"Let's stipulate that Barack Obama's comments about class resentments in America were impolitic.[...]
If we have become so politically correct that Barack Obama cannot discuss the nature of class resentment without rival campaigns grandstanding, then we are entering a politics of demagoguery that will lead to neither wisdom or light."

Unbelievable. No double standard here.

Louisville-You are right that the incidence of drug taking in my home town of LA is epidemic, but there are a lot of resentful and depressed kids out here in the rat race whose "expectations have outstripped real outcomes". I was just remarking that our research says that lower income self medication is climbing.

My point about the gay marriage debate is simply that in poor communities, the evidence of families falling apart is everywhere, and so it doesn't take any convincing when some eloquent demagogue says the American family is under attack. The fact that he chooses to blame "the other" (gays, immigrants, liberals)is immaterial.

You are right that Barack's choice of words was stupid. He knows that. But that doesn't change the fact that there was truth in his words, however inartful.

The USA has gone backwards so quickly in the in the last 7 years that the country is in a state of shock. This is obvious from the inability of people to think clearly and focus on the main problem of getting rid of the GOP. Forget this trivia, put everything into the main game, otherwise it won't happen.

My take on Obama's ad lib is that it was completely pointless and even mean-spirited. Sure, appeal to the working class folk in America is a bread and butter staple of not just Democrats but Republicans as well. The Republican subtext usually is "you might not be part of the "elite", but you are part of the virtuous life: the life of Church and Hunting. Democrats on the other hand usually tell them that the reason why they have limited expectations is because the greedy Republicans are hoarding it for themselves and that if they elect a Democrat into office, they will get a fair share of the good life too.

Obama seems to be telling these poor people that yeah you are screwed and guess what, that's why you cling to your stupid Religion and Guns. Further, he does not even offer them hope or a way out. He rubs it in.

Maybe there is no hope, I don't know, but if there isn't don't rub their noses into it. Not very smart and Hillary has every right to pounce on him for that.

Obama was not offering any "dialogue". He was not offering any hope. His point was pointless and mean-spirited.

"And for 25, 30 years Democrats and Republicans have come before them and said we're going to make your community better. We're going to make it right and nothing ever happens. And of course they're bitter. Of course they're frustrated. You would be too. In fact many of you are. Because the same thing has happened here in Indiana. The same thing happened across the border in Decatur. The same thing has happened all across the country. Nobody is looking out for you. Nobody is thinking about you. And so people end up- they don't vote on economic issues because they don't expect anybody's going to help them. So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. But they don't believe they can count on Washington"
It's important to stay focus on what Obama really mean. Evrything here it's right!

Inflation adjusted median income is down from 10 years ago. As night follows day that must mean that the cohort below the median are less happy than that same cohort would have been ten years ago. Not only because they are living slightly less well but because they aren't achieving the improved standard of living which they've been conditioned to assume. Not least because they are aware that until now that was the case. And some of them will be bitter. More than in the past. .

It's not elitist to recognize facts. It's elitist to assume that working class americans don't also recognize facts.

Until I see some contradictory data I'll assume that working class voters know he's right and wonder what HRC and McCain are going on about.

That doesn't mean I criticize HRC for trying to make an issue of it.Nor that I think she would be
an inferior candidate or president (I'd prefer Obama but I think she has a better chance of winning).

It's just that I think that he called a spade a spade.

And as usual I think the exchange of insults above
is beneath the standard that should apply here.

Is This Not A "Gaffe"?

Actually, the people being discussed by the political elite in both camps -- I being one of those in the Obama camp -- probably do not follow this third normal form meta-politics very closely, certainly not from the Pasadena Gun Show, where I hang out -- being a politically connected formerly young, over-educated, urban professional, heir but not "trust-fund babie", and actual "preppie" but, also, loyal Democrat, son of the Confederacy, and ... crack shot.

The interesting point is that while the alienated living-off-Social-Security-and-military-or-police-pensions sellers at the gun show are -- sagely in my opinion -- disgusted with both parties, the buyers are of mixed race and very open to Obama.

I think that the same could be said of floor-pass holders at computer, home, auto, and livestock shows.

My problem is that the washed-up "politicos" -- wannabe lobbyists and under-employed lawyers mostly -- who run the Democratic Party as a smug and complacent patronage-chain. They would rather lose in November than lose control of the party. They are in full agreement with the GOP: They would rather politics were an auction. Only, gee, Obama is trashing them with his retail fund-raising.

Way to go Barack! Keep it up!

::JRBehrman

Obama didn't "discuss the nature of class resentment". He judged the people living in "poorer regions". He revealed his attitude about those people. He will be perceived by them as attacking their values. Further, his attitudes on religious faith extend beyond "poorer regions". This is exactly the kind of thing that can cost the Democratic party the presidency. It's not an issue of political correctness. It's an issue of bad politics.

As I understand it, the real reason the divorce rate is much lower in MA than in MS [9:49 AM above] is that MA has a significantly larger proportion of college graduates than does MS: college graduates tend to marry later, when they have their heads together better, and consequently the marriages hold up batter.

As an American elitist, I can report that we indeed tend to believe that badly-off people sometimes do scapegoating for their problems. I suspect that the moral responsibility here involves some culpability on both sides -- I'm not at all sure it's empirically true that there's more "values voting" when times are bad economically. It seems to me that Obama's comments contain some mix of acute sensitivity to the economic plight of the people he was referring to, combined with an outright listing of some "wedge issues". I don't see any real problem with his ascription of bitterness to people in such situations. The tricky part came with the fact that certain of the items on the list (e.g., anti-immigrant or anti-gay sentiment) are ones where we, the elitists, really do believe that we know better, morally speaking. Politically speaking, this put Obama, who prefers to tell the truth -- and is good at telling the truth with effective spin -- something I believe in, both for raising children and in general -- in the position where telling the truth about how he really felt really wasn't workable. The hard part, or part of it, is that people's reactions are hard to parse into scapegoating and intrinsic parts, in addition to the fact that not everybody in these situations holds these positions anyway, not to mention the fact that parts of the list, especially religion, are matters where we ought to be quite respectful.

I consider the list a can of worms. And I think that nobody, no matter how gifted a natural politician, is likely to get through a campaign without blundering into such a can of worms at some point.

Madison believed that we should have separation of church and state throughout the land, federal and local. There was a fascinating moment during the congressional debate over what became the First Amendment. How could the beloved First Amendment be harmful to religion? Huntington feared that it would overturn or interfere with Connecticut’s approach, which was to have state-supported religion.
Chat | Chat

Are you good until this issue thanks admin.
Chat | chat

This information is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of microsoft hyper v server, free iscsi target for windows