1. nat wrote:

“Pittsburgh Mayor Ed Ravenstahl” is an error, actually his name is Luke Ravenstahl.

2. John wrote:

Pennsyltuckyans also enjoy what Dubois referred to as “the psychic wages of whiteness,” which allow them to close ranks around race rather than reason.

This is hilarious. And what is the percentage of black votes that Obama got?

3. www.rayandsamara.com wrote:

good points Marc. I think you pretty much summed up PA. I have hope that this will all come to an on the 6th. There’s no way Clinton can beat Obama in NC and he has a good chance at winning Indiana. After that, she’s history.

4. www.rayandsamara.com wrote:

did you ever say who you voted for? Are you a Pensyltuckian? or a Demo-Elite?

5. Marc Lamont Hill wrote:

john,

90% of black people voted for obama. as i’ve said a million times before, this is just as unreasonable….

6. james wrote:

john, i think the point is that the pennsyltuckians are voting for the white candidate simply because they have deeply ingrained racist viewpoints, while the blacks are voting for a black candidate simply because he represents a source of pride and hope, not because they believe obama will be sticking it to whitey.

7. ChgoSista wrote:

“First, Obama must make a more creative and aggressive attempt to court the traditional Democratic base. Second, he must convince influential party leaders to support him as quickly as possible.”–>I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE.

8. John wrote:

pennsyltuckians are voting for the white candidate simply because they have deeply ingrained racist viewpoints, while the blacks are voting for a black candidate simply because he represents a source of pride

james, that’s a pretty strong indictment of thousands of people. Is it not possible that white folks believe Hillary might make a better president? It HAS to be “deeply ingrained racist viewpoints?”

9. Christopher Wink wrote:

To be fair, I think the Clinton campaign also refused to give out ’street money.’ It had never been brought up before, so I think that point is overstated, no?

10. Garrett wrote:

Obama’s campaign can be boiled down to two words: income re-distribution. He’s doomed, thank goodness.

11. John wrote:

Hillary got something like 8 percent of the black vote in Pennsylvania, while Obama got 45 percent of the white male vote.

Now tell me again who is “closing ranks around color?”

Obama ran a masterful campaign in the early months. He was exciting and inspiring, and he had an easy road to the nomination.

But he has not performed well at all under the pressure of an extended campaign:

* His past associations are really hurting him because they contradict the key message of his campaign, that he is a uniter.

* His inability to answer questions off the cuff contradicts his ability to deliver prepared remarks, making him appear to be nothing more than a speech-giver.

* His campaign’s shift to “politics as usual” contradicts his claim to be above the fray. Now Rev. Wright is quoted as basically saying Obama’s famous “race speech” was just a politician doing what he has to do. Thanks for the support, Rev.

* He appeared to denigrate a large portion of the voting public in Pennsylvania in a way that was amateurish and unthinking, and his follow-up comments only did more damage. His use of phrases such as “typical white person” and the way he misrepresented his grandmother to portray her as racist hasn’t helped.

Basically, the ever-important narrative on Obama has shifted. It has nothing to do with race and everything to do with competence and experience.

Obama has only himself to blame.

12. knowledge_base wrote:

Yeah John, and I’m sure you think MLK was a communist too.

13. John wrote:

No, I don’t. But what does that have to do with Obama?

Can you not use any of your critical thinking skills to understand why Obama has lost some of his early popularity?

No … it just HAS to be racism — even though Obama is still drawing significant portions of the white vote?

Are you so blind that you believe Obama’s race prohibits him from making a mistake? That because he “represents” he is infallible?

He is a man running for president with a political belief system that is far, far more liberal than most of the country. He knows that — that’s exactly why his early campaign focused on bland promises such as hope and change. That’s why he disinvited Rev. Wright from his presidential bid announcement.

His associations do not necessarily label him, but they do provide insight into his thinking, his belief system, his core values. And once you get past “hope,” he just isn’t connecting with moderate Democrats and independents.

I mean, the guy asked a bunch of Iowans if they seen what Whole Foods was sellling arugula for these days. They don’t even have a Whole Foods in Iowa.

The bottom line is that political campaigns turn on the “narrative” that builds up about a candidate throughout the campaign season.

Think Dukakis in the tank. John Kerry windsurfing. Robert Dole’s grumpiness. The narrative on Obama has shifted from “shining superstar” to “questionable liberal.” And he hasn’t helped himself any.

14. Taylor Siluwe wrote:

John,

Obama’s off the cuff remarks ARE less flawless than his speechs — naturally. But with pundits and nit-pickers who’ve already decided he’s not the man burrowing through every thing he says, scrutinizing every gesture he makes, looking for something, anything to use as an excuse not to vote for the candidate that’s clearly winning this race — is there any wonder why he occasionally stumbles?

And people keep asking why can’t he close the deal? The real question should be, why is Hillary losing in the first place? Bottomline is he will get the nomination. And anyone with half a brain knows that a McCain Presidency is not only bad for America, but for the world.

We’re are finally getting rid of one smiling, dancing fool … it would be a crime to replace him with a doddering, war-mongering new one.

15. John wrote:

Just another comment …

Obama recently called Bernadette Dohrn a “respectable figure of the mainstream in Chicago.”

Yet on YouTube there is a video — shot in 2007 — of Dohrn talking about overthrowing the U.S. government and capitalism itself. She calls America a “monster” and a “beast.”

If Obama truly believes that folks like Dohrn represent the mainstream, he does not deserve to be president. Man, John Adams must be turning over in his grave.

16. econwhat wrote:

Garrett:
I know you don’t even want to honestly talk about “income re-distribution” and the putrid part YOUR REPUBLICANS played in nearly causing catastrophic financial ruin to this country in just about every area possible!!! Snow-balling effects that are downright dastardly but with stunningly skill, the undeniable MVPers’ of Blind-man’s Buff; predatory loans, out-sourcing in everyway possible, juggler extraordinaire of interest rates, faux greenies building idiotic McMansions and come to think of it mega-mansions as well. All should have a hyphenated last name ie. Joe Doe-Switcheroonie! Acting like an activist, but a deep-down to the bone privatist, pimping a smile from the unknowing by making paper airplanes and securing a photo-op to place in some evidentiary print vehicle,or on the shelf behind the piano. LOL Continue wearing the blinders, you fool yourself not me. I’m outta here.

17. John wrote:

Huh?

18. knowledge_base wrote:

I never called it racism. Ignorance and Americans not being an informed enough electorate to vote for the person best qualified, but not racism (maybe a little but more so ignnorance).

My MLK comment came more from the idea that you seem so easily swayed to lowest common denominator (spin) about certain individuals and not others. Where’s your critique of McCain and Hilary. You think they will lead the nation better than Obama?

19. Garrett wrote:

While McCain isn’t my first choice to be President, he’ll do a much better job of steering the beast of the federal government than Obama. There simply isn’t a comparison. Let’s remember that the office of the President is an administration, not just one person. Obama the person gives a great speech. Not what we need. Obama’s administration? Well, how’s his campaign been managed? Whoa, what’s that smell?!

20. just me wrote:

How do you reply to this type of statement by Pat Buchanan?

A Brief for Whitey
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted 03/21/2008 ET
Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America .

Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.
This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American com munity into the mainstream.

Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks — with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas — to advance black applicants over white applicants.

Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to supp ort soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?

Barack talks about new ‘ladders of opportunity’ for blacks.

Let him go to Altoona and Johnstown , and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for ‘deserving’ white kids.
Is whi te America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America ’s fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent ?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?

Is Barack aware t hat black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.

Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.