Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2007 > December > 10 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USOn how Andy Young’s comments on Obama came to light
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Over the weekend, videotaped comments of former Atlanta mayor Andrew Young on Barack Obama’s candidacy took the Internet by storm.
The clip even made the Drudge Report.
Obama was too young, the former United Nations ambassador said. He didn’t have the support network you need to keep out of trouble. Bill Clinton was just as black. Volatile stuff. See our original post on the topic here.
But when did Young make those comments? Sept. 5, says Jim Welcome, executive producer of Newsmakers Live, where the Young video was posted.
The clip wasn’t put up until late October or early November, and even then the video was buried a couple layers deep on the web site, Welcome said.
But from what we can piece together, two things happened.
In late November, the web site was revamped so that the Young interview — the most recently taped by Newsmakers Live — begins playing as soon as the site is visited.
That same Thanksgiving week, Welcome and editor-in-chief Maynard Eaton mentioned the interview to Rob Redding, an Atlantan who operates Redding News Review, an Internet clearinghouse for African-American news.
“I guess ‘the black Drudge’ is how we’ve been termed,” Redding said — not that he likes the comparison.
Redding posted a link to the Young interview on Wednesday. The mainstream media picked it up Friday afternoon.
“He helped to be sure,” Eaton said. “I think the jury’s still out on who broke it.”
Said Welcome: “Redding got it before any journalist that I know of.”
The interview received about 36,000 hits over the weekend.
The original date of the interview is of some importance. Sept. 5 was about a month before the Clinton campaign — a clockwork organization already famous for its message control — began rolling out its black support in the South. In other words, Young’s comments were — well, they were what the former civil rights leader does.
In fact, only a portion of the interview is aired. And if you look on the web site’s archives, you’ll find that, before Young made his comments on Obama, the former mayor addressed his tendency to make news with his seat-of-the-pants statements.
Said Young:
“I don’t really think about words. Now Martin was an orator. Martin Luther King thought about words. He was an English major at Morehouse. He had memorized long passages of Shakespeare and W.H. Auden and all the poets. Knew the Bible. Almost had a photographic memory. So for him, the oratory was important. I just never was into it that much.
“I started out very early figuring that I had to say what was in my heart. And I didn’t really worry about how it came out. That’s the reason I get in trouble every now and then. That quite often people will misunderstand or misinterpret what’s in my heart. Because I don’t censor myself.”
Young, if you couldn’t tell in the trouble-making video clip, is a Hillary Clinton supporter — as is John Lewis — and has hosted a fund-raiser for the candidate.
Services »
Comments
By Sidmore
December 10, 2007 4:46 PM | Link to this
Andrew Young needs to stop being a hater just because his once promising career has turned to crap. Obama belongs in the White House NOW.
By Amos Ajo
December 10, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this
Ambassador Young is someone I know very well with great respect. What he said has not been clearly understood. He never hesitated to say that he wants Obama to be the President. In his comment, he cited three examples - Dr. King, Mayor Jackson of Atlanta and Mayor Campbell of Atlanta. His argument is that Obama needs a more established network to protect him. His comments were based on his personal experience and came across to me in a very sincere way. The only difference I have is that times have changed. Nothing we knew 20 years ago has been the same.
By Ike
December 10, 2007 5:03 PM | Link to this
I bet Young wants Bill back in the white house, so he can continue to provide him more black ho’s to bang, just like the stupid old days.
Sorry, young.
Two powerful black women - Oprah and Michelle will restore to black women, the dignity that people like you and Bill Clinton stole from them.
The White House belongs to a man who treats women like queens.
By George
December 10, 2007 5:19 PM | Link to this
Does it really matter when the comments were made? Another question: why did your synopsis of what was said, i.e. “Obama is too young, Clinton is just as black” not include the further insulting, demeaning and disgusting statements that Young went on to make in comparing Clinton to Obama? Perhaps printing the comments again was unnecessary - so be it.
What is it exactly that endears Americans, specifically black American, to Bill Clinton? And what does Bill Clinton’s so-called “blackness” and extramarital dating habits (despite having been married for 30-years) have to do with Hillary Clinton’s qualifications to become POTUS?
And finally, does Mr. Young honestly believe that young, middle-class (and rising), traditionalist black Americans really care about the “support network” of the old-guard council waiting in the wings for Clinton handouts? When he says “keep him out of trouble”, does he mean to remind him of the hell they’ll raise if he were to suggest to America that black people (and everyone else for that matter) can do for themselves better than what government largesse can do?
Just curious.
By Joe in Vermont
December 10, 2007 5:21 PM | Link to this
Sorry you left out the Young’s comment about Bill Clinton dating black woman. It on the CBS and other sites.
Like so many Clinton backers, Young’s had a great run, but is way past his time. Most people under 50 have a vague notion of who he is, but that’s it.
The beginning of the end of racial polarization for most of America is in site. People like Barack Obama and Oprah are leading the charge. I’m a New England “white guy”. What I see in Obama is a Presidential candidate who is “half black” and not a “black” candidate. Big difference.
By Oscar
December 10, 2007 5:34 PM | Link to this
This is yet ANOTHER example of how the RACE thing will be a distraction if Obama is nominated, and how distracting the Clinton scandals will be also, along with Hillary being a woman.
We DON”T NEED this. I hope Iowans choose Edwards. He is the logical, and best choice.
By Ronald T
December 10, 2007 5:36 PM | Link to this
Young is a sellout. Plain and simple. Young and John Lewis are two so-called black “leaders” that think we need to beg massa for a handout. Barack is the future and the future is now. He probably urged MLK to wait until white people approve of us sitting in the front of the bus.
