Steve Lopez: A God and Guns America
Speaking as a former resident of Pennsylvania, and as Time magazine's American Scene columnist -- a job that took me to nearly every state in the country -- I feel compelled to say that Sen. Barack Obama's so-called controversial comments about life, fears and anger in small towns are essentially fair and accurate.
Was it a generalization to say that people find comfort in religion and ammunition, and grow suspicious of people unlike themselves in difficult times? Yes. But there is much truth in what he said. It really is a God and Guns America, and it's easy to find five minutes outside of Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and San Francisco, and even in those big cities to a lesser degree.
It might not have been politically smart for Obama to say what he said, but that's what's wrong with the campaign trail. It's a place where speaking your mind is not only discouraged, it's attacked by opponents who reduce politics to pablum, and we all suffer in the end.



HRC did a grave diservice to women and young girls alike this past weekened.
She sent them a loud and clear message that the only way to advance as POUS is to act like a man by toting guns and drinking whisky and beer.
This is exactly the type of bad behavior and misperceptions that women have been fighting to as part of there quest for equality in the workplace.
I have absolutely nothing against owning guns, hunting, or drinking. I do however think it is a travesty to use those activities as examples of what it takes women to succeed.
It is a sad day in American that not a single newswriter, blogger, or political pundent made these observations.
Posted by: Sylvia | April 14, 2008 at 12:53 PM
politics isnt about right or wrong. its about getting elected to help your financial supporters.
obama's candid assessment reminds people that all politics is
about self-interest and they dont want to be reminded of that fact.
the country is bitter and rightly so.
in a profit before people scenario that we live in, those that dont
offer the powers that be some tangible return are soon forgotten.
obama's sin was not dumbing down his opinions just to get elected
(like mcbush or clinton)
Posted by: dick bohanon | April 14, 2008 at 01:01 PM
No one likes ideas, opinions and discourse in America anymore. I would not care if Berack were muslem, if he knew he was American first. I do not care that he has issues with religion and guns or abortion, as long as the people have thier rights. In fact, I do not care if people have guns, they have five to every person in Canada and not even near the crime. But then you can buy codiene and other drugs legally. Americans can not handle the truth about themselves and thier own ambiguity. It is, we are, an immature people. Maturity is voting for who will best serve us as a whole not every little group who "Needs thier feelings never to be hurt" wa wa. I do not expect he will pass the equel rights amendment upon entering office and Hilary would, oh well. Women seem pretty used to it. He is fine, Hilary is fine. No one can move the mountain of our Oil, Heath Care, Pharmacy owned government. No one. It should be interesting to watch him try.
Posted by: economics | April 14, 2008 at 01:03 PM
Obama also made it clear that in times of bitterness we cling to what we believe in, therefore it is not at all a slight toward religion or guns to say what he did. Voting on issues like God and guns have substituted for rallies for jobs and economic stimuli, therefore people never get anywhere because they've given up on the government helping them on anything else.
This is a Rohrschach Test: those who wish to turn it against Obama will (and Hillary's support base being mostly people with high school education or less falls right into the trap) and those smart enough and educated enough to tolerate nuances beyond sound bites will see what Obama is talking about.
Not the best POLITICAL move, but like race another topic that we need to discuss and deal with before this country can improve. Clearly some like Hillary and McCain just want to be elected, a campaign with no goal for any improvement for the masses but just to get the candidate the office, so they'll steer clear and mock Obama for speaking what everyone in politics already knows.
Hillary drinking beer and talking like she's a CLOSET REDNECK, just to woo a few more votes, is the saddest sight in politics right now.
Posted by: Jim | April 14, 2008 at 01:07 PM
One more thing: of course the bitter people don't like to be reminded that they are indeed bitter and pessimistic about things. It hurts to hear the truth sometimes.
Posted by: Jim | April 14, 2008 at 01:10 PM
"..and those smart enough and educated enough to tolerate nuances beyond sound bites will see what Obama is talking about."
Well said. Unfortunately, the dumbing down of our masses is where the real issues lie. Funding for education is continually reduced; is it any wonder then that the uneducated and uninformed elect our politicians?
Sounds like a underlying scheme to me.
Posted by: Rex Markel | April 14, 2008 at 01:35 PM
genius. no one disputes that voters are concerned with "God and guns"
the issue is BO's implication that people are too stupid to know their economic interest and bc of that stupidity vote based on something else, such as guns and god. thats what he said, whether you accept that or not is another matter.
