The Atlantic - Latest Comments in The great debate again

Re: The great debate again

tomtom — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:58:45 -0000

George Will is no idiot, but in this case he is stupid.

Among white people the only people who get seriously annoyed about Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson are conservatives, and they are not voting for Obama.

Will is projecting his inner drama on white people at large.

Ta-Nehisi is right. No one knows the electoral effect of Obama's race, but Obama himself is right when he points out that being a black man with a funny name is not exactly the well-worn path to the White House.

Re: The great debate again

cd — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:30:20 -0000

So True. Like yesterday on Meet the Press all the heads were saying ish like "The powel endorsement will help in Florida with its large retired military population." Really? Any evidence of that? Or are you just making things up? That could happen, sure. Or people could really not care at all. That could happen too. Or maybe the heads will keep talkin about how it will make a difference with voters, when it really wouldn't, but then a narrative is created in which it actually might. No one really knows at all (although it would be nice if it helps).

Re: The great debate again

john — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:36:12 -0000

Something else for me about this: what if he's a little bit right? I have searched my very soul about this and so what if it does make an old white guy like me feel good to vote for an AA who is like much smarter, much more thoughtful and self-critical, a MUCH better competitor (in terms of campaign strategy) than the white guy? If Obama brings tears to my eyes, maybe it's more because I've sat in too many bars, too many basements and livingrooms, listening to too many white people say "n*****" without doing a damn thing about it instead of because I'm just so down with all the black folks.

Re: The great debate again

DB Cooper — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:49:26 -0000

And why do we let people like George Will get away with implying that it's unforgivable to vote for someone because they're black but highly desirable to vote for someone because they shoot large animals?

I'm pretty sure George Will has never touted a candidate because of his hunting prowess. And I KNOW he's done NOTHING but rip the large-mammal-shooter currently in the race.

Again, TNC's original critique of Will's statement was fair enough, albeit something that could be said about everyone who spounts an opinion about the True Motives of Man. I just think the comment thread went off the rails a bit when we started playing "just how racist is George Will?"

Re: The great debate again

zacksback — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:03:34 -0000

As every woman knows, the phrase 'I don't know' exists in the vocabulary of .0000010% of the male population. Pundits like Will are a tiny subset of this population.

You do the math, T-N. :o)

Re: The great debate again

M.C. — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:13:17 -0000

Obama's not really THAT young. He'll be 50 soon. He is fairly hot for a middle-aged guy, though, and I think a lot of young people respond to that.

What's the male equivalent of "MILF"?

Re: The great debate again

Thomas R — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 04:35:05 -0000

One thing worth considering is that there are people in this country who aren't black or white.

There have been states, in the primaries, where Obama did better than expected. It seems possible that some Asians or Hispanic voters feel that if the door opens for the son of an African immigrant it also opens for the children of Chinese, Mexican, Guatemalan, and Korean immigrants.

Also in a "change election" being different than previous politicians, in ethnic or religious ways, can be an advantage. Being Catholic may have helped JFK in some states even if it hurt him in others.

I think age though might be more significant. Many younger people are turning out more and young people, very much discounting me, prefer younger people. The kind of people who don't like young people, because they see them as immature or unpredictable, might be mollified by Obama's steadiness. (And admittedly I wish there was a bit more of "Bob Dole" in McCain. I want old guys to be seasoned or sagely more than unpredictable and shocking)

Re: The great debate again

MoeLarryAndJesus — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 01:09:02 -0000

You know what truly awful, terrifying, you-know-it's-coming-but-it-will-still-make-you-go-aaarrggh thing is?

Within a week of the Obama victory (although he MAY hold off until after the inauguration) we'll be "treated" to the high-minded and gracious Will column tracing the path to Obama's victory back to Jackie Robinson. And the column will mention Pee Wee Reese at least twice. And probably Branch Rickey. Really, Branch Rickey.

.......... @%$#@$

Re: The great debate again

Nquest — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 01:00:15 -0000

LOL

TNC, all I can do is laugh at your response to Nara. You gotta love those preemptive accusations.

I have the sudden urge to pay top dollar for the best pollsters to find out what percentage of non-white guys (Nara only said s/he wasn't a White "guy") who say things like "guys like you see racism everywhere." In fairness, I'd have a poll to show the percentage of White guys vs. non-white guys (which would include White women and everybody else but White men) who have the same kind of attitude towards people who deny seeing racism anywhere in anything in any actual incident in the news, etc.

Re: The great debate again

mars — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:21:35 -0000

OT: The Biggest Football News of the Day!!!

