Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Richard Gwyn begins: "Barack Obama has to be one of the smartest, eloquent, calm and cool and psychologically well-balanced (think of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush or Richard Nixon) American presidents of modern times."

US President Barack Obama listens intently at the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony in Oslo Norway, 12/10/09. (photo: Susan Walsh/AP)
US President Barack Obama listens intently at the Nobel Peace Prize award ceremony in Oslo Norway, 12/10/09. (photo: Susan Walsh/AP)



Obama Too Smart, Too Black for
Declining America

By Richard Gwyn, The Toronto Star

24 October 10


arack Obama has to be one of the smartest, eloquent, calm and cool and psychologically well-balanced (think of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush or Richard Nixon) American presidents of modern times.

He's also one of the toughest, although he neither sounds it nor looks it. Shrewdly, and surprisingly candidly, an aide has recently described him as "the most unsentimental man I've ever met." Ruthlessness comes easily to Obama, that's to say, which is what it took for him to beat a presidential nomination rival as tough as Hillary Clinton.

And yet his popularity is dragging down toward 40 per cent and by all the omens his Democrats are about to get trounced in the November congressional elections.

Obama does have some serious problems. He's black.

Unquestionably, a lot of Americans hate their national leader being black, and, worse yet, a black who is the smartest man around. It's a variant, incomparably uglier, of the widespread loathing of John F. Kennedy for making people feel bad by being so handsome and sophisticated, sort of a presidential Clark Gable.

Then there's the economy. The lack of jobs is serious and perhaps even more so is the widespread insecurity among those who do have jobs. A double-dip recession is a real prospect.

Yet the truth - admittedly a near-irrelevancy in politics - is that Obama headed off a near-depression caused by Bush and corporate greed and arrogance and stupidity, and by his stimulus package brought the economy back at least to consciousness.

Included in this was financial regulatory reform and reform of the auto companies (it's working unexpectedly well). Also health-care reform.

Now he's attempting a second stimulus package. It's been blocked by the Republicans, who are insisting that planned tax cuts be extended to the wealthy (incomes above $250,000) as well as to the middle class.

This blockage of a second stimulus is being cheered on by the populist Tea Party movement. Go figure that, other than that many Tea Partiers undoubtedly can't stand the fact that he's black.

This is the point. Obama's problem, which indeed is sizeable, doesn't reside in himself, although he needs to learn the art of faking sincerity that Clinton, with his "I feel your pain" pitch. was so good at. Obama's problem resides in America. It's become a near-dysfunctional society.

The Tea Party, which is a genuine grassroots movement, confirms it. It stands for "freedom." No more big government. No more meddling in people's lives. But instead, Sarah Palin.

That a sizeable number of people should want Palin for president is irrefutable evidence their society has gone dysfunctional. She's a third-rater, except in demagoguery (and in faking sincerity). Paris Hilton would do the job as well, probably better.

Why should this be so? My guess is that Tea Party members and a lot of others, including that Florida evangelical minister who wanted to burn the Qur'an, even though it would have put a lot of American soldiers at risk, have actually got onto something important.

That something is that the U.S. today is clearly in decline. This shouldn't be exaggerated. Americans have an astounding capacity for resilience. Once there was humiliation in Vietnam. Once all the experts were saying Japan was about to become No. 1. Both are now history.

The U.S. will always be powerful and wealthy. But it will never again bestride the world like a colossus towering above all others. It will be, rather, a big guy in a crowd.

America's conceit of "exceptionalism," or of being better than anyone else and fundamentally different from all other societies and countries, can no longer be sustained. It's exhausted its quota, a very large one indeed, of bright, confident mornings.

Obama's problem thus is stark and simple: He's the right guy at the wrong time.

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+144 # DofG 2010-10-24 19:23
Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say that Obama is the right guy at the "wrong time". However, I would agree that his problems are a result of a confluence of negatives e.g. an ignorant non-objective-electorate, a democratic party that doesn't wholly have fidelity to it's own ideology, a opposition party that seeks to completely corrupt the very "DNA" of government as a systemic regulator, a press lost in the pathology of capitalism, and an economic system that refuses to reconcile the paradox of competition vs the common good.

Many in the media have tried to make the up coming election about the Obama agenda. However, some political scientists may actually see this election about whether America can overcome the impulses of bias and see with clarity that this black president, who would be the first to admit that he is not perfect, knows what the hell he is doing!
 
 
+46 # Judith 2010-10-24 21:11
DofG

You have nailed it. Brilliant man---knows what he doesn't know--surrounds himself with bright, educated, informed, critical thinkers---but the whole mess we are in is greater than the sum of these parts.

The Palin Passion completely and totally befuddled me and now, I realize, we are looking to turn the ship of state around---a complete 180-- so we "need" an alternate reality---a captain who is the opposite of our President: white and not bright, not well-educated, not thoughtful, not reasonable, not informed, not substantive! someone who can smile, darn ya' smile and take her lenscrafters persona to the next level---a fractal within the true reality.

America, in decline, can be graceful and accept its place as a world citizen with ingenuity and democratic values or it can be in denial and hasten the slide, spending its energy on arrogance and defiance and clinging to its history like a Romanov clutching a silver tea service on its way to execution.
 
 
+26 # genierae 2010-10-25 06:29
Well said Judith! We who see clearly, must endure living in a country where most are blind. The ignorance of the majority is very hard to bear!
 
 
+14 # Phil Bowler 2010-10-25 16:11
Quoting
Well said Judith! We who see clearly, must endure living in a country where most are blind. The ignorance of the majority is very hard to bear!


Dear Genierae,

Well stated! With all the news that surrounds us, I believe it is not ignorance, but stupidity.

One has to consciously "bury their head in sand" not to know what has been happening with our Government. #1.) By surrounding himself with wall street insiders, some would say "crooks," the President has averted a depression and very possibly, world economic collapse! #2.) The President has reached out to the Republican's in Congress only to be met with NO! on every piece of legislation he's offered. In fact, they seem hell bent on doing all they can to see this President fail! These legislators ought to be voted out of office and then tried for treason! #4.) The direction the President is leading our country is on the right path. The middle-class have long deserved a break. By introducing the first Health Care plan in our history, and moving us in a progressive direction, he deserves our support.
 
 
+5 # genierae 2010-10-26 06:53
Mr. Bowler, I agree totally. The corporate media is minimizing Obama's accomplishments , and they even have the nerve to say that it is Obama who won't work with Repubs. What can be done in a society where the mainstream media and a major political party have been corrupted to the point that our very freedoms are threatened? I voted absentee ballot because I don't trust the voting machines and I would recommend that everyone do so.
 
 
0 # Fox 2010-10-28 17:12
I more or less think the same as the above but the two of you sound like you're about to sneak off and make out. I'm always wary of people so certain of themselves. It concerns me that some of the things I think might be true you, are positive are true.

As for me, all I know is that I know nothing
 
 
+2 # Dorothy Hart 2010-10-30 15:03
Of course you'd think that way, after all you work for FOX, and isn;t FOX a Republican newtwork??? All you do is use scare tatics, and what's this about cutting Medicare if the Health care passes. Only if the Republicans repal the Health Care Reform and have your way to pirvitize it and make it into 401K's which we all know depends souly on the Stock Market. Why mess with something has worked since before I was born, and unlike the scare tatics that the right wing, it is NOT BROKE!!
 
 
-12 # faye frost 2010-10-27 06:08
Plain and simple, Obama is not liked for his social and political ideology. The United States is a majority center "right" "Christian" "conservative" country. Obama is as far "left" "liberal" "progressive" as they come. The two views simply are not compatible and anyone who is that far left will not be supported by the US population no matter what color their skin is. Obama ran as a centrist and uniter, to get elected, then showed his real political stripes once he was safely in office. If it was about color, how come tea party people can't stand Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd either? Pelosi is white Italian Catholic and Reid is Mormon. And they are all as white as the tea partiers!
 
 
+8 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 16:41
You reveal just how poorly informed you are faye, when you claim Obama is far "left"...even actually left AT ALL. That's just another teabagger lie. As someone who IS on the far left, and proud of it, I can assure you that Obama couldn't possibly be a leftist. If that's what you're worried about, go to bed tonight and get a good night's rest knowing that even if Obama were to have the last word in anything, their ain't no way he'd ever past for being leftist. Your post gives me pause to laugh!

And gee, I bet you think Franklin D Roosevelt was a leftist and a majority of Americans voted for him repeatedly! Quit confusing right wing talking points for knowledge. That's absurd.
 
 
+7 # Rob 2010-10-28 05:09
I doubt that the Obama haters are repelled by his "ideology", which they mainly know NOTHING about. Consider the common claim that Obama is a Marxist. I've read Marx and Marxists as well as writings by Obama himself. Only a political illiterate could imagine that Obama is a Marxist.
Moreover, the Tea Party protests started BEFORE Obama had a chance to formulate policies. So, the animosity isn't driven by policy issues alone.
There is a reactionary white racism as well as archaic conservatism among a part of the US population, and simply denying it won't make it go away.
 
 
-1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 02:13
As I ahudder, I must say that your analysis is brilliant. Extroardinary post!
 
 
-13 # Me 2010-10-26 17:44
No, you didn't nail anything Judith!

Obama is so far from the smartest guy around...black or not. Case in point: He used a teleprompter to speak to school children!!! What does that tell you?

He's about as bright as a tv anchorman. He can read and he can speak well.

Besides all that he's sending us down the path of Canada and the UK. Do you see where that's gotten them? We can't afford his social agenda nor his open border policy.
Multiculturalis m has never and will never work. Just sayin'.
 
 
+7 # Rob 2010-10-28 05:13
I've heard Obama speak in person and I've read a number of his writings. If he's not the smartest guy around he's certainly one of the smartest--certainly smarter than any of the leading Republicans vying for power.
But Amerioa does have a tradition of being anti-intellectual as well as anti-Black. and Obama is both black and intellectual.
 
 
0 # dave 2010-11-03 12:45
ME. I think Canada is doing much better than us right now so you wish we were like them. You need to do your research before commenting about other countries. You may never travelled out of the USA. I assumed.
 
 
+46 # Leopold 2010-10-24 22:41
Your first paragraph is a great summary of what ails us as a nation. There is also the lie that privatization will solve all our problems - a mantra repeated over and over without thought.

"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all." GK Chesterton (1908)
 
 
+9 # Judith Linn 2010-10-25 02:02
Wow! An articulate statement that really says it all! You should be a journalist. Wishful thinking!
 
 
+8 # FHM,III 2010-10-25 05:02
I agree with your description DofG. I wish, with a large degree of hopelessness, that civic mindedness could be returned to our population. But alas, not many, save Sandra Day O'Connor give a hoot about such stuff. So, we continue to suffer along.
I hate my growing cynicism.
 
