This is my sentiment, as well. Everyone is trying to make hay out of something that’s basically true, even if the details are a bit murky.
Some thoughts on the latest diversion of Campaign ’08, a campaign apparently hell-bent on keeping the nation mired in its own stupidity.As a native-born, small-town Pennsylvanian, a son of native-born, small-town Pennsylvania parents – one from the coal region, one from Lancaster County – let me assure you that the so-called offensive, condescending things Barack Obama said about the people I come from are basically right on target.
“Bitter” perhaps best describes my late mother, an angry Irish Catholic who absolutely clung to her religion.
Dad, also a journalist, wasn’t really bitter as far as I know, but he sure liked to hunt.
So, despite carping from Hillary Clinton and annoying yapping from her surrogates (really, it’s like turning on the lights at night in a puppy farm), I take no offense.
One of "those" things
Once again we are spending time on something the Bush/Clinton brand of politics uses to divide us. Are the comments going to end the war? Fix healthcare? Help working families? Resolve immigration? No. Is just a distraction designed to use us for political gain by trying to inflame differences. The 3 remaining contenders for President are all smart, compassionate and talented people. But they all don’t have the same integrity. Hillary is the one with the least. If it’s not Obama, I’d go for McCane. I want my President to show some respect for my intelligence. The Clintons never have.
I agree.
I resent the Clintons continually playing politics as usual, and grasping at every spoken word by Senator Obama to attach him and twist his position. I am in Indiana and anger, bitterness and some other choice words, I dare not use to express my disappointment, are my feelings toward this government and the current situation that we are in. I find it very condescending that the Clintons are ignoring the reality of the situation.
This issue Bull
Obama traveled through Pennsylvania on bus and probably ran into some bitter people. He is right people are bitter, I am. I am also just pissed off about how politicians try to distract us from the real issues w/ back stabbing,manipulative behavior! Lets get back to the issues. Americans are bitter and/or pissed. We are not worth 50 million(+100 McCains Wife)like McCain, and we havent made 109 million in 6 yrs like the Clintons. They swim in cash while our gas prices and food prices go up w/ no raises from our employers things have gotten tough. Let’s stick to the issues!
Baer's got it wrong here
IMHO, Obama’s remarks were more representative of what happens when people move up and down Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs from Bottom to Top:
Physiological (food, water, etc)
Safety
Love/Belonging
Esteem
Self-Actualization
The past seven years, people have moved down on this scale of social needs. IMO, during the Clinton years most Americans were moving up probably to the Love/Belonging and Esteem levels. But during the last seven years of Bush, I believe most Americans have moved down to the Safety level and some possibily dropping all the way to the bottom.
Here’s the definition of “Safety” from Wiki
———————————————————————————————————————————————————
Safety needs
With his physical needs relatively satisfied, the individual’s safety needs take over and dominate his behavior. These needs have to do with man’s yearning for a predictable, orderly world in which injustice and inconsistency are under control, the familiar frequent, and the unfamiliar rare. In the world of work, these safety needs manifest themselves in such things as a preference for job security, grievance procedures for protecting the individual from unilateral authority, savings accounts, insurance policies, and the like.
For the most part physiological and safety needs are reasonably well satisfied in our affluent and relatively lawful society. The obvious exceptions, of course, are people outside the mainstream — the poor and the disadvantaged. If frustration has not led to apathy and weakness, such people still struggle to satisfy the basic physiological and safety needs. They are primarily concerned with survival: obtaining adequate food, clothing, shelter, and seeking justice from the dominant societal groups.
Safety needs include:
* Personal security from crime * Financial security * Health and well-being * Safety net against accidents/illness and the adverse impacts —————————————————————————————————————————————————————You can easily see where Obama’s remarks fit this category.
pd
Baer's got it wrong?
Dear pd,
I disagree. Baer is right on target with a well-reasoned argument that makes perfect sense.
In terms of anyone “being out of touch”, your own convoluted and confused psychoanalytical dissertation is one I would like to see you put forth in a working class bar anywhere in Pennsylvania.
I would pay ten bucks just to watch the imbroglio that would be sure follow.
It would make great entertainment.
Matt Thomas
Everything has a psychological underpinning
Matt,
Where Baer is wrong is in concluding the cause is “politicians” or “government” or “perks”. It’s not.
Maybe you should read the hierarchy before you comment on its value.
