicate with both candidates," Jackson said. "There needs to be someone to steer both camps into a safety zone."
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
I think his statements are misleading and manipulative.
I think the issues are much more complex.
There are nuances here that the public has not been made privy to. I don't think Obama's success is an accident. He's got powerful players behind him. They are corporate. Perhaps the kennedys have been there all along. They are most definitely white which would make it easy for white people who are affluent to counsel everyday white people to vote for him. I'm not ruling out the possibility that his supporters are both republican and democrat...
What is known for sure is that they are trying to consolidate a particular kind of voter support across race lines.
But they aren't being transparent about the nature of their agendas. "Unification" isn't their end game. They have something else in mind. Dominoes are falling all nicely in a line. But we won't understand why until it's way too late.
What is known for sure is
How would you describe that particular kind?
"What is known for sure is
"What is known for sure is that they are trying to consolidate a particular kind of voter support across race lines."
This statement speaks to what I was trying to discuss when I described Obama as a glorified Oscar De Priest in an earlier post a couple of weeks ago. The fact that powerful white political elders are supporting him seems to me an indication that they feel they can manipulate strings better with a black president than with a restored Clinton presidency.
"I have an appreciation for
"I have an appreciation for and communicate with both candidates," Jackson said. "There needs to be someone to steer both camps into a safety zone."
No, Rev. Jesse never, ever makes it easy. The notion of him playing any sort of broker role worries me. He is not a democrat with a small "d".
I am not worried about any white political elders pulling strings. Events are outstripping them as well. Everybody is winging it at this point.
These thoughts are
These thoughts are interesting but I think they are more of your mindset than what is really happening.
Hillary Clinton has negatives around 50%. The party KNOWS that if she wins, Repubs come out. I take the fact that support rose up after the race baiting by Billary as an admission that the party knows if Blacks don't show up, they lose.
Anyway...
Obama is winning the caucus races more so than the primaries.
I'm with DarkStar. There are some Democrats
Who loathe the Clintons. Whose nightmare is Billary. Who remembers losing the CONGRESS a mere 2 years into Bill Clinton's Presidency. Why take that risk again with Billary. When you can have the Presidency and the Congress. Make no mistake, if its Billary, the Rethugs won't stop running against her if she makes it to the White House. She'll be their rallying point for taking back the Congress too. It'll be HELL for them. So, here comes this young guy who seems to:
1. Be able to bring in young voters (PRESENT voters)
2. Who is able to get MORE Blacks to register and turnout (PRESENT voters)
3. Who understands that Hispanic Illegal Immigration Amnesty mess (FUTURE voters)
4. Who doesn't scare away White men (NEEDED voters)
And, who isn't Billary.
What's not to like and want to have? Are their powerful players backing Obama - no doubt.
The Kennedys came out for Obama because they are loyal to the PARTY, and they saw what Billary was doing to the PARTY had horrific implications for November and beyond. It had to be stopped dead in its tracks.
The point of the Kennedy endorsement was NOT to ' win' Massachusetts for Obama. The purpose of their endorsement was to STOP the GHETTOIZATION of Barack Obama into THE BLACK CANDIDATE. They had to stop Billary from doing that, in order to give him traction for Super Tuesday, because they believed, that if Obama won certain states, especially a cluster of nearly all-White states, that he could no longer be Ghettoized as ' THE BLACK CANDIDATE', but he could go back to what he's been running on : The Candidate for President Who Happens To Be Black. The MSM would rather run with the 'HIllary beats the Kennedys in Massachusetts' meme, than to admit the deeper purpose of their endorsement, because, let's get real, they didn't even want to admit to the race-baiting by Billary.
Excellent and astute
Excellent and astute analysis, rikyrah. You hit upon some points I had been thinking.
Slightly
Slightly off-thread.
Tomorrow morning I am going to go see a presidential candidate speak for the first time since I was a teenager. The good thing is that it is Obama. The other good thing is that I only have to walk a block and a half from my house.
Who was the first might I
Who was the first might I ask?
I Forgot 2 Mention
I think Jesse Jackson, Sr. is trying to seem gracious in his support of Obama. Jackson knows his time is up and he's trying to be more statesman-like in his exit.
Thanks ubstu34
I want people to be alert and aware, because they keep on trying to marginalize Obama - Clinton and her MSM supporters.
The Memo from South Carolina was that he couldn't get WHITE votes, even though he had won 90%+ White Iowa and come within 2 points in 90%+ White New Hampshire, and had WON RURAL Nevada (that's how he got more delegates from Nevada than her)
Winning 43% of the White vote in the DEEP SOUTH, winning the majority of Whites in California, and New Mexico, plus winning the damn near all-White states of Idaho, Alaska, North Dakota and Utah, put that to rest.