By Andrew
December 10, 2007 6:14 PM | Link to this
I am dazed and confused at the so called state of former African american leadership. After all of the struggle of the civil rights era and the conservative view against the new breed of Martin King and Co.
Anrew Young has become the old head opposition to the new generation of “Why We Can’t Wait”. Andrew Young is no more credible to speak on the state of affairs today than Kris Kringle!
By Andrew
December 10, 2007 6:15 PM | Link to this
I am dazed and confused at the so called state of former African american leadership. After all of the struggle of the civil rights era and the conservative view against the new breed of Martin King and Co.
Anrew Young has become the old head opposition to the new generation of “Why We Can’t Wait”. Andrew Young is no more credible to speak on the state of affairs today than Kris Kringle!
By Annabelle
December 10, 2007 7:42 PM | Link to this
God help the world if a Republican ever said those words.
By vwcat
December 10, 2007 10:17 PM | Link to this
Somewhere along the way the civil rights leadership and icons sold their souls to the Clintons. they tried to convince the public that Bill was a black president and cared because Bill went to a few black churches and playacted well. The Clintons demand 100% loyalty and there will be a price to pay to those who do not swear alligance to them. While at the same time the clintons embrace and are actually the supporters of corporate America, people like Rupert Murdoch and all their other republican foes from the 90s. Amazing how the black president, Bill is also the adopted son of Poppy Bush. All of America must reject these pretenders who will suck the money and dignity from everyone they meet. There is a leader for all races and ages waiting for America to get over the Clintons and see them for what they are. A leader who is decent, dignified and brilliant. A leader who won’t use people and make them swear fealty to him. A leader who will repair a very damaged America. Prove Young wrong and chose the real first black president in Obama.
By doc
December 10, 2007 10:46 PM | Link to this
What a shame that the first time a black man runs for President he can’t get a break because he’s “not black enough.” And this from other blacks! Who the hell is in charge of determining “racial purity?” I thought that was the Third Reich, not Andy Young.
By huh
December 11, 2007 12:06 AM | Link to this
A true shame and a travesty. Andrew Young should be ashamed of himself.
By wizinit
December 11, 2007 12:27 AM | Link to this
So Andrew Young says Obama is too young. About what you’d expect from some one too old. And Bill Clinton is just as black as Obama?
In 2006, Andy said: “The way this came out it makes me sound like I’m refuting everything I’ve done over almost 70 years, frankly.” Oops, he done did it again.
By wizinit
December 11, 2007 12:29 AM | Link to this
So Andrew Young says Obama is too young. About what you’d expect from some one too old. And Bill Clinton is just as black as Obama?
In 2006, Andy said: “The way this came out it makes me sound like I’m refuting everything I’ve done over almost 70 years, frankly.” Oops, he done did it again.
By Roxanne Smith in Iowa
December 11, 2007 12:41 AM | Link to this
Why is it okay for Obama to stand on a stage with a microphone and strongly imply that Bill and Hillary are from the wrong generation, ie: they are too OLD, but Obama supporters are upset that Young said Obama was too young.
In all my years as a Democrat, I have never witnessed such a travesty of hypocrisy and dishonesty as the Obama campaign has exhibited.
It is disgraceful. Barack Obama is an ego-driven rookie. Many of his supporters are “followers”. And to top it all off, in comes Oprah. A woman who has not voted in a primary since 1988 and who gave George W. Bush the kiss of approval not that long ago.
God help us. Democrats …. if you have not already chosen a candidate, do not consider Obama. Our country and we, as it’s citizens, have suffered too long. Vote for Hillary, Edwards, Biden, Richardson, Dodd or Kucinich. They are all decent people with good experience.
Obama is a cypher.
By Whatever Andy
December 11, 2007 12:54 AM | Link to this
Hey Andy, tell us about you and Barrick Gold. And that stuff you and your consulting firm did with Wal-Mart sure worked out.
By Bob Bolt
December 11, 2007 1:16 AM | Link to this
Andy Young has always had a problem with the facts and his mouth. Worst Ambassador to UN we have had in my life time. He cost this country hundreds of millions dollars to cover up what his mount said before his brain was put into gear. medical term is called diarrhea of the mouth. Just another embarrassment for GA brought about by Jimmy Carter and the bad old boys he took to D.C..
By Dave from Atlanta
December 11, 2007 6:11 AM | Link to this
Andy Young and John Lewis are a big let down this time around. Their respect has always come from them being men of conscience, integrity and action. But they have sold these invaluable commodities for the cheap expedience of Clinton’s cronyism.
The saddest part is that if Obama were white, these same “leaders” would have considered him a natural fit for the Presidency. Obama is older than Bill Clinton was when Clinton ran for President. Even Christ had his ministry a full 13 years younger than Obama’s age. Of course, the great MLK had already finished his work on this earth a full 7 years before he reached Obama’s age. So this gives the lie to Andy’s “too young” argument.
It is sad really, that Andy and John can now count themselves among those elements who have never taken the time to examine Obama’s superior intelligence (Harvard Law Review president), compassion (chose community service in disadvantaged neighborhoods in Chicago, instead of Wall Street), political skills (worked across the aisle both in the Illinois and US senates to pass important legislation), administrative skills (has the most innovative, inclusive and well run campaign) and all-round unmistikable leadership abilities.
I feel truly sad to see these great men fall down from a well deserved place in the pantheon of great Americans with conscience.
By Dave from Atlanta
December 11, 2007 6:15 AM | Link to this
Andy Young and John Lewis are a big let down this time around. Their respect has always come from them being men of conscience, integrity and action. But they have sold these invaluable commodities for the cheap expedience of Clinton’s cronyism.