Posted by: Come on, BO stepped in it | April 14, 2008 at 01:52 PM
Jim
So anyone who doesn't think like you on economics and social issues is a red neck?
good to know you are so very tolerant. so i guess its ok when others stereotype a liberal such as yourself as some homophobic slur or call you an elitist, the tag fits and isn't in anyway inappropriate?
of course not. obviously that nuance you claim to have doesn't allow you to critique your own value system.
Posted by: Redneck? Come on, self proclaimed enlightened people | April 14, 2008 at 01:57 PM
there is an old chinese saying, "if you want to lead, you must first put yourself below the people." Yes, let us hear the candidates, free to speak their mind, but in a campaign where every word is political, this little slip speaks volumes about his true feelings. If he had served in office for many years, he maybe could voice such feelings. But Obama is an unknown. HIs record is thin. The voters don't know him, and vice versa. A first timer, running for president, voicing such comments, especially about blue collar working stiffs, makes him sound superior and arrogant. Are Hillary, Obama and MaCain really the best leaders America can produce? mediocre comes to mind.
Posted by: Wilbur Varela | April 14, 2008 at 02:05 PM
Obama was eventually going to bury himself. This is the beginning and anyone who is running for president and really does have such contempt and views for many parts of America is unelectable in my opinion. What a sap this guy is - so much for hope.
Posted by: Jay C. Benson | April 14, 2008 at 02:05 PM
Mr. Lopez, as a respected columnist i am glad to see you taking what i consider the side of the fence that should be stood on. I think it's a bunch of political bull that is being banded about concerning Obama's comments, because as you agree they are essentially fair and accurate. Yes, i do too feel that more than most of America hides behind ones own ignorant fears. Obvious as a country we elected the Bush family to a total of 12 years to do the damage to the entire world that that family has done. Let's see....Neil and the savings & loan debacle. Daddy Bush and Iran-Contra and now let's see, son W. and his crackpot strategy on the war on terrorism. Yes, my fellow Americans we do need a severe wake-up call. Also, believe this....a lot of us won't be waking up from our fears before we die, so change amongst the people is along way off and change does come from the people, so if we want true change....WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!
Posted by: andrew boyd | April 14, 2008 at 02:14 PM
I heartily agree with you. Obama needs to realize though that in such brief speeches, he cannot begin to address the meanings and roots of the fear and subsequent pride taken in guns and 'god' (whatever god it is out there who believes in killing- not the God I learn from). I fully agree with him, but I can also see how his failure to respond to the truth with a more thought out response, one that is truly from a compassionate heart that wants to work out the lies and speak truths into the situation, would get him into trouble. Rarely do people change the way they think from a few quotes against them. It takes someone more than a presidential candidate to change a village's mind. It takes a village to raise a child and it takes another village to help the children unlearn what they have been taught.
Posted by: Ariel Climer | April 14, 2008 at 02:18 PM
Of course Americans are bitter. Look at where our economy is and where our economy is heading. It hurts to see our country treated like nothing while politicians in Washington are having a blast. I want to change that. I think we need a different approach to take care of business. We need to elect that person that will bring new ideas. I honestly think OBAMA has a better chance to bring some change, and to dialog about what is the next thing we need to move forward. For ourselves and our kids.
Posted by: Pachecosita | April 14, 2008 at 02:21 PM
Yeah, so? What's your point Steve? Oh, and it should be the comments 'are' accurate, not 'is' accurate. Gotta love the LA Times.
Posted by: Jayne | April 14, 2008 at 02:33 PM
HRC better watch-out. Scolding someone for telling the truth suggests that she is afraid of truth. Just another example pointing to her lack of leadership. I wonder why her genius focus groups didn't tell her that if she can't advance an argument, she's better-off keeping her mouth shut.
Posted by: John | April 14, 2008 at 02:41 PM
Of Course what he alluded to was true. The blue collar families are very bitter, and they seek comfort in familiar icons, because they are scared too. Truth. Why does the media and HRC & McBush try to disparage a truthful observance? Because they are the problem, not him.
Posted by: Franklin Hall | April 14, 2008 at 02:53 PM
Thanks, Jayne, for the heads-up about the is/are disagreement. Fixed now.
