What it came down to was they don’t like Obama because he was born in Iran, or Iraq or Arabia, and he’s a Muslim and he refuses to wear a flag pin evrey day like every red blooded American should. And they know this because they heard it from their neighbor.
No, what it came down to is that the interviewers/writers cherry picked those kinds of answers. :rolleyes:
Every watch Jay Leno and Jaywalking? Do you really think the folks we see (out of the thousands of clibs taken) are representative? Or just funny?
A complete bullshit allegation, as evidenced first by the obvious personal offense the author of the rebuttal piece exhibits by basically affirming his belief in the same ugly rumors he claims to be so offended by, and second by every response in the comments section by current or former Findlay residents who affirm the attitudes in the WaPo story.
“The truth” in quotation marks? The obvious implication is that there is no “truth” to the fact that he was born in Hawaii, is a Christian family man and has a track record of public service. To imply any such thing is telling of the author’s ignorance and bias.
Calling those truths “a line that the Democratic party would like everyone to believe” is a stunning display of ignorance and, frankly, hate.
His “record” is more complex than where he was born, what faith he practices and his history of public service? What does his “record” have to do with any of that? OH YEAH, his “Muslim roots” and his mere claim that he’s a Christian, something he simply “declares” himself to be, certainly not something he, you know, practices.
You know, it seems to me you’d fit right in in Findlay. Why don’t you do us all a favor and fuck off there, huh?
But what does that say about the electorate? There’s a point to be made that patriotism (let alone right-thing-ism) is not determined by how prominently you display the American flag. And yet its spun as, “Left Sneers at Flag Wavers. Vote Against the Dems in Retaliation”.
Well are there enough to make it a recipe for the Dems to lose more elections, or aren’t there?
Well I see lots of similarities between black extremists and conservatives. But the crackpots the OP is talking about deign to represent “middle America” and are clearly a much larger voting bloc than the former.
It’s obvious that the author of the original story handpicked his subjects to get the responses he wanted. That doesn’t mean that no one in Findlay supports Obama, but that those particular people don’t and not for good reasons. But the way the story was written, the whole town is labeled by the words of some people in a particular neighborhood. It’s no wonder that residents were offended, and as for the ex-residents, some said that they understood the outrage while saying there was some truth to the stereotype.
I don’t follow the Findlay newspaper but it’s a good bet that it’s got a Republican slant by virtue of its location; NW Ohio outside of the cities is overwhelmingly Republican and most of the newspapers reflect that. So in terms of the statements you object to, I wouldn’t have expected anything else. (I’m not an optimist when it comes to local newspapers.)
I actually think this election will hinge less on “Obama is a MUSLIM!” or his connection with Rev. Wright and far more on age and class differences. And like it or not, an ‘elitist’ newspaper such as the Washington Post doing this sort of story on towns like Findlay will hurt Obama far more than it helps him. These people may not be clear on the facts but they know when they are being put down and condescended to, and they will vote in accordance with those feelings. If Obama wants to win, he needs to find a way to reach these voters, and the Washington Post isn’t helping him.
Yes, I know. Obama is so great that the only possible reason anyone would not like him is due to Ignorance and racism. :rolleyes:
All you have to prove my allegation is bullshit is have the writer publish every single one of the statements/interviews he gathered, instead of cherry-picking the ones that proved his point. His point seemingly being the same as yours= Obama is so great that the only possible reason anyone would not like him is due to Ignorance and racism. And oddly, in the original article, Saslow was only able to find one ignorant person to quote- pollard. He also has Peterson who is 77 years old and admits he’s “confused”.
Looks at these “ignorant/racist” comments by the other two people quoted *"Said Don LeMaster: “He’s a good speaker, but you’ve got to dig deeper than that for the truth. Politicians tell you anything. You have look beyond the surface, and then there are some real lies.”
Said Jeanette Collins, a 77-year-old who lives across the street: “All I know for sure about Obama is that we’re not ready for him.”
Then they have one pro-Obama person.
So, other than vague unsubstanciated un-cited rumours, the very Liberal Post was able to find one old confused dude, one ignorant dude; and now they paint the entire town as racist and ignorant.
And just who are you responding to/addressing in the rest of your post? I put no “truth” in quote marks, et.
Just more proof that you’re a fucking idiot with an agenda. Nowhere I did I say or imply that Obama “was so great that the only possible reason anyone would not like him is due to Ignorance and racism.” Nowhere, and yet here you go accusing me of it, not once, but twice.
And you’re either so stupid you can’t read for comprehension, or you didn’t even bother to read the rebuttal article I quoted, if you think I was referring to you putting “the truth” in quotes.
Oh, but you did use the rolleyes smiley, so that must mean you’re way more ntellectually superior.
You did, however, essentially accuse DrDeth of being an ignorant racist (“it seems to me you’d fit right in in Findlay”) which is a nasty thing to say, and did so despite the fact that he’s said nothing to deserve such an accusation.
If you’re going to go around making vicious accusations without basis in fact, get ready to suck it up yourself.
Oh bullshit. The WaPo article never uses the word race, let alone makes any allusions to it. And the only two instances of the word “racist” are quotes from residents that either Obama is a racist or that his pastor is. There’s not one single allegation of racism in that entire piece.
Ergo, there’s not even a hint of allegation of DrDeth fitting in there because he’s racist. He fits in there because he’s fucking idiot.
Try reading for comprehension yourself, whydon’tya?
In my humble opinion, that’s simply a lie. The Findlay story was very much about racism, and it was pretty obviously your intest to lump DrDeth in with racists. You can backtrack and say it’s not so, but you’re full of shit.