The saddest part is that if Obama were white, these same “leaders” would have considered him a natural fit for the Presidency. Obama is older than Bill Clinton was when Clinton ran for President. Even Christ started his ministry a full 13 years younger than Obama’s age. Of course, the great MLK had already finished his work on this earth a full 7 years before he reached Obama’s age. So this gives the lie to Andy’s “too young” argument.
It is sad really, that Andy and John can now count themselves among those elements who have never taken the time to examine Obama’s superior intelligence (Harvard Law Review president), compassion (chose community service in disadvantaged neighborhoods in Chicago, instead of Wall Street), political skills (worked across the aisle both in teh Illinois and US senates to pass important legislation), administrative skills (has the most innovative, inclusive and well run campaign) and all-round unmistakable leadership abilities.
I feel truly sad to see these great men fall down from a well deserved place in the pantheon of great Americans with conscience.
By UNaffiliated Voter
December 11, 2007 6:28 AM | Link to this
Lawd, these democrackkks scare the hell out me!
www.ERRVideo.com
See what REAL black American leaders are saying!
Emancipation: Revelation or Revolution?
By Tonya Hayes
December 11, 2007 6:45 AM | Link to this
I wonder why the media reports this in print without pointing out the full vulgarity and factual inaccuracy of Young’s comments.
Youbng’s example of the Clinton’s poitical network - the defense committee Hillary set up to deal with attacks from all the women Bill had been involved with;
Young’s example of Bill’s blackness -the fact that he has been with more black women and that he started a Soul Train line at a party for Nelson Mandela where Hillary lifted her skirt and boogied down the line.
If you watch the full tape it just gets worse.
Send that dinosaur back to Jurrasic Park and bring on the future. And a note to Mr. Young, most black people prefer that you use standard English when addressing serious issues. Leave the jive talk at home.
By Tina
December 11, 2007 6:45 AM | Link to this
I wonder why the media reports this in print without pointing out the full vulgarity and factual inaccuracy of Young’s comments.
Youbng’s example of the Clinton’s poitical network - the defense committee Hillary set up to deal with attacks from all the women Bill had been involved with;
Young’s example of Bill’s blackness -the fact that he has been with more black women and that he started a Soul Train line at a party for Nelson Mandela where Hillary lifted her skirt and boogied down the line.
If you watch the full tape it just gets worse.
Send that dinosaur back to Jurrasic Park and bring on the future. And a note to Mr. Young, most black people prefer that you use standard English when addressing serious issues. Leave the jive talk at home.
By Mack
December 11, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this
Wow. interesting postings. Andy Young just like everyone else has a right to his beliefs and opinions. Don’t take away from what he accomplished because you disagree with him. Last time I checked this was America, although over the past few years we have seem to revert back to harsher times. We need the best canidate in the White House to restore some of the dignity we onec had, whether its Hillary or Obama. We have to attack what’s going on in America one level at a time, starting with equality and justice for all, I remember reading that one day in school…Did it change? Someone please enlighten me.
By Glenn
December 11, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this
It is so sad that the old Civil Rights Leaders like Young, Lewis, Sharpton, and Jackson can’t stop promoting themselves and what they did 40 years ago. They are always promoting themselves while at the same time denouncing young qualified blacks that are trying to uplift the race without selling their souls. Are they jealous of the young minds? Are they jealous because they don’t have what it takes to accomplish what Obama has in such a short period of time. Those old guard people have had years to step up to the plate but instead they continue to sell out to those in the establishment that continue to throw them crumbs from the table as they did during slavery.
By Oneluv
December 11, 2007 9:12 AM | Link to this
TOTALLY NOT SURPRISING, another black person speaking down on one of their OWN!!. Obama HAS WHAT IT TAKES TO BRING THIS COUNTRY BACK TO PLAN A; GOD’S PLAN. Study to “show” yourself Mr. Young approved.I still remember how YOU READ A PRAYER at MLK’s homegoing. God is rising YOUNG, NEW PEOPLE EVERYDAY to carry out HIS PLAN, The time is NOW!!! God Bless you!!
By Will Jones
December 11, 2007 9:55 AM | Link to this
Young is a servant of the false-elite destroying America. Barack’s vision will restore our ideals and, in justice, remove the false-elite from our necks. Their gravy-train is pulling into the station: they send out frauds like Young to try to convince the People not to make the corrupt rich have to walk the path of righteousness leading to nooses for Bush, Cheney, and their top accomplices. The Clinton’s personal corruption walked hand-in-hand with NAFTA, Waco, and his administration’s continued failure to bring to justice the known traitors who murdered Kennedy and King to keep us in Vietnam…the same faction Young works for which committed 9-11 to put us in Afghanistan and Iraq. Young is corrupt and must be shunned by The People.
By Brown Girl
December 11, 2007 11:33 AM | Link to this
Those comments are completely ignorant and out of line and completely unbecoming of a former US Ambassador. Is he in the beginning stages of Alzheimers? Does have Tourets? I believe he owes Barack Obama and the American people a public apology.
I wish those old so called black leaders would step aside. At the very least, they need to recognize that times have changed so strategies MUST and HAVE changed for those of us “making it happen”. They in no way speak for the majority of African Americans in this country. I implore the media to stop giving them the “mike”.
By Brooklyn_born
December 11, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Young’s attempt to devalue Obama’s ethnicity is nothing new within the black community. It is a childish ploy usually used to degrade or diminish black people who do not follow the typical leftist/democrat mantra. One of the reasons why Young’s comments have so many people upset is simply because the target is someone within the democrat party.