 
+2 # Judith Fran Feldman 2010-10-26 17:19
Wait a minute. Didn't Sandra Day O'Conner help speed our decline by putting "W" in the white house?
 
 
+34 # Ed Bogdan 2010-10-25 05:08
I agree with you but feel that you have left out one major factor: The need for a 100% public financing mandate. The recent Supreme Court ruling permitting unlimitted,non-accountable corporate campaign donations has simply aggrivated an already untenuous situation. Our democracy will continue to disintegrate without true, comprehensive public financing requirements, resulting in the return to politicians capable of running on their own platforms.
 
 
-55 # dnha14 2010-10-25 07:44
Do you also think that the Wall Street donations to the Democrats and the $140 Million from the unions to the Democrats and the GE money and the media money, all going to the Democrats should come under the same scrutiny? Yeah, didn't think so. You just want to control the donations to Republicans. Democrats can get all they can take and more. That's OK because only "good" money goes to Democrats. Sheesh!
 
 
+18 # LeeBlack 2010-10-25 11:00
This is not what liberals think - liberals want money to come to elections openly - not secretly. Also, we want our representatives not to be beholden to large groups who have given large amounts of money. It has nothing to do with the money going to one side or the other.
 
 
+15 # LeeBlack 2010-10-25 11:07
Isn't the real point of the article that America's self-image of "we're number 1" blinding us to reality? Our Manifest Destiny was not a God-given right. We were presented with an opportunity to a new kind of government and room to grow. We now need to recognize our place in the global political presence.
 
 
+8 # Phil Bateman 2010-10-25 20:35
Sheesh! You apparently read some of that stuff that's always in conservative minds, but not on the printed page. You guys have become talking point sound machines. No matter what is said, you recite your talking points without any understanding of the actual conversation. Besides. Don't you think the $140 million you say are going to the Democrats from (shudder!!) unions, GE(?) huh? and the "media" is a paltry sum when compared to the mega-millions donated to Republicans from Karl Rove's little off-the-books pac and the US Chamber of Commerce's millions from undisclosed donors, much of it from foreigh nations. You guys are so stuck on "rewind" you have no idea what is going on in the real world. Maybe a timely intervention from those who really love you might help?
 
 
+6 # Hors-D-whores 2010-10-26 00:42
This is the first time I've read that Democratic candidates are getting money from Wall Street, or GE. I guess I would have if I read the right-wing lie machine. The money from unions (I doubt they have $140M to give) is pittance compared to the money from the corporate oligarchs and the whole Karl Rove despicable bunch that is going to the unqualified Tea Bag candidates.
There is a big problem though, TOO MUCH MONEY going to all elections and the Citizen United case has created a monster.
What is the next election going to cost, a kazillion dollars?
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 02:22
To answer your qustion dnha14: Yes, most democratic voters absolutely welcome thorough public disclosure of money going to Democrats. You obviously don't and that makes you part of the problem. And you mention "media money". You do know, don't you, that the media most benefits the right? Or are you naively believing that the media is some how "left". You'd think you were completely unaware that most on the left favor public campaign financing and public disclosure. Sheesh indeed!
 
 
+6 # Doug 2010-10-26 05:16
Yes, I say dig into all contributions because I'm American FIRST and democrat second and that's the differance between us. Stop with the fox speak. First, Unions make up 10% of the work force, nothing. Second ABC,NBC and CBS all suported Bush and the Republican canadates because of their hands off policy, that's just a verifiable fact.

Bottom line, Money that comes to the Democratic party is accounted for and about the working class. Right or wrong it's about the people. Money that props up the new and improved Republicorp party isn't even about America it's about taking over America and that's a huge differance.
 
 
-4 # john henry 2010-10-26 12:53
A wonderful explanation can be found here if you can handle it.

http://apathetic-usa.com/
 
 
+3 # Judith Fran Feldman 2010-10-26 17:40
I can handle it. I just don't agree. The premise is flawed. It assumes that unrestrained capitalism ("freedom") leads to pie in the sky. It doesn't. No more so than communism. Both extremes are disaster.
 
 
0 # GJ 2010-10-26 19:16
Judith,

Communism, Fascism, Socialism are all capitalists systems. They all require capital to function. Think about it. The United States was founded as a Republic with a Free Enterprise System, notice it was not a free market. It also is a capitalist system because it to requires capital to function. The only difference between the systems is who controls the capital. Free Enterprise also requires a strong moral component to function with any semblance of fairness. This usually came from a belief in a higher power. The idea that there is a higher moral code than government. However that has been What we have now is a parasitical elite class on both sides of the aisle who get us to go at one another's throats over, for lack of a better term, crap while our country is stolen from us. I would encourage you to read the redress of grievances at the end of the Declaration of Independence. What our government has been doing for more than 40 years pales in comparison.
 
 
+37 # kath 2010-10-25 06:27
I agree with DofG, but I also believe that we need to stop internalizing the garbage that the Repugs throw out there.

Because they do not have any really smart candidate for President they decided to demonize smartness. They don't have a majority so they decide to be a roadblock instead of working together for the good of the country. They need to be slapped and put in time out for being nasty bullies! Then we wonder why our schools are going through such hell because of bullies... the Repugs taught them well.
 
 
+5 # Carol Gardiner 2010-10-26 06:59
Kath... You have it sooo right! Good to read all of these responses for a change instead of the garbage the blind GOP follwers are bombarding us all with.
T ahnks for articulating your thoughts so well for all of us who are in complete agreement.
 
 
+7 # muriel schnierow 2010-10-25 08:12
You've got that right and tho there may be a decline i believe there are more of us than them (them being the Tea Party Ignoramuses and battered GOP)all best Mur
 
 
+16 # lizzie 2010-10-25 11:32
I believe there has to be more of us than them, he was voted in to this office and those of us who are wavering should revisit the last decade. I do not believe this nation is that illiterate yet. It is time we came together and gave this president the full four years to govern. I opt for this intelligent man to lead us over the Palins and O'Donnell's.
 
 
+15 # muriel schnierow 2010-10-25 08:20
Re Mr. Gwynn_ THERE IS SOMETHING CALLED AN (EMBEDDED COMMAND) SAY IT OFTEN ENOUGH AND IT WILL BE BELIEVED. DID FDR SAY ALL WAS LOST? NO HE SAID WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR BUT FEAR ITSELF. SO WHERE IS THIS DECLINE? NOT IN MY FAMILY AND FRIENDS. WHERE IS THIS HUGE SUPPORT FOR THE PALIN? IN THE MEDIA THAT GIVES HER UNDESERVED PUBLICITY.
 
 
+2 # Carol Gardiner 2010-10-26 07:00
AMEN!!
 
 
+17 # Nancy S. Moore 2010-10-25 08:24
As an American and a Democrat who fully supports and respects President Obama, I find your comments insightful and spot on. It is frankly becoming embarrassing to admit I belong to this country with the situation in our current political environment. I'm not certain if it was worse having the inempt Bush as president or having the brilliant Obama being so ravenously attacked and maligned by the the opposition.
 
 
+2 # Troy 2010-10-26 03:02
Hear hear!
 
 
+94 # DaveW. 2010-10-24 20:49
Yes President Obama is smart. President Obama is Black. And President Obama, is, lets be honest, too passive for a nation chalk full of half wits and hooligans. His party has (in the Senate especially) only given him lukewarm support and the Blue Dogs of the House are political mongrels without a pedigree. His worst decisions were surrounding himself with financial insiders like Geithner and Summers, keeping us locked into foreign wars, and basically trying to stay above the fray when he should have waded in on a variety of subjects. We are a primitive species at heart. His is a disciplined mind. Loggerheads ensue every time.
 
 
+21 # boxhillbob 2010-10-24 21:29
DaveW, You have broken the code. The Presidency requires more than smarts. It requires ability to see the obvious--that high crimes cannot go unpunished, and wars cannot be endless. It requires some pragmatism; if Plan A (welfare for the rich) isn't working, then try Plan B or C. Giving billions to banks helped them. Maybe giving billions to the working poor and middle class would help both the banksters and the economy. Try trickle UP. Black or White has nothing to do with it.
 
 
+40 # DaveW. 2010-10-25 06:52
Boxhillbob, I agree with much of your analogy but must dispute your final point.
Black, does have "something" to do with it.This man was looked at in a negative light by certain Americans BEFORE he ever took office. It had nothing to do with his policies. Limbaugh was blaming him for economic collapse BEFORE he ever took office. Tell me the details of one other President who had to confront a "birther" conspiracy. Also, the things you say are "required" of a President involve some level of "cooperation", especially from members of your own party. We don't have a monarchy. We allegedly have a Democracy or to be more precise a Representative form of government. One man can't do it all alone. If Democrats had stuck together like the totally united opposition they faced in the Republican party we'd be looking at a much larger list of accomplishments for the President, and the country, than we see now. You are deluding yourself if you believe politics have become color blind.
 
 
-10 # BrianM 2010-10-25 16:02
The US is a republic with democratically elected representatives . We are by no means a "Democracy". If one man tries to do it all alone, then he's a tyrant or dictator. It's funny that so many claim President Obama to be so intelligent, yet his transcripts are guarded tighter than Fort Know. He's so far over his head that this 'coolness' that so many see is reminiscent of a 'deer in the headlights' look to most of us who have not seen him as the 2nd coming of Christ. He's a one-term president, which is good for the US. Who cares what color he is. It is his European-style idealogy that is important.
 
 
+5 # mark 2010-10-25 22:12
And I assume that's 'old europe'.Obama's no more a would-be dictator or monarch than his predecessors. GW simply had more handlers, and fooled people into thinking he was just like them, while whittling away their rights.
 
 
+7 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 02:40
Where in the heck did you get your bs from? Uh, if you'd bother to look up "republic" in the dictionary. You'll find that "republic" and "democracy" are synonymous...as in the words are interchangeable . They mean the same thing. Deer in the headlights? I doubt it but even if true, how would you look standing in front of the massive lie machine AKA Republican party? Or didn't you realize that the party of NO is about the business of throwing wrenches into everything Obama attempts to do for the sole purpose of wrecking him, even the country's economy, simply in order to "win"? And I hope you don't really object to his, so called, European-style ideology...or didn't you know that the founding fathers and the U.S. Constitution were massively and positively influenced by EXACTLY this?
And I still can't believe that you wrote "We are by no means a Democracy." The ironic truth is that if the Republicans take over, we most certainly won't be, or didn't you know that listening to and attending to the will of the people in order to form a government of the people, by the people and for the people has NOTHING to do with what those fools are about?
 