Veronique
Posted by: Veronique | April 14, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Obama was right that for the past 30 years or so there's been a trend toward voting outside one's interests. However, he didn't say it was because they're "too stupid" to look out for themselves. There are many complicated reasons why cultural wedge issues resonate so strongly in this country. "Stupidity" is not one of them.
Posted by: Ben | April 14, 2008 at 02:55 PM
i don't think being a magazine reporter,, (when?) and traveling around is any way to really know the average small town resident in one of the many places with huge job loss. you are as out of touch as Obama if you think people turn to guns and God in bad times, as a 'crutch' you are as condescending as Obama. He did not,by the way, grow up in any kind of deprivation. his single mother was divorced, with an advanced degree,and he attended internationally prestigious schools his entire academic career. he is an elitist and you don't know the difference between being poor and writing about the poor
Posted by: aure lambert | April 14, 2008 at 03:05 PM
Obama's describing gun ownership, religion and opposition to illegal immigration as the pathology of bitter and angry people jumps to the level of bizarre. People are bitter over playing by the rules and trying to earn a living, only to watch those who do not do the same reap the benefits at their expense. Does Obmam find this a sign of emotional illness?
Posted by: caroline | April 14, 2008 at 03:19 PM
i am from a small town, and now live in los angeles, and still say hello to complete strangers. there's as much of a social caste system at work in a tiny town as there is in big town USA, and those who are criticizing senator obama's comments are being nothing if not disingenuous, if NOT completely hypocritical.
i completely agreed with the context of his comments. unfortunately, he stepped in it when he suggested that gun ownership and self-righteous bible-thumping were confined to small towns ;-). seriously, small towns are far more impacted when a major employer departs, because they're so much intimate than their big city counterparts.
Posted by: Kimberly | April 14, 2008 at 03:45 PM
It is amazing to me the spin people are putting on what Obama said.
These remarks were made in a setting where he did not expect them to be heard by the public, and he said exactly what he meant.
Now that it has reached the public, he is spinning it and changing the words and the meaning.
He said that, People cling to religion because they are bitter, that they believe in the right to bear arms because they are bitter.
Also, although no-one is talking about it, he said that the people who don't support him do so because of antipathy towards people who are different.
The truth is that there are people who don't support him because they do not believe he is the best candidate.
He should not try to psycho-analyze people and stereotype they based on his analysis.
He is the most hypocritical person I have ever seen.
He accuses others of racism, but attends a racist church.
He accuses Hillary of dirty politics but pracitices dirty politics non-stop.
He says he is the only one who doesn't take money from the oil companies, when of course that is not true.
He says all of his campaign donations come from small donors, when more than half of them come from very large donors.
He goes thru PA, bowling, feeding cows, and stopping in a bar to have a beer, and then makes fun of Hillary Clinton for drinking in a bar.
People who like Obama will vote for him no matter what, just as the media will defend him no matter what.
If he wins the nomination, McCain will win the general election because the Republican party will make sure he is put under the microscope and all of these problems will be put together for the American people.
Hillary Clinton is the best choice for the democratic nominee.
She has always worked for the American people and will continue to do so.
She believes in America and the American people.
Posted by: cheryl | April 14, 2008 at 03:51 PM
"the issue is BO's implication that people are too stupid to know their economic interest and bc of that stupidity vote based on something else, such as guns and god. thats what he said, whether you accept that or not is another matter."
Did you even read the speech? He didn't say or in any way imply that they are too stupid to know their economic interest. He said that after years of the government doing nothing about their economic problems, that they had given up on voting for economic interest, instead turning to cultural issues. You have to read past the soundbites.
Posted by: L.P. | April 14, 2008 at 03:53 PM
I agree that candidates should feel free to speak their minds. Many people who support gun ownership rights wouldn't otherwise know that Obama believes their desire to retain those rights reflects "bitterness." Some voters prefer that politicians leave their guns alone. These voters should know that Obama does not agree. In addition to pointing out his opposition to the notion of gun rights, he's pointed out that he has a serious lack of respect for people who hold a contrary view to his own. This is quite helpful.
Posted by: Chris | April 14, 2008 at 03:57 PM
RELIGION AND GUNS HAVE EXISTED LONG BEFORE THERE ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. BARACK THINKS EVERYONE IS BITTER LIKE JEREMIAH WRIGHT'S LEGION OF "POOR".
