Louis Farrakhan backs Obama

Louis Farrakhan backs Obama

www.chicagotribune.com

Speaking to thousands of members of the Nation of Islam at their annual convention Sunday in Chicago, Minister Louis Farrakhan praised presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama as the only hope for healing the nation's racial divisions.

Farrakhan, 74, the longtime leader of the Nation of Islam, said the war in Iraq, the nation's faltering economy and the increased number of natural disasters were signs of "a nation in peril."

(visit the link for the full news article)

Although Obama has not sought Farrakhan's endorsement and has said that the disagrees with Farrakahn on many issues, this development will no doubt influence many.

Personally, I don't pay any attention to luminaries who endorse candidates. Such might make for interesting conversation, but I choose my candidates based on the issues.

However, endorsements are made because those who make them believe that their opinion matters.

According to the media, not my own calculations, the next few weeks will make the difference in who will get the Democrat nomination, so it will be interesting to see what the results will be of this incendiary character's endorsement, if any.

www.chicagotribune.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 2008/2/25 by GradyPhilpott]

The fact that Louis Farakahn is supporting Obama is really a none issue.
The last time I checked, Farakahn is a US citizen who has the same rights as the rest of us and he is excercising those rights through the democratic process.

Obama does not support Farakahn or his views at large, so the endorsement is just that...an endorsement.

Quite frankly there are much larger "boogiemen" for the American people to worry about, weather they were created by fear-mongering or simply neocon groups like AIPAC.

Groups like AIPAC concern me much more than Farakahn, because of their ability to influence our foreign policy decisions to get us to do completely stupid things...like attacking Iraq, and now beating war drums for an attack on Iran.

reply to post by realmatrix


Farrakhan's endorsement is a non-issue to you and me, but it might be a lot more important to some members of his voter base.

The endorsement wll help Obama among some voters. The question is will it hurt him overall.

That's what will be revealed in the next few weeks.



[edit on 2008/2/26 by GradyPhilpott]

reply to post by GradyPhilpott


Grady, Obama has never spoken in front of a Farakahn audience, but he has spoken in front of the AIPAC crowd. The only way the Farakahn will become an issue rather than AIPAC is if the media and neocons put a spin of this endorsement..

Most Obama supporters could care less about Farakahn..thats the old politics and it kind of plays into Obama's "Wheelhouse".

Needless to say we will have to wait and see how this plays out but...methinks it's all non-sense and silliness.

Originally posted by realmatrix
The fact that Louis Farakahn is supporting Obama is really a none issue.
The last time I checked, Farakahn is a US citizen who has the same rights as the rest of us and he is excercising those rights through the democratic process.

So is the Grand Dragon of the Knights of the Klue Klux Klan!

What does that got to do with it at all ? Not all americans are people candidates would feel honored to have them endorse them.

I wonder what would be the reaction if the Grand Dragon were to endorse Clinton ? I bet the Blacks will just consider that as a "non-issue" right ?

I'd like to see that happen!

Now, when an openly Islamic fundamentalist nut says "Vote for this guy" I know that a LOT of Americans are going to cross that candidate off in their minds as no-no.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by IAF101]

reply to post by realmatrix


I appreciate your personal concerns, but I support Israel and the politicians who do.

Also, neo-con is a term that has no meaning to me.

If it means a conservative politician who also supports Israel's right to exist, then I'm all for it.

Mostly, when I hear the term it is used as an invective, which for some reason always makes me go completely deaf.

I'm not really sure that I've ever heard a Democrat described as a neo-con, but I guess anything is possible.

At any rate, the issue here is what effect, if any, will Farrakhan's endorsement have on Obama's candidacy one way or the other.


[edit on 2008/2/26 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by IAF101

Originally posted by realmatrix
The fact that Louis Farakahn is supporting Obama is really a none issue.
The last time I checked, Farakahn is a US citizen who has the same rights as the rest of us and he is excercising those rights through the democratic process.

So is the Grand Dragon of the Knights of the Klue Klux Klan!

What does that got to do with it at all ? Not all americans are people candidates would feel honored to have them endorse them.

I wonder what would be the reaction if the Grand Dragon were to endorse Clinton ? I bet the Blacks will just consider that as a "non-issue" right ?

I'd like to see that happen!

Now, when an openly Islamic fundamentalist nut says "Vote for this guy" I know that a LOT of Americans are going to cross that candidate off in their minds as no-no.

[edit on 26-2-2008 by IAF101]

:

Hummm that's very interesting...David Duke supported and voted for Bush in 2000, and that did not seem to effect any turn out or opinion about Bush....

So you're point is what? That somehow because Farakahn supports Obama it is now going to stain Obama politically, even though Obama has nothing to do with Farakahn?

Nothing could be further from the truth.

David duke voted for Bush but I dont remember Bush accepting his sponsorship? In fact David Duke has publicly condemned the Bush adminstration as Zionist pawns and called his neo-conservative agenda as crazy.
Duke in Damascus
Obama however is all to happy to get this Islamist nut's sponsorship, in the typical dem tactic of pandering to minority groups, one after the other, as secure voting blocks.
This will however backfire and turn the majority of American see him for what he is, another crooked Chicago Socialist that wants to sneak into D.C and pander to his fellow Islamist brothers.