 
+6 # genierae 2010-10-26 07:21
Well said, Daniel! Republicans are guilty of treason for sacrificing the good of the country in order to bring Obama down.
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 11:56
Daniel,
The two million words: you read the wrong assignments. Brian is correct.
 
 
+1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 16:48
Quoting
Daniel,
The two million words: you read the wrong assignments. Brian is correct.


No, he isn't. So there. Neener, neener, neener....(yawn)
 
 
+6 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 07:11
BrianM, "If one man tries to do it all alone, then he's a tyrant or dictator." I'll "assume" you were saying the same thing when George W. Bush was proclaiming himself "The Decider."
 
 
-6 # Roji 2010-10-26 14:05
Right on! Enlighten the "blind" & "deaf" who worship at the altar of eutopia seduced by the leftist priesthood!
 
 
+3 # Phil Bowler 2010-10-25 16:28
Well said Dave!
 
 
+13 # SpeakSense 2010-10-25 13:17
Two points on which I disagree with your statements. 1st-Billions were given to the banks under GWB not BHO. The billions that President Obama intended for the middle-class/working poor have been held hostage by a hostile Congress (Republicans but also far too many weak & spineless Democrats). 2nd--Black & White has and unfortunately will always factor into American politics. For too many on the "right", Pres. Obama was the wrong man for the job as soon as they saw the "color of his complexion".
 
 
+1 # susan trevelyan-syke 2010-10-24 22:16
You said it. Too bad he only respects the minority New/Blue Dogs and blames the majority Democratic base.
 
 
+3 # Judith Linn 2010-10-25 02:03
Great ananlysis!
 
 
+4 # Phil Bowler 2010-10-25 16:25
Quoting
Yes President Obama is smart. President Obama is Black. And President Obama, is, lets be honest, too passive for a nation chalk full of half wits and hooligans. His party has (in the Senate especially) only given him lukewarm support and the Blue Dogs of the House are political mongrels without a pedigree. His worst decisions were surrounding himself with financial insiders like Geithner and Summers, keeping us locked into foreign wars, and basically trying to stay above the fray when he should have waded in on a variety of subjects. We are a primitive species at heart. His is a disciplined mind. Loggerheads ensue every time.


Dear Dave, I say lets vote out the "Blue Dogs" and the Repubs, and vote in progressives! On Geithner and Summers, their role likely saved us from a depression. As far as keeping us locked in war, the President is taking steps to responsibly end our involvement in these wars. While what you say about our being a primitive species and The President as being of a more disciplined mind, I say lets vote based on our "better angels." Lets support the good that has thus far, been achieved. I believe it will only get better.
 
 
+3 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 07:30
Phil, You are a optimist in an age of pessimism. I am grateful for people like you for I am becoming more cynical as I grow older. (54) I agree, vote out Blue Dogs and Repugs and vote in progressives, but believe until we really hit bottom this won't happen in a meaningful way. Geithner and Summers should have been substituted for by people like Reich, Elizabet Warren, Krugman and Stigletz to name a few. The "insider" status I mentioned no doubt "helped" them understand the system and provide Obama with useful information. But the "conflict of interest" their insider connections exposed left them, Obama, and progressives having to do to much explaining. Afghanistan war is hopelessly muddled and corrupt. The President is the head of the Military Industrial Complex. Any President! Whether he approves of it or not. That, and the omnipresent specter of oil, looms over our prolonged involvement. No matter who's President we have, as they all have said since FDR, "vital interests" in the Middle East. I like your "better angels" idea. Practically all I'm seeing is "little devils."
 
 
-154 # Jeff Vintner 2010-10-24 20:56
Mr. Gwyn is apparently living in an alternate univers. Either that or he was unusually capable of writing while in a straight-jacket from his padded room.

The senile Mr. Gwyn drops back to the familiar line of liberal fanatics that anyone who disagrees with the Obama regime is racist.

The old and vapid Mr. Gwyn is living proof that liberalism is a disease of mind and spirit. So lacking in creativity and rational thought that only the platitudes of decades long dead can be repeated ad nauseum by those who have no respect for the nation's voters UNLESS they vote the "right" way.

Poor Mr. Gwyn, it's time he go home and take his metamucil.
 
 
+30 # Patricia McCairen 2010-10-25 00:16
Jeff Vintner proves the veracity of Mr. Gwyn's editorial. His stupidity is the disease that is ruining this country.
 
 
+5 # BARBBF 2010-10-25 03:42
Quoting
Mr. Gwyn is apparently living in an alternate univers. Either that or he was unusually capable of writing while in a straight-jacket from his padded room.

(SNIP)

Poor Mr. Gwyn, it's time he go home and take his metamucil.


I think his other problem is he's still drinking WAY, WAY, WAY TOO MUCH KOOL-AID.
 
 
+39 # Ralph Averill 2010-10-25 03:55
Let's put it terms someone with your limited linguistic skills, ("univers","platitudes of decades long dead",) can understand. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, (Sarah Palin) it's a duck. Let us help you out here. It's not that Obama is black, it's that he's very smart, smarter than most, and black. You hate Obama, yet you voted not once, but twice, for the semi-literate, phoney Texas good ole boy George W. Bush. Mr. Bush, and his gang of thieves, thugs, and whores, left a train wreck for which you, having voted for him twice, bear some responsibility. Now you, and your ilk, (look it up), are doing your best to impede the man most capapble of fixing the mess, against your own best interests. And that, my friend, is a text-book definition of dysfunctional. Does that make the author's point more clear? No? Well, I tried.
 
 
+19 # Norman Wear 2010-10-25 05:29
Quoting
Mr. Gwyn is apparently living in an alternate univers. Either that or he was unusually capable of writing while in a straight-jacket from his padded room.

The senile Mr. Gwyn drops back to the familiar line of liberal fanatics that anyone who disagrees with the Obama regime is racist.

The old and vapid Mr. Gwyn is living proof that liberalism is a disease of mind and spirit. So lacking in creativity and rational thought that only the platitudes of decades long dead can be repeated ad nauseum by those who have no respect for the nation's voters UNLESS they vote the "right" way.

Poor Mr. Gwyn, it's time he go home and take his metamucil.


Ironically, Mr Vintner's comments confirm Mr. Gwyn's assessment of American dysfunction.
 
 
+24 # genierae 2010-10-25 06:21
Thus speaks a creature of the right, a promoter of exceptionalism, a proud Republican of the 20th century; as if his party hasn't created this mess we are dealing with. Let's not forget that Mr. Vintner is speaking on behalf of the rich elite who have only contempt for the rest of us. They attack every good thing that Obama and the Democrats in Congress have done and do their best to destroy any progress that has been made. They are the party of the dark ages and they depend on the people's ignorance to get elected. The fact that a black man is in the White House scares the hell out of them, and desperate people will take desperate measures. I put nothing past these hatemongers.
 
 
+22 # Kennan 2010-10-25 06:26
Why are so many who are against the present administration so unkind? Are we not Americans? Can we not be respectful and be happy that we live in an America where there is more than one party to balance excesses out? If we do not like someone we can use our power to vote against them, but why resort to mocking words against those who differ? Cannot people disagree without phrases such as "liberal fanatics" (as if there were no conservative ones), "senile Mr. Gwynn" and "go home and take his metamucil"?
This seems to be an especially combative and uncivil election season. I wonder how many of us could easily and quickly fix the problems in America and administrate perfectly? There seems to be a vicious attitude of hate toward the President. What disturbs me most is that many of the ones who say such things about him claim to be Christians! Where do we find Jesus or his apostles condemning or saying mean or mocking things against the government of their day?
 
 
0 # billy bob 2010-10-25 19:27
Here's how you fight fire:

WITH FIRE.

Stop asking repugs to go against their nature and grow some civility. Instead, do what our liberal fore-runners did (the last liberals who accomplished anything) and FIGHT BACK.

I can hurl insults as well as any repugnican and there's no shortage of right-wing targets worthy of our insults.

Come down and play in the mud with the rest of us mortals - unless you want to watch American politics from the outside.
 
 
-3 # john henry 2010-10-26 00:00
your musings are correct. We are living in an age of deteriorated manners. Tolkein's orks seem to prowl about and sometimes we follow their lead.

Lest you fall into the maudlin complacency of some understandings of Jesus teaching, remember that his prescription for attaining liberty was:

Joh 8:31 ¶ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

And of those who worked against the righteousness of their heritage:

Mt 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 ¶ Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

Also remember that all men, Christian or not, are imperfect. It is that imperfection of men that our Constitution addresses in its scheme for self government by sinners.
 
 
+17 # john p 2010-10-25 06:58
Mr Vinter, you mistake a vituperative ad hominem attack on Richard Gwyn as a form of acceptable criticism of the position taken in his article. I see no disrespect for the nation's voters-President Obama was democratically elected, was he not?
If you have a point, make it intelligently without resorting to incivility.
As for liberals using racism as the basis of right wing criticism, you haven't been reading the same blogs-either rightist or leftist-that I have.
You may well not be racist, but your comment reeks of an age bias. Are there an other biases you'd care to exhibit. Try to base criticism on facts. By the way, the US Declaration of Independance and the resulting Constitution was based on the politcal writings of European liberal thinkers. They are long dead; perhaps they died of your new medical discovery, the liberal "disease of the mind and spirit."
 
 
-8 # john henry 2010-10-25 23:41
Mr. Vintner, you touched a nerve in 150 of these lefties. Perhaps you did not show enough respect to the Canadian globalist opinion marketer. Yes, Mr Gwyn does inhabit an alternate universe. He shares that with a disturbingly large number of people of no faith in God and a narrow vision of mankind's ability to thrive in liberty. He is one who thinks he knows better than you do how you should live your life. He also is among those who think they know how nations should conduct their affairs.

Nevertheless, your identification of liberalism as a disease of mind and spirit has enraged some of the afflicted and will enrage more. I take exception to your failure to prescribe the cure: expansion of the mind to encompass the uncomfortable, fact founded truths upon which Western Civilization has painfully grown for three thousand years or more.
 
 
+8 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 03:09
With all due respect John, I am not infected with any disease of mind because I am a liberal. I find myself enraged by the undeniably destructive consequences of conservatism and the blithe dismisals of conservatives to the inevitable proofs of their destructive thinking. And the "fact founded truths upon which Western Civilization has painfully grown for three thousand years or more" were found mostly by liberal thinkers who opposed the prevailing views of the conservative status quo's of their time. This fact found truth has been evidenced countless times from the begining of civilzation. You mention "expansion of the mind to enompass the uncomfortable" as what? A cure for liberalism? Silly thing to say John. My adult growth into liberalism was predicated upon my devotion to a disciplined reading of approaching 2 million pages substantially devoted to challenging all of my discomforts, high among them being my own ignorance. I started out as a Nixon Republican (shudder)and while I have much to argue with the Democrats I have finally liberated myself from the arogant blinders of Eurocentric BS that infect people such as yourself. As for "western civilization" I side with Ghandi.
 
