Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditBarack Obama's "A More Perfect Union" speech is the most popular video in the world today, drawing an unusual 1.2 million full views in its first 24 hours on YouTube – double the views of the next most popular clips. YouTube only counts visitors who watch an entire video, so hundreds of thousands of additional visitors probably watched part of the 37-minute address.
While commentators and Democratic leaders predict that "A More Perfect Union" will ultimately be seen as a historic contribution to American race relations, it is already making history in YouTube politics. At this pace, it will be the most watched contemporary political speech in Internet history. In about a day, it is already the second most viewed item on Obama's innovative YouTube channel, which boasts 810 videos and 13 million channel views. (For comparison, that is nine times the views of Clinton's channel and 21 times the views for the McCain channel.)
Obama's all-time top video, a 4-minute response to President Bush's State of the Union recorded exclusively for YouTube, ultimately drew 1.3 million views. An Obama aide tells The Nation that video took about two weeks to reach one million views -- this longer Philadelphia address broke one million views in a single day, with visitors voting it the top rated and most "favorited" video on YouTube. And over at MSNBC.com, an excerpt of Obama's speech was also the most popular clip, drawing over 360,000 views.
Obama has staked his campaign on the premise that we cannot solve the country's problems through the old, broken model of divisive politics and scandal-driven, never-ending media battles. From improving race relations to ending the war responsibly, he is offering voters honest and nuanced ideas over soundbites. And a record-breaking number of people continue to embrace this unusual political proposal -- often routing around the media filter to hear from Obama directly.
Update: In traditional media, big speeches are largely treated as a menu for ordering a few appetizing soundbites. That's why Joe Klein understandably worries that:
Most people will never hear the elegant complexity of Obama's speech in full...though they certainly should. As others have already said, it was the best speech about race I've ever heard delivered by an American politician.
Yet as this video goes viral, tapping many months of the campaign's decentralized organizing, literally millions of people will see the speech in full. An Obama Campaign email urged supporters to send it to everyone they know, while MoveOn and ColorofChange called on their large membership base to circulate it as well. YouTube stats indicate that many viewers are finding the clip from links on Obama's site, in addition to general interest news sites like the Huffington Post and Crooks & Liars.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
As HAPPY will no doubt tell us, "who cares? Run the video of Wright again!"
Remember, McCain can't win on the issues ("Four more years"?)...gotta go after Obama on a character fight!
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 12:34pm
libzsuk-Under your frankshitz id you admitted that you do not know what a liberal is so how do you know that libs suck since you admit that you have no idea what a lib is?The fact that you changed ids when you lost the discussion yesterday indicates that you are a candyass like your boy Bush.
Posted by i'm nobody at 03/19/2008 @ 12:46pm
Can somebody at the Nation's web site please police the comment section like other sites do? Calling Obama the kind of names that this libz guy does does really not belong.
Posted by Steve1us at 03/19/2008 @ 12:52pm
MELBER: Obama has staked his campaign on the premise that we cannot solve the country's problems through the old, broken model of divisive politics and scandal-driven, never-ending media battles.
And it's refreshing that by his speech, he effectively admitted that he was so post-racial that he took NO ACTION to reform one little 8,000-member Church led by a Racist. Yes, indeed, his model of INACTION isn't the same "old, broken model of divisive politics".....it's based on the new politics of HOPE and CHANGE....that's the ticket!
I am HOPING for CHANGE in the stock market everyday.....and by golly, it works sometimes!
Posted by Happy at 03/19/2008 @ 12:53pm
May these 1,200,000 full views translate into votes, preferably enough Super Delegate votes announced soon enough to prevent Billary from taking the Democratic party down to immolation with them.
Posted by sloper at 03/19/2008 @ 12:53pm
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS 18 January 2008
'...Not to dampen any parade, but if one asks if there is a single thing about Mr. Obama's Senate record, or state legislature record, or current program, that could possibly justify his claim to the presidency one gets . . . what? Not much. Similarly lightweight unqualified "white" candidates have overcome this objection, to be sure, but what kind of standard is that?
I shall not vote for Sen. Obama and it will not be because he -- like me and like all of us -- carries African genes. And I shall not be voting for Mrs. Clinton, who has the gall to inform me after a career of overweening entitlement that there is "a double standard" at work for women in politics; and I assure you now that this decision of mine has only to do with the content of her character....'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 12:56pm
McCain can't win on the issues...
Posted by MASK 03/19/2008 @ 12:34pm
Issues, what issues? IF McCain went to a church preaching God Damn Blacks, I won't vote for him....will just vote down ticket races!
You know as well as I do, the Libs' ghastly double standard on defending Obama's standing by Rev. Wright. From here on, McCain can be endorsed by the Grand Duke himself, and all that will do is more replays Rev. Wright being a "part of" Magic!
You were going to revise your prediction, well?
Posted by Happy at 03/19/2008 @ 12:58pm
Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia:
'...In response Nixon made an impassioned reply on national television in a speech known as the "Checkers" speech because it contained a sentimental reference to Nixon's dog, Checkers. The speech included a full disclosure of his personal finances, and Eisenhower then kept him as his running mate....'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 12:59pm
Pretty speech, but... I don't know if UNITY is the answer. Do we really want to turn into a one party system like Mexico's PRI? Maybe this is the time to talk about a parliamentary system so all voices are represented.
