He who blinded by ambition, raises himself to a position whence he cannot mount higher, must thereafter fall with the greatest loss." --Niccolo Machiavelli
Thursday morning, it seemed, if even for a brief moment that radio host Tom Joyner's Obama fever started to break. In a post on his blog at BlackAmericaWeb.com Joyner stated:
The polls show that if Obama runs against McCain, it’s anybody’s guess who will win in November; right now they’re tied. The polls show that right now, Hillary is nine points ahead of McCain and has a better chance of winning in November than Obama does. Of course, that poll was taken before Rev. Jeremiah Wright threw up the Omega hooks.
Stay with me.
If Hillary becomes the presidential candidate and Obama is her running mate, the two of them have an excellent chance of beating McCain in November.
Click on the link above the read the full post to get the whole picture. Joyner took a chance posting those words. He's been an ardent Obama supporter and he's already witnessed the way his African-American listeners stepped on commentator Tavis Smiley's neck for daring to question Obama. True to form, they are now set to call Joyner an "Uncle Tom", no pun intended, for even remotely doing the same. The thing is, I don't agree with what Tom has suggested at all. I think Obama really is a cancer in the democratic party and he would be just as bad for Hillary as he is proving himself to be for other Democrats who are up for re-election this year. See one of the previous posts here and all over the web about the N.C. GOP's ad against the Democratic candidates for governor who have endorsed him.
As I read the comments in Joyner's blog post and read comments at other African-American sites in which so many continue to defend Obama despite his blatant disregard for our issues and in light of the way he so casually kicked Jeremiah Wright to the curb for political gain and the way he left all of those Black residents of Rezko's slum housing in the freezing cold, I had an epiphany--and one I'm not too happy about. Black America is acting like the proverbial "Chick on the Side"--willing to accept the crumbs that Obama tosses her way every now and then, willing to be used and abused, in "hope" that something will "change" about the dynamic of the relationship. He just "needs more time". Sound familiar? UrbanDictionary.com defines the "Chick on the Side" this way.:
1. chick on the side
2. A woman you have good times with, but have no serious commitment to.
3. A woman who will never have her lover's full respect, time or attention. In short someone who needs a good slaying and lies to herself in saying "I'm gettin' mine...", yeah right. You're confused girl.
The thing is, the "chick on the side" always "hopes" this guy will one day make her the main squeeze, but he never does. He continues to go back to her bed, getting what he needs and then he slinks on off, back to his real woman. That's what Obama has been doing. Using Black America for votes, sliding through these cities and towns offering up sweet words, but not even actually bothering to make any empty promises to African-Americans. He plays on their emotions, tossing out words like "hoodwink" and "bamboozle"--you know, "buzz" words, but he hasn't promised them a dayum thing! That's just how slick he's been in getting Black America to drop it's panties. He just shows up and they come falling down! My God, even the most desperate woman makes a slick willie bring her some Mickey D's before she gets down on her knees to service him! Where has our dignity gone??? Surely, there was a time when we had more than this, or is Obama really a better pimp than Iceberg Slim????! Heed the warning Black America. You can't always get what you want. You get what you need...Check out the Rolling Stones below and make a donation to Hillary's campaign while there is still time to rid yourself of Obama the deadbeat. --SUGAR
10 comments:
Your description does not describe Obama's relationship with the Black community, but it instead really describes the Black community's relationship with the Democratic Party!
But the party cannot win without the Black vote. For decades of dedication and hard work for the party, this is the first time Black America has made a request.
Black America wants Obama because it knows its status will change in America, that it closes the door on racial inequality in America, and that inclusion is possible.
If the party turns her away, the implications for Governors, legislators, Mayors, school board members, and city council members, will be great if she stays away from the polls.
Ah yes the great Greek thinker Anon. has entered the building!
Please explain to me gentle reader how Barack gets to kick the Black community to the curb twice without any consequences.