 
-10 # john henry 2010-10-26 10:28
Daniel,
I'm encouraged to hear that you side with Ghandi. After all he brought India a form of government and a national language he learned in England. His India enjoys still the transportation network built by Britain. Notions of equality imported brom Western Civilizaiont make India a vital and productive nation. Much of India's economy was imported. Three hundred fifty years of English nation building paid off handsomely. Ghandi led a grown up India to declare its independence in a way similar to the independence many a young adult declares from parental authority when the time is right. You proposed a fine defense of colonial development.

I have been told taht any young man who is not a liberal has no heart. Any old man who is not a conservative has no brain.

As to disease: Any physician who diagnoses and treats himself has a fool for a patient.
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 17:01
Yeah, 25,000+ pages of reading about Ghandi, a good beginning I'm sure you'd agree, leads me to a different conclusion. What Ghandi accomplished, he accomplished IN SPITE OF, not BECAUSE OF Britain. He considered Christianity but essentially gave up because he couldn't find any Christians...not that he didn't know scores upon scores who claimed to be Christian. Apparently you aren't current with India's currently developing transportation system...and it sure ain't British. And mine an argument for colonialism? John, you're being absurd. India, like most middle eastern states, would just as soon have preferred never having been under the colonial authority or influence of Britain, or haven't you read anything else but singularly anglo/eurocentric history? Having been to India I can assure you that their regard for Britain remains very mixed. There's plenty of little john henry's running around New Dehli but trust me, they are greatly outnumbered.
Oh, and my licensing requires certification sufficient to assure you that your last sentence is worth a few belly laughs! Thanks for brightening up my day!
 
 
-8 # AMB 2010-10-26 02:01
Well said Mr Vintner - That the author can say that Obama is the most intelligent president with a straight face is laughable. He is a disgrace to the USA and a communist to boot. But, don't tell the progressive idiots that - they have their head somewhere in lala land and refuse to see reality. Can't wait until he's booted out of office - that's the day i get drunk!!!
 
 
+3 # genierae 2010-10-26 07:35
AMB: I take it you are a Republican. Can you tell me why you are a Republican? Are you very rich? I am truly interested in why anyone who isn't wealthy would be a Republican. They care nothing about the rest of us, they want to do away with all social programs, they want to take our money and give it to the corporations. So tell me, are you rich?
 
 
+85 # HAL 2010-10-24 21:01
I think Obama and his race are only a secondary element here. What is on the first level is the fact that the Republicans and their corporate bosses lost (some, not all) control of the nation and they will stop at absolutely nothing to get it back! And thus the total lack of cooperation to work on the real problems we have. Just sabotage all items presented--just throw wrenches into the gears of it all--to bring the nation to a standstill--and then take political advantage of the frustration of the population. Isn't that exactly what has been happening? Not a bad plan if you want control again!
 
 
+77 # giraffe23 2010-10-24 21:05
Americans' prejudice about color, honesty, gender, intelligence, fairness, etc will kill the best we've been offered in a very LONG time. Prejudice like alcoholism is an equal opportunity employer. Wealthy, religious, athesiest, leaders of companies, unemplooyed,ver y poor, middle class -- men, women -- ALL "get your heads out of the sand." Keep listening to the rhetoric (mantra) of the Republican politicians and you'll take us right back to another Bush era. THINK! Turn off FAUX news. "Listen to their words" -- they contradict themselves in the same sentence (e.g. Tax cuts + reduce deficist (holding out on the middle class for the 2-3% rich who have most of their money off shore anyway.)
 
 
+14 # Judith Linn 2010-10-25 02:05
Would that people would listen to people like you...and me!!!This is so sad. People wnat to take back their government..from whom? They want the corporatiions to run us...into the ground. Low information voters are our new plague.
 
 
+92 # VivaldiCO 2010-10-24 21:06
As a society, we are racist and anti-intellectual. For a moment, some of us thought we had a way to get past that. No such luck.
 
 
+11 # Jim Capatelli 2010-10-25 00:24
I disagree. The majority DID get past all that. And we continue to.

Regardless of whatever shortcomings and disappointments of the Obama Administration, the fact remains that we DID elect him, when many said that no one so black, so liberal and with such a name could ever win. Guess what: He Did.

But more importantly, WE did. We proved that we could assemble a majority for this man, and defeat those who were determined to keep us mired in the past.

We're not going back to the America that was. That's over. And we have the numbers on our side, especially in the long run. It IS getting better. Just keep working and don't ever give up and let the bad people (conservatives) win by our inaction or apathy.
 
 
+9 # genierae 2010-10-25 07:06
I sure appreciate your optimism, Mr Capatelli! America will rise up again, we will have better days, but never again must we insist on having our own way over the rest. We must take our rightful place internationally , as a nation that can help lead the world to a place where all nations can live in peace and without want.
 
 
+12 # Curtis L Walker 2010-10-24 21:21
The Tea Party IS NOT A GRASS ROOTS entity.

Nothing but old angry white men, most getting a check from the GOVT each month led around by corporate America AND FORIEGN DONERS TO TEA PARTY supporting Senators.

Author was right on most everything else, but please, Tea Party is not grassroots. Well documented so how did you go there?
 
 
-6 # bys 2010-10-24 21:44
Seriously, this has to be the worst analysis on the internet. It is just possible that there are some other reasons for Obama's slippage from glory besides dark skin! Maybe its the continuation of some dark policies by the previous very white president?.....
 
 
-10 # Steve 2010-10-24 21:52
GARBAGE! I'm Black, and believe me, Obama's problem is not because he's black. He represents the same corporate, political, and military interests that the rest of those former presidents mentioned in the article represented. That's way the people are turning against him. He's basically a hypocrite. Talks a good game, but his actions speak much louder (i.e., Afghanistan, Iraq, TARP, so-called stimulus, and the big health care payoff to big pharma, etc., etc.). These writers need to get off this black thing. That has nothing to do with it.
 
 
+3 # TStarr 2010-10-27 16:13
Quoting
GARBAGE! I'm Black, and believe me, Obama's problem is not because he's black....These writers need to get off this black thing. That has nothing to do with it.


Steve: I am also Black. Have you seen the "Tea Bagger" signs depicting President Obama as a "bone-through-his-nose" witchdoctor? Did you see and hear news footage of health care reform opponents spitting on Black Congressmen and calling them "The N-Word"? Maybe that wasn't shown on Faux News. Racism and "This Black Thing" has *everything* to do with it.

Are you really Black or are you an "Oreo" (Black on the outside, Glenn Beck on the inside)?
 
 
-19 # john henry 2010-10-24 21:58
If BO is too black, how did he get elected President? A huge number of white voters voted for him. Since then many voters of all races have realized their mistake.

If BO is so smart, why does he continue to plunge the nation into a morass of debt it can never get out of? If BO is so smart, why does he have so little respect for constitutional government. A government of men stands no chance of continuing on a predictable path of relations with other nations or development of its resources. Each change of elected leaders will bring a change in direction. Can it be that he does not intend to relinquish power? Or could it be that he intends to crash our economy? Could it be that his intelligence is unsullied by love of country?

Of course the entire article is built on false statements and distortions of people and ideas where ideas are discernable. Perhaps even a paranoid shunning of valid conceptions of people and ideas.
 
 
+16 # DaveW. 2010-10-25 07:26
John Henry, You,sir, never cease to amaze me. The President was elected because he simply made more sense than electing a generic, wacky "Maverick" ( whoops, forgot he's not a Maverick anymore)who had a running mate, let me be gracious now, who was and is slightly above the finger painting level of intelligence. He was elected because of eight years of what most sane people would agree was the worst President the country ever had. One who, I might add plunged the nation into that morass of debt you speak of. Your "so little respect for Constitutional govt." is non-sequitur. But my favorite part of your well-honed McCarthyist diatribe is "Can it be that he does not intend to relinquish power? Crash the economy? Intelligence unsullied by love of country? lol Do you own a copy of "The Red Network" by Elizabeth Dilling. Written in 1934, it provides all the little paranoid prattle necessary for you to stay up late at night in a sheer panic. Glen Beck has one. Do you?
 
 
0 # john henry 2010-10-25 09:51
Dave,
My observation was simply that many white voters voted for him. The Gwyn article seems to leave that out. I will not defend either of the Bushes. Both were pretenders to constitutional conservativism. As to crashing the economy: if he is so intelligent, does he not recognize this to be the result of insurmountable debt? He is either not intelligent or he has a plan for the financial collapse he is engineering. I will try to find a copy of the book you recommend. Sounds like I should read it.
Have you read Signature in the Cell, Stephen Meyer's persuasive work? I'll read your recommended book if you'll read mine.
 
 
+10 # DaveW. 2010-10-25 14:49
John Henry, What's causing the "insurmountable debt" you so often speak of?"Entitlement spending?"
Programs supporting "illegal aliens?" I suppose it has nothing to do with the Military Industrial Complex or the "perpetual war on terror" the Neocons arranged. What about taxes John? The Republican party,one and all,agreed the tax cuts Bush handed out in '01 and '03 should expire this year. Now,they brand the very expiration they agreed to as a "huge tax increase!" This will add enormously to the debt. The disparity in wealth between top and bottom in the U.S. hasn't been this pronounced since the gilded age of the late 1800's. Putting dollars into the hands of lower and middle class Americans will do more to stimulate the economy than giving it to obscenely rich "investors"(who primarily)inves t in themselves.Or mega wealthy "job creators" who simply off shore the profits and out source the labor.Was the country,in your opinion, better off financially in the 1950's? If not why?If yes,check the tax rates then. What would Obama stand to gain by "crashing" the economy? What's your definition of "Constitutional Conservatism?"Is it "Social Darwinism?"
I'll look for your book.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-25 16:37
johnny,

The white voters who elected him aren't the same ones who have a problem with the fact that he's black.

I DO, however, agree that the people who didn't vote for him hate him for an even MORE important reason:

NAMELY THAT THEY LOST AND A DEMOCRAT IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Who was the last Democratic President that repugnicans and TEA-HUGGERS did show the respect that is supposed to be given to the President of the United States of America?

If you can remember the last Democrat treated with respect by the right, then I assume you're the oldest person on Earth to actually remember GROVER CLEVELAND!
 
 
+5 # genierae 2010-10-25 10:42
Dave W., it does my heart good to read such an excellent comment. Thanks!
 