Posted by nursevic at 03/19/2008 @ 1:02pm
Re Hitchens: an alcohol heated hot air balloon, scamming us with his plummy accent & his canned comments, a publicity hound with nothing of substance, and certainly not depth, to add to public discussion of any important issue. To be ignored.
Any comparison to the Checkers speech is risible; just watch the Checkers speech. Or for that matter, any Nixon speech.
Posted by sloper at 03/19/2008 @ 1:06pm
Posted by NURSEVIC 03/19/2008 @ 1:02pm | ignore this person
you are misinformed about Mexico and their politics. it was not a unity gov't. quite the opposite. it was more like what the repubs wanted to install here. permanent repub majority.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 1:06pm
Posted by HONESTLIBERAL 03/19/2008 @ 12:56pm | ignore this person
there is NOTHING liberal about you.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 1:08pm
From Wikipedia
Dennis Kucinich:
'...Kucinich was elected Mayor of Cleveland in 1977 and served in that position until 1979.At thirty-one years of age, he was the youngest mayor of a major city in the United States, earning him the nickname "the boy mayor of Cleveland". Kucinich's tenure as mayor is often regarded as one of the most tumultuous in Cleveland's history. After Kucinich refused to sell Muni Light, Cleveland's publicly owned electric utility, the Cleveland mafia put out a hit on Kucinich. A hitman from Maryland planned to shoot him in the head during the Columbus Day Parade, but the plot fell apart ... In 1998 the council honored him for having the "courage and foresight" to stand up to the banks and saving the city an estimated $195 million between 1985 and 1995....In 1983, Kucinich won a special election to fill the seat of a Cleveland city councilman...1994, when he won a seat in the Ohio State Senate. "He was in political Siberia in the 1980s," said Joseph Tegreene years later. "It was only when it became clear to people that he was right... he got belated recognition for the things that he did."...In 1996, Kucinich was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, representing the 10th district of Ohio. He defeated two-term Republican incumbent Martin Hoke by three percentage points. However, he has never faced another contest nearly that close, and has since been re-elected five times....He has criticized Diebold Election Systems (now Premier Election Solutions) for promoting voting machines that fail to leave a traceable paper trail, and posted internal company memos on his website in which company executives promised to deliver the 2004 Ohio election to Bush. He was one of the thirty-one who voted in the House to not count the electoral votes from Ohio in the United States presidential election, 2004....'
Barack Obama:
'...Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996 , ... In January 2003, Obama became chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee when Democrats,...regained a majority in the Illinois Senate. He resigned from the Senate in November 2004 following his election to the U.S. Senate...'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 1:12pm
Posted by LIBZSUK 03/19/2008 @ 1:00pm
The Republicans have run out of ideas. Their appeal to working class America that "you may be rich and benefit from our policies one day" is wearing thin, as most Americans are now realizing that they have been conned and that they are no richer today than they were when Reagan began the conservative revolution.
Trickle down policies never quite trickle, and selling American public policy to the highest bidder has been disastrous to the middle class, and the only beneficiaries are a handful of rich guys that only care about themselves.
Posted by Metteyya at 03/19/2008 @ 1:18pm
Diversion of the day: anybody wants to buy Kinky Friedman's home in Austin?
6006 Mountainclimb Dr., Austin, TX 78731
$500,000
MLS# 3717625
4 Bedrooms
2.5 Bathrooms
2,342 Sq Ft (+/-)
Greenbelt Like Backyard
Visit Kinky's Home Website
The Bob & Sharon Real Estate Team
512-372-9494
Posted by Happy at 03/19/2008 @ 1:18pm
happy-You listen to and support a racist hate monger named Rush who,also,likes to make fun of disabled people.Please,stop your hypocrisy.
Posted by i'm nobody at 03/19/2008 @ 1:18pm
4 July 2007 -- CounterPunch.org -- Jeffrey St. Clair and Joshua Frank
'...Barack, for the second quarter in a row, has surpassed the fundraising prowess of Hillary Clinton. To be sure small online donations have propelled the young senator to the top, but so too have his connections to big industry. The Obama campaign, as of late March 2007, has accepted $159,800 from executives and employees of Exelon, the nation's largest nuclear power plant operator. ...
The Illinois-based company also helped Obama's 2004 senatorial campaign. As Ken Silverstein reported in the November 2006 issue of Harper's, "[Exelon] is Obama's fourth largest patron, having donated a total of $74,350 to his campaigns. During debate on the 2005 energy bill, Obama helped to vote down an amendment that would have killed vast loan guarantees for power-plant operators to develop new energy projects the public will not only pay millions of dollars in loan costs but will risk losing billions of dollars if the companies default." ... Clearly Senator Obama recognizes the inherent dangers of nuclear technology and knows of the disastrous failures that plagued Chernobyl, Mayak and Three Mile Island. Yet, despite his attempts to alert the public of future toxic nuclear leaks, Obama still considers atomic power a viable alternative to coal-fired plants. The atom lobby must certainly be pleased....'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 1:26pm
Posted by I'M NOBODY 03/19/2008 @ 12:46pm
I was giving him a chance...soon as I saw "half breed"...Ignore bin, same ol' MOUTHSHITZ.