When black conservatives are regularly labeled as “self-haters” or “sell-outs” it’s ignored or even encouraged by some of the same people who now take “offense” when it happens to a fellow democrat. It’s wrong when it’s done to Condi Rice just like it’s wrong when it’s being done to Obama. But for too long we have allowed our ethnic identity to be defined not by genetics but by political affiliation. Their platform becomes litmus test in which we gage our own ethnicity. That is a very powerful position for any political party to be in, that explains why the Clintons are so comfortable with the claim “First Black President”, many of us encouraged it.
By robert a. gibson
December 11, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
What did Andrew Young think when people criticized a young and inexperienced Baptist minister for leading a bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama which propelled him to national civil rights leadership before he fell to an assassin’s bullet at the young age of 39? Should King have waited on the sidelines for more mature Black leadership to take action? Andrew Young is 75 years old and fails to see the wisdom in thinking before one speaks! Young has lived seven and a half decades and thinks foolihly that Bill Clinton is not only Black, but Blacker than Obama.It really is an insult to Black Americans to say that Clinton is Black. Young has the right to support any candidate he chooses, but if he really was as mature and wise as one might expect, he would keep his thoughts to himself for the or the first time in his life and not attempt to undermine the campaign of Barack Obama. WWMD? What would Martin do?
By Brooklyn_Born
December 11, 2007 12:10 PM | Link to this
The reason why Young is trying to diminish Obama’s ethnicity is because he assumes that is his onlt advantage and the primary reason why black people are supporting him.
Young apparently believes that black people are not able to discern good candidate from bad, only black from white.
The positive responses he got from his audience did not give him reason to believe otherwise.
By Lana
December 11, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this
You know I think the strange thing about this is people are saying that if Obama were white people would not be saying he is not experienced. The honest truth is that if Obama were white as “just” a state representative and a first year senator, no one would have given him their money or their support. What Obama is getting is AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, the kind that most whites and most blacks don’t like, where you are given a chance because you are a friend of, not fully and truly qualified. It seems to me that Obama has always been one of these fake affirmative action folks that always got a chance becuase they were a friend of. My question to anyone is if Obama was a street guy, doing drugs etc. he must have received affirmative action (a pass) to get into Columbia and Harvard and now he’s asking for a pass to get into the White House. If he were white he would not be there, these days! Clinton was governer, Bush II was a Governer, Reagan was a governer, Bush 1 was vice president! Let’s get real and look for some experience or are we so dumb that we can not recognize that when a candidate gets Usher Raymond and Oprah to be his spokespersons that he’s light as a feather. When we host the Russians who will he get to greet them, the barcadi guy in the commercial. Anyone who does not know that a talk show host is not qualified to solve real world problems may be a little slow on the uptake. This is just like some woman that got hired for a job just becuase she was black becuase white people said they could not find a “qualified black person” , there are qualified black people out there but nobody wants to find them. If the person looks good and speaks correct English they are qualified for this society we live in. What we end up getting is an embarassment one of the greatest nobel prize winners in the world, a pioneer in DNA has said derogatory things about black scientists, why, not becuase there is a lack of qualified black people , some of the greatest science people have been black George Washington Carver, a black man discovered blood plasma, a black man even discovered the filament to the light bulb, no there are qualified black people out there but too many people want Milli Vanilli, not substance and the real thing. WE HAVE A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WHO HAS MADE OPRAH WINFREY HIS SPOKEPERSON. GIVE ME A FREE APPLIANCE WOULD YOU!
By Susan
December 11, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this
Hilllary is running a campaign to be the next president. Obama is running a campaign to inspire me personally to be the best I can be and the country to be the best it can be. So who do you want leading us? The one with an ambitious personal agenda with a “wide-stance” on issues or the genuine visionary one who is capable of surrounding himself with people of good character and judgement?
By Anne
December 11, 2007 3:15 PM | Link to this
Obama has more intelligence, courage, and ability to bring people together. And that includes countries. The face of America here and abroad stinks. We need someone with the foresight and courage to change what’s there now and brings us back to the great country we once were. Hillary hides behind what she knows not. She does not even know herself or what she believes in. Her campaigh workers feed her words. Her husband speaks for her. God help this nation if she wins the nomination, or worse the election!
By Dave from Atlanta
December 11, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
Lana (who posted at 1:25 PM) and other Obama doubters:
Do us a favor please. Don’t display so much arrogance from a basis of such ignorance!
If you had taken even a little bit of time to inform yourself on Obama, you would have found that: 1). Both of his parents had doctorates (PhD), his father in Economics from Harvard and his mother in Anthropology. So, he is geneticaly more likely than not to posess superior intelligence.
2). He described his growing up years extensively in his well acclaimed book Dreams From My Father, which was written a number of years before he ever entered politics. In it, he details in an honest and compelling way, his growing up years struggling with issues of identity, experimenting with common vices and yet revealing a mind with uncommon insight into human nature. Coming largely unscathe, out of the personal struggles of those years, reveals Obama as someone with character and courage.
3). He attended university at Occidental in California, transferred to Columbia and later went to Law School at Harvard ON MERIT (not your affirmative action). He PROVED himself to be to be THE BEST at Harvard and was recognized by his peers there who elected him President of the scholarly Harvard Law Review. In case you didn’t know, that is not somethng you get through affirmative action, you have to EARN IT.
4). Obama’s moral principles and compassionate character was shown by shunning an easy life on Wall Street (which his academic credentials had qualified him for) and instead taking up the cause of the poor and the unfortunate on the South Side of Chicago, on a salary most high school drop-outs would not accept. He used his law degree to continue fightig for the civil rights of the less fortunate. As a one time professor of Constitutional Law a the University of Chicago, he will bring to the White House and deep understanding of the law that upholds our liberties, in a way other recent occupants have not.