 
+2 # DaveW. 2010-10-25 18:20
genierae, It does "my heart" good to know that other human beings still have the capacity of critical thinking and the compassion to realize that if we keep going the way we're going....well, you know the rest. Thanks to you too!
 
 
+3 # genierae 2010-10-25 10:39
John Henry, you're so predictable. Trying to persuade you to open your mind is futile. Beating my head against a brick wall is not my idea of a fun thing to do.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-25 19:17
johnny,

I asked you on a previous article to explain your comments that President Obama doesn't respect the Constitution.

Please explain. What, in your opinion has he done to undermine the Constitution? Are you suggesting that he should finally close bush's torture camps and repeal bush's "patriot" act? If so, I agree. If not, what are you talking about?

This time, rather than just making hit-and-run comments you don't care to back up, respond with facts.

Be specific.
 
 
-6 # john henry 2010-10-25 23:21
billy bob,
President Obama is not alone in violating the constitution but below are two examples.

The Oath:
Article II sec 1 :--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The duty:
Article II sec 3 ..he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed..

(He ignores the flood of foreign nationals freely entering this nation without following legal requirements and abides thier continued illegal presence here)

Another requirement: Article IV sec 4 Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; ....

He has denied the states this protection
(in Arizona he caused warning signs to be placed)

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Obamacare is in violation of this.
 
 
+6 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 08:00
John Henry, You speak of the Presidential oath, then Article II, sec 3 of Constitution. Then say of Obama "He ignores the flood of foreign nationals freely entering this nation without following legal requirements and abides their continued illegal presence here." If you do a little fact checking you'll find that President Obama has DEPORTED more "illegals" in less than two years than his predecessor did in his last four. He has tripled the amount of Border Patrol between us and Mexico. He has denied Arizona the "right" to usurp the very Constitution you so vigorously defend by simply reminding them of Article I,sec I: "Congress alone has the power to make laws." If Arizona is left to its "own devices" what's to stop any state from enacting any one of a number of draconian laws they can dream up. Rights granted states under Federalism do not trump Federal jurisdiction. Article VI clearly states both "The Constitution and federal laws are the highest laws of the land" and "Federal and state officials owe their first loyalty to the U.S. Constitution." You're playing the old tried and true "states rights" game reinvented by Nixon's "Southern Strategy." We're on to you.
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 10:46
Dave,be onto me if you must but also be onto the constitution. I wrote that other presidents had violated the constitution also. That the President’s administration claims increased enforcement is not the same as doing the whole job which is his constitutionall y assigned duty. When this administration places warning signs to American citizens to stay out of American territory near the border because of drug and human traffickers from south of the border, that is plainly a surrender of that land to invaders. If he were enforcing the law Arizona would have no complaint. He is not. Arizona has a constitutional right to defend itself in event of emergency. An emergency exists because of this Presidents refusal to uphold his assigned duty.

You do violence to Article I sec 1 by taking it totally out of context. It reads:
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives .” This is a prescription for forming the legislature of the federal government.
It in no wise negates Art. IV sec 4.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 13:24
If other Presidents were in violation of the Constitution where were your complaints about bush on these threads a few years ago?

FOR THE 5TH TIME ARE YOU FOR REPEALING THE PATRIOT ACT?

DO I NEED TO POINT OUT THE BILL OF RIGHTS TO YOU?

STOP DODGING THE QUESTION. IT SHOULD BE EASILY ANSWERED BY A CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR SUCH AS YOURSELF.
 
 
-6 # john henry 2010-10-26 14:50
Billy bob, I have voiced the same constitutional position for years. It is not popular and has made no inroads so far. I have only recently come among you folks in this blog.

Patriot Act. In time of threat to national security, I would not unilaterally disarm, but find no excuse to still be under the same rules and regs cobbled together by the bush league after 9-11. My petite Oklahoma born blond squeaky wife has been searched at the airport when no airplane terrorist who was not a Muslim male from 18-40 years old has been identified. I do not worry about govt listening on my cell phone and cannot imagine anyone being assigned to do so. Nevertheless, the Bill of Rights applies to American citizens and must be upheld. The law can be replaced with a constitutional one. Only American citizens are protected by the BoR. Foreigners are not.

I detest rudeness in a man as much as the violation of our constitution and would very much like to see manners taught in schools along side our rich cultural heritage. Did you know that the subject of the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence is RESPECT. Respect is the foundation of our national spirit.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 17:19
Sorry, I have to respond.

I'm glad you were worried about the Constitution before President Obama entered office less than 2 years ago. If you're actually telling the truth, you seem to be the ONLY conservative who was.

HOWEVER, your defense of the "patriot" Act DISPROVES THE LIE THAT YOU CARE ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION AT ALL.

By the way, the Constitution DOES NOT only apply to American citizens. That's a popular and WRONG misconception. It is very specific on that point. It applies to ALL PERSON living in the United States.

Spare us the lecture about rudeness and manners. You're BY FAR the most disrespectful person who consistently comments on these threads, as your many insults can attest.

I can quote things too:

I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (UNLESS IT'S A CHARTER SCHOOL); or abridging the freedom of speech (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT WAS PASSED AND RUMSFELD TOLD US ALL TO WATCH WHAT WE SAID)

cont.
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 19:31
bb, I did NOT defend the Patriot act. Read carefully. "I would not unilaterally disarm, but find no excuse to still be under the same rules and regs cobbled together by the bush league after 9-11" That means we have had nine years to find a set of regulations tht apply to an enemy and that do not endanger the liberty of American citizens. Foreign citizens in their countries are not under protection of the Bill of Rights.

You are a person of passion. Passion rightly directed is an asset. Wrongly; it becomes your enemy.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:59
It's plain and simple johnny. REPEAL THE PATRIOT ACT. No reason to dance around the subject "not defending it".

I, like you, am a person of passion. Elections matter. Unlike you, I've backed up every comment I've made. If you think that's the "wrong direction", I'd suggest you get a better map.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 11:10
Also, if you're "not defending" the so called "patriot" act, why are you not EXTREMELY angry about it? You are virtually FROTHING AT THE MOUTH over illegal immigrants and have concocted a bizarre rationale as to why that somehow has to do with the Constitituion. Yet, you only used one convoluted sentence to describe, in squishy terms, that you weren't completely happy with the greatest threat the Constitution has faced in the 223 years since it was passed.

I know the Bill of Rights is a set of Amendments, but it's STILL part of The U.S. Constitution.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 17:20
cont.

or of the press (UNLESS IT'S UNEMBEDDED); or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT).

II. A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed ("WELL REGULATED" MEANS NOT JUST AN A-HOLE WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE AND A POLITICAL GRUDGE).

IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT MADE THIS NULL AND VOID)
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 17:23
cont.

V. No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT MADE THIS NULL AND VOID).

VI. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;

cont.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 17:23
cont.

to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT MADE THIS NULL AND VOID)

VII. In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT MADE THIS NULL AND VOID)

VIII. Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. (UNTIL THE PATRIOT ACT MADE THIS NULL AND VOID) - I STILL HAVEN'T HEARD YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT TORTURING PEOPLE.

IX. Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. (IN OTHER WORDS, OBAMA CARE IS COMPLETELY CONSTITUTIONAL)
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 17:19
John Henry, I think you confuse RESPECT for being nice or something silly like that. Your adaptation of respectful affect is by no means a fundamental attribute of respect which is something so much deeper. I actually question your depth of respect for anyone not in agreement with, and this is NOT name calling, what so often seems like a smug and smarmy, self congratulatory egotism, well armed by a anglo/euro-centric veneer which more closely resembles arrogance well far and above actual enlightenment. I can play that too I suppose. My point though is that lacking the capacity for humility in any form, an attribute that seems obvious to me, you are incapable of genuine respect for any one or any ideology that does not accord with you.
Think affect john henry. Are you for real or are you just playing games? And don't even bother to answer here. It would be interesting I suppose but your internal schema is not consistent with reality. IF the world were as you describe it, then why the hell is it so abundantly NOT that way at the same time? You must really believe in your own rhetoric without any doubt or wondering. Gee, it must be nice to be so perfect...and wrong so often!
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-28 08:32
BEAUTIFUL COMMENT DANIEL!!!
 
 
+5 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 13:36
john henry, Impossible to argue with someone who has already made up his mind. You do not address the issues I raised and instead rely on you and your "Conservative Constitutionali sts Colleagues" warped view of that document. This country has exploited "cheap labor" from south of the border for many decades. It's been a "working arrangement" the governments of both countries have encouraged despite gross violations of basic standards of human decency. The whole acquisition of lands captured in the Mexican war (1846-48) was an unjust land grab fueled by Manifest Destiny rhetoric and fulfilled by deception. Perhaps signs near the border are merely for the "safety" of citizens. Mexico's government is obviously having a "difficult" time with drug gangs and cartels. Arizona, or any other state does not have the right to trump Federal jurisdiction. Congress, not Arizona, is empowered to "call on the militia (National Guard) to put down rebellion and invasion and to enforce the laws." (Sec 8) We have not been invaded by Mexico. And the only real "rebellion" has been errant Arizona nationalists who insist on granting themselves powers denied them in the Constitution.
 
 
+5 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 14:04
John, It is a wonder to me how two Americans (I'm assuming you're an American) can see things so differently. I read your posts and almost invariably comes the looming specter of "invasion." The vast majority of "invaders" come here to work and then to send the money (after they've paid a host of taxes) back home. We offer them the same welcome, rejection, exclusion door mat each time they come and go. You're world of shadows and demonization can't survive in a shrinking global economy that will have to rely on cooperation and understanding more and more as we go on. The Constitution adopted in 1787 could not possibly foresee the dramatic changes that would occur. "Diversity" was an ingredient completely lacking in its makeup, yet its that diversity which has made the country the "melting pot" for which it is justifiably famous. The Tea Party and those who think like you are merely regurgitating Father Coughlin, John Birch Society blather that's been proven to be disingenuous at best and morally corrosive (as well as deadly) at worst. We're NOT going back to pre-civil rights days. We're not going back to the antebellum south. We're not going back to 1787. Get over it!
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 19:39
The law is the law. Whether you agree with it or not changes nothing. Either we are a nation of laws or we are not. When a law is not enforced, the whole structure of the law is weakened. If we do not like a law, our representatives can make a new one; we cannot.

It grieves me to see so many people with no love for the country that nurtured them. Should your view prevail, liberty will be lost. And the tragedy is that you show no evidence that you know what is being lost.

I hope you and bb enjoy your lives. Goodbye.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:55
You're right johnny,

The law IS the law. That's why I, like the overwhelming majority who voted in the last election are not disappointed about the President going too far, but not far enough.

