’)
McQuain at Q and O:
Obama endorses reparations
I pointed out, yesterday, the latest in redistributionist schemes being cooked up ala “global warming”. Dale notes that the belief in a Democratic win seems to be bringing these sorts of ideas and potential claims to the fore as they line up for their hopeful piece of the pie.
What did Sen. Obama actually say?
In answering that question and a follow-up on whether he thought reparations were in order for Native Americans and African Americans, Obama gave a nuanced answer.
“The most important thing for the American government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds,” Obama said.
He explained that Native Americans were doing worse than any other group by every measure, including high unemployment rates and living in “deplorable” housing conditions.
“I’m more concerned about delivering a better life,” Obama said.
He said as far as reparations were concerned that he was more interested in strategies to lift people up from the legacy of discrimination. Such strategies would include improving inner city schools, so students received a quality education.
Obama also said that programs for health care and education for everyone in America would be among the best way to help disadvantaged individuals because such programs will disproportionally affect and benefit minorities because they are suffering most.
Oh, so, he doesn’t support reparations.
ALSO: Instapundit just makes up that Obama said America’s history was unusually tragic. He never said that. Of course, it’s sort of intriguing that a white upper class male from the south doesn’t think there’s anything tragic in our history of note. Heh, indeed.
Obama: “I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged,” the Democratic presidential hopeful said.”
Instapundit: Does Barack Obama think that American history is unusually “tragic”…
Yeah, he tossed in a gratuitous italic “unusually” but it wasn’t in quotes. So how do you get that “Instapundit just makes up that Obama said America’s history was unusually tragic.”
Seems to me your indulging in the same slight distortion of what someone actually said that he is.
Nice pic, Oliver. Not Kim Kardashian, but still. Vintage 1940? How about crediting the photog, if known.
“a white upper class male from the south doesn’t think there’s anything tragic in our history”
Oh no, man. We’re America, f yeah! Whatever we do, we’re on the side of the freakin’ angels.
Instapundit just makes up that Obama said America’s history was unusually tragic.
While Glenn threw in the unusually in the form of a question, he didn’t accuse Obama of saying it because he didn’t include it in the quote. Sean’s right. You’re complaining about Glenn doing something you’re actually doing.
InstaCracker makes stuff up? Why, this is about as noteworthy as a Ryan Howard strikeout.
Look, McQuain and his fellow George Allen confederates are simply paralyzed with fear in the face of an Obama presidency. Look for the attacks and lie to get more hysterical as it becomes apparent McSame’s candidacy is failing.
It doesn’t matter that Obama wants reparations and is too afraid to publicly announce it while quakers (defended by Baptists since 1775) and non-American-Americans make excuses for him.
It doesn’t matter because reparations will not be paid. Period.
Yes, it’s a distortion to quote someone’s own words:
Why would anyone think Obama was talking about reparations after he said that?
Remember when Oliver actually dropped words that McCain said in order to claim he was willing to fight in Iraq for 100 years, and then innocently claimed they were McCain’s words?
Now we have Obama’s own words without any slicing, and Oliver calls it a “distortion.”
Daniel,
Are those the same Baptists/Puritans who hanged Quakers 100 years earlier?
Gee, thanks.
No slicing, JWG?
The words you quote are in the excerpt Oliver provides at the top of the post. Did you see the part just a couple of grafs down, the part that Oliver helpfully posted in bold type?
while quakers (defended by Baptists since 1775)
Thanks, Baptists.
If you have any info about that, daniel, I’m interested.
Perhaps I missed the part where he said he opposed reparations?
The part “helpfully” in bold does not provide Obama’s words; it provides the reporter’s interpretation.
In order to slice off someone’s quote, a quote is needed in the first place.
McQuain gives pseudo-intellectual wingnut pseudo-libertarians a bad name.
Yes, providing the actual politician’s words rather than a reporter’s interpretation gives a group a bad name. Idiot.
Where is the direct quote where Obama explained he was interested in strategies to lift people up?
All you have done is summarize what YOU say Obama said rather than quote him directly.
Interesting that at the same time you include the quote on reparations.
Why not include a direct quote? Or at least a link?
Huh? How can I be told my quote is included in what Oliver posted and then be told I haven’t quoted him?
My quote is in all the papers. Look it up. What Oliver included afterward is not a quote. It is a reporter’s summary.
Either Obama is for reparations or he is against them. Why can’t he just make it plain? Why does he need to say to a question about reparations that we need more than government talk; we need government deeds? How does that NOT sound like support for reparations when that was the question?
“Why does he need to say to a question about reparations that we need more than government talk; we need government deeds?”
Because Obama clearly believes that reparations would represent “government talk” and that he would more prefer “government deeds” (“delivering a better life”). The very fact that he contrasted the idea of reparation payments with “delivering a better life” implies, of course, that Obama feels that such payments would not “deliver a better life”; therefore, Obama did not endorse reparations.
Jay, even though you are right about Oliver and Instapundit, I still don’t believe that should let the latter off the hook here. It’s pretty clear, at least to me, that with Instapundit’s snarky “question”, he’s trying to say that the very fact that Obama would want to see the “tragic history” of America acknowledged indicates that Obama probably believes that the country’s history was unusually (there’s something wrong with my italics button on my computer, just picture the word “unusually” in italicized form) tragic.