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 1:35pm
Issues, what issues?----Posted by HAPPY 03/19/2008 @ 12:58pm |
Exactly. How does Grandpa win on "I'll give you more of the same of the last 4 years"? You admitted it yourself, it'll take the 527s smearing Obama for him to win.
As far as revising my prediction...heard something yesterday after lunch that gave me hope again!
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 1:36pm
Mask-It's odd that the right wingers who come on here don't try and chase mouthshit off of here considering how embarrassing he should be .
Posted by i'm nobody at 03/19/2008 @ 1:40pm
Posted by I'M NOBODY 03/19/2008 @ 1:40pm
Well, everybody knows that the SHITZ is just stupid....but I've seen HAPPY praise ...MARKCANYON!!!! for a post.
Now if they'll pay homage to an admitted neo-Nazi...who knows?
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 1:48pm
Clearly Senator Obama recognizes the inherent dangers of nuclear technology and knows of the disastrous failures that plagued Chernobyl, Mayak and Three Mile Island. Yet, despite his attempts to alert the public of future toxic nuclear leaks, Obama still considers atomic power a viable alternative to coal-fired plants. The atom lobby must certainly be pleased....'
Posted by HONESTLIBERAL 03/19/2008 @ 1:26pm
More smears and distortions from Camp Hillary and her conservative friends!
Obama has made it quite clear for anyone who has bothered to listen to him or go to his website that nuclear will only be pursued if the nuclear wast issue is dealt with. The so-called "inherent" dangers based on 3-mile island and Chernobyl are overstated, as the French have been operating nuclear power plants safely for decades and get 70% of their power from these plants.
But even though the French have made great strides in re-processing spent fuel, this does not completely solve the nuclear wast issue, and Obama has insisted that the industry needs to solve this before we move forward with this non-fossil fuel based clean energy source.
Obama has also embraced solar, wind and non-foodstuff biofuels as other alternatives we should pursue "in addition" to nuclear. He has stated that the promise of any of these technologies lies in America's ability to innovate, and investing in these clean energies holds the promise that shortcomings now associated with these power sources will be solved.
Posted by Metteyya at 03/19/2008 @ 1:51pm
Mask-Happy listens to the racist Rush and quotes him and compliments Adolph Canyon and then makes a big deal about Wright's statements.This is just more partisan BS where my side can do it,but yours can't.
Posted by i'm nobody at 03/19/2008 @ 1:51pm
Check out the Ehrenreich piece that just appeared on The Nation site. A doozy. Seems Hillary belongs to a rightwing Christian cult. But since it's rightwing, not left, perhaps that's A-OK. Unlikely we'll be reading about this in the NYTimes.
Posted by sloper at 03/19/2008 @ 1:59pm
'Sloper Re Hitchens: an alcohol heated hot air balloon...'
Oliver Burkeman:
'...Since the parting of ways on Iraq … Hitchens claims to have detected a new, personalised nastiness in the attacks on him, especially over his fabled consumption of alcohol. He welcomes being attacked as a drinker "because I always think it's a sign of victory when they move on to the ad hominem."...'
From Wikipedia -- Bibliography of Christopher Hitchens
2007 God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything. Twelve/Hachette Book Group USA/Warner Books, ISBN 0446579807 / Published in the UK as God Is Not Great: The Case Against Religion. Atlantic Books, ISBN 978-1-84354-586-6 2006 Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man": A Biography. Books That Shook the World/Atlantic Books, ISBN 1-84354-513-6 2005 Thomas Jefferson: Author of America. Eminent Lives/Atlas Books/HarperCollins Publishers, ISBN 0-06-059896-4 2004 Love, Poverty, and War: Journeys and Essays. Thunder's Mouth, Nation Books, ISBN 1-56025-580-3 2003 A Long Short War: The Postponed Liberation of Iraq. Plume Books 2002 Why Orwell Matters, Basic Books (US)/UK edition as Orwell's Victory, Allen Lane/The Penguin Press. 2001 The Trial of Henry Kissinger. Verso. 2001 Letters to a Young Contrarian. Basic Books. 2000 Unacknowledged Legislation: Writers in the Public Sphere. Verso. 1999 No One Left to Lie To: The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton. Verso. Reissued as No One Left to Lie To: The Values of the Worst Family in 2000. 1995 The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice. Verso. 1993 For the Sake of Argument: Essays and Minority Reports. Verso. 1990 Blood, Class, and Nostalgia: Anglo-American Ironies. Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Reissued 2004, with a new introduction, as Blood, Class and Empire: The Enduring Anglo-American Relationship, Nation Books, ISBN 1-56025-592-7) 1990 The Monarchy: A Critique of Britain's Favorite Fetish. Chatto & Windus, 1990. 1988 Prepared for the Worst: Selected Essays and Minority Reports. Hill and Wang (US)/Chatto and Windus (UK). 1987 Imperial Spoils: The Curious Case of the Elgin Marbles. Chatto and Windus (UK)/Hill and Wang (US, 1988) / 1997 UK Verso edition as The Elgin Marbles: Should They Be Returned to Greece? (with essays by Robert Browning and Graham Binns). 1984 Cyprus. Quartet. Revised editions as Hostage to History: Cyprus from the Ottomans to Kissinger, 1989 (Farrar, Straus & Giroux) and 1997 (Verso).