There is nothing convoluted about Maslow’s Hierarchy. It simply explains as each basic human need is met, people move toward wanting fewer material things and more self-fullment. It is perfectly understandable that someone lower on the hierarchy, say in the “safety” category, would cling to the things Obama mentioned. For example, the need to feel safe from crime helps explain some, certainly not all though, of the gun culture, the current desire for more prisons and harsher sentencing. It also helps explain the anti-immigrant sentiment (“they’re taking my job”) we see in many blue collar areas. People are quite scared for themselves and their well-being at present.
The Republicans have been exploiting, and I might add creating, this fear for years. Hasn’t it occurred to you that Dems can exploit this whole issue by showing voters that by the GOP’s pro-business, anti-labor, anti-government policies are designed to keep people fearful and voting against their own economic interests? Obama made a stumbling start, but it was a start.
pd
on target
Where does Hillary come off with attacking Barack Obama when her husband in 91 said this:
The reason (George H. W. Bush’s tactic) works so well now is that you have all these economically insecure white people who are scared to death,” Clinton was quoted saying by the Los Angeles Times in September 1991.
I can’t see much of a difference in what was said here Bill and Barack. Do you?
Voting Against Economic Self-Interest
While Obama’s comments may not have been worded in the most artful way, they were right on target.
Blue-collar Americans across the country are discovering that their decision to vote for Republicans because of their stance on gay marriage, abortion, guns, etc. has come around to bite them on their asses. As a whole, the Republican party has never been concerned about the wellbeing of the middle and lower classes. Reagan Democrats and their legacies have allowed themselves to be fooled into thinking that so-called values issues would affect their daily lives.
So, has the fact that gay couple in the Mt. Airy section of Philadelphia can’t get married in Pennsylvania really made a difference in the lives in the people Levittown, Altoona, Scranton, etc.?
your comment
‘twue, ‘twue, ‘twue.
Voting against self
You are completely on target. People are fooled into living in a constant state of fear, but the wonderful information age that we are living in seems to finally be having an impact on the fear-mongers’ ability to spread their lies. EVERYONE has an agenda and small-town American’s are so loving and trusting they sometimes fail to keep that in mind. I have the experience of growing up in rural Pennsylvania, but I also have the experience of spending quite a large amount of my adult life living in Chicago. I wish everyone were able to have my experience since it gives a great view of both rural and urban mindset. And here is the epiphany – everyone wants the same thing. Enough of a paycheck to pay for the roof over their head where they and their family can comfortably eat, sleep and go to the bathroom. After that, there is only free time and how you choose to fill it.
I was born in a small (PA) town
Obama wasn’t talking about why people vote for Republicans. He was trying to explain to wealthy donors why people don’t vote for HIM. Because there’s something wrong with the voters, of course.
It might be a better strategy to figure out how to get these voters instead of making excuses. Because, you know, you might need their votes in the general election.
that's wrong
Here’s what Obama said:
“Our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives.”
Obama did NOT say there was anything wrong with voters. He said they were RIGHT to be cynical.
If voters don’t believe a President will change things, voters will use some other standard for voting. But if voters believe that a President can change things for the better — create middle class jobs — they’ll vote for the candidate best able to deliver that change. Obama believes he can win that argument, because he’s not the candidate who promoted NAFTA or the candidate whose spouse works for the Columbian government — Clinton is.
So, clearly, Obama recognizes that voters have a right to be cynical. His challenge is and has been getting voters to believe in their government again, and to be part of the change. If Obama is president, I’ll have a lot more faith in government.
Well, here’s something
Well, here’s something that’s wrong right off the bat. Pennsylvanians fared well under Bill Clinton and either Obama is ignorant or he’s lying when he lumps the Clinton years together with the Bush years.
Interesting, though, that you truncate your quote right when he goes into clinging to guns, religion, and xenophobia. He just had to go there, didn’t he? Once he went there, he stopped making economic/government arguments and made it cultural.
Also, interestingly, you don’t address my point that Obama wasn’t talking about Pennsylvanians voting for Republicans (which they haven’t in the last four presidential elections) but talking about why they’re not voting for HIM. Face it, he cannot close the deal. He does not appeal to a significant part of the Dem party and he will have a tough time winning the general election because of this. He pointed this out himself with his comments! What is he going to do to change that? That was my point.
As for faith in government? ANY Dem can restore faith in government because Dems believe in government and believe it can be put to work to improve people’s lives. Rs don’t believe that, and the way they run things shows, from poisonous consumer products to Hurricane Katrina.