The "law is the law", which is why I think it's important for bush and his cronies to be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 13:20
So your entire argument about the Constitution amounts to two points:

1. That we have illegal aliens (there were none before the 20th Century because ANYONE could freely enter and become a citizen - THAT'S RIGHT!). It's interesting that forcing American citizens to face check points is an example of "defending" the Constitution by your logic.

2. That Congress passed a health care bill. What part of this is beyond their rights as duly elected members of Congress? This is what Congress does - PASS LEGISLATION. It is afterall, the LEGISLATIVE BRANCH. I'm sorry if you disagree with the results of the legislation passed, but to say that it's suddenly "against the Constitution" is a bit of a stretch and intellectually dishonest.
 
 
-14 # john henry 2010-10-24 22:01
Perhaps Richard Gwyn might consider organizing a new political party: the President Obama is too Damn Smart Party.
 
 
+17 # Nickw 2010-10-24 22:06
As a Canadian with a political leader whom I would rather not mention, I extend an offer to America to trade their leader for our leader, plus several bright up and coming Canadian politicians in a straight up trade for the rights to acquire Obama. As your neighbor I am compelled to tell you just how lucky you all are and how much we need a leader like him in Canada. Give Obama, the Senate, and the House the time needed to finish what they started. If the Reds get control of the House the past 2 years will be all for not. Good Luck Nov. 2nd
 
 
-8 # Kris Merschrod 2010-10-25 06:43
Thank you Nick for the offer. Were we building a hockey team that might workout well for us. Unfortunately our "league" in DC is quite dysfunctional and Obama's group is really not that good at defense. On offense they seem to get the puck but then they can't seem to pass it back and forth between the left and right side of the rink and the right side of the team seems to believe that they really belong on the opposition team. But the referees do not blow a whistle even though one team ends up with too many guys on the ice at once.

We're having a terrible time playing the democracy game, but maybe your guys would beat some sense into their new team members.

BTW I have been screeched in a few times. Many thanks for thinking of us in these more southern provinces :>)
 
 
+8 # genierae 2010-10-25 07:27
NickW: There are many Americans who do appreciate Obama, and realize that he must be given the time that he needs to accomplish his goals. However, since the mainstream media is corporate-owned, we don't get the coverage that we deserve. The corporate world wants to destroy Obama, and their Republican shills are doing everything they can to see that he gets no credit for anything. Since they are not bound by human decency, (they don't believe in it), they are free to do any dirty, lowdown thing they can think of. On the other hand, the Dems are the nice guys of politics, and so it is harder for them to retaliate. Their minds don't harbor such hatefulness, and they just don't feel right being mean. Add on to this the ignorance of the majority of voters and you have troubled times. But don't count us out just yet, Americans are capable of moments of greatness, and we are renowned for our can-do attitude. We will get through this and we will be stronger for it. At present, we are a work in progress.
 
 
-6 # john henry 2010-10-26 10:49
Were he mine to give, I would make a present of him to you. As for making the USA a southern veresion of Canada, I think not. For those who want Canadian government, your immigration laws make it easy for them to move to join you. May your multicultural paradise thrive.
 
 
+4 # Amen to All That 2010-10-24 22:06
Exactly - nothing more to be said - racist and anti-intellectual.
 
 
+17 # Charles Hammond 2010-10-24 22:11
Re: dysfunctional society.

The Republicans have filibustered virtually EVERY bill the Dems have wanted to pass. The Dems have had a MAJORITY and time and again, the will of the majority has been frustrated by the Republicans. With a tool that is supposed to be used only in an emergency. And they do it with reckless abandon, consequences (and the will of the majority) be damned.

Fu*k them.
 
 
-6 # john henry 2010-10-26 12:21
Charles H, you are correct; the Dems have a majority and still failed to work with the minority even of their own party. Leaders P, R, and O attempted to push legislation without any input from the Republicans. I am no defender of Rep pols, but the whole idea of govt involves give and take and exchange. Tyranny does not bring agreeable results. How was it put by the POTUS' friend from SEIU? If we cannot use the power of persuasion, we will use the persuasion of power.
Tyranny?
 
 
+15 # ActiveVoice 2010-10-24 22:13
The dysfunctional intersection that exists today between media and politics has everything to do with the American decline so lamented in this column:

The Tea Party is not so much a grassroots movement as it is a media creation -- first dreamed up as a stunt by right-wing media personalities, then reported on so obsessively by the mainstream media that it began to appear legitimate. Magnified each step of the way by the right-wing echo chamber and then rubber-stamped by the mainstream media, it eventually took on a life of its own. Now it's a national force.

In addition to creating the Tea Party, both right-wing and mainstream media called this election for the Republicans long before any valid predictions were even remotely possible. The narrative that it was going to be a bloodbath for Democrats was simply accepted and reported as gospel from the outset, hammered into the public consciousness until it seemed inevitable. And now perhaps it is.
 
 
+9 # Kris Merschrod 2010-10-25 06:50
Nice analysis,AV

The media seems to have a death wish for hope and change - as those poor buggers, too, are headed for downsizing and outsourcing.

If the Republicans manage to overcome the odds and do have a majority in the house, then the dysfunctional Congress will go into full-tilt deadlock. Obama's only option will be to do what he should have done all along - recess appointments to staff and apply the regulations as they exist. Then not waste energy on legislation. At least he then can show what can be done.
 
 
+11 # genierae 2010-10-25 07:41
Active Voice, you are exactly right! You see so clearly the evolution of the Tea Party, it is certainly a creation of the corporate media. They are also trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy with their predictions of gloom and doom for Dems. American progressives have so much going against us, but we can use that to become stronger. We must not give in to despair, with Obama in the White House, we are making headway. We must work to elect Dems, they are the closest to us in their aims. It is also very important to continue to educate the public, and acquaint them with reality. We must endeavor to persevere!
 
 
+8 # ME Browning 2010-10-25 08:27
Totally agree with this analysis. The corporate-owned media deserve a lot of the blame for taking our country down this long, dark road. One-sided coverage of the Tea Party movement makes that gaggle of ignoramuses out to be so much bigger, and thus seemingly more powerful, than they really are. Our 24-hour news cycle, and the fact that the media are now owned by a very few (mostly war-profiteering) corporations, thrives not on getting out the truth but on stoking fear — of Muslims, of terrorist attacks, of government programs that don't line the pockets of private corporations and, yes, even fear of Obama himself. Our country is in the saddest place I've ever seen it in my lifetime. Our collective memories appear to be at the Alzheimer's stage.
 
 
+13 # John Hanlon 2010-10-24 23:57
While denying racism, Jeff Vitner, with breathtaking ageism, contends that Mr Gwynn is too old to have a relevant opinion and liberalism is proof of a diseased mind. One can only wonder what life is like in his universe.

He is, in fact, living proof that the fundamental problem with democracy is that two prejudiced idiots can outvote an unbiased sane person.

Regardless of your politics, you'd have to agree Barak Obama inherited a sick and ailing nation. That he has always asked for a bipartisan approach to rescue the economy and restore the strength of a once great nation should surprise no-one. His belief that the problem is bigger than political divisions was clear from the start.

His main problem is that he's calling for pride in a country strapped by prejudice: of religion, race, politics and so on and so forth.

It's hard to say exactly what state the country is in, but its clearly not united.
 
 
+17 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-25 00:00
Lwr's see now. My two sons moved them and their families to Denmark, my daughter is moving to either England or France shortly, my nephews have moved to Canada. My sister moved to China (imagine that!) and two of my cousins moved to Australia. All have or are about to renounce their citizenship...and here's what they all have said about the United States: "Land of the stupid...a banana republic with a really, really big military and lots and lots of guns floating around." Also, none of them see a future for their children here, all are college educated and none of them plan to come back until maybe open revolt commences against our kleptocrcy. The majority of them have served in the armed services or been Federally employed. None ever missed a chance to vote. All of them gave generously to charities and not one has a criminal record of course. And each of them hate American exceptionalism and cannot stand the lying hyocracy of it. Just maybe they have a point.
 
 
0 # Harold R. Mencher 2010-10-25 06:30
Hi Daniel. I left you two responses under the "BREAKING: NEWS WIKILEAKS...." article under your response to "Unclepueple." I would be interested in your opinion.
 
 
+7 # Claude Steiner 2010-10-25 00:30
It's quite clear where J Vintner stands. Does he really believe that his point of view is made more persuasive by his petty insults? For my part I agree with mr Gwyn and his age makes his views all the more credible. I am a liberal and try to respect peoples differing opinions but Mr. Vintner makes it hard to get past his low-brow attacks. God help us if that's the best we can do!
 
 
+2 # Jeanne Pieper 2010-10-25 00:50
The world is getting more and more Flat!
we need to realize this is inevitable, and get over it! And stop blaming Obama for this. He is just recognizing it, and is helping it along.
 
 
+9 # Byron 2010-10-25 01:29
Conservatism is a protection and glorification of the present moment, and the past. Liberalism scans the present for its defects, and advocates change to improve things, especially for the dispossessed and those who have fallen through the safety net.
 
 
+9 # Brabenec 2010-10-25 02:56
What puzzles me the most is why so many of us vote for and support the issues and politicians that are in direct opposition to our own, personal best interests. Are we as a society that ignorant? Or is there a lot of wishful thinking going on? Do we want to dance with the stars? "I vote like the elite, ergo I am one."
 
 
+7 # genierae 2010-10-25 07:50
Brabenec: I read somewhere that the vast majority of Americans never stray from the politics of their ancestors, and my mother is a great example of that. She has refused all of her life to criticize a Republican, despite the fact that she has never been helped by one. Makes no sense, but that's her family's party and she's sticking to it. The truth is, a vote for a Republican is a vote for the rich elite, therefore a vote against your own best interests. Democrats have always been a party of the people.
 
 
+4 # Ron Fletcher 2010-10-25 03:12
It is no mistake that Obama has a destroyed country to fix. The Repugs of the last administration made sure of it. That being said, the accomplishments of Obama are not great, they are all terrible compromises where none should have been necessary,him being a great leader. He has chosen expedience over substance, which is too bad for all of us.
 
 
+4 # Otto Otowski 2010-10-25 03:38
Richard Nixon psychologically well-balanced? George W. Bush eloquent? Richard Gwyn, what planet have you just stepped off of?
 
 
+4 # Rocket 2010-10-25 08:07
I believe that Mr. Gwynn is implying that none of the mentioned presidents were well-balanced.
 