First there was the "State of the Black Nation" conference in NOLA. Then there was the 40th Anniversary of The MLK assassination observance. Barack missed both. The two most important Black events in 2008 political calender and Senator Hope missed both. Even John McCain showed up for the MLK observance. You know Mr "I voted against the MLK holiday every time it came up?"
"Black America wants Obama because it knows its status will change in America, that it closes the door on racial inequality in America, and that inclusion is possible"
Really? You are saying color trumps substance?
Exactly when did the Democratic Party become a suicide Pact? When did the Black community become a pack of Lemmings? Have you any idea how stupid your talking points is Mr or Ms Anon? Blacks make up at best 17% of the vote. Women on the other hand make up 60% of the people who actually show up at the polls. So Democrats get to swap 17% of the vote for 25% of the vote that gets angered by nominating "the chosen one?" But wait it gets better; lets abandon 60-70% of the white male vote. Lets also loose the fastest growing demographic in the USA- the Hispanics. While we are at it lets abandon the seniors too. Lets do that to lock down the only sure bet that African Americans can deliver- the District of Columbia.
The meme of nominate Barack or Blacks won't vote for the Democrats has all the wisdom of a five year olds temper tantrum. If you don't get your Barack cookie you are going let McCain get elected? You are willing to have at least four more years of ReThuglican destruction if you don't get your way? How foolish and immature.
If Barack does not get the nod it is because he failed to make his case to the Supers. It means the party elders have decided that he is a looser in the General.
But thanks for playing; you have unintentionally shown how Obama Delusional Disease is alive and well. Even when the man repeatedly kicks you to the curb, you come back for more- just like a battered wife or the girl on the side.
The black community wasn't kicked to the curb on any of these events. In fact, we would have been REAL dissappointed if he had wasted valuable campaign time away from the campaign on these events. "The State of the Black Nation" is just talk, no action. We have plenty of talkers to handle that. Likewise, we have plenty of people to observe the observance. But only Obama can take care of getting elected President.
He is the best candidate period. He just happens to be Black.
It is clear, you have little statistical knowledge and understanding of electorial politics in America. To put it simply, when Blacks leave or are missing, Republicans win.
We are the most loyal of all Democrats. Others come and go, but we have always been there.
Still can't leave your name?
Oh well, typical Obamabot behavior, unable to come out in the open and really stand behind your own opinions.
Be that as it may the statistics are solid. Going by the number of people who actually show up at the polls women make up almost 60% of the vote. Bare minimum Women out pol men 55%/45%. Not only that, women are more reliable voters than any subset that one can mention.
African Americans on the other hand are not as reliable. Some of this is blatant gamesmanship by the Republicans; caging voter lists, under supply of voting booths in Black neighborhoods etc. However some of this is also due to apathy. Blacks routinely under vote their numbers.
Secondly in many states the black vote is negated by racism. In states with 7% to 14% black populations, white racist can and do out vote blacks making the Black vote a net negative.
In no state can the black vote give the election to any candidate save in very local affairs. There are some Congressional districts, Counties, and cities were Blacks are the numerical majority but no state. State wide blacks have to find allies. The Democratic Party joins blacks with others to form a winning coalition.
Coalitions requires compromise and finding common ground. None of the participants can say "my way or the highway" What is being threatened here is that if the Democrats don't play by your rules blacks will storm off with the ball.
That is most counter productive and juvenile arguement posted by Obama fans yet. You are going to let the nation continue in Republican hell if you don't get your way. Brilliant. You are going to break off from the Democrats and form your own (loosing) party and insure GOP dominance for the next 4,8,16 100 years? If that is not the very definition of ignorant then please offer a different one.
Your "logic" falls on its face. It is the arguement posted by a mafiosi "that's a nice party you got there; I hate to see it break because you didn't vote for my man."