I grew up in Forest County
Spent 27 years there. In 2000, I bumped into one of my classmates on a trip back home and asked him who he was voting for. Of course he said George Bush. I asked him why. His response…and I quote…was: “Because Al Gore will take my guns away.”
I sat there staring at him for a few seconds. And it hit me at that moment that the Republicans had successfully built a foundation for hitting those “god, guns, and gays” issues every election cycle to get voters like my classmate to vote AGAINST there own economic self-interest.
That is what Obama was talking about and he is exactly right.
Republicans will have lower
Republicans will have lower taxes. High taxes are what’s hurting families.
Democrats, especially in Pennsylvania, tax and spend like drunken sailors.
Actually, Democrats make drunken sailors look frugal.
We just can’t afford more spending on more lies, like global warming, and more programs that don’t work.
Too many people are feeding off taxpayers. All Democrats offer is more of same.
BS
Republicans lower taxes on the richest among us. Meanwhile, they’re policies result in rising prices across the board so that middle class and poor Americans can’t afford anything. Gas and food prices are going through the roof.
Oh, but don’t worry, Bush is giving us a “stimulus package.” I feel better. Can’t wait to get that $300. I’m sure it will go far.
Lower Taxes?
That statement clearly shows that you are one of the elite whom the Bush tax cuts benefit the most. Or you just haven’t read enough on middle-class America’s tax burden under the Bush administration.
It was under a Democrat’s watch (and I hate to admit it was Bill Clinton since I’m pro O’Bama) that we finally balanced the American budget and even had money in the bank. The Bush administration, upon Bush’s appointment by our Supreme Court, blew the cushion we had when it gave everyone a few bucks to put in their pocket. I don’t know what the $350 bought for you, but it didn’t go that far for most American’s. The Bushies then went a step further and started mortgaging our futures by running up huge swaths of debt that you, your children, your grandchildren and even your great grandchildren will work to pay off. McCain has said he supports many of the Bush administration’s policies so he is, in all actuality, the one who wears the label of more of the same.
If you choose to ignore everything else that I’ve said, then please at least hear this: Many respected economists (many considered to be authorities on the subject) have long held that poor and middle-class Americans consistently vote against their interests when they vote a Republican ticket. They would be the people who would know.
haaa!!
I make $28,000 a year.
I had no idea that made me an elitist!!
ooops
I am sorry to the poster above. I thought the “elite” comment was directed toward me (the $28,000 a year working poor guy). but, alas, I see it was directed at the poster above me.
Republican trickle down
Republican trickle down economic policies have failed our country over the last eight years by creating big winners and equally big losers. The problem will continue and grow exponentially as long as the current tax policies of lower taxes for wealthiest remain in place, as the relatively few winners rarely write checks to the larger pool of losers (losers – solely in the economic sense… don’t want to be taken out of context like Sen. Obama). A Democratic Admininstartion is more likely to give working class, manufacturing employees a seat at the national bargaining table. I cringe thinking about all the human capital we’ve wasted among the very poor and working class individuals. Again, a Dem Adminstration will invest in the people; not only big business… just wait until you see the return!
Republicans Are Not Fiscally Conservative
I can’t believe that you can’t connect the dots. Bush and the Republican Party have not been Fiscally Prudent for many years now. No, the Democrats are not any better, but please don’t publish the BS that Republicans will lower the taxes. The Bush Administration is the worst bunch of financial derelicts I have seen in my lifetime! They have created a mess that our great grandchildren will still be paying for. How much have they borrowed from the Chinese to support their follies? This money will have to eventually be paid by future administrations regardless of whether they are Democrats or Republicans. They have taken care of the wealthy, but many middle class Americans and on down the economic scale are suffering right now. Not only is the cost of gas out of sight (Iraq War and other shennanigan being pulled by the oil companies), but the cost of food has risen the highest in 17 years. I am a former, longtime Republican, but these clowns are not practicing or living by the good, old fashion Republican Values.
where have you been
lower taxes… only for the rich. “spending money on lies”... sounds like spending on Iraq. Republicans are going to get canned and i cant wait. Outsource the republicans and keep the jobs.
taxes are here to stay
anyone that thinks the promises of lower taxes is possible while insisting on more government help is delusional. Instead list the things you are willing to do without and taxes will go down. No sports in schools….cheaper school taxes, no more special programs for special students…cheaper school taxes. No state road repairs, no Penndot. lower state taxes. No court system beyond District Justices….lower taxes. No Public Utility Commission…lower taxes. But what will you really be paying out of your pocket for pot hole repair, cheer leaders, educating disabled students and not putting criminals in a jail cell to keep you safe. Should I talk about snow plowing costs? If the candidate says no taxes you need to understand they are silly.