SHOULD EVERYONE SCREAM GOD DAMN AMERICA NOW? BARACK LIVES IN HIS OWN WORLD ( OR JEREMIAH'S) THINKING THAT THE SMALL TOWN AMERICA SHOULD RATHER SCREAM GOD DAMN AMERICA THAN DO SOMETHING USEFUL WITH THEIR LIVES.
REMEMBER THAT ASIAN GUY WHOSE MOTHER WAS KILLED BY LA RIOTERS?
HE WAS IN A VIDEO WITH A GUN DEFENDING HIMSELF.
HE WASNT BITTER BARACK, HE WAS DEFENDING HIMSELF AGAINST PEOPLE WHO WOULD RATHER LOOT AND BLAME SOMEONE ELSE THAN RUN A MOM AND POP STORE JUST LIKE HIS MOTHER DID.
SO SHUT UP BARACK. YOURE A LOON.
Posted by: Liz Wetzel | April 14, 2008 at 03:59 PM
Hillary is trying to steal this election the way she looted the White House china.
Posted by: John | April 14, 2008 at 04:10 PM
As a former Philadelphian (Steve, I used to read your column back home too), and as someone who travelled to and worked in many of the economically depressed areas of my home state, I am not only not offended by Obama's comments, I'm encouraged.
He's right. This has nothing to do with intelligence, this has to do with working class people being systematically disenfranchised by the administrations that court their support, year after election year, and then abandon them. The vacated steel mill towns, the destruction of the family farm, the ruination of the local, community based bank--all have hurt working class people in Pennsylvania (and New Jersey and Ohio and New York and every where else) in a way that middle to upper-middle class Americans never appreciate. They ARE bitter, and they are justifiably bitter.
Posted by: Leigh | April 14, 2008 at 04:13 PM
I'd like to see your stats regarding the campaign contributions and the oil money, Cheryl. I have not heard of these things things and would like to read more.
Plus how can any woman vote for a candidate that takes money from companies involved in wide-spread sexual harrasement suits?
Plus it seems more now that to vote for Hillary would be to vote against Bill Clinton. I don't know why she would try to distance herself from him other than to achieve some small victory. We know that later they will be on the same page as her husband so she could use his name in her campaign.
I applaud the steelworkers in PA for booing her when she went negative. Then again if she didn't go negative, she wouldn't be in the race. I'm glad Barack is taking a positive spin on her remaining in the race...to toughen him up for the General Election.
Posted by: mark | April 14, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Someone please answer this question...
Can anyone, regardless of political experience, articulation, charisma, intelligence, etc., do any worse a job as president as Bush has?
Posted by: RuskinRules | April 14, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Mr.Obama get your spin right. Pennsylvania small town middle class whites are often deeply religious, because they believe with all their heart that being kind to your fellow human beings is the right thing to do, that the golden rule of doing onto others as you would have them do onto you is the path to a better life... to God. They can be immensely religious. They do not do this out of bitterness, but out of love.
As to guns, hunting is part of the Pennsylvania culture; and always has been. Hunting is not being clung to out of bitterness. Pennsylvanians hunt, because they enjoy doing so. With regard to Hillary Clinton's comments about her childhood experience, where her father showed her how to use a gun, I do not hear Hillary claiming that she is a hunter, but rather simply acknowledging her own experience and knowledge of the hunting facet of the PA background. And she is absolutely right. A number of my Pennsylvania cousins do hunt. It is a part of the Pennsylvania culture.
Finally, Mr. Obama, it would be well for you to remember your history. These same little 'bitter' white folk come from the same stock as the good people of Pennsylvania of days gone by, who during the era of slavery helped run away slaves escape via the Pennsylvania underground railway. The people of Pennsylvania come from a very proud heritage.
Mr. Obama it will be well for you to learn and acknowledge that there is no typical American white person.
And the PA polls: ARG Pennsylvania Democrats poll is finding as of today (4/14/08):
Pennsylvania
Clinton 57, Obama 37
Posted by: ElaineE | April 14, 2008 at 04:24 PM
context is everything - check out his audience for these remarks and I think we then get a feel for what this guy is really all about - they knew exactly what he meant and I do too - spin as he might, he just seems all the more arrogant as he explains that we didn't really hear what we just heard - the more we see of the real-life Obama the better - this type of stuff just can't be hidden in the age of internet journalism - see zombietime.com for great photos of the event and an full transcript and partial audio recording
Posted by: anon | April 14, 2008 at 04:28 PM
Many people are angry, as Senator Obama said. However, the connection to guns and religion is whacky. What's he saying?... If all those unemployed folks in PA got jobs they'd suddenly become anti-gun atheists? I don't think so. Try again, Barak, and this time do it without talking down to us. We already know you went to Harvard. No need to rub it in our faces.