 
-7 # BBFmail 2010-10-25 03:50
Larry Pinkey's 2008 BlackCommentato r.com article:

Never mind that Barack Obama, contrary to corporate myth, was never in reality a so-called grassroots, political, “community activist,” but was in fact a financially paid, funded, and comfortable opportunist who did not lay his life on the line in any serious manner for disenfranchised people. Moreover, his alleged “volunteer” work in Chicago was anything but the stuff of legend in serving the people, though one would never learn this from his current supporters in the corporate media. Indeed, Barack Obama is himself the beneficiary of the many serious and committed women and men grassroots, political, community activists who went before him, and who often paid for their activism by tortuous jail/prison time and/or death. Serious community activism is no joke and will never be hailed or supported by corporations or the corporate media.
 
 
+6 # JUNE SELEY KIMMEL 2010-10-25 04:08
DAVE W. AND HAL HAVE IT EXACTLY RIGHT. I WOULD ADD THAT WE ARE SO POLARIZED THAT THE RIGHT THINKS THE LEFT ARE A BUNCH OF BABY KILLING WIMPS WHO ARE JEOPARDIZING THEIR NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LEFT SEES THE RIGHT FOR THE GREEDY OSTRICHES OFTEN ARE IN THE TOP 2 % . THE ONES WHO FASCINATE AND FRUSTRATE THE MOST ARE THE MIDDLE AND LOWER MIDDLE WHO CONTINUALLY VOTE AGAINST THEIR OWN SELF INTERESTS BY VOTING REPUBLICAN. THE US HAS A.D.D. THUGS WERE BETTER UNDER BUSH? IT IS INSANE.
 
 
+14 # Missy 2010-10-25 04:27
The sad part is that Obama has attemted to do what is right to save the middle class and surprisingly it is the middle class that has turned against him. instead of being grateful for his efforts they fall for the lying claptrap the Republicans are selling. I hope they wake up before election day or this will be the end of our country as we know it.
 
 
+18 # Pat in Idaho 2010-10-25 04:52
Obama's big win in '08 was such a thrill - I am a white, 77 year old lady, and was so
proud that we had elected a black man, and one so intelligent, etc.etc. - at last! I am so ashamed and disappointed at what is currently happening - the Tea Party, the Koch Brothers, Palin, Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell - the list is long and discouraging! What have we sunk to?
 
 
+13 # ray mcknight md 2010-10-25 04:52
The steady decline of US mental health is evident in its presidents from Reagan to Bush Jr. Bill Moyers noted it years ago " accepting the Global Environmental Citizen Award at Harvard Medical School: "The delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress."
 
 
+6 # genierae 2010-10-25 08:11
Mr. McKnight: That was before Obama. We now have brains back in charge, and that's why Repubs are so incensed. Not only do we have intelligence and compassion in the Oval Office, it resides in a man who happens to be black. He sure makes Republican presidents look bad and they sure are scared.

It should be mentioned that Bill Clinton is also a very intelligent man. Democrats seem to have cornered the market on brains.
 
 
+7 # Jane Gilgun 2010-10-25 05:02
We've always had these radical destructive tendencies in the US. Right now there not enough constructive push-back. We've tried to be value free, and the radical right has come in with their version of values. We've tried to be fair (a value that is not part of the national dialogue) and big money hires people to twist fairness into trampling on freedom. All revolutions begin in the library. We need a national campaign of good ideas, perhaps a national education agenda on the values of the constitution as well as its content.
 
 
+11 # peterjkraus 2010-10-25 05:03
A take on today's America that is spot on. This was easy to see coming: it will take a long, long time for America to overcome the inbred love of stupidity, its hate of "eggheads" and veneration of high school football players, to finally grow up and learn wrong from right.

It's a shame. Obama would be a great President at any time, and without his leadership, we'd now be an officially recognized Third World nation.

Let's see which idiot on the right will be the new messiah to lead us to the new "shining slum on the hill".
 
 
-2 # Myron Draper 2010-10-25 05:17
Weak position and weaker writing. MD/CC
 
 
+4 # Dale O. Wallin 2010-10-25 05:20
It takes faith in your fellow man to trust
in capitalism. U bet, the character of our
Nation, when given to greeed, is exposed!
When the very foundations of our Home
Land have been crumbling, we start to turn
back. Let's pray that we turn all the way,
and rebuild those foundations.
 
 
+6 # Rowland 2010-10-25 05:20
The Dems, once again, were fools not to undo the damaging Bush agenda (like the tax cuts for the wealthiest) and the PATRIOT Act right away upon Obama's arrival. Now, if the media is correct, it's too late. The party of "no" will have won, using the most insidious and negative philosophy in US history. Just say no to the party of no.
 
 
+4 # AML 2010-10-25 05:25
With such fact checking resources such as Factcheck.org and politifact, there are way to get at the truth. Assuming that's what you'd like to get at...
 
 
-9 # Len 2010-10-25 05:26
Obama has not done a thing that he promised. He hoped for bi-partisanship above the needs of the American public. He is, if anything, a tool of the capitalist class and big business.

If anything we should talk more about a parliamentary government and/or outright socialism.

People should rule...not tools of the big business and money.
 
 
+9 # Rowland 2010-10-25 07:26
Len, I don't know how you got to that conclusion. Obama hoped for bi-partisanship and got a resounding No from every republican at every initiative. It was the republicans that put party (and big business) above country and did everything they could to make Barack Obama look bad, so they could get back to putting anti abortion, anti Social Security flacks back in power. Obama's mistake was not nailing Cheney for his serial lies that got us into wars.

Obama has indeed done almost everything he promised.
 
 
-12 # kent 2010-10-25 05:29
Your condition is known as 'ODS' or spelled out it stands for Obama Derangement Syndrome.
 
 
+3 # FRM Sunny Ithaca 2010-10-25 06:59
Clarification please - is ODS suffered by the left or the right?
 
 
+4 # Joan Fistick 2010-10-25 06:01
How about this : no argument that stupidity and racial bias are alive and responsible for the current sorry state of affairs-- here's an alternative view of the teaparty movement: it is a creation of Rove and company that in effect has created an entity which is to the right of mainstream Republicans thereby creating the illusion of a centrist GOP. That might snare a significant section of the non-critical . Anonymity prefered.-JRF
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:52
You hit the NAIL ON THE HEAD.
 
 
+13 # wfalco 2010-10-25 06:17
Obama's race is everything. I am tiring of the argument that we liberals/progressives are always crying about "political correctness." Face up to the truth and admit that the majority of working class and under-educated whites are prejudiced.They are easily swayed by right wing populism that is based on politics of hate and fear. I am offering a generalization but it is based on personal experience.
I reside and work in the real world with both blacks and whites.
One item of political uniqueness I have encountered is the inability of most of the aformentioned whites to even state HIS NAME. Is there anyone else out there who has noticed this phenomenom? They can not even say "President Obama"-what else could it be but too foreign and too black?
 
 
-1 # FRM Sunny Ithaca 2010-10-25 07:03
I had that same problem with "The Shrub." His name just did not grace the title of President of the USA in my mind. I love to hear "President B. Obama" perhaps I'm biased?
 
 
+5 # genierae 2010-10-25 08:22
wfalco: Excellent analysis. I was raised in W.Va., and I truly love that poverty-stricken state, but every white person I knew, whether in my family, or in the community, was racist. It was the kind of racism that was taken for granted, passed down from one generation to the next, without thought. Virulent and endemic, and somehow, by God's grace, I was not affected by it. I grew up with these people, and Jesus was right. "They know not what they do."
 
 
+2 # wfalco 2010-10-25 10:44
I was raised in W.Va., and I truly love that poverty-stricken state, but every white person I knew, whether in my family, or in the community, was racist.

Yep ! I especially like the people who always seem to drawl.."I don't care if someone is red,purple, or blue...if they work hard to improve their lives their OK with me...I don't see color...yada..yada..yada...Yeah right!
 
 
+4 # genierae 2010-10-25 13:57
wfalco: There's a lot more to a state than its people. I grew up in the country, and there's no more beautiful state than W.Va. We spent our childhood running through the woods, fishing in the lake, rock-climbing, and exploring the creeks and fields. We developed a strong bond with nature that survives to this day. My love for W.Va. bears no relation to its people.

The point can be made that though they are racist, at least they are honest about it.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2010-10-25 16:47
I've noticed that the corporate media usually refuse to use the word "President" before the last name of ANY Democrat.

When bush was occupying the White House (see, I can play that game too), the AP and most local newspapers were always referring to him as "The President" in headlines. I have NEVER seen an AP headline with the phrase "President Obama" included.
 
 
+8 # Glen 2010-10-25 06:23
The discord we are witnessing in the U.S. is exactly what was planned for citizens. Had anyone been paying attention they would have noticed the endless discussion through mass media of protests, endless presentation of irresponsible rhetoric coming from the mouths of foolish "candidates" for office, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh stirring it up, and so on. And it worked to divide us all.

This is one aspect of having only a two party system that now allows for no other influence, much less suggestions for how to run a country as big as the U.S. has become. Race does matter due to the populace not quite maturing or getting past long held prejudice. It is that immaturity that accepts without question only two parties. Two parties that are under the control of the wealthy, the military, and corporate giants.

No matter the style of a president, or intelligence, they are all bought and sold, and the beat goes on.
 
 
+2 # Ranger 2010-10-25 06:25
Gentlemen: White voters elected Obama, who is only the latest in a long line of presidents who want to rule the world and do not care how many Americans have to die or be impoverished to do it. Obama is proof that a large portion of America is deluded enough to think that poliitics can solve something other than who will be dinner for the cannibals in Washington DC.
 
 
+8 # genierae 2010-10-25 06:42
This article is so satisfying to someone who is sick and tired of reading negative and dishonest ones about President Obama. I am very honored to have such an extraordinary man as my president, and to see his lovely family in the White House. The night of the election, when it was reported that he had won, we went outside and shouted his name over and over, we were so happy! We found out the next day that our neighbor was going to shoot at our house, but his dad restrained him! Needless to say, we lived in a racist neighborhood.

One of Obama's biggest problems is that he assumes that all Americans are as smart as he is, and will therefore understand him and what he is trying to do. Would that it were true.
 
 
+12 # Ron Moody 2010-10-25 06:42
This just in from H.L. Mencken --

The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth:
-- Henry Louis Mencken: American humorous journalist, 1880-1956

Our current rash of Obamaitis is only an outbreak of a very old affliction to the American character. Time to dust off Mencken and Will Rogers and get back in touch with our collective national inner depravity.
 
 
+1 # mediasavy 2010-10-25 06:47
Here's another way to look at things:

The party of Roosevelt got elected by landslide margins on the edge of the worst economic crisis in 80 years. Obama played on that legacy & MLK's civil rights movement when he asked us to have the 'audacity' to 'hope' for 'change we can believe in.'

Why wouldn't most Americans vote for that on the edge of the new depression? Most did. White folks too.