5). He later ran for the Illinois State senate, where he championed very difficult but compelling casues like reforming the death penalty, ethics reform that cleaned up political corruption, tax breaks for low and middle income earners, reducing racial profiling of minorities, providing health care for children and running a very successful voter registration drive. He succeeded in these difficult tasks by working mostly across party lines, against very entrenched interests even in his party. Because of this, he has been endoresed by both Republicans and Democrats he worked with.
6). Obama won his US senate seat with 75% of the votes in Illinois, winning in all demographic groups and geographic areas. This he did against people who had far greater political pedigree and money, a true indication of the respect that people who know him have for him. So, he didn’t just fall out of the turnip truck into the US Senate. In his three odd years in the US Senate, he has continued to work across party lines to get difficult legislation passed, including ethics reform, control of nuclear weapons and championing the casuse of humanitarian crises in places like Darfur.
7). While Obama has not held the office of Governor, for instance, America’s greatest presidents, including Lincoln and Washington did not hold such offices either. In the case of Lincoln, he had barely spent a few years as a CONGRESSMAN (not even Senator) when he became President. Besides, if a resume was all that mattered, then Bill Clinton should never have been elected against Mr. Experience himself, George Bush 1.
8). In public life, Obama has displayed tremendous moral courage and judgement, unlike others, like calling out the Iraq war to a tee, at a time when it was politically risky for him. He continues to display superior judgement that has built him an enviable following and endorsement by some of the most respected and experienced foriegn policy and miltary experts. He has also displayed an uncanny ability to wade through expert advice and apply superior judgement in coming up with ground breaking and effective policy decisions on all of the issues that are of concern in our daily lives. Please do yourself a favor by going to the barrrackobama.com site and look at his Issues section.
9). And then there is that “it” factor, which a leader has. Bill Clinton had “it” and so did Reagan. Hillary doesn’t, nor did Kerry or Gore. So, if Democrats want to lose another election that shouldbe theirs, let them nominate another Establishment Candidate that doesn’t have “it”.
In short, anyone who approaches this election with an intelligent and open mind, would know that Obama is by far the best candidate to have come around in quite a while, Black or White. It’s America’s great loss, if enough of us do not realize this to vote him in. As Oprah said the other day “you can’t keep doing the same old thing (voting for political cronies) and expect to get different results (perpetual conflict while our major problems fester)”.
By Iron Mike
December 11, 2007 4:08 PM | Link to this
Dave @ 3:43 PM:
Obama is a traditional tax-and-spend liberal who would not renew the Bush tax cuts and would also remove the income cap on social security taxation.
The result would be an expansion of the federal government, greater dependence on the welfare state, economic growth, reduced capital investment by businesses, and greater unemployment.
He attends a black separatist church—a fact that belies any ability to “bring America together.”
He has no executive experience (similar to Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and others)and couldn’t answer the question as to whether illegal aliens should be granted drivers licenses—and this was 2 weeks after Mrs. Clinton couldn’t answer the question.
When Washington and Lincoln were president, the federal government was small and manageable. Washington had executive experience leading our troops in the Revolutionary War. Obama has no such experience. In short, Obama is no Washington or Lincoln.
Your multi-paragraph effort is long on accolades but short on specifics—just like Obama.
By Dave from Atlanta
December 11, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
Iron Mike @ 4:08 PM:
At least you’re trying to make arguments on the issues and that’s an improvement over the usual uninformed anti-Obamaists. I’ll take your arguments in turn:
“Tax-and-spend” liberal may be one of thus staples guaranteed to bring out the worst in Southern voters, but it certainly doesn’t encourage an informed discussion. The point is “Tax who?” and “Spend on what?”. The simple fact of the matter is government (any government) cannot function without taxation. So the question really is “how much” and “how fair”. Obama’s policy proposals answer these questions in quite a progressive way that will uplift the country. He proposes for instance, to roll-back the Bush tax cuts only for the very wealthy CEOs and the like (who will usually scurry it away) and instead will actually give tax breaks to working people who will actually spend it to keep the economy going. And what is so bad about letting the very rich pay their fair share of social security that makes life bearable for a vast number of seniors who have done their part in keeping America prosperous through a lifetime of hard work. Would you rather see them working at McDonald’s into their eighties and nineties? Would you really want to live in a country as uncompassionate as that? Also, I suppose George Bush’s “spend-without-revenue”, which leaves us and our grand children in hoc with countries like China to finance our foreign misadventure in Iraq, is the model of good economic policies you would rather have? I’d say give me a responsible, pragmatic Obama approach to the economy any day. For crying out loud, he has one of the best team of economists and significant store of Wall Street support, which in itself should give unbiased minds a lot of comfort.
Obama does not “attend a black separatist church”. That is another fat untruth which is barely less despicable than claims that he is a Muslim. The Trinity United Church of Christ which he and his family attends in Chicago is part of the main-line Protestant United Church of Christ (UCC), one of the oldest Christian denominations in America, with adherents even among the Pilgrim Fathers. And the last time I checked, the Pilgrim Fathers were mostly White men from the British Isles. The UCC happens to have more progressive views like ordaining female priests but, they are certainly not “black separatists”.
Executive experience is important only in so far as it indicates your ability to make good judgments in future. I can say that with some authority as someone who has been one for a while. George bush 2, Jimmy Carter and any number of business executives who haven’t quite lived up to snuff had lots of experience before taking up office. In the case of the Presidency, the most important executive ability is being able to wade through myriad sources of information and formulating policy decisions that show good judgment in hindsight. At each stage in Obama’s life, he has demonstrated this uncanny ability, right up to the way he currently runs an unwieldy national campaign built only recently from scratch, which has broken a lot of records in the process of successfully taking on far more “experienced” campaigns run by Clinton and Edwards. This type of natural ability to make good judgments, rather that just the number of years you have spent warming an “executive” bench which you may have attained through cronyism or accident of birth, is what most right thinking people should value in a president. In any case GEORGE BUSH IS A SECOND-TERM PRESIDENT AND WE ARE STILL IN IRAQ. Need I say more on experience?
