What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

chuckhasker@yahoo.com — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:16:15 GMT

Andrew you are right on point. I too thought that the "story of silly Jesse Jackson dustup," hurt Mc Cain and Mc Cain and his group of do nothings were busy doing what they do best, missing a news cycle. Chalk another one up for Obama. Thanks Chuck Hasker.

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

orion12 — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:38:19 GMT

Oh Obama!! This guy gets kicked from all sides. Whatever he does he will be hassled by someone.

I think Jackson has outreached himself. But I am not surprised. He is a frustrated man. He considers himself a leader of blacks and that he knows what is good for them. He has failed to be president of the United States. On the other hand Obama has outshone him. Let us say, there is no comparison between both of them in the quest for the presidency. So he must be somewhat jealous looking for holes in whatever Obama says or represents. He should be excused.

What I am seeing here is honesty on the part of Obama. He is not sucking up to whites or putting down blacks. He is saying if as it is. Some blacks will feel uncomfortable with being told that they are not good fathers or parents. The statistics show that. He was making a point to let people think about responsibility. That is all. So what is wrong about that. Why should blacks be upset? Some say he should look at the big picture. But is it possible to discuss all the fundamental problems of the black population in just a few minutes. Nooooo!! This is what worries me about the lack of objectivity of some black people. Obama is practicising some new politics and calls the shots as he sees them.

Now, some people made a lot of noise when he mentioned the bitterness of some whites. They did not want to hear the truth. This is what happened to Jackson. He did not want to hear the truth. But if you look at the social setup of blacks, a lot of their problems have their roots in bad parenthood. This should be mentioned so that the problem can be worked on. Obama's comments were right on and honest.

I do not believe that whites are going to vote for Obama because of what he said about blacks. But at least people will understand that he is not campaigning as a president for blacks. He wants to be president of the peoples of the United States. Period. Whites who will never voter for him because he is black, will not ever change their views of him because they have their own prejudices, which are unaffected by logic. There are also some blacks who hate Obama because of his stature and success. Those too will only turn from him because they will justify their prejudices by what he said.

In the final analysis, Jackson has helped people to see that Obama is interested in attacking fundamental problems. I hope though, that Jackson is very ashamed by his behavior.

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

sanrioscenario — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:46:12 GMT

I think the funniest part of all this is how absolutely um, nuts, the press has gone over all of this. There's a really funny reel that shows a compilation of the absurd reactions of news anchors/political pundits. Enjoy! http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/10/cable_news_anchors_choking_on_7663.php

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

PacificGatePost — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 05:15:23 GMT

OBAMA CANNOT POSSIBLY MEET EXPECTATIONS, EVEN HIS OWN ---

Obama’s impossible road ahead:

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/07/why-obama-will-win-but-cant-deliver.html

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

NorthBridgePatriot — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:12:18 GMT

Isn't Newsweek supposed to be a credible news source? I'm sorry, but this article looks like it was written by a 12 year old. What is the "Altantic" Magazine? Should "diss" be used in a magazine like this? Mr. Romano, please go back to texting your friends about your facebook page, and leave journalism to the professionals.

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

Historypro — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:08:28 GMT

Jesse Jackson is like a pro-athlete past his prime who insists he can still play the game. We shouldn't deny Jackson's past contributions because, in fact, they were many and they were important. We shouldn't dismiss him as irrelevant and out-date either because he doesn't have to be "over the hill" unless he so chooses. Unlike a pro athlete, whose success is built on youthful muscle, a politican can evolve into a "senior statesman" over time if he or she accumulates wisdom and grace. This should be a wake-up call for Jackson: will he become a respected senior statesman or a pathetic has-been out of touch with current reality? It's his call. Right now he looks like nothing more than a crude lout, maybe even a bit jealous over Obama's great polish, promise, and refusal to pander to prejudice -- of any type or persuasion.

As for Stumper's point -- that both Obama and the news media missed an important opportunity re: foreign policy because of this idiotic brouhaha over Jackson -- I'd certainly agree. I can understand why Obama was forced to respond to Jackson's ignorant quip so let's call it like it is: because it was the news media who played it up ad nauseum. All candidates are forced to respond to the news media (to do otherwise would be suicidal). This is an excellent example of who really drives presidential elections and who determines what issues are put before the American electorate: it is the news media through their choice of topics and issues they determine the "debate du jour."

If Newsweek, MSN, CNN, FOX, the bloggers and pundits, and anyone else operating within the grinding machinery that we loosely refer to as "reportage" or "journalism" really wants to contribute

to the democratic electoral process --- well, then boyos: ignore the chicken **** and focus on the chicken salad. PLEASE!

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

chuckhasker@yahoo.com — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:04:36 GMT

This message is for Northbridgepatriot. I've got news for you Mr. Northbridgepatriot, Andrew Romano is a very good writer and reporter. Most news articles give me a headache when I read them or I get mad and upset when I read them because other news reporters distort, twist or leave out the facts and paint their own picture of their reality. If you read enough of Andrews news reports you will find the information is informing, fresh and seen out of the eyes of youth. Whether I agree with him or not at least he is honest. Not some fake journalist just writing to get a headline grabber. If you need to vent go and do it somewhere else. Practice your english critique at CNN they need your comments so buzz off. Chuck Hasker

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

onepoker — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:11:20 GMT

Northbridge I often disagree with mr. Romano but I think your post takes it too far. The man expresses his views and opinions in an interesting and well thought out manner.

As for a key allie privately discussing removing your testicles because you talk down to his constituency I don't know how helpful this is to Obama but I doubt he will lose any votes over it.

re: What's Really 'Nuts' About Jackson's Outburst

cataclysmo — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 04:19:09 GMT

Why anyone believes this is real is beyond me. Does anyone really think Jesse Jackson talks like this? It sounds like some line a white Hollywood writer would create for him. The question honest news organizations should be asking is "did Obama ASK Jesse to say this?" What better way to get those ignorant white voters who "cling to their guns and faith..." than to appear to have Jesse Jackson hate you. Condescending would apply if you felt people were intelligent, herding the sheep is more accurate.

Th other half to this, if it were true, is that the news media has virtually ignored the violent tone of this this comment and has given Jesse Jackson a virtual pass? This should be a career ender. Give me a break...