What is even more ridiculous is that "your man" is not now nor ever been a part of the mainline Black experience. He is the product of Midwestern White upbringing. He was raised by three white people in the racially relaxed atmosphere of Hawaii. In Hawaii he went to the most top-draw private school in the state. He had the love and support of his super-educated mother and his super achieving grandmother. He also had the undying affection of his grandfather. Barack's support system and circumstances were miles away literally and figuratively from the experience of most African Americans. To call him the son of a single mom while technically true is a gross distortion of his actual life. He had a support system that most single mother children of any race could only dream of. He started out with much more than a poor white boy from Arkansas named Bill Clinton did.
Other than the mouse in your pocket who is the "we" do you speak of? Who is the "we" who did not care about the "State of the Black Nation" conference? The organizers certainly cared. The Participants and attendees cared and at least one candidate for president cared. Pity, it was not your candidate Barack Obama.
HRC took time out her busy schedule to go to the "State of the Black Nation" She thought it important. She took the time to go to NOLA when her political life was on the line in Texas.
Let's look at that from another view. NOLA the very symbol of ReThuglican apathy and hatefulness toward poor people in general and poor people of color in particular. Have you forgotten G W Bush's callous disregard for NOLA? Did you forget him strumming a guitar while the Crescent City drowned? Did you forget the Photo Op where the decider in chief dragged in generators for a photo op and the left the city in the dark when he left? Who Better than the first serious black candidate for office to bring out the contrast between Republican malign neglect and Democratic engagement? Who better to focus the lens of the world on the abject failure of the Bush Administrations efforts in rebuilding? Symbols matter Anon, HRC gets that. Please note that the other no show was John Sidney McCain. Is that the company you want to keep?
And what, pray tell, is your or Barry's excuse for his missing the 40th anniversary ceremonies attached to the death of MLK? Enlighten us, MLK was only the most important non-governmental official in the last part of the 20th Century in the USA. Prophet, Poet, Philosopher, Preacher, Moralist, Martyr, and a whole lot more; that was the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. How in the name of all that is just and right can you not show up at his remembrance? Please, even McCain hauled his 72 year old crypto-racist carcass to that soirée.
In one regard Barry is right. you are being hoodwinked, bamboozled, and given the run-around. Thing is the flim-flam artist if the man stealing a riff from Malcolm X.
Note to the uninformed: this nation is no where near being post-partisan, post-racial, or past the politics of division. The entire Obama justification rest on a false premise or at least a very slender reed.
Frankly the Democratic Party would be in a much better place if John Edwards were still in the race. Edwards was the man who made HRC and Obama behave. Edwards was the man who kept the discussion on the issues. Hell Edwards was the man providing the issues. Remember his first official act after folding his campaign? The man grabbed a hammer and help build a house in NOLA. In that single act he did more for poor people in NOLA than either HRC or Obama have done since super Tuesday.
Actions speak louder than words. The only actions out of Obama have reveled nothing but arrogance and contempt for his solid black support. He has taken the black vote for granted. He has slandered the legacy of the only two-term Democratic president since FDR. He has made kissing noises about the worst man in American history for black people since Nathan Forrest. That would be Ronnie Reagan. Have you forgotten his comments about the "excesses of the 60's and 70's?" Some of those "excesses" were the war on poverty, the civil right movement and end of anti-miscegenation law to name just few.
If a white politician were to float just a few of Barack's greatest hits to the black community they would run him out of the neighborhood on a rail. Time and time again he has offered up DLC and Republican lite talking points to no ill effect. He gets away with it because of his skin tone; no other reason.
The proposition that Obama is some great new phenomena is laughable. The claim that he has superior judgment to Clinton is ridiculous. In the area of nuts-and-bolts knowledge Hillary runs circles around Barack. She is a wonks wonk. The woman really works the details to the ninth or tenth permutation. The woman is a real work horse.
This is not to say Obama is a dolt; far from it. He just does not have the experience and to be blunt he does not have the will to get into the weeds of government.