3, Obama did struggle with the question on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. But only because of the debate format, in which he was asked to give a silly yes/no answer on a fairly complex issue. That to me shows a leader who thinks, rather than just pander. He has before and since spelt out a very thoughtful position on that same issue in other forums.
Washington and Lincoln had to deal with the same issues of judgment any modern leader (president) faces. While their daily remit may not have been as expansive, they did not have all of the modern technological and organizational aids either. The fact is, the qualities of successful leadership have not changed much since the time of the Pharaohs, Alexander the Great, roman Caesars, Charlemagne, Washington, Lincoln and yes, Obama. They all basically had to deal with organizing/leading human beings to effectively work together for the good of their societies.
If you need more specifics than offered in these necessarily brief blogs, please do yourself a favor and visit www.barackobama.com
By DAKU LAWSON
December 11, 2007 5:43 PM | Link to this
As African of the age of Andrew Young as well as the great majority of the African population, we understand why Andrew Young and the entire generation of the African American leadership are panicking. They know that the election of Barack Obama as a US president will surely bring to an end to the system of corruption to which they had, for decades in cahoots with and so deeply compromised themselves, (obtaining diamond, gold, money) with the most corrupted and hated African dictators with the late Mobutu topping the list, that the advent of Barack Obama is seen by Andrew Young and his fellows as the most frightening nightmare they could have ever imagined. The Clintons had not only allowed them to pursue their dirty and criminal business in Africa but implicitly condone the policy that starves the African population and plunder the continent riches.
Pretending that Obama who is today at the age of other democrat: JFK is not old or experienced enough to lead the USA, is the most nonsensical and stupid argument an African American can make. Oh Mighty God and all the Ancestors of the African American slaves and the legion of the generation of the founders of the NAACP: W.E.B Dubois, Paul Robeson and many others. Please wake up from your graves and help save African Americans from their delusion and help elect Barack Obama to the supreme post, for making centuries-old dream _of millions of slaves massively deported, who are the today survivors and the millions contemporary African population _come true!
By Lana
December 11, 2007 10:28 PM | Link to this
Dave your comments were what initially caused me to comment in the first place. The honest truth is Obama is the least qualified candidate running on the stage, to not recognize this is to engage in the same blindness that racists have engaged in for years, it’s just the opposite.
I will answer some of your points in the order that they strike me as just plain wrong or as an exaggeration of truth.
First of all early in the campaign a person from Obama’s circle made a video accusing Hillary of being Big Brother. However, so far in this election I have seen the Obama camp revise history and the facts numerous times to fit them. Obama has a Winston or is a Winston from 1984 manipulating and rewriting facts to suit the situation. The one thing that is striking about Obama is his bold use of issues against the other candidates when he has in fact had the same views as they have.
First of all let’s deal with the Iraq War issue. Everyone was for further inspections, however when Bush pressed the issue everyone caved. Tim Russert has footage of an interview during the democratic convention where Obama said he supported the war. “Everyone” was wrong on the one “even” Obama and for him to get on a moral high horse when there is footage saying he supported the war is frankly ludicrous, childish, and immature. Hillary has taken a leadership role and admitted she made a mistake about Iraq. When questioned about his support of the war at the Democratic Convention he said something to the effect, the democrats were on board so he was too. This is not being against the war. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2007/11/obama-speak.html
Second of all Obama did win by a landslide but that’s because it was revealed that his opponent and his wife had been swingers. His opponent who had been leading by a wide margin proceeded to jump out of the race. You can read about it here http://dir.salon.com/story/mwt/feature/2004/06/26/jack_ryan/
As for Obama being a Muslim, on a subconscious level I believe he is a Muslim, and I’ve spoken to other people who though he say’s he’s not believe that he is. Some folks even believe the Saudi’s have paid someone off so we can have a Muslim president but that’s just speculation and falseness but people can’t help the way they feel.
Finally back to the experience issue, what Andrew Young did say that I could agree with was that the Clinton’s had been in the white house before and had the experience of being there. I am adding that in the catastrophic situation that this country is in now that the only reasonable and intelligent choice would be Hillary Clinton because 1. she has Bill and she will always ask his advice when she needs it, and two she has been an advocate for people for many many years. Hillary Clinton is not pretending to be concerned she is and she has not wavered in that concern for others. Barack has Michelle and though I believe she did a great job writing Oprah’s speech, I think when Andrew Young stated “wait until the children grow up a little more so that they won’t get made fun of” in that infamous interview that young gave, I think in the back of his heart he was hoping that Michelle Obama would comb her daughters hair and make them look a lot more feminine. “This is an Atlanta thing, an intraracial issue that only black folk understand” but it does have a bearing on political presence especially as it relates to the highest office in the land.
As for Obama’s age, I personally don’ think he’s too young he’s too inexperienced and immature. Oprah is his spokesperson. OH GIVE ME AN APPLIANCE WOULD YOU!
By Dave from Atlanta
December 12, 2007 12:35 AM | Link to this
Lana @ 10:28 PM.
I’ve found it worthwhile to monitor this blog today and address scurrilous disinformation against Obama from Hillary Clinton supporters who now in a state of complete panic. Is this level of dishonesty and outright untruths the “fun part” that Clinton promised barely a week or so ago? Whatever happened to integrity and focus on what each candidate truly promises for America?
