Friday, April 11, 2008

Elitist Obama Steps In It


"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

This quote is a big deal. Over the next week or so, myself and many others will be going over it in order to show the public just how out of touch with the mainstream American Obama actually is. Let me try to be the first.

There are so many things about this statement that should permanently damage the Obama campaign that it's difficult to figure out where to begin.

First, many of the jobs in the Rust Belt did disappear and have continued to disappear over the last few decades. Our economy has become far more technology based in recent years, making many of these industrial jobs obsolete. This is not to mention the damage that unions and high taxes have wrought on these big companies causing many of them to move overseas or south of the border.

Obama is correct in saying that far too many political candidates have promised that these outdated jobs will come back to town, when the truth is that they are gone for good.

Despite this, it's hard to believe that folks in Pennsylvania who lost their jobs 25years ago, are yet to find another form of employment.

Obama paints a picture of a jobless redneck, polishing his shotgun and watching the 700 Club because 25 years ago he lost his job and he's been down on his luck ever since.

So the first instance of Obama's elitism, evident in this quote, is his lack of faith in the persistent nature of the average American. This idea that an individual who loses his job, will remain unemployed for two and a half decades, because he is too lazy or simply too stupid to find employment is incredibly insulting. However, it fits in very well with the worldview of the Democratic Party that the free-market is unfair and that the federal government is best suited to fix its inequities.

Obama lists five things which he believes these perpetually unemployed schmoes have "clung to" since their assembly line shut down. It is obvious that Obama views each of these things in a negative light.

He uses "antipathy to people who aren't like them" (racism) and "anti-immigrant sentiment" (xenophobia), two things which a vast majority of Americans view negatively, and couples them with religion and guns, things which a great many Americans view in a very positive way.

However to liberal elites like Obama, guns and religion are just as bad as racism and xenophobia. Liberals rarely say this, but Obama let it slip out when he was speaking in San Francisco.

On the gun issue, Obama obviously doesn't understand the attachment that many in this nation have to their firearms. They view them as a valuable tool in protecting their families or for recreation, letting off steam at the firing range or hunting.


But Obama is from Chicago. In his world, guns are seen in a completely negative light. They are used almost solely to commit heinous crimes and wipe out young lives. Gun control advocates love to throw around statistics which show hundreds of "children" dying of gun violence every year. What they don't point out is that this violence is not being perpetrated by the five year old son of the rural Pennsylvania mill worker, but rather by the teenage gang-member on the south-side of Chicago who is getting revenge on another teenager for disrespecting him.

On the issue of guns, Obama just doesn't get it.

He claims that religion is yet another thing that these unemployed folks "cling to" once they lose their jobs. This is incredibly insulting. Not only is Obama implying that religion is an artificial comforting device of the lower classes, equivalent to their love of guns, but he is also implying that these folks all of the sudden looked to God for help once they lost their jobs.

He is claiming that God is little more than an outlet for these poor, ignorant people's bitterness.

Again, this is a typical, liberal-elitist view of religion.

The truth is that these Americans most likely grew up with religion in their lives. Their relationship with God is not one of convenience but rather a lifelong relationship and one that has served to strengthen familial and community bonds throughout American history.

Liberals like Obama tend to see religion in a negative light. They see it as the opiate of the masses, as a quaint throwback to puritan times with more negative effects on the populace than positive ones.

As we now know, Obama's experiences with religion are far different from those of the average American. He has experienced religion in the Muslim world and in the black churches of Chicago,which we now know more about than we ever cared to, but he seemingly has no clue as to the way the vast majority of Americans worship.

On the issue of religion in America, Obama just doesn't get it.

As we know, "anti-immigrant sentiment" is code among liberals used to describe the beliefs of anyone who opposes illegal immigration or who wants to protect our Southern border.

As with all issues involving people of a different skin color, liberals believe that this desire to control the flow of those coming in from other nations is based purely on racism and xenophobia.

Once again, the good people of Pennsylvania and elsewhere in the nation who are concerned about our porous borders are far more intelligent and well schooled on the issue than Obama and most other liberals give them credit for.

These folks understand that unchecked illegal immigration poses an economic and national security threat to this nation and touches on the American people's dedication to its core principles regarding law and order and national sovereignty.

The American people overwhelmingly want tough federal government action when it comes to illegal immigration, but like most liberals on the issue of illegal immigration, Obama just doesn't get it.

Obama and others on the left also believe that anyone who doesn't live in a big city must automatically be a racist. Assuming that people who don't have jobs are blaming their misfortune on "people who are not like them" is once again tantamount to calling these people ignorant. Quite the uniter this Obama guy is.

Finally, the part of the statement that really left me scratching my head was when Obama added "anti-trade sentiment" as an attitude which the unemployed have adopted due to their frustration. Once again Obama is clearly trying to point out that like racism and xenophobia this sentiment is unjustified.

But it's Obama himself who has been railing against free-trade for the last four months, publicly opposing NAFTA in order to score votes in the Rust Belt, while his surrogates engage in a whisper campaign with foreign dignitaries, ensuring them that in reality the candidate actually supports the agreement.

So which is it, Senator? Is free trade a positive force being used as a scapegoat by Pennsylvanians to explain their plight, or is it the true cause of their suffering?

You can't have it both ways. The meteoric fall of Mrs. Clinton is evidence of that. Remember the illegal immigrant drivers licenses flap?