Our government is seriously broken and we do not have the time or the resources to attempt OJT for the next resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
We have already seen the results of a David Axelrod production in Massachusetts. The governor there was elected on an almost identical campaign of "hope, change, and transformational post-partisanship" Deval Patrick tenure as Governor has been a big let down. Very little has been accomplished because the legislature has collapsed into partisan bickering. Patrick has been weak and ineffectual as governor. Need anyone be reminded of Patrick's skin tone and the precedent it broke?
Of the two candidates left standing, Hillary is marginally better because she knows the ins and outs of Washington. She has at least fourteen years of tribal knowledge from being the first lady and then a senator. Barack has a grand total of two. No grouping of wise old men and women is going to get Barack over that experience hump. Remember Hillary also has her group of wise old men and women, plus she can better process their advice.
Of course the man who would have been best choice as our nominee did not even bother to run in 2008. After all is said and done we need to figure out why Al Gore did not get the nod. That is the elephant in the room; the best person for the job was never considered. When he did run, we let the Republicans steal his victory. What a pathetic lot we all are.
James aka "spincitysd"
James,
It is clear you haven't figured it out yet. This election is much bigger than Obama, Hillary, or McCain. In addition to electing a world-class leader to lead us and the world, we have an opportunity to "move the chains" in the area of equality, minority and race relations, and close the door on our dismal history of second class citizenship for African Americans.
One way to think of it is, the status of Blacks and minorities before M L King and the status of Blacks and minorities after King. If elected, it will be the status of Blacks and minorities before Obama, and the status of Blacks and minorities after Obama.
It is a bold quest, given the state of race relations in America, but we have until November to figure out if we want to be known as the generation who moved us forward into a period of equality, and closed the door on our disgusting past in this regard.
Obama is the most significant Black leader to emerge since King.
In terms of Obama not having a mainline Black experience, what you don't understand is that being Black in America transcends everything else (money, up-bringing, education, everything else). When you see a Black person, immediate images emerge. You make certain assumptions about the person, and proceed to act accordingly.
For all of us, Black, White , green or purple, Obama will be one of America's greatest presidents. We have an opportunity we may not get again in our lifetime. Generations to come will know that we tried to bring closure to the issue of racial inequality, by electing one of the best and brightest of our times, and he happened to be Black.
Once again the Obama arguement of style over substance. Or at least the arguement of symbolism over all else.
Why exactly electing a black man more symbolic to the world then electing a white woman? No woman has ever captured our highest elected office; black or white. Granted we missed on hell of a twofer when Shirley Chisholm failed to get the nod way back in the dark ages of the 1970's.
We have twice voted for an illusion over reality; once with Ronald Regan and the other time with George W Bush; we need to do scrupulous vetting of all the candidates.
Having actually listen to both of the Junior Senators books I am not totally unaware of Barack's history. Unfortunately the books are more a political documents than an honest accounting of his life.
That seems to be a ongoing theme with Barack; every time one does a little due diligence on him there is less than meets the eye on first glance. There are disconnects between his story and the facts.
A gloss or should a roughing up of his life story has occurred to make it more "authentic."
More to the point claims are laid by supporters that have zero support in reality and more than few items that seem to counter those claims.
Re-read or re listen to his books and you will see a disturbing disconnect between his advertised position as a Progressive or god help us a far-left liberal and his Center-right DLC positions.
Time and time again Barack gets a pass on right wing talking points that would cause a white politician unending woe in the Black Community. The tongue bath he gave Reagan was especially appalling. You do remember how good ol' Ronnie started his run in 1980- by supporting "States Rights" in Philadelphia Miss?
Strip away the passion of the stump speeches and listen to their content. Turn on the skeptical and rational side of the brain and reanalysis the Obama talking points Are they really transformationally different? If this a white politician would you be so thrilled?
This is what happens when you let skin tone trump all other considerations. This is what happens when you insist "we got next."
This is not to say race is not race is not an issue. This is to say race is not the only issue. Barack had no real connection with mainline black America till he showed up in Chicago as a community organizer. He had no connection with the black church before he met up with Wright. For heaven sakes he might have actually became a Unitarian if his Granddad had been more involved in that church.