As sole editor 2007 The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Non-Believer. Perseus Publishing.
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 1:59pm
Can somebody at the Nation's web site please police the comment section like other sites do? Calling Obama the kind of names that this libz guy does does really not belong.
Posted by STEVE1US 03/19/2008 @ 12:52pm | ignore this person
we self police here, using the IGNORE button. I suggest you get acquainted with it
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 2:06pm
Posted by I'M NOBODY 03/19/2008 @ 1:51pm
Well, the ditto-heads have been in a bit of tizzy lately.
Ol' Rush sees little way that his REAL choice....Hillary...is going to get the nomination and win the Presidency.
Actually if McCain wins, Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. will be put in the back of the auditorium again (pre-Reagan). "Maverick John" knows he has to suck upto them for a while, but as Eagleburger says, once he's in power, he'll tell the Hard Right and Religious Right to sit down and shut up as he tries to build a "new coalition" of the indies and moderates. (IF he can win that is, of course).
Then Rush will be on the outs...destined to wail against the "Democrat Congress" for some bill...just to see McCain SIGN IT!
If Obama wins, he does better, but has to walk on eggshells (and he knows it). He's bound to slip up and say something racist and start looking like Ann Coulter or worse. He just couldn't help it...can't extemporaneously speak for three hours, five days a week, during an Obama Administration without saying SOMETHING stupid....and it blowing up in his face.
Atleast with Hillary, he could brush aside any charges of sexism with a "She's not really a woman, anyway". "President Obama"?....ol' Rushbo will tread lightly or risk Don Imus Time!
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 2:08pm
The above post proves this "MASK" slug is a total idiot....Hey mask get a life....all you ever do is hang out here day and night copying and pasting posts from years back.....you have no life
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 2:12pm
Now you've done it. The mouth-breathing, knucle-draggers are going to start frothing.
Posted by Lil at 03/19/2008 @ 2:24pm
Posted by HAPPY 03/19/2008 @ 12:58pm
You like many have ignored his speech. He didn't stand by Wright's comments. Have you never had a friend that everyone thought was an ass but you knew better than anyone and knew was a good person? Again they took 10 minutes out of 30 years. Sorry not everyone works on political expediency only Happy. Some people even in the political world surprisingly enough are actual normal people not just politicians trying to dupe as many as they can.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/19/2008 @ 2:30pm
"You like many have ignored his speech"
The speech does not matter..its too late..the damage is already done....besides most of you Marxist twits agree with the good Rev Wright
Congratulations
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 2:36pm
I have to agree with MASK and NOBODY on this one too. You agree with Rush and Canyon, both racists, but now you are trying to make a big funk about Wright's comments. It's funny you are so wrapped up in partisan politics it blinds you to your own hypocrisy. I am sure you will come out with some comment about how agreeing with certain things someone says isn't agreeing with the persons entire ideal system but isn't that what Obama said in his speech. That he likes Wright but disagrees with the disgusting comments he made?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/19/2008 @ 2:38pm
Posted by LIBZSUK 03/19/2008 @ 2:36pm
Sleep my wailing child, your brain right now is too small to comprehend grown up talk. When you learn to speak like the rest of you and understand complex thought you will be able to share political discourse with the rest of us.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/19/2008 @ 2:39pm
Understand this complex thought you marxist fool....your party is cracking up and your too stupid to realize it....You just chant "Change Change Change"
Being relegated to the dustbin of history like the Whig party is the "Change" I am looking forward to
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 2:44pm
Understand this complex thought you marxist fool....your party is cracking up and your too stupid to realize it....You just chant "Change Change Change"
Being relegated to the dustbin of history like the Whig party is the "Change" I am looking forward to
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 2:44pm
Posted by LIBZSUK 03/19/2008 @ 2:44pm
It's ok keep crying. Maybe one day you will be taken seriously.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 03/19/2008 @ 2:53pm
Lee Sustar -- 4 November 2006 -- CounterPunch.org
'...Consider the junior senator from Illinois' own words in his new book The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.
Early on, the reader learns that Obama shrugged off his college radicalism during the Ronald Reagan administration. "My friends and I stopped thinking and slipped into cant: the point at which the denunciations of capitalism or American imperialism came too easily," writes the man who declared on the eve of the 2004 elections that he would be willing to support the bombing of Iran.
Elsewhere, Obama offers a caricature of the left's views in order to assert his own supposed realism. "I would find myself in the curious position of defending aspects of Reagan's worldview," he writes. "I couldn't be persuaded that U.S. multinationals and international terms of trade were single-handedly responsible for poverty around the world; nobody forced corrupt leaders in Third World countries to steal from their people."...
Recently, however, Obama joined other Senate Democrats in a sop to the anti-immigrant right, backing the construction of a 700-mile border wall that he had previously vowed to oppose without "comprehensive" immigration reform.
As Obama makes clear in The Audacity of Hope, we can expect more such moves to the right. He may seek to revive liberalism, but only within the framework of the rightward shift in U.S. politics over the past 30 years.
Obama's agenda is reheated Clintonism: raising the minimum wage, an expansion the Earned Income Tax Credit, and investment in education, alternative energy and technology--positive steps, perhaps, but certainly no far-reaching social programs. Workers at risk of job loss should have access to wage insurance, he writes, but he doesn't call for an increase in today's miserly unemployment benefits....'
