For the second day in a row I am loathed to respectfully disagree with Dr. Lamont Hill. As I stated in a previous post, I enjoy reading Dr. Hill's post because I believed that his criticisms of Senator Obama were fair and valid (at times a bit nit picky though). However, his posts as of late seem to bespeak something else. In his grading of Senator Clinton I believe that Dr. Hill is guilty of something that the vast majority of the electorate is guilty of, and that is unwarranted familiarity. The belief that you know how a person thinks or feels because you erroneously believe that your response or the response of others, in a similar situation is universal in nature. You project your feelings onto a person without stopping to realize that you don't know them well enough to do that. That was the case in his critique of Senator Hillary Clinton's performance. Dr. Hill presumes that Senator Hillary Clinton was not sincere in her endorsement of Senator Obama, but I am not sure how he could conclude that. Making such a statement cheapened the critique for me because there was simply no way of objectively quauntifying that conclusion.
Furthermore, I am glad that she did not make the claim that Senator Obama was fully "qualified" to be the President of the United States of America. Even Dr. Hill has admitted on a number of occassions "his resume is thin" and that "there are definite questions of experience" (comments made in the past three months on the "O'Reilly Factor" - thank God my head didn't explode writing that). So why would Dr. Hill require Senator Clinton to deny a glaring deficiency in Senator Obama's qualifications (an issue presumably implied in his choice of running mate) that he acknowledges. I thought that the grade should have been at least as high as Governor Shweitzers, whose words in print seemed to come alive even as I read them. Whether he will be a future star (Gun rights enthusiat and advocate, and I am too!) remains to be seen, but he read very well.
Nothing will be enough for some people. That is sad.
Dr. Hill's Grade C-
Mr. Hill is not an authority on anything but Mr. Hill. It is amazing how bias his opinions are as they relate to Obama. I understand that he can relate to Obama being a African -American man who has overcome all odds but give me a break. Mr. Hill pump your brakes dude, get a grip your comments are comparable to changing lanes with out looking in the rearview mirror. Things are not always what they appear to be it not alway safe to indiate and then move. Stop listen and then proceed with caution. All you see is a black face in a seemly high position and you are impressed. My sister made a comment to me that she is voting for Obama because she has two boys and she wants them to believe that there are no limits to what they can accomplish using Obama as an example. The population of black men versus white men who are housed in prison. Isn't that an example? I have one son and a daughter and I refuse to use the one instant where one token black man has exceeded outstanding odds. Especially when he has nothing much to say. I was cheering for Hillary but now am voting for McCain. President Clinton's comment about the X candidate and the Y candidate makes sense to those of us who are really listening. You give Hillary a A-. When you hear the dogs Mr. Hill you stop.
"His remarks reminded us why, in a perfect world, Kucinich would be the nominee instead of Obama."
Indeed.
"I understand that he can relate to Obama being a African -American man who has overcome all odds but give me a break. "
Your reading instructor must have taken many breaks.
Mr. Hill isn't even much of an Obama fan to begin with.
The critique centered around Hillary words as they related to Obama and Obama's need for them in the election.
No wonder you are voting for McCain, you are delusional as he is.
POW! POW! POW!
"I was cheering for Hillary but now am voting for McCain."
That's because you are a nitwit.
McCain is the near polar opposite of McCain on nearly every issue. If they have any similarities, they are only on the surface of the issue.
Prof. Hill I so agree with your A- rating on Hillary's speech. However, is there any way you can get Professor Harris-Lacewell to reconsider and return to the point/counter-point both of you so effectively orchestrated for an extended period....Pleeee...zzz...e! I'd like to read her response to your rating of the speakers.
I thought Hillary did a good job. I have concerns about her sincerity, or her ability to be natural and unaffected, or pretentious. When she meets people while carousing, she pops her eyes open like she's met with the most wonderful surprise. I would be insulted to be greeted that way. I prefer when people's eyes light up naturally when they see me. Or vice versa.
Hillary's speech was slick. She acknowledged the failings of her campaign and her acknowledment was as audible as ever to a trained interpretive ear. She said she is aware the American people will not elect another administration that will fail. Implicitly stated, but that includes her own failed campaign administration as well.
Hillary referenced the twins, McCain and Bush in the Twin Cities. That line was borrowed from Obama when he slammed her in a primary debate. Obama told Hillary that he could not tell if he was running against her or her husband. Her response was "Well," rather than, "Are you blind, Can you not see? Do I have a nose like Pinocchio? Are you tone deaf, do you not hear my voice? Barack are you dumb or being sarcastic?"
There are people in the South who do not know how to pronounce Barack Obama's name. Yesterday, someone said: "Orack Barama." And that person is black and eligible to vote. That person was not trying to be funny or crack a joke. People don't know who Barack Obama is and these McCain ads are "cutting his nuts off" so Obama and company may need to step up their ads perhaps in a swift and more defensive manner.
To the Spainard,
I see that you resort to the same ditry tactics as Obama. Calling m a nitwit is very immature. If you have something concrete to say fine , but my comments weren't even directed at you. The american people are blinded by Obama. He is not as he appears. I think any reasonable and intelligent person would look at his record (or lack of it) to make an informed decision. McCain pick a woman ,Palin, from Alaska. I am sure you have an asspinion about that also.Barack will never win it's not his time and thank god for the GODs that there are more reasonable people in this world than you! By the way watch Fox News a little more you may learn something. Mr. Hill worships Obama Bin and Laden.
By the way with that POW POW POW, Are you shooting at me?
