The Presidential election in 2008 is not about race
I have made it no secret that I am very much against Barack Obama and I believe I have made it very clear why. I believe the change he keeps talking about will be more of a change than our country can handle and will be more of a change than he is telling. I do not like his position on abortion, the 2nd Amendment, taxes, national security, our national sovereignty, the list goes on and on. As I write my articles, detailing why I do not intend to vote for Obama, I find it interesting to see the replies I receive, accusing me of different things. There seems to be one main theme to them, one main accusation I receive about my “real” reason for not supporting Barack Obama.
The first thing most Obama supporters start throwing in my face is that they believe I am racist, that the only reason I will not vote for the man is because he is African American. I don’t know if they really believe that, despite the fact that I have given no reason for them to have come to that conclusion, or if that is just the first thing they can think of to try to derail my arguments against Obama. I also find it disturbing to see some of the articles the main stream media is publishing, trying to get Americans to believe that the only reason he may loose this election is because of racism.
The Associated Press has an article about an AP-Yahoo News poll that starts off this way.
Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks – many calling them “lazy,”"violent” or responsible for their own troubles.
The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 – about two and one-half percentage points.
When I read the entire article, I was left with two impressions. One, that the media can not figure out how John McCain is staying so close to Barack Obama in the polls when the political landscape clearly favors the Democrat and two, if Obama loses, his campaign and the media are going to lay the blame on the altar of racism. It’s pretty clear that the Obama campaign and the media do not want us to be thinking for ourselves, but rather take in and accept their diatribes about racism being the sole cause Americans may not elect Barack Obama as their President. If Obama looses this election to John McCain, it will be because Americans saw through his “change we need” rant and decided it wasn’t a change we could trust.
Let’s be clear about this. This Presidential election is not about race. It is about issues that we all should care about, such as the economy, the war in Iraq, abortion, the 2nd Amendment, and other issues I could name. When you cast your vote on November 4th, you need to cast it for one reason only. Do not look at the color of Barack Obama’s skin. Look at the issues you care about and vote for the candidate who best represents your views. Vote for the candidate who you think will best lead our country forward. To do anything less, to cast your vote for or against Barack Obama because he is an African American is a disservice to yourself and to our country.
That’s my take!
Larry
This presidential race has had alot to do with racism in the attacks that have been promoted against McCain (Age), and Sarah Palin (Gender). If Obama doesn’t win this election it will not be due to the color of his skin. In my opinion Larry, you are right concerning the issues important to the 2008 Presidentail election…the economy/tax plans, war and terrorism, abortion, health care reform and the list goes on.
Synthia Esther
http://www.synthiaesther.com
http://www.concernedsingleamericans.com
IS OBAMA FAILING TO WIN BECAUSE OF RACE?
Interesting article, however it would be even more interesting to see the same kind of analysis if the black candidate was Colin Powell, or Condelza Rice. If the black candidate had more experience, and didn’t vote present over 100 times … was not so far to the left … did not propose such radical changes to our society, such as a socialistic agenda … did not have negative associations, such as 20 years tied to a Reverend Wright, and other radicals … Threw his close friend of 20 years under the bus for personal gain …did not have a Muslim name, father and step father, just 6 years after 9-11, and while America, and it’s allies is in the midst of constant attacks from murderous Muslim terrorists … was properly vetted from the beginning … did not enjoy such overwhelming biased favoritism from the media … did not arrogantly create his own Presidential seal … did not disrespect historical American institutions, and traditions, as a way of selling his Change message … did not use accusations of race in response to every opposing argument … did not flip flop on important issues … chose Hillarry as his running mate … as well as several other substantive factors.
Good article.
I agree with Synthiaesther and Howard.
For a reasonably scientific survey, one should perhaps have used comparables: a) surveys made last year, when Obama was only the name on an untried product; and b) surveys made this month in European countries, some with a race problem, where Obama is still only a name.
I’m reasonably confident that these comparables would not have supported this survey.