Posted by HonestLiberal at 03/19/2008 @ 2:56pm
Yo, HonestLib, you don't sound so liberal. Or honest. Go throw the election to McC, AIPAC's finest asset in this race. It will thrill your hero Hitchens no end. More war against Muslims.
Then go cash your AIPAC check, post haste.
Posted by sloper at 03/19/2008 @ 3:12pm
the republicans Being relegated to the dustbin of history like the Whig party is the "Change" I am looking forward to
Posted by LIBZSUK 03/19/2008 @ 2:44pm | ignore this person
see he's not so bad. he just needs a little "editing"
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 3:13pm
Posted by HONESTLIBERAL 03/19/2008 @ 2:56pm
Assuming, what you post is correct. I still have to ask so what? No one is perfect and no one maintains the same views on all issues throughout life. What it comes down to for me is 4 more years of the same ol shtick with McCain or a lite version of the same ol shtick with Clinton, as both are owned and operated by big business and corporations. While Barack an inspriring leader offers actual hope for change. Being a skeptic, I am doubtful meaningful change can be had, but compared to the other options with all their touted "experience" I don't even have any hope.
Posted by Extraneous at 03/19/2008 @ 3:24pm
Speaking of Imus....Osama was one of the 1st critics of Imus and said he should be fired.....
What a total phony this Barack Milhouse Osama is
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 3:31pm
Posted by RIO BRAVO 03/19/2008 @ 3:28pm
Hey, RIO, who ya voting for this November?
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 3:47pm
Hillary will not get the nomination. It is clear after Obama's speech yesterday and the more than two million downloads on YouTube of that speech that he has touched people in a way no other politician has since John Kennedy did in 1960 and his brother Robert did in 1968. The number of young people that are joining the political process because of Obama is staggering. The commentators like to speak about the Black vote but he is not winning States such as Minnesota, Washington, North Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska and Wyoming because of any Black votes. He has clearly tapped into a deep yearning for change in the American people and for a leader to bring the country together. If you hate the Republicans then I guess you are going to vote for the revenge minded candidate, Hillary Clinton, but what both both Clinton's have failed to understand is that America wants to get beyond the politics of divisiveness, polarization and demonizing those who don't agree with our particular point of view. Obama's message is the message of hope and a new way of getting the nations business accomplished without angry and nasty partisanship.
Posted by mjkoch at 03/19/2008 @ 3:49pm
Osama said:
"If I had anyone on my staff that said those remarks they would be fired"
MSLSD interview with David Gregory
Enter the good rev Wright:
GOD DAMN AMERICA etc
Barack "Not that Hussein" Osama is a lying two faced phony
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 4:03pm
Rio-Do you have a son who comes on here using the libzsuk and frankshitz ids?
Posted by i'm nobody at 03/19/2008 @ 4:09pm
"America is a MEAN country" said Michelle Osama
Wonder if she heard that from the good Rev. Wright with her daughters in tow????
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 4:23pm
Posted by RIO BRAVO 03/19/2008 @ 4:05pm
Maybe you missed my question...who are you voting for for President this fall, RIO?
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 4:28pm
many of the things Wright said are perfectly true. That is why they are so upset. so they try to shoot the messenger.
in any case, Obama handles himself very well in the clinches.(sports metaphor)
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 4:30pm
Posted by RIO BRAVO 03/19/2008 @ 4:05pm
Maybe you missed my question...who are you voting for for President this fall, RIO?
Posted by MASK 03/19/2008 @ 4:28pm
I bet I can guess...
Any candidate on the ballot with an R after their name
Posted by Extraneous at 03/19/2008 @ 4:41pm
Posted by EXTRANEOUS 03/19/2008 @ 4:41pm
Actually not sure I'll EVER get an answer...for RIO BRAVO? He doesn't SUPPORT anything...just opposes things.
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 4:44pm
The speech Obama should be giving: Malcolm X sez: "I believe that there will ultimately be a clash between the oppressed and those that do the oppressing. I believe that there will be a clash between those who want freedom, justice and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the systems of exploitation ... We must make them see that we are the enemy ... So let them turn the money for defense in our direction and either destroy us or cure the conditions that brought our people to this point ... Nobody who's looking for a good image will ever be free ... You've got to take something in your hand and say, 'Look, it's you or me.' And I guarantee you he'll give you freedom then ... We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us ... If you're not ready to die for it, put the word 'freedom' out of your vocabulary."
Read me [mickeyz.net]
Posted by coolobserver at 03/19/2008 @ 4:54pm
Posted by COOLOBSERVER 03/19/2008 @ 4:54pm | ignore this person
very good. many fine Malcolm X speeches on YOUtube.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 5:00pm
Happy2....Its your STALINIST mentality at work.,....
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 5:04pm
Ya know...this explains the gaps in the conversation. But we all know that those who crave attention emerge again. Of course good ol' Hapster's never gonna engage us on points, so that's as much wasted breath.
Posted by yutsano at 03/19/2008 @ 5:28pm
Can somebody at the Nation's web site please police the comment section like other sites do? Calling Obama the kind of names that this libz guy does does really not belong.
Posted by STEVE1US 03/19/2008 @ 12:52pm
The hazard of free speech is hearing things you might not like and/or disagree with. But the worst thing you can do is silence those voices, because when you stoop to their level they win.
