Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
An example of one of those well-informed, educated WEST VIRGINIA voters.
Hillary and her supporters must be so proud. Ignorance and racism is your base! Excellent!
Good Morning America, on the scene in West Virginia, introduced their viewers to Janis. She's not a particularly enthusiastic Hillary Clinton supporter, but for her, Hillary has got one thing on Barack Obama: she's not a Muslim. Of course, neither is Obama.
[WATCH.]
var config = new Array();
config["videoId"] = 1543318529; //the default video loaded into the player
config["videoRef"] = null; //the default video loaded into the player by ref id specified in console
config["lineupId"] = null; //the default lineup loaded into the player
config["playerTag"] = null; //player tag used for identifying this page in brightcove reporting
config["autoStart"] = false; //tells the player to start playing video on load
config["preloadBackColor"] = "#FFFFFF"; //background color while loading the player
config["wmode"] = "transparent"; //Share popup windows should overlay player
config["width"] = 486;
config["height"] = 412;
/* do not edit these config items */
config["playerId"] = 1443726242;
createExperience(config, 8);
KATE SNOW: Janis said she can't support Obama.
JANIS: He's Muslim and that has a lot to do with it. I just, you know, I just would rather have Hillary.
SNOW: Just for the record he constantly says he's a Christian -
JANIS: I know he does.
SNOW: You don't believe him?
JANIS: No.
Now, it's hardly newsworthy to learn that stupid people exist and they do, in fact, vote. I mean, we have this whole thing called "the Bush Administration" that more or less proves that. But it's a little astounding to hear Kate Snow, who, as a reporter, is ostensibly charged with informing the public, offer up the mealy mouthed, "Just for the record, he constantly says he's a Christian..." As Snow well knows, there's a reason that Obama constantly says he's a Christian: it is because he is a Christian. The correct response would have been, "I'm sorry, but you are mistaken." Or, failing that, at least show us a voter capable of making a passionate and authoritative case for Clinton.
Comments (31)
If you paint all Hillary supporters in W. Virginia as racists, you are engaging in racial prejudice. It is so much easier for some Obama supporters to say W. Virginia is racist by nature than to examine the impact on them of Obama's comments and his connection to his pastor who has made racist comments. Obama has raised questions in a lot of people's minds.
And don't try to make it all about race. Are 90% of blacks supporting Obama because they are racists? Could they possibly think of him as the better candidate? Could they find him inspiring? Could they like his health care plan, for example?
I know it's annoying for some that Hillary is still in the race, and that she is likely to have two landslides today. But allow for the possibility that people genuinely support her for good reasons. If you can't stop the racial guilt-slinging now during the primaries, you will probably also be doing it in the Fall. It doesn't make your candidate look any more attractive.
May 13, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the other landslide she'll have today?
May 13, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is only one primary today, Kentucky holds its primary on the 20th along with Oregon. Unless you predict an actual landslide will fall on Hillary, which I suppose is possible in the mountains.
May 13, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, I'm absolutely ready to accept the notion that Hillary's supporters are supporting her for good reasons. She has a lot of positive qualities. I just find it impossible to ignore the good reasons not to vote for her.
May 13, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Saying people from an area are racist isn't a racial prejudice. It's not racial anything.
Even given all the assertions you made, it's regional prejudice.
May 14, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
to adapt the phrase regarding Muslims:
Not all Hillary supporters are white racists, but virtually all (democrat) white racists are Hillary supporters.
May 14, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, both of them.
That is the most pathetic post today.
May 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are burying your head in the sand if you really think that is the case.
May 14, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Look, West Virginia is a lost cause. They aren't going to vote for a black man. The reason this woman said she couldn't vote for a Muslim even though she knows he's not a Muslim is because she was on television. Among her friends, she tells the truth: she ain't votin' for no black man.
May 13, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes: and that's why it will be President McCain. Too many voters would rather vote Republican than black. "Not gonna put no colored boy in the White House. Yes, I know there are good colored people too; doesn't mean they should be President."
(I don't support Clinton, Obama OR McCain. I support stockpiling canned goods.)
May 13, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry. We'll win in lots of places where race is a less salient issue for voters. The mountain west and upper midwest states show strong support for Obama.
May 14, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
To say that everyone in WV who votes for HRC is a racist based on one person, is saying like everyone who supports Senator Obama is a nitwit based on these posts here. I dont think either statement is true but there is tons of anecdotal evidence for the latter right here.
May 14, 2008 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well let's see: the exit polls show it, the people on this forum who have been there say it, and every piece of media coming from the state shows them confirming it.
I'd like to quote Marx: "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot."
