here's the embed: <embed src= http://content.bitsontherun.com/players/iMvtnZS1-dh3Zgtip.swf width="640" height="480" allowfullscreen="true" />
<embed src="http://content.bitsontherun.com/players/iMvtnZS1-dh3Zgtip.swf" width="640" height="480" allowfullscreen="true" />
i think we may find out the larger story here is the outrageous complicity of the media in 2008, in obscuring salient aspects of Obama's background, and their utter failure to perform the role they've traditionally filled in american political life, ie, properly vetting the candidates. you can see how incurious (in the tank) they are by watching first this discussion on CNN: <object width="416" height="374" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" id="ep"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><param name="movie" value="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2012/03/08/exp-point-bachmann.cnn" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2012/03/08/exp-point-bachmann.cnn" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="416" wmode="transparent" height="374"></embed></object> and then this: <iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ByAIUOmQzeM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
PBS aired the footage and talked about the protest in 2008. No one hid it. It was simply unremarkable to everyone in the country other than you people.
Because Obama spoke favorably of a professor who had politics that disagree with the politics of some people who post here. It's all means nothing of course because we can see that Obama has been a very centrist president, and he's been in office long enough that any radical tendencies could have come forth already.
some thoughts from Bell: As to the personal: I want to say quite clearly that I am a product of affirmative action. I am not stupid and I work hard and would likely have had a worthwhile career without affirmative action. But that career would almost certainly not have been as a law teacher and legal writer. I absolutely would not have become a full professor at the Harvard Law School. Without the Harvard imprimatur, my unorthodox writings filled with allegory exploring the depths of racism in the law and the society would likely not have been published and, if published, would not have been taken seriously. ...For me, affirmative action made possible the connections, and luck made affirmative action popular just when I needed it. For better or worse, affirmative action is why I have been invited to speak to you this afternoon. add this to Holder's comments before congress the other day, that he could not envision a time when AA should not exist, so that people of color could "get what they deserve" and I think one can begin to put together a picture of Bell's acolyte's views on AA and racial preferences.
powell doesn't preach racial division and class warfare, both of which are central to Obama's concept of Hope and Change.
I'm trying to figure out what Joel Pollak, one of the only (if not THE only) Tea Party candidates to get absolutely trounced in 2010, has to do with Professor Bell. But I do appreciate the comic relief. Pollak is hilarious.
I don't think that quote says what you think it says. But, if you want to know what Obama's views are on affirmative action and racial preferences, why wouldn't you look at all the things Obama himself has said or done on the subject instead of trying to divine from the tea leaves? Did this guilt by association racket work so well in 2008 that we have to trot it out again? At least that Ayers guy once did something wrong.
Based on which Obama policy? Powell freely admits he got where he was by Affirmative Action, and Powell has said so, and that's as much preaching as the quote you put up by Bell.