Heh heh heh...From a poster over at DKos:

In Florida, Miami Dolphins owner Wayne Huizenga has announced his plans to pack up his toys and go home if Obama wins the election, saying that he'll sell the team because of Obama's tax policies. After 15 years of plodding mediocrity under Huizenga (no Super Bowl wins, AFC Championships, or even AFC Championship Game appearances, compared to 2 Super Bowl wins, 5 AFC Championships, and 7 AFC Championship Game appearances in the 27 years prior to Huizenga), Dolphin fans are probably ready to thank Obama for ridding them of their pathetic owner. And baseball fans will remember Huizenga as the guy who dismantled two separate Florida Marlin World Series championship teams to pad his wallet. Bottom line? If an Obama presidency can get Wayne Huizenga out of the sports biz, that's change Miami sports fans can believe in.

Re: The great debate again

Ta-Nehisi Coates — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:55:11 -0000

"It is guys like you who see racism where non exists that annoy me.

BTW,before you accuse me of racism I am firmly committed to Obama and am not a white guy."

Nara,

You are a racist. If I were white, you would never read this blog. Take your racist drivel somewhere, else you racist. Oh I forgot. You are a racist.

Re: The great debate again

professordarkheart — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:32:12 -0000

so much of this country is so eager...to feel good about itself by doing this

Isn't that the main reason anyone votes for anyone? I mean, I'm sure there are any number of voters who are thinking, in part: "Isn't it awesome that we're not as racist a country as we once were?" (yes, it is). Then there are those who are thinking: "Ain't no one gonna tell me what to do, man--I'm a maverick." Maybe some are thinking: "I may not have gotten that promotion I deserved, but at least another woman is kicking ass." Or even: "I may say some stupid shit on occasion, but that Joe Biden makes me sound like the second coming of John F. Kennedy!"

Both campaigns, and political campaigns in general, want to convince voters of one thing: if you vote for us, it will prove how discerning and morally upright you are. Why should feeling good and morally upright because we're demonstrating the decreasing power of racism be any less legitimate than feeling good and morally upright because we're taking a stand against communism, or abortion, or elitism, or whatever? And why do we let people like George Will get away with implying that it's unforgivable to vote for someone because they're black but highly desirable to vote for someone because they shoot large animals?

Re: The great debate again

bab23 — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:06:57 -0000

And I suppose he raised $600,000,000 because he's black, too. Who knew what a lucrative enterprise not being Jesse and Al could be?

(I reckon the number of people who do/don't vote Obama primarily because of his skin color will be statistically insignificant.)

Re: The great debate again

Nara — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 23:00:00 -0000

Please give me a break. Pundits give their opinion (and he did mention that it is difficult to measure this). It is not neccessary that they be right. You could argue that his point is not valid without making it personal. It is guys like you who see racism where non exists that annoy me.

BTW,before you accuse me of racism I am firmly committed to Obama and am not a white guy.

Re: The great debate again

brucds — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:51:08 -0000

I didn't see that the link referred to the "Powell context" of Will's remarks when I made that comment, but I want to note that Will's commentary was so overtly obnoxious in context that, while I happened to be on the phone when it was said, my wife (who "happens to be black") paused the DVR, started shouting at the TV and called me in to "listen this shit." I was stunned when I heard it (on rewind) and thought it was extraordinarily creepy and dishonest even for a prick like Will.

Re: The great debate again

brucds — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:45:00 -0000

What was actually totally despicable about that comment from George Will is that it was in response to a question from Stephanopoulos about the meaning of Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama. Will proceeded to paint Powell's endorsement as a "black thing." So Colin Powell, a major figure in the Republican establishment, and probably the most authoritative military figure of the past 25 years, gets reduced to "a black guy endorsing a black guy" by one of the pre-eminent conservative pundits when he endorses Obama - despite the fact that he did it thoughtfully, deeply-considered and explicitly rejecting a racial rationale. Will probably hadn't heard Powell's explicit points in his endorsement, but to leap to a racial analysis shows how deep-seated the racism among these clowns actually is.

Re: The great debate again

Nquest — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:00:08 -0000

he can hardly go around dissing St. Ronnie.

He can start with Pat Buchanan. You know, the guy who still gets to spout his polarizing politics on national TV. An nation institutionally approved position Rev. Wright never had -- Jesse and Al don't have it now even in this historic election year.

Re: The great debate again

brooksfoe — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:42:25 -0000

Look, I'm a white guy, and if I'm honest with myself I know one reason I'm particularly excited about this election is that Obama is black, and it's a powerful moment to be able to vote for a black guy and make a statement about the kind of multiracial, multiethnic, open and embracing country I want America to be. Not that there aren't plenty of other reasons to vote for Obama -- grasp of policy, analytical cast of mind, all-around smarts, oratorical wizardry, sympathetic stances on the issues, and his keen sense of strategic politics. But a lot of white people will get an affirmative emotional kick out of voting for a black guy. Not all of them are already liberals. There aren't many hardcore conservatives who are going to vote for Obama, but among the undecideds, the sense of optimism and positivity that comes along with voting for the black guy is going to win Obama some votes.