Posted by yutsano at 03/19/2008 @ 5:29pm
The hazard of free speech is hearing things you might not like and/or disagree with. But the worst thing you can do is silence those voices, because when you stoop to their level they win. Posted by YUTSANO 03/19/2008 @ 5:29pm
Very true, but the screamers are time consuming & can be ignored individually, if one wishes. That too is a right.
Posted by sloper at 03/19/2008 @ 5:37pm
1st YouTude, then the USA, then the world!
Posted by hsuBfools at 03/19/2008 @ 6:01pm
Preacher O made this speech because he was forced to by his falling stance. He choose to hide behind a teleprompter delivered speech on victimology instead of taking questions from voters and explaining why he had an intimate relationship for over 20 years with a man who hates the United States of America. This is somebody you want to vote for for President? I truly don't get it.
Posted by happygolucky at 03/19/2008 @ 6:30pm
why he had an intimate relationship
complete nonsense.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 6:54pm
definition of intimate:
1. Spiritual Leader
2.spiritual Adviser to his campaign
3. Married him
4 baptised him and his kids
5. he never threatened to leave church after anti-american speech
BARACK MILHOUSE OSAMA IS TOAST
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 7:26pm
Looks like we'll have to concede these Cheneyfreaks, Rovelovers and Bushsuckers absolutely can not stand anything about Obama. Once a Neocon...
Posted by winyahn at 03/19/2008 @ 7:54pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=winyahn
the most viewers of all time for Obama's speech on YOUTUBE. no wonder they're scared shitless. they think if the whistle louder....
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 7:58pm
I finally heard the speech it was a very good spech. I thought he covered differing points of view that, coming from his multi-cultural background, he was/is privy too. Now from my experience, my cousin Tootie is my Jeremiah Wright. She is loud, tactless, manipulative and I definitely don't agree with all of her viewpoints. My last statement, if you don't personally know her, may lead you to think negatively of her. I do know her. She is family and I love her. At times I may not like/approve of her actions but I know she's in my corner. If I'm threatened in any way I know I can call on her to help me. We don't hang in the same circles (she's a little older) but in church I hug her and let her know I love her. I'm not gonna cut her off 'cause she does/says stupid stuff at times. She's family, an adult and she has her own opinions separate from anyone else. You can't characterize an entire family based on one member's actions. The fact that one has to explain this is maddening.
Posted by k330k at 03/19/2008 @ 8:01pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=k330k
a brilliant rhetorical move on Obama's part to make it so personal. he stands head and shoulders over his peers, if he has any at all.
trust me, this will all go away. he's no Howard Dean or John Kerry.
meanwhile the old old soldier wears his ignorance as a badge of honor, much the same way many do here
.Iran may train Iraqi fighters, but they would be Shia NOT Sunni. it was the Sunni ruler of Iraq, who attacked Iran, plunging it into a very destructive war.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 8:08pm
"Obama has staked his campaign on the premise that we cannot solve the country's problems through the old, broken model of divisive politics and scandal-driven, never-ending media battles." (From Melber's column)
There are 2 things that anyone who has paid attention to American presidential politics for the last 40 years knows:
1) All presidential campaigns have been driven by the so-called "southern strategy" first exploited by Nixon. I say "so-called" because that term was simply a euphemism for Nixon's naked appeal to racism among what used to be southern Democratic voters. It worked then, and it continues to work. It will work this cycle too. It always does.
2) Since November 1979, Americans have adopted the habit of allowing various despots and cutthroats from the Middle East to pick their presidents for them. This was the case of Carter v. Reagan in 1980, and the bargain the GOP made with Khomeini was consecrated the very day St. Ronald was inaugurated. Khomeini smiled upon his handiwork that day, and Reagan continued to do the work of that regime throughout his term in office (vide Iran/Contra). We saw a similar thing happen when Saddam defied & "unmanned" Bush the Elder when he held onto power after Poppie "lacked the stones" to "finish the job." Conservatives deserted Poppie and embarrassed him with his loss to Clinton. Score one for Saddam. Eventually, the son avenged his father's humiliation in OIF--purportedly to find the WMD Saddam had squirreled away. When that failed, W's own failure--not bringing in Bin Ladin "dead or alive"--ironically conduced to his advantage when the Al Qaeda leader aired a threatening videotape just prior to the Bush/Kerry election. Once again, the People spoke and they said loud & clear, "We like it when our elections are commandeered by terrorists and Middle East thugs."
No prediction yet, but don't be surprised if, in an economic environment when US dollars buy less and less oil for our SUVs, the Oil Empires play the power card again and pick our POTUS for us.
Posted by goyadad at 03/19/2008 @ 8:17pm
Birds of a feather.
Posted by USAPRIDE at 03/19/2008 @ 8:17pm
Posted by USAPRIDE 03/19/2008 @ 8:17pm
I wish you wouldn't use "USA" in your id. I'm from the USA and you're embarassing me. Of course you have every right to be embarassing, in this venue. I'm just saying....
Posted by k330k at 03/19/2008 @ 8:25pm
GOYADAD - fascinating, certainly agree with #1. So in terms of #2, is the war not in Obama's positive column? Or is Obama a nonstarter?