What about Alzheimer's Disease
Five million people in this country suffer from Alzheimer’s Disease. During the next administration, the number will skyrocket due to the aging baby boomer population.
We need to ask our candidates what they’re going to do about it before it bankrupts Medicare and Medicaid. PA voters must ask that question now. www.alz.org/election08
Tonight, on Nat'l Geographic...the White Male!
Where to begin? I could probably fill several pages with a response, rebuttal, analysis, etc., but I’ll try to condense my remarks as much as possible. As a conservative, white, somewhere-in-the-middle class voter (i.e., within spitting distance of the demographic Obama was, ahem, “describing”), I can’t say I was terribly offended by his characterization of people like me. However, that’s probably due to the fact that I’ve essentially become immune to such descriptions, after fielding arrow after condescending arrow fired from the hard left over the years. I’m not entirely sure why this is news. Howard Dean essentially spewed the same venom several years ago, attempting to explain away John Kerry’s loss. As I recall, former President Clinton blamed “conservative white males” (and their guns…and their faith…) for the ’94 GOP takeover of Congress. In short, this is nothing new from the left. I do have to admit that this “sociological study” of conservative white males does continue to amuse me, however. Sometimes I feel like I’m part of National Geographic study that occurs every two years. “Why, there he is, the conservative white male. Quiet now… he appears to be…wait…yes, he is pulling the Republican lever. This is fascinating. There must be some sort of biological pull that forces this subject to vote Republican…astounding…”
Um…could it be possible that we just like the Republican candidates better? Is it within the realm of possibility that, when comparing the platforms of the two major parties, that we like more items from the Republican column than that of the Democrats? Despite popular wisdom on the coasts, the “conservative white male” does in fact have a functioning brain and is capable of rational thought and decision-making. Shocking, I know. Yes, some of us do vote on the taboo-ish “social issues” (you know, the issues that should “never be talked about”, unless one argues in favor of the liberal position). I guess I should point out that voting solely on those issues doesn’t make one a complete dolt. I’ve known liberals that vote solely on the “choice” issue, and as far as I know, they’re still recognized as something akin to Nobel laureates in their respective coffee houses. So if we’re taking “single-issue” voters to task, we should realize they exist on both sides. Personally, I vote for those who will, a) recognize their political existence is solely dependent upon the earnings of taxpayers, b) vote accordingly based upon a), c) recognize government is not the solution to each and every social ailment, d) tailor the government programs that actually do work more as a helping hand, not a heavy hand, e) respect the Constitution and not treat it as just something cool to reference in speeches, f)...well, I’ll stop here for now, but interestingly enough, I haven’t even gotten to the terms “life” or “gun” yet. I guess most of my fellow “conservative white males” aren’t looking for a “well-educated”, smooth-talking political savior to create a few programs (on our dime) and end this long, dark, “bitter” period in our lives. Just let us keep more of what we earn, protect us and our families, and stay out of the way. If Obama were truly listening, that’s what he would hear as he crosses the Commonwealth. He hears what he wants to hear and sees what he wants to see because his campaign would cease to exist if the alternative were true. There would be no need for a candidate such as Obama that will “unite the country” and “bring us back to our senses”. Wait…I should stop…I think I’m starting to sound a little “bitter”. Besides, I need to go clean my shotgun before it gets too late.
White Male
I wonder … you’ve heard about the 50 Hedge Fund people who made BILLIONS this past year … how many of them are NOT WHite Males? Ans:
0Ummmm … could you put your “fucntioning brain, rational thought process and decision-making” skills to work and explain to me … Why is that?
Another 4 Years with the Clintons in the White House
TH point is if your looking for a candidate thats for you Vote for Sen. Obama if you want another 4 years of the Cllintons and drama vote for Sen. Clinton. What everybody has to understand is Hillary Clinton is running for president not Bill Clinton
I live in Scranton PA and I
I live in Scranton PA and I really can’t trust Hillary Clintons judgement. She has run a incompetant campaign. She’s lied about Bosnia. Her chief strategist and Bill Clinton is Pro Nafta. Even though Sen. Obama has made controversial statements, I think Sen. Clinton has done far more worst to Pennslyvanians with Nafta and her lies than Sen. Obama’s statements.
