Woman: I can’t trust Obama. I have read about him and he’s not, he’s not uh — he’s an Arab. He’s not —. McCain: No, ma’am. He’s a decent family man [and] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that’s what this campaign’s all about. He’s not [an Arab].
While I agree with Obama in praising McCain for his attempts to temper some of his supporter’s misinformation, fear, and anger, I think this dialog is surreal. If I were an Arab reading of this exchange or a Muslim hearing Obama’s denials that he is Muslim without any attempt to suggest that that in and of itself is not a bad thing, I’d be rather alarmed. There are many aisles that need reaching across.
Off-Topic: What do the square brackets mean? I’ve seen them on other places in English text, but since I live in Belgium, I’ve never learned what they are for… Can someone explain?
or where what was actually said has been replaced by something different to make it more obvious, or less offensive
example:
McCain might have said “i dont like him”
the papers might print “I don’t like [Obama]” because without the rest of the sentence it’s not obvious who ‘he’ is
and yes i suppose one has to admire McCain for not accepting a cheap shot at his opponent, still not going to vote for him though. Or Obama.
It is unfortunate that people read into events things that are not there. That’s how lame arguments are made. There are two lists of items from which both candidates are drawing when they make their alleged statements. One is the list of things that Obama clearly IS and the other is the list of things that Obama clearly IS NOT. These lists are in no way necessarily exclusive. That is what is being read into the statements. Obama is a decent family man and Obama is not an Arab. Neither Obama nor McCain even implied that Arabs are not decent family men.
Obama is from Illinois and Obama is not a sheep does not mean there are no sheep in Illinois.
Greg, I have given this some considerable thought, particularly because you did not merely respond with a quick and easy quip.
It seems to me that you are reducing human use of language and meaning to predicate logic - that’s the kind that analyzes statements of the kind “All As are Bs, All Bs are Cs, therefore all As are Cs”, and if it’s not insert the branch of logic that fits, please - and that seems simply insufficient to me.
McCain could have responded to that woman that Obama is not an Arab and left it at that. That would have accurately addressed her comment and freed him from the need to praise an opponent who is already leading him according to most polls. People mean more than they say.
In responding to an assertion that one of the presidential candidates is “an Arab” it does not good to explain that there’s nothing wrong with being Arabic. It’s like talking about the national debt. You don’t do that in the same conversation in which you try to convince people to elect you.
No. I’m trying to elevate human nature beyond the tendency to believe what one wants to believe and into the realm of acting first only on what one knows first hand. People in fact do mean more than they say. I just begin to get suspicious when, for instance, you or John Foss are telling me what Billy or yoopers mean when they say something. I agree that in the McCain/Obama example that this is an unfortunate concatenation of sentences. Who is leading in the polls at any one moment is not pertinent here whereas praising an opponent is.
Edit: I’m going on a group ride. I’ll poll everyone there and then exclude all of the input except JC’s. I’ll report back with awesome smilies.
I just found out that I don’t know how to include emoticons in posts . Lucky you, they would have been AWESOME:D. JC said something about hateful democrats throwing Molotov cocktails at Republican campaign signs. He seemed to think that fit in here somehow;). Others made constructive comments which I successfully ignored:p.
I would still like to believe that people either do not, or at least would like not to, fill in information that really isn’t in a statement or a conversation. If you think about it, that is the thing that situation comedies are made of. Sit-coms evolve when the viewer is privy to a word or phrase that one of the actors missed or a scene that the actor is not aware of. The sequences of events that make a sit-com on TV usually make a tragedy in real life.
I agree that McCain lack of clarification should not be interpreted to mean that he believes that Arabic people cannot be “good family men”.
It is however, sad and pathetic that these things are being tossed around both as misinformation and that they underline deep-seated racism in our country.
Much like it would be political suicide to not have corrected this woman, it also would have been political suicide to defend the image of Arabic people to this group. I don’t believe that McCain is racist, but people who are racist will be voting for McCain. Not necessarily because they like his policies best, but because he’s not black, brown, or muslim.
I think as much as McCain may disagree with supporters with these views, he probably recognises that it’s not in his best interest to alienate them.
. Lucky you, they would have been 
democrats throwing Molotov cocktails 
at Republican campaign signs. He seemed to think that fit in here somehow;). Others made constructive comments which I successfully ignored:p.