We must try to humor these poor unfortunates, Michael.
Some of them actually think they've got a shot in November.

__________________
You meet the same folks on the way up as you do on the way down.

This is intentionally ambiguous language, designed to allow one's auditors to read into it whatever they wish. As such, it is highly disingenuous; and that speaks very poorly for any serious aspirant to high public office--especially the presidency.

Is Sen. Obama the first national-level politician to engage in such vague, Rorschach-test language? Hardly. Both Democrats and Republicans have done so on many occasions in the past. But that does not make it even slightly more acceptable, in my opinion.

Any major-party candidate for the presidency (or the Senate or the House, for that matter) should be unfailingly specific, to whatever extent that is possible. There are, of course, some things that do not easily lend themselves to hard-and-fast specifics (future tactics as concerning the Iraq War is an example that leaps to mind); but a lack of specificity that is apparently rooted in a desire to play games with the electorate--more accurately, to manipulate the electorate--is unforgivably cynical, as I see it. And that, irrespective of whether a "D" or an "R" succeeds the candidate's name.

I really have to take issue with someone trying to spin this into Obama supporting reparations - which means monetary reparations to African Americans for slavery, lynchings and other past abuses. Reparations was an idea developed by a small extremist group, and the idea has never developed any level of wide spread popularity with African Americans.

In short, this is a cheap shot. It is a cheap shot to the point that I would have to stop to challenge anyone's racial biases for saying something so far fetched.

__________________
National Debt =

That's not a surprise because you have an obsession with people's race as has been shown over and over throughout this forum. Why are you ashamed to be white, Michael?

Nothing has been twisted. Obama's words are Obama's words. I never claimed that he supported reparations. I asked a valid question. What other meaning to "the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds" is there? Since you are so certain that questioning his own words is nothing more than a racial overtone you obviously know exactly what he meant, so please, do elaborate and tell us. Tell us precisely what Obama meant by that sentence.

__________________
Carolina Politics Online

Sam

Me? Ashamed of being White? Bwahahahaha!

What else could it mean? Congress officially apologizing for lynchings equals "just words." It is a nice gesture, but the nitty gritty issue is what do you do in that case were white high school students were using a noose as a racist symbol for lynching to harass African American students. Then you need to DO something about it. That is not a real stretch of the imagination where as interpretting Obama as supporting reparations is, especially since he has never taken a position previously in support of reparations.

__________________
National Debt =

Now, go back and READ THE WORDS:

"I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it's Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds."

Translation: when it comes to reparations, the government needs to "offer deeds" and not just talk about it. He's being intentionally vague and what he said certainly keeps reparations on the table.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

So what deeds is he talking about in regards to reparations? This is the question nobody has been able to answer so far.

__________________
Carolina Politics Online

Sam

Why don't you ask him?

Wouldn't that be more honest than trying to make up the answer yourself while insulting those of us who support him?

Can't you anti-Obama folks think up threads that actually discuss the issues and policies he stands for? Do you always have to fall back on half truths and lies? Why is that? isn't it because the things he stands far are what's good for our country and you just can't stand to see a really great Democrat take over after a really horrible Republican has made such a mess of things? Which do find yourself being more loyal to these days, your party or your country?

Reparations = MONEY

What Obama is talking about = DEEDS (not money) - most likely what we are already doing to insure citizen civil rights are not violated.

__________________
National Debt =

Exactly. Like I said, I saw the speech. He was talking about making things fair for all people to pursue the American dream.

To twist this into Obama supports reparations is dishonest. But that's the GOP's MO, so what do we expect?