Who are these people???
I can’t believe all the baloney I’m reading from Mr. Baer and a few others about growing up in Pennsylvania’s Small Towns. Mr. Baer’s arguement especially that his mother was an Irish Catholic because she was angry or that his Father may have been angry because he loved to hunt don’t follow any kind of logic that I’m familiar with. Like mr. Baer, I too was born and raised in a small town in Pennsylvania (Easton in the Lehigh Valley) and I will always credit my love of country, pride in my state, and deep affection to my Hometown to my small-town upbringing and values. It was where I first learned to salute the Flag, recite the pledge of allegiance, and sing My Country tis of Thee. It was where I learned to respect, love, and know my neighbors BY NAME – next door and across town – and take pride in the neighborhood and town in which I lived. It instilled in me the values of hard work and responsibility in order to always improve the lot of myself, my Family, and my Community. It was a place where you went to sleep at night and didn’t have to worry about anyone breaking into your home because you didn’t have bars on your windows and doors. Even walking through the roughest part of town, I didn’t worry about ever being mugged, knifed, or shot. And on Sundays, our Family and many other Families in our Hometown went to Church to pray for the strength meet life’s many challenges – without bitterness – and to thank God for – among other things – the many blessings we enjoyed living in the best darn Hometown and the best darn State in America. Now unfortunately, with the passage of time and the outward sprawl of the Big Cities of Philadelphia and New York toward my old Hometown, I’m aware that some of the negative elements of Big City life such as crime (Philadelphia is reported to have a nearly one-a-day rate for murders) has started to pervade even my Hometown. However, one lesson which growing up in a small town taught me, is that you must meet your challenges head on with that Stubborn Faith in God and in your Neighbors that things will always eventually get better. Now some folks who claim to know better regard this thinking as the mindset of a “nation mired in it’s own stupidity”. However as I’ve stated before, I still don’t follow their logic. But what do I know? After all, I’m just a small town boy.
how do we mange to have any discourse?
what Baer said: Dad, also a journalist, wasn’t really bitter as far as I know, but he sure liked to hunt.
what you said: Mr. Baer’s arguement … that his Father may have been angry because he loved to hunt don’t follow any kind of logic that I’m familiar with.
what doesn’t follow any logic is how someone how actually read what Baer posted could manage to make the claim you did.
It’s right there in the post! How can people be so completely out of touch with something that is written right in front of their face!
What's the issue?
Mr. Baer stated that he AGREED with Sen. Obama’s comments that People from small towns are “bitter” because of their lot in life and that they “cling” to their Religion and Guns as a result of that bitterness. I noticed you didn’t challenge my conclusion on his view of his “angry Irish Catholic Mother who absolutely clung to her religion.” Saying “his Father wasn’t REALLY bitter AS FAR AS I KNOW” is not the same as saying – with NO equivocation – that he WAS NOT BITTER. And if he truly believes Sen. Obama’s comments that many who hunt do so out of bitterness, then his “BUT he sure did like to hunt” comment regarding his Father seems to leave open the possibility that his Father may have been bitter without his knowing about it. Oh, and just a suggestion, referring to people as “out of touch” and using a lot of angry exclamation points really doesn’t enhance civil discourse. In fact, in the small town where I grew up, some would regard that as rude.
What's the Issue???
Politicians use these “wedge issues” to distract voters and create divisions “forcing/coersing “ voters to focus on single issues WHILE putting into place laws/bills/ploicies that are not in the best economic interest of these very same voters! That is the issue!!!
A Sham of a Debate!
The ABC Debate was a Sham and very one-sided.. ask Barack all the Got-cha questions and never questioned Hillary about Mark Penn and Columbia? What kind of fairness is that.
George must of owed Bill Clinton a big favor & Bill got it! Is that why he never once asked Hillary about Mark Penn and Columbia? Is that not pertinent to the campaign as he says? Yes. And, Obama was 8 years old when Ayers committed his offensive act, to try to tie Obama to that is ludicrous! If America is to get to a more Positive place, we will need a leader who is positive and inspirational, one like Barack Obama. Clinton in her willingness to lie, divide and conquer has wallowed in negativity and negativity begets negativity… we don’t need that kind of personality leading America at this time or any time… that is if we want to get to a more positive place. Obama, if elected, will be the People’s President and much beloved!
Post new comment