And what about Mrs. Clinton? She will no doubt try to make an issue out of this remark, but it's probably too late for her to do so. Remember, many liberals who will be voting in the Pennsylvania primary have the same elitist attitude as Obama, so while it could potentially help Clinton widen her lead in that state, it could also hurt her.

Regardless of whether Clinton wins in the Keystone state, the consensus is that it's probably over for Clinton.

Clinton surrogate, Sen. Evan Bayh, played the electability card saying,

"The far right wing has a very good track record of using things like this relentlessly against our candidates, whether it's Al Gore or John Kerry and I'm afraid this is the kind of fodder they might use to really uh, to uh to harm him with."

And rightfully so. Ironically, this is just what Bayh is trying to do, using the GOP as a foil to disguise the Clinton's identical motives.

Barack Obama is cool. Kids love him. He oozes charisma. He's relatively young for a politician. These qualities lead some to believe that he must be in touch with the majority of the American people, who are modern, open minded and ready for change.

The truth is that Obama has no clue as to the desires and lifestyle of the average American. His worldview is only representative of the black inner-cities and the latte drinking, global citizens found in the penthouses of New York and the hybrid cars cruising the streets of San Francisco.

With this attitude, there is absolutely no way that Barack Obama can ever hope to become the President of all the people.

This, as well as the Reverend Wright issue, will undoubtedly come back to haunt him in the general election.

Is Obama "out of touch" with a vast swath of the American public? It would certainly appear so.

Strike Two senator. You're running out of chances.

- Dan Joseph

Sphere: Related Content

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Very well said. I agree with just about everything, except that it is probably over for Clinton. I think there is still plenty of time for the rest of the voters and for the superdelegates to realize she is the one who can win in November. She can take the popular vote and with that fact and the issue of Obama's inelectability, I think it very plausible for her to take the nomination.

Get with it people!! HILLARY 08

Obamaniac said...

Oh yeah? Oh Yeah? Well........McCain is old, and stuff.

foutsc said...

Great article! Very well written. I like the picture of Obama with the Clampetts. LMAO and LOL!

Applying South Side of Chicago victimology to middle America really backfired! Obama is in way over his head.

Anonymous said...

Intelligent reply obamaniac!
As a former liberal who would have fought for gun control, I now find myself with a gun. After seeing what happened in New Orleans after katrina and what is happening with immigrants in Europe, I realise that the government cannot and will not protect us in a time of civil unrest. Believe me, we are destined for civil unrest.

Gambit said...

Even though I agree with most of what's written in this blog, John McCain and the Republican establishment are no better. In fact, McCain and the GOP "elites" are even MORE out of touch with the American people.

The sad truth is, NONE of these 3 dirty Senators can lead America to a better era. We'll be voting for the "lesser of 2 evils" yet again. Until either the GOP and/or Dems radically reform their parties, America will continue down an increasingly dark path of moral, economic, and social decay.

Anok said...

I would like to point one just one thing, regardless of what Obama said, or intended to say, regardless of who you support politically or your political affiliation in general, one thing rings true about what Obama said, albeit he said it poorly.

When times get tough, there are a few things that people "cling to", use, or movements that will see a dramatic increase. You can see it in any impoverished area in just about any part of the world.

1) Violence, or crime, typically violent crime - which brings a rise in the need for gun ownership by non criminal folks looking to protect their own.

2) Religious beliefs grow and are depended on quite heavily and religious congregations see an increase in attendance.

3) Drug and alcohol abuse rise. (which in turn rises crime rates)

4) The "scapegoat game" gets started, and one or more groups of people must be blamed for all that ails us. Typically, and historically speaking it's foreigners and immigrants that are often to blame by citizens. Also, minorities, and recently, homosexuals. This breeds the racism and xenophobia you wrote about.

So, while Obama certainly made a mistake in how he said what he said (not just because he pigeon holed a particular brand of American citizen, but also the timing and overall reasoning was off) he is correct in what he is saying.

Anonymous said...

Having lived my whole life in a rural blue collar community in Indiana, I think Obama is right on the mark. He is totally in touch with what is going on. Jobs keep leaving town, and our residents do cling to their guns, and they are bitter, and they do resent immigrants. They have plenty of reasons to feel that way. I think anyone who says he's out of touch simply hasn't spent anytime in a rural blue collar community. My Uncle has 250 guns, including 3 types of AK47, and a Tommy gun. He even makes his own AK47 bullets. He's 58 and was "laid off" permenantly when his company outsourced the work to Mexico. I'd say he's a little bitter, and he clings to his guns a bit, and really doesn't like immigrants. But then again maybe Obama is just out of touch. I'm sure this comment will get torn apart in an attempt to dissect and misconstrue the truth of my remarks, just as was done to Obama. No Psuedo intellect blogging about the election wants to have an honest dialogue about the concerns of the working class depsite the fact that they are responsible for the manufacturing, and/or transportation of everything you own. That's okay you have to justify and qualify yourself some how.

Anonymous said...

Good Job. Damn good article. I wish more Americans were tuned into the internet so that they could read stuff like this. I had a neighbor who was 70 years old and totally avoided computer activity--till he got cancer. But even then he wouldn't view blogs. Got all of his information from CNN, CBS etc.
-thineprof