That’s sort of what I think too. You can see a clip of his introduction here:
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/04/whats_with_the.html
That was unwise. McCain is a warmonger and the Obama campaign needs to pound that meme from now 'till E-Day.
Oof, that was hard to watch, he’s not a polished speaker.
Initially, I didn’t think it was about Obama at all. It seems like it was about, well, Tiger Woods.
Then at the end when he says “This is the real audacity of hope”, well, it makes you wonder.
If it really is a stealth comparison to Obama then I could think of worse ones he could be saddled with.
In fact it’s an idiotic comparison to draw if he’s trying to denigrate (ha!) Obama. Tiger Woods is hugely successful and popular precisely because he’s so immensely talented (in a mainly white – at the professional level – sport at that) and an appealing personality overall.
If all the Republican attacks on Obama are as boneheaded as this one, we have nothing to worry about in November.
Actually, he’s not a warmonger. When it suits him politically, he’s all for demanding our troops be brought home immediately, and that we not engage in peace-making or nation-building.
As to the subject of the OP, I think it was tinged with racism in a way that the speaker probably didn’t even realize in himself. He probably did think he was just trying to find someone with similar qualities to Barack Obama (and let’s be honest, those similarities exist), and used the first person to come to mind as an example for comparison. But it still comes off sounding like, “You can have your token black guy in an otherwise white playing field. . .” Not good.
One thing I can say for this election cycle and Barack’s candidacy is that it is highlighting the subtle racism that permeates our society on a daily basis, and that many of us don’t even see, while others suffer greatly under it.
I think this is probably it. I’ll add only that Tiger Woods, despite his obvious success, comes off (to some) as having a robotic, heavily managed stage-persona, and perhaps the speaker was imputing the same to Obama. Jim Rome’s running bit about Tiger (where the golfer answers every question asked with “The course looks good, my swing feels good, I like my chances”) is as good an illustration as any.
I’m confused. If the guy is pro-McCain, why is he comparing Obama to Tiger Woods? Tiger is a smart, accomplished, successful, has a smokin’ hot wife… you name it. That’s a tremendous compliment. But there had to be some racial overtone (or undertone) to the comment, else why pick Tiger Woods? There is no obvious reason to compare the two except because of their racial background. But even still, it’s a really stupid way to try and pump up McCain.
Perhaps he’ll tell us later that he “misspoke”.
Maybe Tiger Woods is seen by this Bellavia guy as a “movie star” golfer, as opposed to someone less well known (and less well liked). That is, one whose likeable personality has trancended the boundaries of a being known to a niche group of fans.
Tiger is great at what he does, and has worked long and hard to get where he is. But so have quite a few other golfers, and very few of them get to do car commercials and stuff. (We can probably count the number of golf pros who have become so iconic as to achieve name recognition with non-golfers on one hand.)
Obama also seems to have this potential (multi-party and/or multi-racial) appeal, moreso than Hillary or McCain, anyway.
I can’t read Bellavia’s mind, especially at long distance, but maybe that is what he was (clumsily) trying to say.
It could just be the physical resemblance. All them Halfricans look alike.
How many of those other golfers have won 13 Majors? That might have something to do with it. Tiger has lived up to every bit of hype he’s ever gotten.
If I heard someone say that, I would assume they’re picking Tiger because he’s a “hero”, as opposed to McCain, who is a HERO.
Of course, they could’ve picked any ol’ sports guy, but I’m inclined to think that, as talented as he is, they picked Tiger because (a) golf isn’t a “manly” game, and (b) he’s black (duh!).
You didn’t read close enough. I didnt say Tiger didn’t earn what he’s got.
So, I did a search on that phrase to see if there was more context. There is, but it doesn’t provide any more information. My search also led me to Hannity’s web cite, and a discussion group there. Everyone (and I assume they are staunch right-wingers) is saying: “huh?” They all think it was a stupid comment.
I have to think this guy thought he was being really clever and didn’t realize he was just being a dumb-ass.
He was trying to say what? That the other guy is likable, hard working, marvelously successful and popular, but we don’t want him because we have John McCain?
Who is a “true war hero”, I guess (as well as having the “virtue” of being more humble seeming, I assume), instead of merely a popular celebrity or star.
I having a hard time understanding the comment myself, but I’m trying to think of some way this might have been meant without jumping straight to the racism angle.
I have a hard time believing that anyone in national level politics is going to publicly let slip with anything racist these days. Unless they are reall really stoopid. Nothing will kill (national level, not local level) political careers (as well as some talk radio careers, al la Imus) faster than being caught a racist. Well, almost nothing. Maybe getting caught with child pornography would be faster.
Was this guy expressing some (sub)concious racisism? Maybe. But I am trying not to knee jerk and jump my way to a conclusion, even though it’s more fun to do so. 
I can’t see this as anything other than a foot-in-mouth, really stupid, and racially motivated remark. It’s not all that different from Bill Clinton’s remark about Jess Jackson winning in South Carolina, too. But at least Clinton used someone whom a lot of people don’t like. Tiger is extremely popular.
McCain must now denounce and reject this guy! 
See, this is what I can’t figure out: How does the McCain campaign let someone introduce him without going over the introductory remarks with a fine-toothed comb?
Did the McCain camp learn nothing from the Bill Cunningham affair in Cincy?
He definately needs to vet his crowd-warmer-uppers better. (Is their a job title for these crowd whippers?)
If Obama’s as good at politics as Woods is at golf, we’ll be in a good position. If it were Tiger Woods or Arnold Palmer, I’d put my money on Tiger.
That’s an interesting comparison, since Arnie is about the same age as McCain.