But let me address your most scurrilous charges:
In this election cycle, the facts show that Obama has been the leader with bold, fresh and effective initiatives and Hillary has at best just been a follower, aping Obama’s initiatives. She accused him of being “naïve and irresponsible” for agreeing to talk with our enemies. Yet after seeing how well received Obama’s position was, she now loses no opportunity to say she will meet with the leaders of Iran, for instance. She spent forever coming out with a national health insurance program, saying she will propose one after being elected, presumably because she was afraid of being reminded about her abject failure when given the chance to develop one in 1993. It was only after Obama made a successful case that candidates needed to be honest with the American people about the mandate they needed to carry out their plans as President, that Clinton hastily put together a “plan” she copied largely from Obama and Edwards. And now, she can’t even explain convincingly whether she would jail poor people who cannot afford her MANDATED “health insurance” bonanza for her insurance company lobbyists. Obama correctly called the American people’s desire for complete change in Washington, at a time when Clinton was harping back to the days of conflict and moral bankruptcy characterized by her husband’s tenure in the White house. Yet … you guessed it … she is not “the candidate for change”. Even something as simple as voting for the Iraq war budget, she had to wait to see how Obama would vote! The lady simply can’t lead!
To say Obama has been anything less than consistently opposed to the Iraq war is simply another smear campaign geared towards blurring the clear line of his superior judgment to Clinton’s poll-driven politics (it would be a stretch to call it leadership). We all know and have seen videos of his very vocal opposition to the war BEFORE IT WAS AUTHORIZED, at a time when it was far more risky for him, running as a candidate for the US Senate, than others who were already in the Senate. The link to the LA Times Blog you referred to clearly shows in the comments other well informed people putting a lie to the idea that Obama had ever been anything but opposed to the Iraq war. Of course, as a guest to the then presidential and vice-presidential nominees in 2004, it would have been totally inappropriate to come out forcefully against a position Kerry and Edwards had adopted. But even in that interview, he said “from the vantage point I find myself, the case for war had not been made”. So please use some honesty here.
I really don’t know the point you’re trying to make regarding Obama’s landslide win in the US Senate race. Are you saying he did not run against anybody? Because he did. The fact that an earlier opponent dropped out because of moral bankruptcy is all part of what makes Obama a compelling candidate. And, by the way, he did beat the eventual Republican nominee fair and square, after dispatching other better known and better financed Democrats in the primaries. So, what’s you point?
Saying Obama is a Muslim a thousand times will not make him so! You are just repeating these scurrilous rumors which have become the staple of a (not surprisingly) morally bankrupt campaign by Clinton surrogates. Only the dumbest among us would give that charge any more credence that the contempt it deserves. For the record, Obama and his family are practicing Christians, worshiping regularly at a main-line Protestant church belonging to the United Church of Christ denomination. Ironically, that is also the denomination that Andrew Young belongs to (when he is not busy selling his soul for Clinton pottage. Obama’s faith is not a matter of speculation. It is a matter of deep conviction as demonstrated in this speech he gave before he ever ran for President: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-tdM265j7Q
Having been in the White hose is no guarantee that you will make the good judgment needed in these times. Clinton was in the White House when millions of people were slaughtered in Rwanda, without lifting a finger. His ineffective pursuit of bin Laden, while being distracted by his own amorous proclivities with Monica Lewinsky is partly what led us to 9/11. Besides, if being First Lady has the same cache of experience as all of the lifetime of good judgments demonstrated by Obama, why haven’t we had former First Ladies automatically running for President before? At the risk of repeating myself once too often, BUSH IS NOW IN HIS SECOND TERM AND WE ARE STILL MIRED IN IRAQ. So of what value is being a bench-warmer in the White hose, when it comes to making the critical judgments to move this country forward at this time? Your First lady arguments just don’t hold water. AND you saying “Hillary cares” don’t even come close to Barack Obama’s demonstrated compassionate nature through the financial sacrifices he made in his career choices. At a time when Clinton was getting a big fat salary at an Arkansas law firm, Obama was slaving away with the poor and the voiceless in the blighted areas of Chicago, when he was easily qualified to be on the gravy train on Wall Street. That is the sort of character that needs no embellishment to establish his caring nature. Also, consider that at eh time that MLK was chosen by folks in Alabama to fight the good fight, there were many older and “more experienced” preachers they could have called on. But they insisted on him because, in the wisdom of folks who are good readers of human character, only he would do. And the rest, as they say, is history.
Your remarks about Michelle Obama are another low blow that could only come from you Clintonites. Michelle is the embodiment of what a truly emancipated, intelligent and upright woman should be. She is supportive of her husband, has managed to do very well in raising kids while holding her own in a very demanding professional environment. If you are one of those ladies who wouldn’t ever see her child with a hair out of place, in the midst of all the business that comes with juggling professional and family demands, then bless you. But there is nothing wrong with Michelle or the Obama family at this time. And, by the way, you may want to watch Good Morning in America tomorrow morning, to see and hear what Oprah has to say about people like you who disrespect her abilities by claiming someone else wrote a speech she stayed up till 3:00 AM writing the night before her first appearance on the campaign trail with Obama.
By Nikki Terry
December 12, 2007 4:27 AM | Link to this
I am an African American liberal and someone who sees Young as an iconic figure in American history (not just within the African American community). I am still undecided about whether I will vote for Hillary or Barack, but I do support them both right now.
However, I don’t think Young’s comments were meant as serious attacks on Obama’s “blackness” or his dating history. I actually think his jesting was to show how irrelevant those factors are or should be in this election. If an African American man of his stature is able to joke and say “Hey, I’m black. I like Barack, but I’m not going to vote for him simply because he’s black;” I think it gives credence to the black community and its leaders as serious voters. His statements could suggest to candidates that blacks actually do need to be wooed and talked to about the real issues and that our votes are not merely sealed for the candidate that looks most like us.