Posted by: tom davis | April 14, 2008 at 05:27 PM
Bravo Mr. Lopez! Given the raft of collectivism and socialism that you put forth in your pieces on a regular basis it should come as no surprise that you would agree with Senator Obama's elitist comments. I will be waiting to hear, first from the good Senator and then your agreement, when the former places the finger of blame (and correctly so) on the populations of the trailer parks, ghettos and barrios for their bitterness and clinging to their handouts forced from the productive and their entitlement mentality.
Posted by: Mark Smith | April 14, 2008 at 05:39 PM
But it's guys like you Mister Lopez that sets the story straight. My So Cal ortopedic appliance job basically got shipped to China 28 months ago. I got let go after 22 years and several patents. Bitter F**K yes I was bitter. Thank God I could fall back on my commercial pilots license and my surf board. Obamas' statements were accurate. The competition is so scared of the truth because it's going to bust up a club that has been running this country for decades. That club is lobbyists.
Thank you for having the courage and the honesty to call it for what it is.
Posted by: Mike Castillo | April 14, 2008 at 06:33 PM
mark
I don't know if you actually were interested in the information but I am providing links for you anyway.
All of this information is available for anyone who wants to know.
As far a distancing herself from Bill Clinton. I do not this she did anything of the sort. She said that they have a different view on a particular issue. She has been saying that for a very long time.
I live in Pittsburgh and she was not booed by the steelworkers at the convention center. There were a few Obama supporters in the audience and they were the only ones booing. The Obama campaign is known to have people at events to do this.
You can insult Hillary Clinton all you want but I believe that she is the best candidate. I do not think she is perfect. I do not think I will always agree with her. But I do believe that after watching her career for so many years I know what she is about and who she really is. There is so much that people do not yet know about Obama.
I believe that Hillary Clinton has spent her life in public service because she genuinely cares about people. She has fought for womens and childrens rights her whole life. She is smart and dedicated and is the only candidate that is constantly talking about the issues instead of talking about herself. She has precise plans for how she will accomplish the things she talks about.
Our country is in a terrible state and I believe that she is the best person to turn our country around.
Following are the links to see what campaign contributions the candidates recieve and also a link to see how much each candidate has donated to the superdelegates. Obama has donated 3 times as much to superdelegates as Hillary Clinton.
Campaign donations
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/news.asp?cycle=2008
Donations to superdelegates
http://www.capitaleye.org/superdelegates.asp
Posted by: cheryl | April 14, 2008 at 06:59 PM
small town bitterness what about the sour notes that come from the bloggers in this wonderfull place,like the man said you can have my guns when you pry them from cold stiff hands does that make me bitter or an american,just so there is no confusion america will never be europe,for better or worse,if you dont like it the border to canada is allways open
Posted by: victor knopp | April 14, 2008 at 07:04 PM
Obama has bought into globalization, a violation of natural law. Globalization, internationalism and communism seek a worldwide system. Globalization seeks a worldwide economic system, internationalism, country equality and communism, worker equality. Nature is hierarchical and countries should strive for self-sufficiency. There will always be the advantaged and disadvantaged. Globalization gives even more advantage to the capitalist. And we lose our jobs, that which sustains an individual, family, state, and country. Like territory, a country should strive to keep it jobs. Lose jobs and a country loses its vibrancy.
Posted by: Ransome | April 14, 2008 at 07:27 PM
Those of us from small towns understand what Obama is saying. We are not a bunch of children, we know and understand the issues Obama is talking about and can withstand a conversation about them.Please give us a little credit.
Posted by: sal scranton | April 14, 2008 at 07:28 PM
In all reality I've became bitter when I turned 38 and realized I was a dinosaur and in the big scope of things the only people anyone cares about are between the ages of 7 to 34.