There’s no backtracking on something I never said or implied. YOU are not in any position to read my fucking mind, let alone call me a liar. The Findlay story was about rumors and gossip being taken more seriously than facts. PERIOD. Not one word or one HINT of racism was anywhere in that article. It was about MORONS, which DrDeth is one of, as far as I’m concerned, having dealt with his stupid ass for months now in the political threads.
I think it’s pretty clear that the people who don’t like Obama in such a visceral way are going to believe any negative thing they can about him. Obama never had a chance with him anyway. It’s like the people who think that the Skull and Bones society rules the country or any other such nonsense. There’s no amount of contrary evidence you can put out there that will change these people’s mind because they never gave said person a chance to begin with. Luckily these people don’t make up too big a part of the electorate (according to the polls) because Obama’s winning.
That’s true of a lot of voters, but bear in mind that in a close election, what most voters do isn’t the point; what matters is what happens on the margins. A few thousand votes here or there made all the difference in 2000 and 2004, after all, so why not in 2008?
There absolutely ARE some people who’re swung by rumours. I have a friend in the States who wanted to vote for Obama but felt he couldn’t because Obama had - I am quoting - “voted `present’ ninety-sevent percent of the time when he was a state senator.” That is an outright falsehood, but he’d heard it on a news program and it stuck. I thought it sounded fishy, proved it was wrong, and now he’s voting Obama again.
Not all voters are either smart Dopers or nutball religious crazies; there ARE voters, a lot of voters, on the fence, who are easily swayed by rumour and sound bites.
Agreed, and some of them don’t want facts to get in the way of their opinions, as I saw on a different message board. A lady posted some of the silly things being said about Obama, her arguments were dismantled quickly and easily, but her response was something along the lines of, “I don’t care; I just don’t trust that guy.” Well, that’s too bad, if you’re willing to make the decision about your vote by disregarding pertinent information.
I know. I kept saying that Obama’s win was not inevitable. How dare I!?! :eek: Anyone who thinks that *must *be a moron. :rolleyes:
Or look at the other two “morons” they interviewed there:
"*Said Don LeMaster: “He’s a good speaker, but you’ve got to dig deeper than that for the truth. Politicians tell you anything. You have look beyond the surface, and then there are some real lies.”
Said Jeanette Collins, a 77-year-old who lives across the street: “All I know for sure about Obama is that we’re not ready for him.”
*
Yeah, anyone who sez "“He’s a good speaker, but you’ve got to dig deeper than that for the truth.” is a simple hayseed moron. Yeppers. :rolleyes:
Perhaps, or perhaps not. Both of your quoted statements are ambiguous enough to be essentially meaningless; were I the reporter, I’d have followed up by asking “in what ways do you think Obama hasn’t been truthful?” and “why do you say we aren’t ready for him?” The answers to which would reveal the speaker’s hayseed ignorance or canny political acumen, one would hope.
Yes, but in a burg of some 40K “folks” the interveiwer found 1, count 'em, ONE, moron- and altho others claim theycan’t see it, I read more than a touch of racism in that moron. But- one in 40,000? :dubious: :eek: Find me a town anywhere, and if you can’t find at least one quasi-racist moron in forty thousand dudes, I’ll be shocked. Hell, I’d guess several hundred at least. But on the basis of that one moron- hardly a statisical group- the author and many others here arre happy to say that FINDLAY, Ohio, and by extension a lot of the Midwest- is plumb crammed full of morons. Shayna claims “…in that article. It was about MORONS…” and I dispute the plural. One moron, one confused old man, a couple “folks” who seem to have a little savvy, and a bunch of unsubstanciated un-sourced rumours. Gosh darn it, Martha, them hicks is purty stupid I reckon. :rolleyes:
I bet we can find at least one moron like that in a 40K population group starting at Shayna’s home. We could likely find quite a few, some probably not all that far.
Oh wait, the interviewer cherry picked all those people to sound stupid, just like they do in the “man in the street” interviews on Leno. That article was just ripe with rampant racism!
No, wait! There was only one stupid person quoted in that article. ONE.
Who the hell can tell what he’s trying to argue. Either the writer intentionally chose his targets to make the whole town appear like idiots based on a handful of racists, or there was only one moron and all the others were Rhodes Scholars with brilliant political insight.
This is precisely why he’s such an idiotic fuckstick to try to “debate” with. I should learn.
Well good thing it’s not about me directly, as I firmly and utterly don’t believe that supporting McCain = being racist. And not only that, not one single person quoted in that article said anything about their reservations regarding Barack Obama being about his race. And while it’s obviously true that some people indeed won’t vote for him because he’s black, that hardly translates to ‘everyone who won’t vote for him is a racist.’
Take my beloved step-mother, for instance. She’s an otherwise very smart woman. Holds a masters degree in family therapy. She has no problem with the color of his skin. No, she’s terrified of Barack Obama because she, too, has fallen prey to the whisper campaign about his alleged “connections” to radicals and anti-Semites. This is the kind of shit she passes around in emails.
Oooo, Obama’s quoted as saying something unsubstantiated by an unknown source! Some people think he’s not willing to say what he really, really thinks. And a bunch of anti-Israel people used to live in his district in Illinois. OH MY!! :eek:
She, like the idiots quoted in the Flag City article, don’t seem to be capable of using their brains to decipher the shit they’re being spoon-fed. They’d rather believe the super secret, skeeeeery innuendo than do the right thing and look at his actual voting record (forget listening to his speeches, look at what the man has actually done). I mean, look at that picture in that linked article. Could we get any scarier President than that?!
If you’re leaning towards McCain because you agree with his policy stances, or you think his particular experience makes him more qualified, or simply because you don’t like Obama’s policy stances at all (or any combination of the above), I might disagree with you on the facts, but that wouldn’t make you a racist.
And just because some people are too stupid to be allowed to vote, doesn’t necessarily make them racists, either.