As to whether there are more pro-black voters than anti-black voters out there, TNC is right: there's no way to know that. But I don't think it's particularly egregious for Will to come down on the optimistic side. I do think it's egregious for him to blame racially polarized politics exclusively on Jackson and Sharpton, though it's a tough spot for him because the white politicians who polarized racial politics over the last 40 years were mainstream Republicans like Reagan and Helms, and he can hardly go around dissing St. Ronnie.

Re: The great debate again

ed — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:50:54 -0000

Mr. Will should go to that bar I once entered in Cumberland, MD, during a Steelers-Colts game and get the pulse of a certain segment of white voter. Be sure and wear the bow tie, will you G-Dawg?

Re: The great debate again

Marc Adin — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:36:26 -0000

tnc wrote: What is the problem with people simply saying, "You know what, I don't know the answer to that." It's why I never want to be a pundit. The entry requirement seems to be that you have to act like you have an answer to everything, when sometimes, you just don't have a fucking clue. Is "I don't know" outlawed or something?

a "pundit" is supposed to be a learned person, an expert by experience and education. that is a wide berth. in your own way, you are a pundit, and all your commenters are pundits. the common usage now,is that if one's opinions are respected and have a degree of credibility, they are 'pundits.' but that is quibble. the important thing for people like will, and you, and zakaria, and me to always keep in mind is that our assertions and opinions are not facts. they never have been and never will be. they are a best guess based upon a host of known and unknown variables.

that's the way of man. only in retrospect will we know if we were wise. if we are correct more often than we are wrong, we've done well.

constant luck isn't luck at all. it is skill. i think that's what we should understand about obama.

as for will, he knows that he is attempting to objectify his analysis, but in the end, he is aware that what he is saying is pure speculation. he doesn't get paid to say, "i don't know" about all things unknowable. he works in ideas, not in math.

easy up, tnc. we all pull shit out of our ass. it's all in the presentation.

Re: The great debate again

Joel — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:22:45 -0000

Will's basic premise applies to some people, but we don't know how many. He should have avoiding putting a number to his guess in the first place.

Re: The great debate again

Nquest — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:14:17 -0000

George Will's "put paid" idea is the de-Black-ification of Rev. Jesse and Al.

This sh*t is crazy. I've said it and I'll say it again, John Edwards was a poor man's Jesse with the populist campaign he tried to run.

These CONservatives are desperate and they all got the memo, apparently. If it wasn't Tucker Carlson trying to claiming Obama's race speech was produced in the Jackson factory of speeches, it was Krauthammer feigning victimhood in the hoax that Obama built via their own projection onto him whereby they claim he gave them false-hope that he was different from Jesse and Al, the great un-Black.

Yeah. White folks are voting for Obama because he is Black and the big payoff for that is the idea that he is not Jesse and Al. As if Jesse and Al aren't Black. Jesse and Al are no longer proper names for proper nouns. They are reduced to mere terminology of the most despised kind -- "political rhetoric."

Wow! Jesse and Al can't be Black or somehow lose their Blackness or possess a Blackness that's less Black than Obama because, while Jesse received White voters, championed the politics of White Appalachia and sought the release of White hostages, etc., etc., etc., neither Jesse and Al were Black enough to convince White America that they wanted to be president of ALL America as opposed to Black America. The proof of which is the amount of African-Americans who share (or who have internalized) the same views regarding Jesse and Al.

Somehow, the "angry Black man" was never really Black, just "angry", I guess since, again, it's Obama's big, bold Blackness that's just turning White people on.

Re: The great debate again

DB Cooper — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:02:21 -0000

Y'all need to settle down. Will's points, however inartfully expressed, ares that (1) Obama's success is a sign of racial progress, (2) which includes a repudiation of the Sharpton/Jackson identity/victim politics.

What you need to remember is that we need to evaluation Obama's candidacy THROUGHOUT - not just in the general. Jess is right that liberals are the ones who are thinking the way Will speculates - thrilled by the very idea of a black candidate - but that point was relevant to the primaries.

Pooh-pooh the idea all you want, but I agree with Will's that a non-trivial number of voters preferred Obama - at least in some part - for the "new image of America" he would present to the world. I'm one.

Re: The great debate again

MikeCee — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:43:40 -0000

One of the best unscripted moments of the campaign for me was right after the 3rd debate.

Anderson Cooper on CNN asked David Gergen what he thought McCain could do to turn things around after losing yet again and he said "Beat's the hell outta me."

Will's got an agenda for saying that and like most of the pundit class will make it up if need be.

Re: The great debate again

hakidownunder — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:43:02 -0000

What disturbs me about GF Will's comment isn't the sociopolitical mathematics that he pulled out of his derriere to make it, it's that he made this statement in direct response to Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama. Watch the video; GFW's words are the first ones made when the topic of Powell's endorsement comes up. The suggestion, as far as I could see, was that Powell made this endorsement based on Obama's race, and I have a big problem with that.

If there is only one "superstar" of American politics whose intellectual integrity should be presumed, it is Colin Powell. If I were the general, I would be insulted by Mr Will's implication.