Sunny Hundal website

  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • Obama bounces back

    by Sunny
    24th March, 2008 at 12:04 am    

    A poll on Gallup shows that Obama’s ratings across the US have moved up again following his recent address on race. Maybe Richardson’s powerful endorsement helped. I’m praying John Edwards endorses him too. Fact: Since Super-Tuesday, Obama has picked up 62 super-delegates while Clinton has picked up 2. No doubt the media will continue to repeat the narrative that he’s lost the support of white voters etc. In fact even the Guardian is playing this line, which is a disappointment.

    Though, a leader in the Observer today does a brilliant job of nailing his speech:

    Senator Obama noted that, while polite society has declared racial epithets taboo, in private, black and white communities (mostly socially segregated) harbour deep resentments. On one side is the feeling that society is endemically racist. The white establishment cannot be relied upon to do anything to help the black underclass if it means compromising its own hold on power.

    On the other side is the feeling that a narrative of victimhood is used by the black community to extract special privileges. The white working class, goes this view, faces the same barriers to advancement as non-whites, but is expected to surmount them by self-reliance alone.

    This applies to Britain too, as it goes on to say, and I’d agree with that. Though, the difference is that we’ve never had an official civil rights movement (primarily because segregation and racism wasn’t as institutionalised as there), and that class differences here between the achievement of different races, makes the analysis much more difficult. Middle-class Indian girls do way better than working-class black boys in the UK, and that sometimes makes class a bigger factor than race.

    Anyway, let’s hope Faux News’s continual Obama-bashing efforts don’t get far.

                  Post to

    Filed in: Race politics

    17 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs

    1. Jess Slimman — on 24th March, 2008 at 12:30 am  

      Hey, Obama’s the guy - he will fix your computer, and more!

    2. billericaydicky — on 24th March, 2008 at 6:11 am  

      Interesting that having just found this site I find a topic that I was deleted from at Comment is Free only yesterday, that speech!

      There was an interesting discussion going about the reasons why Obama was forced in my view to make it and it is not,I think, to be regarded as equal to JFK or Martin Luther King. It is simply a damage limitation exercise.

      There were a number of posters who got the wrong end of the stick about what I was saying. People should ask themselves a few simple questions. Would Obama have prefered that race be kept out of the debate, I think the answer to that one has to be a yes. Race is always a hot button issue in America in a way that it isn’t here and Obama was always careful to present himself as being a potential president for all Americans.

      Although he had distanced himself from Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton they had not distanced themselves from him and were endorsing him as a “black” presidential candidate and urging support for him because he would pay white America back for slavery and all of the other supposed wrongs that the current white population are supposed to be guilty of.

      That of course was political suicide and Obama stayed well away. That was until the speech by the Rev Wright. Many of those posting on CiF refused to accept that the speech was anti white but only anti American. In the coded language of mainstream America Wright couldn’t come out with the things that Farrakhan says about Jews and whites, but everyone both black and white knew exactly what he meant.

      And even if he were only refering to America what has that got to do with whites who are losing their homes,jobs,pensions and healthcare just like everyone else.

      Obama’s speech was a masterstroke in recovering a situation that could have finished him but the question still being asked was why did he sit through twenty years of similar rhetoric and do and say nothing?

      My other comments that were deleted by CiF question what is the whole Obama thing in the first place. I asked the question there and I will ask it here, what exactly is the “Audacity of Hope”? It is completely meaningless unless you believe that we have no control over our lives and can only be “empowered” by politicians with “vision”, the Clintons were big on the vision thing.

      Obama is basically dishonest, he is leading people to believe that he is going to radically change their lives and he simply cannot. He will be faced with the same forces that defeated the Clintons over healthcare and a Supreme Court that is basically the one that Reagan and the two Bushes put in place.

      I am not saying that we are powerless, people change their lives in many ways, real empowerment is tenants fighting transfers to housing associations where they will lose security of tenure or people occupying a play group building becuase the council want to sell the land off.

      Nearer to home people can empower themselves by registering to vote and then getting out and voting on May the first in the Greater London elections. Last week the BNP got 38% of the vote in a byelection in Havering in outer East London. It doesn’t matter who you vote for as long as you vote. Details at

    3. Shariq — on 24th March, 2008 at 10:28 am  

      Have you seen the clip of Chris Wallace, host of Fox News Sunday and relatively decent guy, attacking the hateful morons on Fox and Friends for Obama bashing? Brilliant.

      I should point out that I have a visceral hatred for Steve Doocy who I think is even worse than Hannity.