Posted by winyahn at 03/19/2008 @ 8:28pm
"explaining why he had an intimate relationship for over 20 years with a man who hates the United States of America."
Posted by HAPPYGOLUCKY 03/19/2008 @ 6:30pm
So . . . it sounds like you've got a lead on a sort of Larry Craig or Eliot Spitzer type story? What are you not telling us here about what you know of the "intimacy" between Obama and Wright? It's a big deal, obviously, and "inquiring minds want to know."
Perhaps you think Obama's statement should have run something like this: "I have not had, and I do not currently maintain, inimate relations with that handsome hunk of a preacher-man, Jeremiah Wright . . . but I understand if some of you think I should have. He is indeed a very hunky sort of dude. Sorry, Michelle."
Otherwise, where's the beef? Is everyone responsible for everything every speaker on every occasion has said in his/her presence? My, my. That's a pretty rigorous standard. Hope you are as willing to enforce it on the lily white right as the black and nasty left. Or maybe not.
Again, all of this completely inconsequential nonsense is swirling around in the mediasphere right now because there is very little substantive difference between the policy stands of the 2 remaining Dem.candidates. It's a "Beauty Contest"-- get it? And those things get mighty nasty mighty quick.
Posted by goyadad at 03/19/2008 @ 8:30pm
Posted by WINYAHN 03/19/2008 @ 8:28pm
Reason I withheld "predicting" is because I don't see any indication of what kind of sirocco will blow out of the Mideast this time. I don't think it will come from Iraq, though. That matter is already on the glide path to its inevitable resolution and I don't think any "Tet"-like development will swing the election one way or another. I think it will more likely have to do with Iran, Ormuz, and $200 bbl. oil. Now who would benefit from that?
As far as Obama's fortunes . . . I'm already on record, but savor every opportunity to repeat it: Clinton on the first ballot in Denver. Slam, and Dunk.
Posted by goyadad at 03/19/2008 @ 8:37pm
How am I embarassing you by using USA?
Posted by USAPRIDE at 03/19/2008 @ 8:39pm
THROW GRANDMA UNDER THE BUS March 19, 2008
Obama gave a nice speech, except for everything he said about race. He apparently believes we're not talking enough about race. This is like hearing Britney Spears say we're not talking enough about pop-tarts with substance-abuse problems.
By now, the country has spent more time talking about race than John Kerry has talked about Vietnam, John McCain has talked about being a POW, John Edwards has talked about his dead son, and Al Franken has talked about his USO tours.
But the "post-racial candidate" thinks we need to talk yet more about race. How much more? I had had my fill by around 1974. How long must we all marinate in the angry resentment of black people?
As an authentic post-racial American, I will not patronize blacks by pretending Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is anything other than a raving racist loon. If a white pastor had said what Rev. Wright said -- not about black people, but literally, the exact same things -- I think we'd notice that he's crazier than Ward Churchill and David Duke's love child. (Indeed, both Churchill and the Rev. Wright referred to the attacks of 9/11 as the chickens coming "home to roost.")
Imagine a white pastor saying: "Racism is the American way. Racism is how this country was founded, and how this country is still run. ... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority. And believe it more than we believe in God."
Imagine a white pastor calling Condoleezza Rice, "Condoskeezza Rice."
Imagine a white pastor saying: "No, no, no, God damn America -- that's in the Bible for killing innocent people! God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human! God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme!"
We treat blacks like children, constantly talking about their temper tantrums right in front of them with airy phrases about black anger. I will not pat blacks on the head and say, "Isn't that cute?" As a post-racial American, I do not believe "the legacy of slavery" gives black people the right to be permanently ill-mannered.
Obama tried to justify Wright's deranged rants by explaining that "legalized discrimination" is the "reality in which Rev. Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up." He said that a "lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families."
That may accurately describe the libretto of "Porgy and Bess," but it has no connection to reality. By Rev. Wright's own account, he was 12 years old and was attending an integrated school in Philadelphia when Brown v. Board of Education was announced, ending "separate but equal" schooling.
Meanwhile, at least since the Supreme Court's decision in University of California v. Bakke in 1978 -- and obviously long before that, or there wouldn't have been a case or controversy for the court to consider -- it has been legal for the government to discriminate against whites on the basis of their race.
Consequently, any white person 30 years old or younger has lived, since the day he was born, in an America where it is legal to discriminate against white people. In many cases it's not just legal, but mandatory, for example, in education, in hiring and in Academy Award nominations.
So for half of Rev. Wright's 66 years, discrimination against blacks was legal -- though he never experienced it personally because it existed in a part of the country where he did not live. For the second half of Wright's life, discrimination against whites was legal throughout the land.
Discrimination has become so openly accepted that -- in a speech meant to tamp down his association with a black racist -- Obama felt perfectly comfortable throwing his white grandmother under the bus. He used her as the white racist counterpart to his black racist "old uncle," Rev. Wright.
First of all, Wright is not Obama's uncle. The only reason we indulge crazy uncles is that everyone understands that people don't choose their relatives the way they choose, for example, their pastors and mentors. No one quarrels with the idea that you can't be expected to publicly denounce your blood relatives.
But Wright is not a relative of Obama's at all. Yet Obama cravenly compared Wright's racist invective to his actual grandmother, who "once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."
