Just a quick response to the recent diary that got all up in arms regarding a line from Obama's SC victory speech. In this diary, it was said that
In his Saturday night So. Carolina victory speech, Barack Obama said, in pertinent part:
"It's not about rich versus poor..."
-referring to the election and I suppose all of the hopefulness and America and puppies, etc.
Well, Mr. Obama, I'm sorry but it IS about "rich versus poor/middle class".
The full quote is also linked, but I'll provide it here to help make my point:
"The choice in this election is not between regions or religions or genders. It's not about rich versus poor; young versus old; and it is not about black versus white," Senator Obama said. "It's about the past versus the future."
I think it's pretty obvious that Senator Obama was referring to individuals here, not the issues. He was setting up the punchline of the past versus the future, while also pointing out that this race isn't about choosing a President based on race, nor gender, nor any other socio-economic background.
That's the past versus the future. To somehow imply that this concept and the fight for the lower classes are mutually exclusive doesn't make a bit of sense. Certainly not coming from Obama, certainly not considering his progressive record.
To suggest, based on this quote, that Obama doesn't take seriously the fight of the lower and middle classes is quite silly. Yes, his message is based much more on unity and building a coalition to make change, while Edwards focuses on a more populist message about class warfare. But if you're going to conclude that Obama in this quote was "dumbass and naive", as was stated in the aforementioned diary, well, I think you're the one that's wrong here.
Just sayin'.