May 14, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, if you can read, you will see that 16% of HRC voters wouldnt vote for Obama. Now that is a real mandate on racism isnt it.
You see the problem with you "look down your nose analysis" is that when you insinuate that anyone who votes for HRC is a racist, you alienate the 16.5 million people who have voted for her (including me). And your attitude and the attitude of most of the commenters here is what is going to destroy Senator Obamas campaign for President. It is people like you who make him look like an elitist. And the people you so gladly smear, people who have a vote, just like you, who have served in the military, who are good Americans, dont like being labeled like that.
May 14, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If if this woman is typical of who is voting for Hillary - they can have her. She must be desperate to be seeking this kind of voter.
May 13, 2008 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if you are typical of the Obama supporters, he can have you. Just think about that statement you just made. I mean really...
May 14, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I spend some time visiting family in WV every once in a while, and my father, who lives there (but is from Canada), quite often makes the observation that his fellow WVians are a stupid lot. I hate to sound "elitist", but every trip to WV confirms my suspicion, from the obama-muslim nuts that run my brother's scout troop, to some of the nuts in my stepfamily, to the woeful educational system, etc.
Thank goodness I was raised in Lexington, KY, by my more freethinking mother. We're not so stupid here as mired in a disappointing (to me) good ol' boy state party system that benefits establishment candidates (like clinton). Though there are large pockets of people who fear black folks.
May 13, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, WV may have more than its share of dim bulbs, but then, a huge percentage of Obama-bots think he is a progressive ... can you get any dimmer than that? I mean, it's not like they've actually read any of his position papers, to educate themselves on his policy plans.
Like it or lump it, voting is a right, not a privilege. Groups of citizens are likely to remain ignorant of external policy matters to the extent that no one informs them. Obama-bots don't study Obama's actual positions, they listen to his speeches and do the bobblyhead thing. They like what they hear -- "isn't that good enough?" Surprise: a lot of other voters do the same thing. They just happen to be listening and bobbing to a different speaker.
Thanks.
mp
May 14, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
We don't believe he is a true progressive.
There are two reasons why I support him.
1) He's a pragmatist, not necessarily a progressive. Looking at his stance on the utterly bullshit gas-tax holiday and universal mandate-based health care policies proved that to me.
2) He doesn't represent a politics that derives its funding from the top 1% of the income bracket.
May 14, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know why you guys keep insisting there was racism in WV, I mean just because their Senator was a former head of the KKK...that's not racism... that's reaching out to the bigot vote!
May 14, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ummmmmmm not racism? Why did 85% of WV voters who said race was an issue vote for Clinton?
I saw a fantastic editorial saying that African Americans voting for Barack Obama in record numbers is not the same thing as racist white voters NOT voting for Obama. African Americans have had hundreds of opportunities to vote for white candidates, and they have. The white people who are stumbling over themselves to find reasons NOT to vote for Obama are racists.
In state after state after state we hear it.
He's a muslim.
I won't vote for that "n*gger"
If you vote for barack HUSSEIN obama, you're a n*gger lover"
And my perszonal favorite I heard in Indiana.
Did you hear they had to call animal control to the White House? Yeah. A coon was trying to get in.
These are not isolated instances. We hear and see them time after time after time.
I am not saying that all of Clinton's supporters are racist. But i will go to my grave with the knowledge that they make up a significant part of her base. AND SHE KNOWS IT. hat's why she pulls out that "white working class" bullshit. Ity is evel, backhanded, and disgusting.
If you don't think that 10 to 15% of the WV vote (at a minimum) were racist votes, then we cannot have a serious discussion, Otto. It's a fact. It's a reality. It's the truth.
But we will never allow racists and racism to determine our nominee. I would rather go down in flames than allow these people to bring down the first legitimate, competant African American candidate.
Do not reward the ignorance.
If you can not see the racist element of Clinton's voting base, then you;re not caring to look very closely.
And I don't believe that sexism has had the same affect. Sexists and racists tend to be the same people. And frankly, my sexist and racist grandfather would vote for a woman LOOOOOOONG before he would vote for a black man. I supect that's the reality around the country.
But we don't need that vote to win in november, Obama is redesigning the electoral map.
So it is time, Otto..to get on board. Will you embrace the progressive agenda and your liberal ideals that will be protected in an Obama presidency. Or will you sit by idly and let mcCain ruin our supreme court?
Moment of truth.
May 14, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not going to caution against insulting an entire state or go too deep into Obama's minimal effort because I've already done it once or twice, if I were to keep it up, it looks like
I could do it all day.
Still, toward your larger point: A reporter can't correct someone, then they wouldn't be reporting and if we were to somehow allow them to become arbiters of truth, whose truth would it be?