Now that I am 51 and fortunate enough to have survived a heart attack thanks to the Los Angeles County Health Department, I can actually say I am happy to be alive and wish everyone in this country would conduct themselves as responsible citizens instead of the mindless consumers the powers to be perceive us to be.
It may difficult for some to fully comprehend, but we do have the power to make this country and the world a better place to live without the need of racial fears.
All the best.
Posted by: Raul X. Garcia | April 14, 2008 at 07:33 PM
I grew up in "small-town America". Obama wasn't inaccurate and surely wasn't attempting to be condescending.
jackrabbitcafe.blogspot.com
Posted by: jack | April 14, 2008 at 07:44 PM
Mr. Lopez,
You might have traveled among Americans, but for all intents and purposes on this issue you neither understand Americans nor are you one.
This country was founded on the idea that the weakest members can find equality in arms-bearing for lawful self-defense.
You reject that fundamental characteristic shared by the overwhelming majority of the rest of us.
Your opinions on this matter count as much as Obama's or HRC's--that is to say, not at all.
I almost always dislike the theses implicit in your point of view.
I dislike this one the most.
And so does America.
Posted by: Tarn Helm | April 14, 2008 at 08:31 PM
Senator Obama shot his campaign in the head with these condescending remarks--and might have handed the nomination to Hillary Clinton--scroll all the way down.
TRANSCRIPT
OBAMA: So, it depends on where you are, but I think it’s fair to say that the places where we are going to have to do the most work are the places where people are most cynical about government. The people are mis-appre…they’re misunderstanding why the demographics in our, in this contest have broken out as they are. Because everybody just ascribes it to ‘white working-class don’t wanna work [!]— don’t wanna vote for the black guy.’ That’s…there were intimations of that in an article in the Sunday New York Times today - kind of implies that it’s sort of a race thing.
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 [the “white working-class”] 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 [the “white working-class”] 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 [which are still predominantly “white”], 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.
[Now you can virtually hear Obama thinking: OOPS!!! I just F***ED up!!! I’d better “change” what I just said!!! I just repeatedly characterized, throughout the last four paragraphs, “a lot” of the “white working-class” folks across the country as “bitter” people whose resentment—apparently toward non-whites, who else could he mean? . . . “it’s . . . a race thing”— compels them to “cling” to such crutches as “religion” or the Second Amendment, i.e., “guns,” “anti-immigrant sentiment,” etc.]
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.
***
Senator Obama begins by contextualizing his remarks as referring to the “white working-class.”
Senator Obama then appears to begin attacking the implication in “the Sunday New York Times today” that his lack of support among the “white working-class” is a “sort of a race thing.”
So far so good.
However, Senator Obama then separates himself from the “white working-class” by using polarizing pronoun and adjective references 15 consecutive times: “they,” 7 times; “them,” 2 times; “their,” 2 times; “these,” 2 times; “a lot,” 2 times.
After referring to the “white working-class” 15 consecutive times in four consecutive paragraphs, Senator Obama then tries to insinuate that he is referring to “people of every background . . . a mix of people, . . . you know working-class lunch-pail folks.”
But the damage is done.
Senator Obama might have perhaps been trying to bridge a communication gap with those comments, but instead he “changed” that communication gap into an unbridgeable chasm.
Posted by: Tarn Helm | April 14, 2008 at 08:46 PM
When you speak your mind ? Don’t be surprised if the people you speak your mind about don’t like it.
We are all suckers for praise… no one more so than politicians… listen carefully to congress and you’ll find that at least 1/8th of the time they are all telling each other how wise, venerable, and wonderful they are.
Nobody enjoys being reduced to an “object” of disrespect… which is essentially what Obama’s comments amounted to. Does a politician tell his inner city constituents “the truth” about themsleves… no of course not … he rather flatters his constituency and puts the blame on somebody else … like any good politician if you want to court them you don’t insult them.
Religion is a very personal thing, guns a little less so … but the “Average Joe” as they say is smart enough to realize when he has become an object of disrespect — and you can’t expect him to like it very much.
Posted by: marc sommes | April 15, 2008 at 10:41 AM
I saw you talking to Conan Nolan about the person you write about in The Soloist and then Conan asked you about Schwartzenegger and you said he was a friend. After all the difficulties you had trying to get help for the person you wrote about in the underfunded mental health system how could you hobnob with Schwartznegger whose policy is to cut schools, hospitals, parks and anything else helpful to the people of California. Schwartznegger is cutting billions from the schools and is against a tax on luxury yachts. It's hypocritical to profess trying to help a homeless person and be friends with a person who will be responsible for the suffering of children and teachers in this state. Why won't anyone speak up, expecially journalists. How could you even talk to Schwartznegger? I was interested in your book untill I heard you smoke cigars with Schwartznegger.
