Aspies For Freedom

Full Version: Obama and Pennsylvania
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Not really autism-related; this article came up in the news scan in my blog. About halfway through my mouth opened in shock. (Now you all can't wait to read it, can't you? Wink )

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...48,00.html

Quote:
CINDY Sowers, 48, is so mad at Barack Obama that she decided to make a sign. It was 3am on Wednesday and she was tending to her autistic grandson while watching television.

She took out a white board and with black tape spelled out NOT BITTER. Then she stuck the sign in her front yard.

Sowers lives in a small house on the main road heading north out of Mercersburg in southern central Pennsylvania. Nineteenth-century president James Buchanan, who supported the rights of slave owners, was born near here. The only Pennsylvanian to be elected president, he held office in the lead-up to the American Civil War, echoes of which can be found in the historical signs along the roads and in the attitudes of the people.

Southern Pennsylvania is almost all white and a place of guns, God and hard economic times. Obama will be lucky to win more than a handful of votes here.

This is the political market that Obama so offended when his private comments to a wealthy fundraising gathering in San Francisco were splashed across cable TV last week.

In a scratchy recording, Obama can be heard stumbling into a clumsy explanation of political conservatism in rural areas and small towns: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them - or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment - as a way to explain their frustrations."

"We are a bunch of rednecks?" Sowers asks on the porch of her house. "I think there are a lot of people who are angry about that."

Sowers, retired from the military, where she held an administrative position, is an avowed Hillary Clinton supporter. She is the kind of blue-collar Democrat who should ensure a Clinton victory in Pennsylvania's Democratic primary on Tuesday.

Sowers's tired eyes reflect the daily grind. She lives with her night-shift working husband, 18-year-old son and 22-year-old daughter, who is a single parent with an autistic son. But, as Sowers says, she's not bitter; she is quick to smile and share a joke. And she's certainly no redneck. Sowers's son, who dates a young woman of mixed race, is supporting Obama, she notes.

"He's angry at me for making this sign, but I don't think he's paying close enough attention," she says. To Sowers, Obama cannot be trusted because of his long-term association with a "wacko" preacher: his pastor in south Chicago, Jeremiah Wright, who is known for occasionally incendiary sermons that Obama's critics say are anti-American.

However, while Sowers's anger at Obama's comments is understandable, other attitudes in these parts are far moredisturbing.

"He was a jerk for saying that," comments Sowers's neighbour Kym Dayley, standing outside her home by her pick-up truck, chatting to her 14-year-old son, Jeffrey, and a friend, Kim Reed, 41.

"The way he comes across TV, I think he is really cocky," she adds. But the conversation soon turns to the fears among poorer whites that Obama was alluding to in his comments, the kind of fears that are likely to be played on even more in a general election.

I ask Dayley if the colour of Obama's skin has anything to do with some of the attitudes to the Illinois senator in southern Pennsylvania. "To me it's a problem, yeah," she responds. "I'm not picking on where he is from, but it just doesn't seem right to me."

Why? "Now you are going to get me into the whole religion thing," Dayley nervously says. Drawing on the Book of Revelations, she says that from what she has read, the signs indicate we are near the "end of days". And then this: "I just know from a lot of reading and things that have come to pass that I think he is the Antichrist." In Dayley's view, the US is being duped by a charismatic messenger of Satan.

Her friend Reed looks on impassively during this remarkable exchange and I ask her if she holds the same view. "No," she says, adding Obama will probably win the Democratic nomination and she may even vote for him. I ask Dayley whether she can stay friends with someone who helps elect the Antichrist. She shrugs and says it will be her friend's decision and that is fine with her. But Dayley's fears are shared among some of her other friends, she says.

Even the non-church-going Sowers entertains the thought, when I ask her if she agrees with her neighbour. "I had wondered about that," she says.

Driving north, past prominent calls to worship - such as a huge sign on the side of a barn proclaiming "God's country" - I stop at one of the bigger gun shops in the area, East Coast Gun Sales, to ask what the management thinks about Obama's comments. "We don't comment on political matters," one salesman says, leaning over a window box full of handguns. The customers are similarly uncommunicative, except one tall young man who is checking out gun-sights. "Barack, Barack, Barack Obama," he says in a mocking tone. "Well, I'll tell you this, I ain't voting for no woman and I ain't voting for no ***."

Given such attitudes, it is little wonder that Obama won Secret Service protection soon after he announced his candidacy in February last year, at an earlier stage in the election cycle than any other presidential contender in history.

But, much to the consternation of central Pennsylvanians such as Dayley and the bigot in the gun shop, a Clinton win in the state is unlikely to stop Obama's inexorable crawl to the party's nomination, followed by a better than even money shot at the White House. The proportional contest means Obama will likely end up with at most 20 fewer delegates than Clinton on Tuesday. He leads her by more than 160 pledged delegates and in the 10 remaining contests there is no way she can catch up.

But because the race has been so close, neither can get to the 2024 delegates needed to clinch the nomination, and the contest will be decided by the nearly 800 super delegates. These elected congressmen, state governors, party officials and the like are, in the end, likely to cast their votes in keeping with the popular vote. In that case, Obama wins.