Barack is different because his race is not central to his being or at least his life story. His adventures overseas and his life in Hawaii detach him from most African Americans. His genetic predisposition to compromise and avoiding conflict are his touchstones not some mythic union with brown folks everywhere.
In short he is a deal making pol. He is a fairly run of the mill deal making pol who has been graced with charisma and smarts. He might be a good president or he just might be another Deval Patrick: long on promise- short on results.
You see style, I see substance. Your ideas about him are your ideas. His colleagues think quite differently about him. I guess its in the eyes of the beholders.
In terms of your question about a white woman instead of a black man, Obama opens the door for all minorities including all women. A Hillary win only opens the door for other white women. We get more groups included with an Obama win, and we get a chance to address a historical issue with blacks that has been with us from the very beginning of the country. The founding fathers wrestled with the issue of slavery and the status of blacks from the Bill of Rights on. An Obama win allows us to somewhat bring closure on inequality in America. A Hillary win, means we probably won't be able to get it done before we leave, and the next generation will have to get it done, and will get credit for it.
You seem to be fixated on Obama's upbringing. It doesn't matter in American society, race triumphs everything else. He didn't need a "mainline connection to the black community". In America, his skin color alone was the only connection needed. While he has an interesting and different upbringing, it in no way limits his "blackness".
If Obama were white, this would have been over a long time ago. With his intelligence, charisma, vision, deal-making skills, and an openess to talk, were he white, it would have been a cake walk. It would be him and McCain by now. Hillary would have been sitting down enjoying her family. The only reason we are here is because he is black and she is white. And she can't fathom losing to a black man.
One's ability to make deals and to compromise is a cornerstone of a good politician. It is how things get done in the world.
Beyond these issues, Hillary has faced the crucible, and her true self has been revealed. For some reason I had respect for her going into this race. Now I have none. I wouldn't vote for her for dog-catcher. She is a liar, she manipulates poor dumb white people by playing the race card, and she is quite underhanded and dirty. She has pretty much told the Blacks who are supporting her that they are nothing. A woman can get it, but not a woman like Hillary.
Lets wait and see what happens on Tuesday.
Well, the worm has definitely turned. Then again it really has not. Barack cleaned house in NC thanks to a 90/10 turn out in the A-A vote. The community is still marching in lock step with their man. And thanks to Gary and other cities Barack came within a whisker of putting Hillary away in Indiana.
Color me unimpressed. Barack's support with whites is still very problematic. Other than his base of upper-class white liberals Barack still has failed to get the vote of the melanin deprived set.
This has been a long, long time phenomena . Ever since LBJ signed the civil rights act and voting rights act way back in the 1960's whites, especially rural Southern Whites, have deserted the Donkeys.
In this election Obama rolled in the south in the black vote. Right there one of your talking points looses its validity dear Anon. No white candidate has ever pulled 90% of the black vote in a Democratic primary-ever. Obama has done this consistently.
But other than his skin tone and his speeches what has Barry done to earn this undying love? He did a few years in community organizing; he served a few years in the state legislature; in short he did zip.
What is distressing is the claims being made about Barack that are based on sheer artifice. Claims are being made despite obvious facts to the contrary. Read or listen to his books, pay close attention to his philosophy or to be brutally frank his lack of same. Close your eyes and you hear DLC talking points. Close your eyes and really listen and you find a man with no core, with no agenda, with no real loyalty to the Democratic Party.
Not that the Clintons excite either. Yes Bill Clinton would sell both you and I down the river for sloppy seconds from a sweet young thing. His welfare "reform" was a travesty. His support of NAFTA was a disgrace. There was no issue that he would not triangulate or pander on. Both the Clintons are just pandering pols who trim their sails to the political winds. So what? That is their job sunshine.
Everything you really needed to know about Bill happened during the Lewinski affair. He dodged, he fibbed, he prevaricated, he spun like a top, he out-and-out lied. He was slick Willy. In the end though, it was all pointless drama. Bill was still smart and competent and keeping the business of government on track. He clocked in a budget surplus and kept the economic good times rolling.