That he is BEATING Hillary Clinton Among White MEN should be a HUGE reporting point from the MSM, and quite frankly, the only commentator who believes this is a serious accomplishment by Obama is David Gergen at CNN, because he's brought it up several times.
NOW, the memo is that Obama can't win Hispanics. They keep on cleaving to Hispanics in California and NJ. Well, NJ was HIllary's back yard, and in CA, he got 10% more than what he got in Nevada. What they fail to report is that he got 40% of Hispanics in Colorado and New Mexico, and 37% in Arizona.
What bothers me is the obvious complicitness of the MSM, not only in the reporting, but the having on of Hacks for Hillary pretending to be objective.
DarkStar, I think I've told you my conspiracy theory
about Jesse Sr.'s support of Obama - he wants Jesse Jr. to be in the running for Obama's Senate Seat if Obama wins.
PS- ptcruiser, I hope you enjoy yourself. I think you will. Watch the reaction of others; I've always found that to be enjoyable during an Obama speech.
John F. Kennedy.
John F. Kennedy.
I saw a piece by Adam
I saw a piece by Adam Nagourney in either Wednesday's or Thursday's New York Times in which he wrote that Obama had not won the votes of white men. My mind immediately focused on Georgia where he had received more than 40 percent of the white male vote. I wondered how Nagourney's claim made it pass the copy editors at the post. A simple fact check would have disproved his assertion.
BTW, we need to begin taking
BTW, we need to begin taking the long view here. I would like to see Obama get the nomination but if he doesn't then I'm not sure that the world will come to an end if Billary and their crowd don't win in November. I think it would be good for progressive folks, the Democratic Party and America if they lost.
I would like to see Obama
I would like to see Obama take the nomination too. But I am doubtful. However, if he doesn't win the nomination, I believe he should run as a third-party candidate on the Si Se Puede ticket. He has the organization, the fund-raising ability, and most important, he has the momentum now. An opportunity like this may only come once in a politican's life. As a registered independent, I don't give a shit about the democratic party. If they lack the sense to realize the opportunity Obama's candidacy presents in expanding the party's base and power, that's their fucking loss.
the Si Se Puede
What's that? I'd Google it but I can't access Google for some reason today.
" I think it would be good
" I think it would be good for progressive folks, the Democratic Party and America if they lost."
I agree completely. I will not vote for Billary if they receive the nomination.
But at the same time I realize that there is a greater risk of this country descending into a police state if John "100 years in Iraq" McCain wins the general election.
This is why you still need a
This is why you still need a big Democratic turnout. You just leave Billary out.
It's also why you don't want to turn out the CBC right away. You want the legitimate reaction to Billary to be the warning shot across their bow.
P6, I just made up the Si Se
P6, I just made up the Si Se Puede (Yes We Can) Party. It's taken from Obama's campaign slogan.
Warning shots across the bow of the CDC are a waste of time. Voting those entrenched desperate houseniggas out of office is the only message I would send.
I cribbed this data from
I cribbed this data from Politicial Wire:
A new Time magazine poll compares potential general election match ups:
According to the poll director, the difference is that "independents tilt toward McCain when he is matched up against Clinton But they tilt toward Obama when he is matched up against the Illinois Senator."
Interestingly, Democratic voters favor Clinton over Obama for the Democratic nomination by a margin of 48% to 42%.
This data underscores the point I made above that Obama should run the risk of leaving the Democratic party if he fails to get their nomination. He can win the general election by taking his supporters with him and drawing from independents like me, and Republicans. The core Democrats seem to prefer Clinton. They'd rather lose with her than win without her.
Warning shots across the bow
If Republicans take both the presidency and the House, you will be among the first I bitch at.
Bitch at the spineless
Bitch at the spineless elected officials that pander to Bush and his cronies. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and most the the so-called democratic establishment are enablers in this mess. Most of them voted for the Patriot Act. Most of them voted for the war. Most of them (in the Senate) voted for Bush's judicial appointments. None of them have brought forth articles of impeachment. That's why I'm an independent. The democrats and republicans, for the most part, are members of the same ruling party: the Corporate Party. A pox on both their houses. If the American people don't have the spine to throw these corporate whores out, then they deserve to be governed by crooks, cronies, and war criminals.
Checking back in...
************************
Hi,
Sorry about that. I made my initial comment and didn't follow up. House and family management called...
What I mean by that is...
The politricksters want malleable voters who respond favourably to emotional button pushing, who don't ask questions, who just want easy answers and who just want to be led by someone who looks like them...man or woman...black or white...who tells them what they want to hear - that everything will be okay...
That's what I meant to say. Oh, but I live in kkkanada and I'm a barbadian by birth. So, I don't vote in your elections. I don't think I'm allowed to vote in anyone's elections at this point. :) I just thought I'd take my brain out for some exercise.
Then everything is
Then everything is hopeless?
You know what I don't understand? Why do people who don't believe in voting try to convince others not to as well?