Clinton's tactic is to highlight Obama's vulnerabilities in a general election; it's a coded message but you can see the fruits of Clinton's labour and Obama's missteps in places such as southern Pennsylvania, reinforcing a subtle - or obvious - antipathy to blacks. Bill Clinton has attempted to pigeonhole Obama as a Jesse Jackson, while Hillary Clinton engaged in some baiting in her televised debate with Obama this week.

In full attack mode, she questioned his links with Wright, but also brought up Louis Farrakhan, the contentious Nation of Islam leader who endorsed Obama in February. (Obama says it was unsolicited backing and he has pointedly "rejected and denounced" his support.)

"As leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to," Clinton said in the debate. "And ... it wasn't only the specific remarks but some of the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, you know, these are problems. And they raise questions in people's minds. And so this is a legitimate area ... for people to be exploring and trying to find answers."

Throughout southern Pennsylvania one hears whispers that Obama is a closet Muslim (he has attended the same Christian church for more than 20 years) or, indeed, that he is the Antichrist. In the hundreds of kilometres I've driven along the back roads of this region, I saw just one sign in a front yard supporting Obama. But what Obama has shown is that by mobilising the younger, educated class across campuses, as well as African Americans and wealthy whites, he can overcome the bigoted views that many still hold in old Civil War lands. This makes it highly likely he will win the Democratic nomination, but the message from Clinton is that he will struggle with poor whites because of his race when it comes to the general election.

Pennsylvania is a swing state and narrowly went to John Kerry in the 2004 presidential race (half of the voters were registered gun owners). The state, along with Ohio, where Clinton easily beat Obama in early March, are critical in the 2007 presidential race.

It leaves super delegates with a difficult decision. One advantage for Obama is that Republican nominee John McCain is also disliked in places such as southern Pennsylvania on account of his relatively liberal views on matters such asimmigration.

Dayley says she is not going to vote for anyone, a view I've heard often, which means any problem for McCain in these parts could be cancelled out, though we are still months away from the election and there are signs McCain is beginning to gather some steam.

But even if they do vote for McCain, the traditional red state Republican turnout in small towns and rural areas in America's middle may well fail to match the huge turnout Obama is winning in the big cities and along the liberal east and west coasts, underlying the perennial political divide in a not-so-united US.

Uck. I know. It's the kind of thing that makes my slap my hand over my forehead (much like Stan is seen to do in South Park, anyone who watches that). I wish there were an emoticon for that. It just conveys a whole lot of this "WTF I can't believe you people are in the same country as me and yet I can which is really pathetic?!"
Outside - as long as McCain doesn't win, I don't really mind either Obama or Clinton. McCain will be worse than either of them.
Interesting.  A couple of points to make here...

1.  I guess I'm one of the few who was sadly not at all surprised by the comments made by the interviewees in the article.  I hadn't heard that particular sentiment before, myself, but I'm not surprised.  I DO know people who beleive the end days are near and that the fighting in the middle east is proof of that somehow, but I've not heard anyone say Obama is the Antichrist.
Amusing, isn't it, that they get all offended at his comments and then the first reason they offer up for not voting for him is- lo and behold- an incredibly radical religious reason.  And they all own guns and pickup trucks.  And they say they're not rednecks?

2.  Admittedly, I live in a college town in Central PA, so there's much higher education here and less rednecks, but for the most part the rednecks I know are damn proud of it, and they don't mind being told they're bitter and cling to their guns, because they are and they do.  Obama was 100% accurate and most of the people he was referring to agree that he was accurate.  Only the ones who are already violently opposed to his candidacy are arguing.

3.  McCain is the worst.  Hillary is bad.  Obama isn't great, but is the best shot we've got.
That being said, I've heard from most sources I've checked that if Hillary wins the nomination, the race for president will be tight; and if Obama wins, he's a shoe-in for president.  So while I tend to agree with waht Korrigan said, I think this year is different- mostly because, as BobB points out, people are so incredibly sick of Bush and want a good, clean shift in direction.  The republicans are totally failing to sucessfully adress some of the issues that are most important to Americans right now, including the war and Global Warming.  They are also failing to properly adress issues like the economy, but unfortuneatly, most americans don't know enough to realize that the Rpublican economic plan is a disaster.  To be honest, the democratic economic plan is a one-way road to reccesion, too, but the republican plan will take us there faster, deeper, and be harder to get out of.  At least the democratic plan offers the possibility of more extensive, positive changes later.

atypical Wrote:
They think it is owed to them....(in my opinion)


Oh I don't know that I agree with that, Atypical. Yes I know it's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I just think that if what you said is in fact true we'd be seeing a lot more of Bill on the campaign trail than we have.

Timelord Wrote:

atypical Wrote:
They think it is owed to them....(in my opinion)


Oh I don't know that I agree with that, Atypical. Yes I know it's your opinion and you're entitled to it. I just think that if what you said is in fact true we'd be seeing a lot more of Bill on the campaign trail than we have.