Duke is a charlatan and a very clever one at that.

He does not lack cajones, either.

David Duke is the white equivalent of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

As far as I know, with the possible exception of his prison time, Duke has never worked a day in his life.

Originally posted by IAF101
Obama however is all to happy to get this Islamist nut's sponsorship, in the typical dem tactic of pandering to minority groups, one after the other, as secure voting blocks.

Obama is NOT "all too happy to get this Islamist nut's sponsorship." He stated as much in the MSNBC debate, if you were watching. (I doubt there's a transcript up yet, but I'm sure they'll be re-playing it all night)

But I do have to agree with your other point: that Democrats traditionally campaign by segmenting the population into special interest groups (latinos, blacks, gays, women, etc). OTOH, so do Republicans (evangelicals, small business owners, gun owners, pro-lifers, etc).


edit to add: sorry about that Orson Wells thing, lol.



[edit on 26-2-2008 by HarlemHottie]

Guilt by association is considered a logical fallacy. Therefore, to argue that Obama is an extremist because one of his supporters is controversial is not logically sound. Farrakhan's endorsement will likely win some votes for Obama but lose some others; overall it shows that Obama appeals to a wide cross-section of people.

[edit on 28-2-2008 by Sestias]

reply to post by IAF101


I hope you realized just how wrong you are in your post when you watched the debate the other night.

Perhaps we should start to screen anyone with different beliefs than ours before we let them speak out or support someone, hmmm? What do you think?

'You can't vote unless you have moral views!'...I kind of like that...

In my opinion, I see a big difference in Farrakhan endorsing Obama, and Ron Paul accepting money from white supremacist Don Black.

Paul could have and should have returned the money. He didn't. As far as I know, Obama has not accepted any money from Louis Farrakhan.

If all it took to ruin a politician's bid was an endorsement from an unsavory character, don't you think everyone would be doing it?

Obama has no control over who endorses him; no politician does. It's how the candidate handles the endorsement that is the important issue.

Originally posted by bigbert81
I hope you realized just how wrong you are in your post when you watched the debate the other night.

Perhaps we should start to screen anyone with different beliefs than ours before we let them speak out or support someone, hmmm? What do you think?

'You can't vote unless you have moral views!'...I kind of like that...

No I couldnt bother to actually watch that snooze fest with the Dem yap all day and say nothing contest. I did read the response and it is typical backtracking.

How come his major supporter, alleged mentor and sounding board gave that Islamist nut Farrakan an lifetime achievement award and he's all for that but when he hears it from the camels mouth, Mr Hussein back peddles?? I call BS!

He's just another Chicago scumbag trying to pawn himself as something else. Its only a matter of time till his charade is brought to an end.

[edit on 2-3-2008 by IAF101]

reply to post by HarlemHottie


You know this could work in Obama's favor.... After the debate, which I thought he handled quite nicely, his comments in reference to LF raised him above the particular conjecture we are seeing in regards to the endorsement.

One can not control someone throwing a dirty towel at them, but if they duck they also can not be held responsible for the towel...

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis
You know this could work in Obama's favor....

I don't know. The problem is, in Obama's hometown of Chicago, lots and lots of black people are associated with the NOI, whether they're Muslim or not. This could come back to bite him, but I'm hoping for the best. It's not like they have a better choice at this point.

One can not control someone throwing a dirty towel at them, but if they duck they also can not be held responsible for the towel...

Tell it to McCain- he caught the dirty towel, and then rubbed it all over his face... it's a pity his likely voters have a tendency toward that sort of dirt (the "Let's kill all the Muslims" kind).

(That was in no way meant to offend you, semper... you were a Romney guy, right?)

Yes, sadly I was a Rom backer.... Now I have dried my tears and I am looking at my alternatives...

I can't seriously get behind McCain. I know, I know, I'm a die hard republican, but more importantly, I'm an American and must do what I think is best for my country...

I like Obama's straightforward approach. I appreciate the fact that he has been the only one to not go completely negative and he has risen time and again above what Hillary Shillary has thrown at him. That speaks of character and I believe that is something a sitting President must have...

So we will see what is what when they start campaigning for the general...

Semper

Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Tell it to McCain- he caught the dirty towel, and then rubbed it all over his face... it's a pity his likely voters have a tendency toward that sort of dirt (the "Let's kill all the Muslims" kind).

Could you please explain this statement. It's just a little too abstract for me. What event or events are you referring to?

Originally posted by semperfortis
I like Obama's straightforward approach.

I agree with everything you said. You know, this is my third presidential election, and I really have to thank Bush for making it clear to me what I expect from a president: intellectual curiosity, level-headedness, and the ability to admit (and correct) mistakes. That's all. And Obama has them.

In some ways, I feel weird about being an Obama supporter, because people expect black people to vote for any black candidate, but that's not it. Based on what he's saying, I'm quite sure that he won't go out of his way to highlight traditionally "black issues," so that's not my motivation.

I truly believe that he is the best man for the job.