Rev. Wright accuses white people of inventing AIDS to kill black men, but Obama's grandmother -- who raised him, cooked his food, tucked him in at night, and paid for his clothes and books and private school -- has expressed the same feelings about passing black men on the street that Jesse Jackson has.
Unlike his "old uncle" -- who is not his uncle -- Obama had no excuses for his grandmother. Obama's grandmother never felt the lash of discrimination! Crazy grandma doesn't get the same pass as the crazy uncle; she's white. Denounce the racist!
Fine. Can we move on now?
No, of course, not. It never ends. To be fair, Obama hinted that we might have one way out: If we elect him president, then maybe, just maybe, we can stop talking about race.
COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
Posted by libzsuk at 03/19/2008 @ 8:45pm
PRIDE -
Birds of a feather. I seem to recall Falwell and Robertson saying something about 9/11 and what was to blame. Laid a few other doozies over the years. Seems it was A-OK for W to keep them on as "spiritual advisers." Same thing for all the other patriotic Republicans. Those the same birds you had in mind?
Posted by Hman23 at 03/19/2008 @ 8:49pm
"How am I embarassing you by using USA?" Posted by USAPRIDE 03/19/2008 @ 8:39pm
Dude, if ya gotta ask, like, what's the point of explaining it?
Posted by goyadad at 03/19/2008 @ 8:49pm
Posted by GOYADAD 03/19/2008 @ 8:37pm | ignore this person
you can repeat it all you like, that doesn't make it so.if wishes were horses beggars would ride.
mind you I have no trouble voting for Hill in the general, I just like Obama a whole lot better. it appears that many feel the same.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2008 @ 9:04pm
HMAN - Do you really feel that the BS spewed by those people even come close to what OB's preacher has said?
Posted by USAPRIDE at 03/19/2008 @ 9:33pm
Posted by GOYADAD 03/19/2008 @ 8:37pm
Help me out a bit please. Using the Iran/ Ormuz example... Who or what entity might dictate to whom that one of Clinton, Obama or McCain is to be POTUS, and how would the vote be rigged?
Posted by winyahn at 03/19/2008 @ 9:42pm
Posted by USAPRIDE 03/19/2008 @ 9:33pm
What's the difference between Falwell blaming gays...and Wright blaming rich white people...for...whatever?
Posted by Mask at 03/19/2008 @ 9:54pm
What exactly is the horrid scenario Obamaphobes so desperately fear??
For ex, w/ McCain I fear:
1- Possible Gulf War 3 /regime change in Iran, and ASSUREDLY constant bul@$%& about evildoers, terror, terror, and
2- Continued supplication to Israel/stalemate for Palestinians,
3- Continued congressional constipation / polarization. No improvement in healthcare costs for the middle class.
4- Continued corporate welfare / increase gap btw rich & poor / deficit / trade deficit
Speak up please, what is the nature of an Obama administration nightmare? What are the implications of Wright in terms of an Obama presidency?? What to you most fear America would face, were Obama POTUS??
So far no "conservative" has explained this.
Posted by winyahn at 03/19/2008 @ 11:27pm
Posted by WINYAHN 03/19/2008 @ 11:27pm
I've specifically asked; even if he were the worst sort of racist, (never had one of those in the oval office before), what would be the worst of his policies?
He is immersed in a huge pool of "the man" (as are we all).
I am more apt to be worried, that even if he is genuine, he could accomplish nothing substantive anyway.
Hardly worried about the implications of another (remotely) possible racist in govt.
Eric
Posted by Malcontent at 03/20/2008 @ 12:50am
Posted by USAPRIDE 03/19/2008 @ 9:33pm
How are they different? All in some aspect or another blamed America for what happened on 9/11. At least Wright tied some of it to issues of foreign policy. Not that God was simply punishing America the "fag nation"
Some conservatives have such a double standard. Wright "blames America" and Obama not only has to disagree with him, he has to "renounce" him as a person. Yet, Robertson and Falwell can blame American culture, and not only is Bush not required to comment on it, its fine for him to consult with those ministers about the War on Terror.
Posted by Hman23 at 03/20/2008 @ 12:27pm
Posted by MALCONTENT
I see. What I am wondering, and haven't heard to date is the connection: how do you go from Wright (all the implications of Wright) to Obama being inept / accomplishing nothing as president?
Anyone on the right that's so inclined, please speak up on this -
Posted by winyahn at 03/20/2008 @ 2:54pm
Posted by WINYAHN 03/20/2008 @ 2:54pm
"I see. What I am wondering, and haven't heard to date is the connection: how do you go from Wright (all the implications of Wright) to Obama being inept / accomplishing nothing as president?"
Not sure if you're implying that I meant that.
I was merely mentioning, how little any one man could accomplish in Washington. Sure, if your agenda is the agenda of big money. (bush/clinton). But, not anything that'd be good for average Americans.
Most of our decent white presidents, were racist. Why can't he be a decent black president, even if he is a racist.
The day you can show me that the black community wields all the power and has all the money, then I will worry about if he is a racist. Seems, almost a non issue, in todays cultural climate.
Posted by Malcontent at 03/20/2008 @ 6:56pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=Malcontent
when black people speak up for themselves, they are invariably branded as racist.
Posted by emile duBois at 03/21/2008 @ 8:36pm