May 14, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
May 14, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Been lurking here for months, but had to create a profile to respond to your post.
A journalist's responsibility, first and foremost, is to inform the people. The point of the profession is to provide responsible, factual information so that people can exercise their civic rights and duties effectively. Problems arise when journalists choose to elide opinion with fact, and to repeat this kind of demonstrable falsehood on the grounds that it's somebody's opinion, and that every opinion is as valid as the next. This sort of thing, as Snow shows, just leads to repeating nonsense Republican talking points ad absurdum and bringing the level of political discourse down to the completely useless, if not the downright dangerous.
There's a good debate going on about this over at The Economist's Democracy in America blog - the link is http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/05/obama_is_not_a_muslim.cfm. One good bit from them: 'Journalistic objectivity should not extend to passivity in the face of pernicious lies like this: it promotes the sort of spineless inanity that demands "intelligent design" be placed on equal footing with evolution, or the babbling idiocy of cable-news shows featuring two sides screaming at each other. A journalist's responsibility should be to the truth, and to accuracy, not to fastidiously trimming the hedges of his objectivity.'
Sorry for getting a bit exercised first time out - next time, less cranky more snarky :)
May 14, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
A reporter could report what experts or those with a learned opinion would say, which is what it appears Ms. Snow did, but because she has no firsthand knowledge or no expertise in the subject, she can't really say what is "truth". Of course, any way you look at it, a lot of "truths" are nothing more than opinion, anyway.
Myself and a couple of others went round and round before, but a religious belief is something that only the believer can know. A person can exhibit outside criteria which corresponds to that belief, but only they know what they think and what they believe.
Yes, Obama attends a christian church and he purportedly agrees with it's doctrine, but only he knows what goes on inside his own head. If I could offer some remotely similar examples: Jimmy Swaggert preached against "sin", but he'd privately masturbate while watching a hooker undress; By all outward appearances, Larry Craig and that preacher from Colorado Springs were as against homosexuality as a person could be, but we've all heard what they'd do anonymously; Heck, I look like a fine upstanding citizen and I'm an active member of my community, but I'm pretty much an expert on where to find porn and if I may say so, I have a pretty sordid past.
Only an individual knows what happens in their head. Obama can be called a practicing christian because he goes to church, but that doesn't make him more of a believer than Fred Thompson, simply because Mr. Thompson only attends services, once every couple of years.
May 14, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
But surely, in this case, it's not about what's going on inside someone's head so much as what can empirically be proven - it doesn't really matter what his personal beliefs are. Whatever Obama believes or doesn't believe, he's attended a Christian church for twenty years, and this, combined with the fact that he says he's a Christian, makes him a Christian - or 'practising Christian', if you prefer. These things are on record; they're not opinions, they're provable facts.
So, there's evidence, not opinion, supporting the premise that he is a Christian, not a Muslim. Therefore, it was up to Snow to contradict the faulty assumption that he's a Muslim - not by saying, 'Well, he says he's not a Muslim', but by saying, 'Well, he's a practising Christian'. It's sad that it should matter whether he's seen worshipping God, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but since it does, it's up to the journalist to accurately state the facts. Anything short of that is doing us all a disservice.
May 14, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really don't want journalists correcting anybody. I'd accept them giving a subject additional "facts" in the form of a question, but a fair journalist shouldn't be testifying about anything.
Prior to the invasion of Iraq, US intelligence for decades had said that Saddam had been working on acquiring WMD and the administration "knew" that his efforts were continuing. If a reporter were to show-up at an anti-war rally for the evening news, they could frame their questions around "the administration" or "intelligence community believes", they might even cite an earlier incident when weapons were destroyed, but they're not allowed to say that "it's a fact that Iraq is trying to build vast stockpiles". Because they had been pursuing that goal before, it'd be technically true but the reporter doesn't know what's happening firsthand.
May 14, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, if I might reference another example that may be more to the point and back to the election: It's a fact that most economists believe that a temporary reduction in the gas tax would be bad policy. This has been widely reported as the majority opinion and a reporter could a question in those words, but they couldn't really report "less gas tax == bad" because they don't actually know it for themselves, let alone, the verdict is really just the economist's opinion.
May 14, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Now, it's hardly newsworthy to learn that stupid people exist and they do, in fact, vote."
So then what is the macro and salient point of this post? That West Virginia is full of stupid people who vote?
May 14, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dave...And I don't believe that sexism has had the same affect.
So you didn't buy one of the 'Bros before Hos' t-shirts that are selling so well on the innernets?
May 14, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course.... i suspect for the white, red neck racist white trash vote of rural WV would n ot consider a black man one of their "bros".
May 15, 2008 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment