Apparently Fox, Drudge, and Politico are just tired of a slow news week and are looking for something - anything - to whip up a frenzy over, and of course the go-to people for quotes on this are the elite of elite cons like Grover Norquist and Karl Rove. I mean, when is the last time those guys had a conversation with someone making less than six figures… besides the help?
So here are Obama’s full comments:
Here’s how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long. They feel so betrayed by government that when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn’t buy it. And when it’s delivered by — it’s true that when it’s delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama, then that adds another layer of skepticism.
But — so the questions you’re most likely to get about me, ‘Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What is the concrete thing?’ What they wanna hear is so we’ll give you talking points about what we’re proposing — to close tax loopholes, uh you know uh roll back the tax cuts for the top 1%, Obama’s gonna give tax breaks to uh middle-class folks and we’re gonna provide healthcare for every American.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And 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.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.
America’s tired of the distortion and game-playing by the right wing noise machine, and its pretty sad the failing Clinton campaign felt they needed to jump on this (perhaps it had something to do with the coverage of President Clinton bringing back the phony Bosnia story).
One wonders where all this media concern about elitism was when John McCain was raising millions of dollars in the home of a British Lord.
Oh, that’s right. He’s a Republican. And he’s THE John McCain.
NBC’s Chris Matthews: “The press loves McCain. We’re his base.”
UPDATE: It’s intriguing that Dems are never supposed to voice any criticism of rural America (which isn’t what Sen. Obama did) but Republicans are allowed to insult San Francisco, Massachusetts, the coasts, etc. It’s like there’s a double standard or something.
UPDATE 2: David Sirota points out that John McCain said almost the same thing. McCain:
“It’s the influx of illegals into places where they’ve never seen a Hispanic influence before,” McCain told me. “You probably see more emotion in Iowa than you do in Arizona on this issue. I was in a town in Iowa, and twenty years ago there were no Hispanics in the town. Then a meatpacking facility was opened up. Now twenty per cent of their population is Hispanic. There were senior citizens there who were–’concerned’ is not the word. They see this as an assault on their culture, what they view as an impact on what have been their traditions in Iowa, in the small towns in Iowa. So you get questions like ‘Why do I have to punch 1 for English?’ ‘Why can’t they speak English?’ It’s become larger than just the fact that we need to enforce our borders.”
Of course, there was and will be no similar outcry for the things McCain says. Drudge and Politico and Fox won’t be working in concert to tell the world about what John McCain does (this is why we have a progressive blogosphere in the first place - the media fails at its basic job). It not that they can’t. They won’t.
They are his base.
Even out of context sounds pretty much right on the money to me. I grew up in a small town in Northern California and I know exactly what happens when the jobs leave. In our case, it was the lumber mills that closed down, but when the jobs left, it pretty much decimated a lot of the communities. Since this was spotted owl country, the scapegoats in our case were the environmentalists.
I’m pretty sure that Ben Smith doesn’t quite understand that, unlike in urban and suburban areas where you have an assortment of industries to go look for work in, if you’re in a single industry town, there’s nothing to fall back on. The town falls apart. That kind of thing can breed a little bit of bitterness, don’t you think?
Oliver
Talk Left is all over this story. Armando, the biggest fake since Carol Doda’s 1965 silicone breasts, has been orgasmic leading the attacks on the candidate he favors. Remember Big Tent/Armando is “for Obama”. Very funny joke.
Why do Talk Left and the pro-Hillary Blogs travel with Fox and Michelle Malkin?
This is pathetic the way this story is being played. Hillary, Armando and the whole Clinton Gang are morally bankrupt.
(digressing…) Why does it say “4 Responses to “Media For McCain: Full Context…”, yet I only see two? (Jefe Le Gran’s and tjproudamerican’s)
Honesty…I can see why the Clintons wouldn’t understand the appeal of that!
from swimming freestyle:
“Barack Obama is a remarkably eloquent man and turning into a remarkably capable politician. But if the Senator believes it’s smart to insult voters from a state critical to your success, he’s hit one of the worst false notes yet in his campaign.
Yeah, I know what his campaign said, and that may have been what he meant. But a sophisticated candidate doesn’t refer to voters in language that can be construed as derogatory or insulting. Obama asserted Pennsylvania voters are bitter and so simple and lacking in maturity and intelligence that they address their frustration by clinging to primitive and reactionary crutches rather than addressing their problems in constructive ways.
It’s divisive. And not the way to attract the voters you need most.”
http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com
Now all we need is for Clinton to point out that Obama gave this talk in San Francisco. I can hope, can’t I?.
Here’s Obama’s response.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sc9PepjyDow
But wait, wait my friends. Wasn’t John McCain just quoted saying something very similar in the New Yorker back in December 2007? Why …
Whoa! Johnny. Johnny. Johnny. Google is your friend.
The extra context doesn’t clear it up for me. Still sounds like an insult.
I did enjoy the Clinton Show today, though.
Grand Pajandrum, you’re my new best friend, thank you.
Oliver, thanks for the link man!
The “bitterness” part isn’t what’s hurting Obama. It’s the “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” part. It does sound elitist and condescending, a fact highlighted all the more so by his audience. It basically says that those issues that people do care about don’t really matter, that they only think that way because they don’t know any better, and that they should care about what he thinks they should care about. Imagine things in the reverse, if a white Republican went to a fundraiser in Mississippi said that black people are just bitter because of years of failed government programs, so that they “cling to racism or slavery or drug laws or profiling or crazy conspiracy theories as a way to explain their frustrations”. How would that go over? This also punches a hole in Obama’s efforts to cast himself as skeptical on trade deals or pro-2nd Amendment, which he’s needed to do in Pennsylvania.
Oh, and as to why Republicans can get away with needling San Francisco or the coasts, the operative standard is electoral politics. Republicans won’t ever win in those places, and don’t need to. Democrats do need to win the votes of at least some level of people in non-coastal states who do “cling to guns or religion” or are skeptical on trade or immigration.
Why did I have to come to an unaffiliated internet blog to hear Obama’s words in their entirety? Would have taken MSNBC an extra 15 seconds to show it all, instead of 5 minutes of the usual talking heads talking ABOUT what they won’t let us hear.
Meanwhile nobody disputes the accuracy of Obama’s remarks, initial or follow-up. Damned for observations that could be found in any newsweekly by any anonymous journalist–what’s wrong with this picture?
It isn’t elitist if it is the truth. I have lived with the people Obama is talking about and he is right. They are powerless to change anything and they are scared. They vote against their economic best interest because they are distracted by the latest shiny thing the GOP dangles in from of them (gun regulation, abortion, gays, illegals) meanwhile they also vote in tax breaks for the richest among us.
They are ignorant and are very happy to stay that way. It is easier to live following someone than leading the charge and these people, while industrious in some ways, are lazy like that. It takes balls and ovaries to change and most of these folks gave control of that part of their psyche to the religious institutions they slavishly follow.
Once my town was solidly D, after abortion was legalized it swung 180 over night. Now it is mostly R but as the population ages it is swinging more to I, rather than any one party. I hold out some slim hope it may change more. Time will tell.
As someone who has lived all over the US, it isn’t just this way in the rural communities. You can find the same mind set in cities and suburbs, in states like KY, GA, VA, IL, CA,and UT. Obama wasn’t just talking about rural people he was talking about all people, EXCEPT for the rich elitist everyone claims he is.
McCain left his wife after she was disfigured in an accident but the media doesn’t care
The last thing that the corporate lobbyists want, and the politicians that they support want, is for the majority of people in American to understand what is actually going on in this country. If the majority of people understood that decisions are made on issues concerning their lives, decisions that are never even discussed in the media, they might be upset that they had no opportunity for input. Well guess what, people DO understand that. They have very little control over many aspects of the economy. No one expects it to be simple, everyone understands that it is complicated. But it would be nice to give folks the opportunity to have some actual input into the process. That is what Barack Obama is offering. People hear that, and wonder, does he really mean it? McCain and Clinton hasten to say he doesn’t. Who do YOU believe?
The extra context doesn’t clear it up for me. Still sounds like an insult.
Color me surprised.
Democrats do need to win the votes of at least some level of people in non-coastal states who do “cling to guns or religion” or are skeptical on trade or immigration.
And yet pointing that out is elitist? I don’t understand. This is the complexity of Obama’s speeches; maybe you disagree with what he says, but there is an element of truth that is undeniable.
And yet pointing that out is elitist? I don’t understand.
He’s saying something that is true. It always confuses folks when a politician does that.
But seriously, is it too much to ask for the media to give the context, to not leave out the parts that are more important? More to the point is it too much to ask that his opponents read or see the whole thing before shooting their mouths?
No way in the world I’ll vote for Obama, but I have to give respect for a campaign that thinks big.
I mean, if you’re going to shoot yourself in the foot, why not use an RPG?
Does anyone remember when, as First Lady, Hillary Clinton said this:
I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.
Here’s what a reporter for Frontline said when “reporting” the comment:
Never mind that Clinton went on to say feminism means the right to choose work, or home, or both; the damage had been done. She’d been tagged an elitist and an ultra - feminist.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html
For Clinton supporters to slam Obama for his comments about small towns is beyond hypocritical. The very same tactics that conservatives used to attack the Clintons during his presidency, are the same tactics Clinton supporters are now using to attack Obama. They are, in actuality, running the conservative media play book against a liberal progressive Democratic. They are, in effect, writing John McCain’s general election campaign ads for him. If, by some miracle, Clinton wins the nomination, what are her supporters going to do when conservatives trot out the cookie quote all over again? How could they possibly hope to deflect it? Quite simply, they wouldn’t be able to because they’ve now validated the reactionary premises on which such tactics are based. Way to go.
When matt61 writes something like this: “I mean, if you’re going to shoot yourself in the foot, why not use an RPG?” he has no idea of the true magnitude of the disaster these kinds of attacks are for all democrats at every level of the political spectrum.
Obama’s comments are what they are and I think they are accurate in the way that religion or guns or anti-trade sentiment can play in the lives of people, whether they live in small towns or big cities. When fellow democrats turn around and attack Obama on the same grounds that Hillary was attacked by conservatives when she was just First Lady, they are taking and RPG to the democratic party and the progressive ideals and policies it claims to represent. That’s a much bigger problem. It reveals the shortsighted focus of the Clinton campaign and its supporters. They aren’t just hurting Obama, they are hurting the party as a whole and the very agenda they claim to support.
Way to go, folks. Way to go.
No way in the world I’ll vote for Obama,
Why is that, matt?
but I have to give respect for a campaign that thinks big.
I mean, if you’re going to shoot yourself in the foot, why not use an RPG?
As fafaroo rightly points out, it is hard to use an RPG on yourself.
This, too, shall pass. Obama remains the strongest opponent against McCain as summarized here. http://acropolisreview.com/2008/04/top-reasons-to-give-barack-obama-your.html
Oliver, I like the blog, but between the variously named Jay’s and the assorted other twits (shooting oneself with an RPG?), you’ve got the dumbest trolls around..
he slipped again.
Why did I have to come to an unaffiliated internet blog to hear Obama’s words in their entirety? Would have taken MSNBC an extra 15 seconds…
Probably because it doesn’t provide any additional useful context.
“Of course, there was and will be no similar outcry for the things McCain says.”
For a couple of reasons: 1) people expect Republicans to say mean-spirited stuff. They’ve been doing it for the past three decades! and 2) the media loves John McCain.
Whoever ends up being the Dem nominee will face stiff competition in the general election. They will be running against McCain AND the media.
BAC