There really was a good reason for you to like the Clintons in the 1990's. Bill lifted normal people up economically and he lifted millions out of poverty. You were not deceived or bamboozled, your wallets were thicker during his term. When blacks fought for him during the impeachment they were supporting their own cause. They knew what the Elephants were up to. They knew that the real objection to Clinton was not the perjury rap or even the bit about adultery. No it was about bringing down a popular two-term Democratic president or at least sullying his reputation.
Flashing forward to the present and one would supposed that Bill and Hillary picked up KKK memberships since they left the White House. From being a mixed bag for the black community the Clintons have somehow drifted over to Strom Thurman's camp. That people now actually are both willing to believe this and amplify this is sickening.
Shoe on the other foot now; would any white politician get away with calling the Clintons racist? Would Joe Trippi, John Edwards campaign chair get away with accusing the Clintons of being indifferent to the fate of the people in NOLA?
Both candidates have played racial politics to the hilt Anon. HRC flogged the Wright controversy for all it was worth. Barack flogged Bills petulant SC comments for all they were worth. Barry got tons of milage out of Hillary's MLK/JBJ remark but some how Obama got a pass when he blew off the the 40th Anniversary observance of the MLK assassination. Remember Anon both white candidates showed up for that remembrance. John McCain even withstood a hearty welcome from the boo-birds.
Finally to your point that in" American society, race triumphs everything else." No, it does not. Upbringing matters immensely, environment matters immensely, personal history matters immensely. Neither Clarence Thomas nor Condoleezza Rice have any connection with the vast majority of black America. Thomas especially is a status quo supporter of the first order; he is in fact the worst sort of reactionary enabler. Just because someone is black does not make them a brother.
There is a real disconnect here, not only with Barack being an "authentic black", what ever the hell that means, but also the whole idea of a post racial society. it is a contradiction to think that only a black man can bring about a post racial society. it is even more of a contradiction to think that this particular man can do so. He is the product of a white mother, raised by white grandparents in the racially mixed atmosphere of Hawaii. Accept that. Environment matters, culture matters, upbringing matters. Barack's upbringing is several quantum leaps from 90% of black people. Hawaii is not South Central, it is not Birmingham, it is not Watts, it is not Newark NJ. Compare and contrast him with his biggest celebrity endorser-Oprah. Now there is a woman who can honestly talk about living a black experience. There is a woman who has overcome all sorts of obstacles including racism of the most concentrated sort.
It is unfortunate that Ms Winfrey is not running; there is a black person with both substance and style. All that and she pulls in women by the bucket-loads too. Be that as it may, we are stuck with HRC and Barack. As women are half the world, she would be an agent of change just as much as Barack is. A woman as CIC is a huge Anon, we already had a black guy be head of the joint chiefs of staff. Your hatred of her clouds your reasoning here. While many may be impressed by Barack holding the top spot, HRC would also galvanize people all around the world. It is more than possible that HRC could galvanize a little black girl as much or more so than Barack Obama. This is not an either or proposition. What is irritating is while we have zero problem pointing out the racist attacks even when they are not there, there is been a boatload of misogyny dumped on Hillary with no ill effect. They sell HRC nutcrackers in thousands of venues, seen any Barack Obama lawn jockeys lately? Didn't think so.
James,
Are you OK? I've missed you. I lot has happened since we last posted. I see you changed your opening picture. Does this mean you think the convention is going to be like this?
Anon. You might want to look at the rest of the Blog. I've been posting original content about every other day. Some days I've been very busy; others not so much. You are of course more than welcome to read and comment on other sections of the blog.
There is an especially long post where Holy Joe Lieberman spews his special brand of stupidity and I then comment. Maybe I should have made that a two-parter?
To answer the question; no I don't think we are going to have riots in the streets of Denver. The picture is ironic, I just love the idea of a riot cop getting bitten by a police dog. It is poetic justice.
Post a Comment