Posted by: Joy Lewis | April 20, 2008 at 11:19 PM
As a retired military officer, I have had the benefit of living in a lot of urban and rural areas of this country and in several other countries as well. Not a brief visit or a drive through tour, living for years at a time.
The urban liberal elitists, like this reporter and Hussein Obama, cannot envision any point of view but their own and that of their echo chamber of friends. People "cling" to religion because if fills a legitimate need in their lives, the same way liberals cling to the articles of their faith in manmade global warming, that capitalism and wealth are evil, andfaith in the right (nowhere mentioned in the Constitution) to take the life of a child before birth, or the faith that they have right to tell others they can't buy a big car, or heat their houses as warm as they choose, or eat as much as they want. Liberals don't want anyone to be happier than anyone else...which results in equal misery for all, except the ruling liberal elite. But it's that gradient of seeing that you can earn more and move up that motivates people to improve their own lot through ttheir own efforts, and improve society by doing so.
Liberals like the reporter who wrote this nonsense for the Times are meddlesome, and free humans don't like it...so we cling to our guns in order to insure that we will have a last resort (as provided by the constitution) to fight back when individuals or the government start taking things that are rightfully ours...like life, liberty, and the right to pursue (not to always catch) happiness.
You haven't proven Obama right or truthful, you've only revealed your own liberal articles of faith, like his.
Posted by: doug in colorado | August 22, 2008 at 01:35 PM
I grew up (in the 70's and 80's)in the small town of Hamburg Pennsylvania which is about an hour north of Philly, today I reside in Costa Mesa CA. Many of my friends had parents with blue collar jobs in the small city of Reading. Most of us had guns in our homes, we hunted with them and kept one or two loaded in the house just in case. No one ever got shot. Most went to church at least sometimes, basic Christian principles were generally supported, many loved God and were peaceful. I had no idea we were bitter. Politically our Parents tended to be Reagan Democrats.
To this day I wish just once that the Democrats would stop nominating elitist Liberals and start nominating a freedom loving, working class hero. Someone who will defend our jobs and fight greedy corperations only interested in the bottom line. Who at the same time understands that we own guns not because we simply like to kill things or because we think a boogyman exists behind every tree. But rather because we like going grocery shopping outdoors wether at the local Amish fruit stand or the deer stand. And sometimes we just like to get together with our friends and family out in the fields and just shoot a smooth opperating, working class gun that was made in America. It's pretty American after all, unless you come from a big city like LA or Phillly.
Many of us want someone who can understand that some of us who cling to God want Universal health care in a sensible way and green jobs created without having to support extreme secularism and irrational fear mongers of guns. And as for immigrants, why is it that liberals are bent on defending illegal immigrants who come up here and put Che bumper stickers on their cars and use communist flags while protesting in our streets because we want our laws enforced? I support the freedom of speech and thought. I don't sopport the communist movement, it undermines freedom of speech and thought as well as the rule of law.
This is why Pennsylvania sometimes manages to elect conservative Democrats like Tim Holden and Bob Casey Jr. This is why the Clintons get more support there (and the Clintons are far from ideal). Instead the Dems nominate a Liberal who talks down to us while in the company of his San Fransico supporters, and I know SF well enough to know that their form of left leaning isn't the same as mine, so we strongly consider voting for Reagan, Bush, and McCain. Not because we are voting in favor of them, but rather against those who kicked us out of our own party in favor of communists, athiests, and people with an unhealthy fear (notice I didn't say respect) of guns. And it was clear to me that Obama was talking down to us folks from small town Pennsylvania. I liked his honesty, not his opinion, and it will show in my vote in November. If Gravel, Richardson, or Clinton recieved the nomination it may have changed things for me.
The Democrats keep getting it wrong, so do the Republicans, but at least McCain hasn't insulted me yet. Perhaps with a Democratic Congress and a Maverick McCain in the White House a deep shade of purple colored politics will emerge, that sounds about right to me.
Posted by: Steve Blatt | September 25, 2008 at 11:18 PM