    4. Sunny — on 24th March, 2008 at 5:25 pm  

      Yeah I saw that through Crooks and Liars blog. Those guys on Fox and Friends couldn’t believe that one of their comrades was challenging the party line!

    5. El Cid — on 24th March, 2008 at 7:45 pm  

      I didn’t think I would say this 10 weeks ago, but I’m glad race has become an issue in the US presidential race (explicitly, that is — it always was implicitly). And the fact I’m glad is to Obama’s credit, because it IS time to move on. He’s set a much needed post-racial agenda. And the Observer — and the liberal middle class wannabe intelligentsia it represents — has finally picked up on it. Instead of the dull old-fashioned black-white guilt-laden race-careerist analysis we saw in January, we have a more balanced and credible picture.
      Good post Sunny

    6. Bert Rustle — on 25th March, 2008 at 12:55 pm  

      Thomas Sowell has written a piece on Obama, The Audacity of Rhetoric

      … Barack Obama’s own account of his life shows that he consciously sought out people on the far left fringe. … “Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets”

      … His voting record in the U.S. Senate is the furthest left of any Senator. There is a remarkable consistency in what Barack Obama has done over the years, despite inconsistencies in what he says.

      The irony is that Obama’s sudden rise politically to the level of being the leading contender for his party’s presidential nomination has required him to project an entirely different persona, that of a post-racial leader who can heal divisiveness and bring us all together.

      … There is no evidence that Obama ever sought to educate himself on the views of people on the other end of the political spectrum, much less reach out to them.

      … Is “divisiveness” defined as disagreeing with the agenda of the left? Who on the left was ever called divisive by Obama

      … While many whites may be annoyed by Jeremiah Wright’s words, a year from now most of them will probably have forgotten about him. But many blacks who absorb his toxic message can still be paying for it, big-time, for decades to come.

      Why should young blacks be expected to work to meet educational standards, or even behavioral standards, if they believe the message that all their problems are caused by whites, that the deck is stacked against them? …

    7. marvin — on 25th March, 2008 at 1:08 pm  

      Thanks for that Bert. I’ve been meaning to read his books for a while now.

    8. The Dude — on 25th March, 2008 at 11:24 pm  

      And while you’re at it, you can buy Hilary Clinton (and daughter) a bullet proof jacket for when she goes off on one of her junkets to Bosnia. Liar, lair pants on fire……

    9. SalmanRush — on 25th March, 2008 at 11:50 pm  

      Its scary to think that if Obama gets elected that he will have a Democratic Congress to basically rubberstamp everything that he legislates.

    10. Sunny — on 26th March, 2008 at 2:28 am  

      I can’t wait. A million times better than those dimwit Republicans rubber-stamping Chimp Bush.

    11. SalmanRush — on 26th March, 2008 at 4:14 am  

      All hail Saint Barack of Obama and the coming of UK style socialism to the US!

    12. SalmanRush — on 26th March, 2008 at 4:15 am  

      Oh and let’s not forget that the Democrats rubberstamped Bush’s Iraq adventure.

    13. Sunny — on 26th March, 2008 at 5:55 am  

      At least they’re trying to make up for it by calling for more accountability and withdrawal. What do the Republican dimwits offer? Another hundred years, and not knowing the difference between Shia and Sunni. Are all Republicans really that thick?

    14. SalmanRush — on 26th March, 2008 at 5:59 am  

      Saint Barack is definitely not advocating withdrawal anymore. He’s hedging like a Bush (pun intended).

    15. The Dude — on 26th March, 2008 at 9:11 am  

      Obviously Salman

      You exist in some kind of alternative universe where Saint Barack of Obama does indeed walk on water. In this universe 4000 US troops are now dead and Sen Obama wants his boys home asap. Remember this also. Obama isn’t Tony Blair. He didn’t sleepwalk himself into a war for no reason and if indeed he does treads carefully in the withdrawal of troops from the Iraqi theatre, he shouldn’t be blamed for the way HE chooses to clean up somebody else’s mess.

    16. SalmanRush — on 26th March, 2008 at 2:31 pm  

      If Saint Barack does manage to get elected, he will disappoint on this withdrawal that all of his disciples seem to believe he is talking about.

    17. Leon — on 26th March, 2008 at 2:45 pm  

      Its scary to think that if Obama gets elected that he will have a Democratic Congress to basically rubberstamp everything that he legislates.

      I wouldn’t worry about it. It’ll only be two years from then the house elections are up and the US electorate will in all likelihood vote for a contrast…

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.