Is that possible?  Honestly, Bill came here to give a speech but Hillary didn't.  We've seen way more of him than her.  Rolleyes

Interesting! I didn't know that!
I find it interesting how this election year, it seems that the Democratic Nomination race is way bigger than the actual presidential election. (There was a joke on a late-night show recently, where they said, "turns out we're going to finally find out who the Democratic nominee is two years into McCain's presidency" or something like that. It just seems so ferocious.)

On a side note, I find it interesting that they spent so much time covering what his pastor said. To me, I see church as like a kind of schooling, and a pastor would be a kind of teacher. I've had a number of teachers (particularly in history/social science) that I've had major disagreements with, but I still learn valuable things from them. It's kind of a funny experience, when you're very liberal and find teachers who are too liberal for you - couldn't say I would've ever thought that would happen, growing up as I did in a wealthy conservative region. Smile )

earthmonkey Wrote:
I find it interesting how this election year, it seems that the Democratic Nomination race is way bigger than the actual presidential election. (There was a joke on a late-night show recently, where they said, "turns out we're going to finally find out who the Democratic nominee is two years into McCain's presidency" or something like that. It just seems so ferocious.)

On a side note, I find it interesting that they spent so much time covering what his pastor said. To me, I see church as like a kind of schooling, and a pastor would be a kind of teacher. I've had a number of teachers (particularly in history/social science) that I've had major disagreements with, but I still learn valuable things from them. It's kind of a funny experience, when you're very liberal and find teachers who are too liberal for you - couldn't say I would've ever thought that would happen, growing up as I did in a wealthy conservative region. Smile )


It's interesting you should bring that up.  Although I understand it, I'm a little sad he distanced himself so much from his pastor when that happened.  Of course, you are partly right, but the media is blowing this way out of proportion.  Everyone has some things that they disagree with their friends, family, and teachers about, no matter how close they are.  Heck, me and my boyfriend have very nearly opposite ideologies in many respects, and we get along anyway.
But more importantly, the comments made by the pastor and the snippets of his speeches were all taken out of the context needed to fully understand them- not only the entirety of the speech, but an understanding of the church tradition he comes from.  Rev. Wright is a pastor in an old tradition of exaggeration, allegory, and shock-and-awe speeches.  This puts off outsiders because they don't understand it.  Yes, he did say we should be damning america.  But he didn't mean by this that he hates america or that he thinks all americans are evil.  What he was saying was that america is in a mess and has done unspeakably horrible things and it's time we stopped pretending we never did.  It's time we stopped acting like we are superior to other countries and can do no wrong.  That's still not a message many americans want to hear, but it's also not what the media are making it out to be.
As for Rev. Wright's relation to Farrakhan- well, again, we all have things on whcih we disagree with our friends and teachers.  Obama has never done anything to indicate that he in any way supports Farrakahn's message or that he is in any way anti-semitic.  That, too, was fabricated by the media.

atypical Wrote:
In what wealthy conservative region did you grow up?  (brought up in same) (still live in similar)


Southern California...yeah. No wonder the liberal autie without much money was ostracized. Cool

BobB Wrote:
McCain is *very* much for the war, and the *vast* majority of Americans want to be *out* of Iraq! Add to that the fact that the Bush Administration is *finally* being seen as a dismal failure, and that McCain is pretty much just an extension of Bush, and you *don't* have a particularly strong GOP candidate...


Not too knowledgeable about American voting habits, are you?  The majority of American voters vote genetically.  They vote for whatever party mommy and daddy voted for.  Of the remainder, the majority vote knee-jerk, either voting their skin color or gender when such issues come up.  The tiny minority left decides almost all the elections in the USA, and they just aren't predictable.

I remember all the Democrats in 2004 'splainin' over and over about how Bush just could NOT hold on against their boy.

Well, at least we don't have the fraudulent email this time around claiming that Bush will suspend elections, like was circulated in 2004.  In 2000, the email claimed that Clinton would suspend elections.

Luai_lashire Wrote:
particular sentiment before, myself, but I'm not surprised.  I DO know people who beleive the end days are near and that the fighting in the middle east is proof of that somehow, but I've not heard anyone say Obama is the Antichrist.



If he's the Antichrist, then good little fundies should all vote for him, thus hastening the Return of the Lord!

Korrigan Wrote:
IMHO, there is not a snowball's chance in...that Obama will be elected.  If the Pennslyvania comments did not do it, his former Pastor did it.  

The lack of unity with the Democratic voters will cause McCain to be President.  Well, that and racism and sexism.  



As in 2000 and 2004, this will be an election for the Democrats to lose.  The Republicans know this, so they're staying out of the way of the Democrat self-destruction.

Why do Democrats eat their own children when it comes to political campaigns?  Year after year, I have been amazed at how the Democratic party manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  Even when they "win" (Congress in 2006), they act afterwards as if they lost--c. f., do-nothing Congress of 2006.  The last Democrat who won a Presidential election essentially campaigned like a Republican.  Oddly enough, his business/commerce policies were remarkably Republican (old guard Republican, not neocon) in practice, too.
Oh come on, GW! How can the Republicans care about your money when the economy is all but up the creek without the metaphorical paddle? It's been a long time since my Aussie dollar was worth so much in the US!
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's