Moreover, it is naive to allow the media’s sensationalism of one of two controversial statements (i.e. opinions that didn’t fall within mainstream ethos) jade your view of a leader with a record of decades of public service in the fight for civil and human rights for all. Which is more likely, Young passionately dedicated himself to the pursuit of equality for all because he truly believed in the cause, or that for many years he put on a facade? And finally, finally, last year the media was able to uncover the hidden truth, he was self-centered bigot looking for a spotlight on ‘the black leader bandwagon’? All leaders, black, white, red, or yellow are targeted by the media and have been abated at some time or another by something they’ve said or done that deviated too far from the norm. Young is no different. I am not suggesting that he is an angel and that some of his statements or actions are not “suspect”. I am just saying that the man has earned his stripes and should not be stripped of them simply because wikipedia or some silly up and coming journalist chooses to define a few of Young’s slippages of the tongue as a part of his character and historic legacy.
By lana
December 12, 2007 4:31 AM | Link to this
Dave,
First of all I would have read all of the above pro-obama comments without comment becuase someone has told me specifically that all that Obama supporters do all day is respond to articles about him all day. I have read positive articles towards the Senator and before it was all over Obama supporters were saying it was an unfair article. You do this to get more media coverage.
As for Oprah, she stumbled over some of the words in her speech maybe she was nervous, I don’t know but most people who write their own material do not stumble on words. She’s a professional if she’s stumbling it may be likely that she did not write the words that she was reading. I remember in high school trying to litter my paper with big words to impress my teacher. Oprah knew the audience and those words were not big, she stumbled and whether she admits it or not I think Michelle Obama or a speech writer wrote her speech, or in the least told her what talking points to use. The words were too directed and not from the heart. The words were calculated and meant not to endorse but frankly to argue with what some obama detractors have said. Just becuase she said she did write the speech that does not mean we have to believe her. I have no problem with Michelle Obama, but women are different I look it is the Cher/Vanessa Williams dichotommy. Both of these women have daughters but cher allowed her daughter to be masculine and Vanessa Williams created a feminine child. Cher’s daughter goes around with her hair chopped off and Vanessa Williams has a daughter that I’ve seen that’s always in place and looks every bit as feminie as her mother. My belief is that the different results are the results of child rearing practices and how much energy you want to put into raising your daughter or encouraging her to be feminine. If you are ripping and running in your children’s formative years and not monitoring their development closely you don’t know what you’re going to get.
As for who I support or don’t support for president, it is pretty obvious who you support.
As for experience and the Clintons, I know gas prices held, I know the national debt was retired, I know that innovation was encouraged, especially in regards to the internet and this is why we are on this forum now, I know their hearts and I know that Hillary Clinton’s run for the white house is not some opportunistic grab for power. I know that the Clintons actually tried to solve problems before entering the white house. Look at inner city Chicago and ask yourself if Obama tried to solve any problems there before leaving or did he just use his constituents for a power grab. I know that people talk about his work in inner cities but most inner city blacks from Chicago that I’ve spoken with say that they will not be voting for Obama.
As for the Clinton’s I do not care about their personal lives. I know that they have advocated good policies for the most part and that’s all I care about. As for when has a first lady believed that she had the right to the white house, maybe not in America but in Several Latin American countries, most notably Argentina: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-12-10-argentina-new-president_N.htm?csp=34
Her husband led the country through an economic crisis which the people think that she can continue.
Finally it may be a good idea if you respond to cite some sources of what you are talking about. This is the internet and we are a hyperlinked society.
By D
December 12, 2007 10:38 AM | Link to this
We are actually witnessing history as it happens. The changing of the guard and it’s not going to be a smooth transition for the old guard. For the winds of change are howling! The old guard shall put up a fight but to no avail. As we see, they are coming out tattered. Oh yes, change is coming, it’s only natural and inevitable.
The first of the old guard John Lewis goes all out for Hillary Clinton, at Pashcals, Jesse Jackson Sr. and his comments, by the way, which his son Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. rebutted (You’re wrong about Obama dad) and now old Andy Young with his comments.
Besides a sound bite and photo op here and there, what are the old guard doing? Although, I must admit Jesse Sr. is pounding the ground, from Wall St to DC hearings.
The fact of the matter is that most of them are really not as connected to the community or much else as they as they once were. John does have a house in the community, I know exactly where it is. As a matter of fact on any given day, you can see his son waddling like a penguin down the middle of the street, because his pants are hanging off of his rear and his underwear are showing.
In reference to Andy’s attempt to clean up his comments, if you read between the lines he’s doing even worst damage. He of spoke presidents and their wives as teams. It seems as if he has no confidence in Barack and Michelle as a team (That’s quite alright, they are and shall continue to do very well). Has he any confidence in any black woman that he is not intimate with?
The total issue is not whom you choose to support. Support whom you want, but don’t be a coward and come up with weak excuses of why you’re not supporting Barack. If the old guard were really concerned with Barack, they’d reach out to him. Barack has put in his time on the ground more than most know. He’s not in the Senate as token. He’s earned his strips and wings. Besides, let’s be honest, most are supporting William “Bill” Clinton and not Hillary as a whole.
The members of the old guard need to revisit the Letter the Alabama Clergy wrote to King and King’s response to the Alabama Clergy, he penned from the Birmingham City Jail. Particularly where he states “WAIT, almost always means NEVER”, “To DELAY is to DENY”.
I say to the old guard, wake up, there is no more waiting, we shall no longer be denied! Introducing the President of, for and by the People as a whole! President Barack and First Lady Michelle Obama 2008-2016!