By doing so, he inherited the hopes and aspirations for Roosevelt-like economic interventionism and MLK's expansion of social, civil and economic rights. Instead, they saved the rich and abandoned everyone in economic trouble during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. He's even siding with the banks against those victimized by mortgage fraud and are losing their homes. Whose side are they on anyway?

They even cut food stamps. Damn..... that's cold.

Can't wait for the budget cuts...
 
 
0 # stanley r. 2010-10-25 18:34
Haven't you heard? Even though he continually sides with Republicans he's secretly a communist. I don't think they'd hate him any more if he really did what he promised.
 
 
-4 # Harold R. Mencher 2010-10-25 06:54
I wholly disagree with Richard Gwyn. Obama's failure to do the right thing for the common man in this country & to carry out the promise of real change made when he was candidate Obama, has absolutely nothing to do with him being black.

If Obama is truly how she describes him to be, tough, shrewd, unsentimental, & ruthless, then that just makes him look much worse, not better, in the eyes of his voting base. It simply means that what he did or didn't do as pres during his 1st term was controlled & calculating.

It means that when Obama selected all of the wrong members for his cabinet, reflecting no change at all, when people complained about it, & his response was that he was the decider, just like Bush, that he knowingly lied to & deceived his voting base.

It means that his seeming lack of leadership to pass strong & robust Bills thru Congress, as everyone was hoping the healthcare reform & the financial reform Bills would be, was simply an act.
 
 
+1 # Paul Foreman 2010-10-25 07:02
Rahm Emanuel sabotaged the healthcare plan now known widely as "Obamacare". Summers and Geithner propped up Wall Street on the backs of Main Street as well as any Republican would have; now Obama has jettisoned two thirds of these "top advisers". At least a year too late; not smart in my book. Very insular, still in Chicagoan "ward politics".
 
 
0 # Glen 2010-10-25 07:29
Are you certain, Paul, that these top advisors were "jettisoned"? Obama knew exactly who these people were from the very beginning. No serious politician is stupid. Most know exactly what they are doing, and why. They are doing what they have been told to do.

Karl Rove could give you some insight into that.
 
 
0 # Bry 2010-10-25 07:12
I voted for Obama. I can go on forever here but I will sum it up to this issue at hand right now...Obama who came from a single mother, who made his political bones on the suffering south side of Chicago... who promised in his campaign to help homeowners save their homes even if it took a moratorium.Instead he gave billions to the banks who said they would work with homeowners via HAMP an never did and now he stands against a foreclosure moratorium when employees of the banks are outing them as frauds and criminals who screwed homeowoners and investers alike. Why is Obama NOT standing for a foreclosure moratorium right now and standing against it, thus once again, standing against Main St and WITH Wall St criminals who've been given our taxpayers dollars? He has not integrity and no heart and if you want to see him realistically you can see what he is and is not based on this issue alone,let alone the promises and issues he's not come even close to staying true to.
 
 
+5 # MJ 2010-10-25 07:18
Simply put: The reality of "United we stand, divided we fall" is about to be realized. The Palins, Becks, Pauls, and Limbaughs are leading many good people down the preverbial road to perdition. The world is watching and waiting for our demise. Obama does not need defending; we need to support him and work together before it's too late.
 
 
-10 # charles mcgee 2010-10-25 07:33
Barack H. Obama has one problem: He is an Indonesian Islamic. Jesse Jackson and Oprah Winfrey are Blacks with whom I identify. I am in no way associated with Obama. I think far more of Snoop Dogg than Obama. Why would I waste time on Obama? I was born Black in Oklahoma America, a cultural anomaly.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:41
You have one problem charlie: You're listening to glenn beck too much. Your accusations have been proven to be lies, but that doesn't matter much to you, does it? As long as perpetuating the lie confuses other morons you've done your part, right?
 
 
+7 # Diane 2010-10-25 07:43
Obama is bi-racial-black father, white mother.Since he is half black,how can he be too black and yet still be black? It invalidates both sides of his family.
 
 
-6 # john henry 2010-10-26 11:01
Perhaps we could start a President Obama is too Damn White Party.
When the Pelosi hits the fan in the 2012 election, he could be the candidate of choice of the Democratic Party, the President Obama is too Damn Black Party and our President Obama is too Damn White Party.

It's win win, win.
 
 
+5 # Elizabeth Butler, SC 2010-10-25 08:23
Somewhat similar to Pat from Ohio, but I am a 78-year-old naturalized American citizen.
Election 2008 was the pinnacle of American prowess in choosing a man of extraordinary gifts despite the ribald racism that ridiculed him.
Our American citizenry has fallen asleep. Middle-class folks work hard raising their families and meeting their church obligations, but take minimal action on matters of urgency and emergency.What has happened to Young America in these past two years?
Disappointed,
Elizabeth Butler, SCNY
Wake up, America!
 
 
-9 # beverly Martens 2010-10-25 08:42
From the 'Blame America First Crowd' who can't admit that the emperor has no clothes.
 
 
+9 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:36
beverly,

Isn't that EXACTLY what your crowd was doing when baby bush was hovering around a 22% approval rating?

People like you "BLAMED AMERICA FIRST" for having too many freedoms after 9/11 before baby bush began dismantling as many of them as he could get his paws on.

People like you "love America", but HATE EVERYTHING IT STANDS FOR AND THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF IT'S PEOPLE.

Spare us the patriotism lecture HYPOCRITE.
 
 
+4 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 03:43
Quoting
From the 'Blame America First Crowd' who can't admit that the emperor has no clothes.

Oh, and I suppose that Bush's nakedness (not to mention naked stupidity) was not abundanty obvious to you? As for being in the "Blame America First Crowd"...you would say I am one of those simply because I blame Republican's first which I do. Republicans think they are the only Americans that count and come up with things like that label.
 
 
+6 # James Cremin 2010-10-25 08:48
The USA is very racist. As a 75 year old white male with 14 mixed race children, I experience it. In Oklahoma, where I live, all 77 counties went for McCain. If Obama was a white person, he might get some support, but the corporations would still fight him along with the party of "NO".
 
 
+4 # rob 2010-10-25 09:19
"Obama's problem resides in America. It's become a near-dysfunctional society."
BS
1st, granted America has become quite dysfunctional, but Obama's "problem" lies between Obama the campaigner and Obama the politician! Obama the campaigner railed against the wars, against spying on Americans, torture and rendition, banksters, insurance companies, etc. Obama the politician has taken actions Opposite his campaign rhetoric. He expanded the wars, continued the spying, the torture, and the renditions, and given banks and insurance companies trillions in tax dollars, and will force Americans to pay for crappy insurance that they can't afford, and that the insurance companies will try to fight every claim made!! And, he packed his cabinet with the same criminal insiders that created all our problems in the 1st place!!
That is where Obama's real problem lies, between what he talks and what he walks!! He's just another corporate lackey, like his predecessors!!
 
 
+2 # JDMCN 2010-10-25 09:46
Spoken like a true Canadian.
 
 
-5 # old dog 2010-10-25 09:56
is that all you have is race card how about taking ownership of his own failed policy,s quit blaming bush the simulus failed for bush it will fail for oboma
 
 
+5 # mark 2010-10-25 22:43
'Oboma' simply hasn't done enough stimulating. And of course race is of issue here. You recall what was said of his 'deep-seated hatred of white people'? Seems plenty of folks eat that junk up. No racism here, it's over there! Thanks, Glen!
 
 
+7 # SchoonerScotty 2010-10-25 10:08
A large number of Americans do not have any issue with Obama's race. Remember, it was the predominately white farmers from Nebraska who voted for him in the initial primaries! While many of us perceive him to be an extremely intelligent person, my sense, and the sense of many of my black friends, is that perhaps due to his Jungian personality type, he may be too oriented to trying to be the "peacemaker" and have a strong, idealism to work across the aisle with the Republicans, in the hope that true bipartisan support could really improve our nation.

The truth is, he should have told the Republicans, "Look, this is where we are going, with or without you!" and done it! Now we are in serious trouble since the Republicans are back to lies, distortions and over simplification of issues and solutions to trick those less informed to vote for them from the middle class. They use FEAR!

As Rob mentions, Obama needs to back up his rhetoric with specific action to support it! The new financial laws will lack any real teeth, due to the panders (lobbyists) so we will be back to a depression again. What about the war?
With tax cuts, who will pay for services?
 
 
+9 # PWarren 2010-10-25 10:16
This is indeed mostly a "Christian" nation, so stop and think. These people have been taught from the cradle, that ignorance is innocence. And ONLY innocence will take them to their heaven. They (like my mother) believe this with their whole heart. So whatever their authority tells them, they take as absolute truth. Anything that disturbs this mind set, terrifies them, and there are still a lot of them around. It is to this group that the Palins, Becks etc, speak in code to. So to them Armageddon is just around the corner and damnation to anyone who tries to hold it off.
At least that is my theory, and I live in one of the largest nests of them (Utah). Mother is 96 as I write this, pays tithing out of her SS and will take this belief to her grave. She is not alone.
 
 
+1 # rima 2010-10-25 10:16
Wait a minute. Wasn't he black when we elected him?

The problem is that we euphorically expected a transformationa l figure, and unfortunately he is a politician like the rest of them.
 
 
+4 # Europe calling... 2010-10-25 22:53
I just wonder why the so called "white" people reject their own blood and culture, the 50% of white blood of Obama and the fact that 100% white people have raised him up in supposedly 100% white values.
As an adult informed citizen he has later chosen to make abstraction of the skin colour and just be a HUMAN BEING (who once visited Africa as a tourist, you know what "tourist" means don't you?).

If someone of you ever visited Africa, you would understand what being bleck means. It is a totally different concept, and something the black people themselves are very proud of.
 
 
-11 # witz 2010-10-25 11:55
The life long secretive dreams of the Elite liberals. "If we could somehow just eliminate the majority of those who are not as intelligent, have the reasoning power and can see the way things should be, we could save the world".

Only we, the Intelligent Elitists of the Left, know what is best for the masses! Only if........
 
 
+7 # mark 2010-10-25 22:54
Same old 'elitist' talking point hooey. The supposedly 'anti-elitist' elites of the right have their own set of plans for the masses. No thanks.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 07:16
The great thing about people like "witz" re-using Gingrich's manufactured talking points from the '90s is that they're so tired and old that we've all had plenty of practice pointing out their stupidity.

The accusation, "elitist" always seems to come from the same ACTUAL ELITISTS who insist that people making over $250,000 per year are paying too much in taxes.

The fact that "witz" thinks we're stupid enough to fall for the "elitist" insult coming from the right, is further proof of the right's ACTUAL elitism.
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 03:50
Quoting
The life long secretive dreams of the Elite liberals. "If we could somehow just eliminate the majority of those who are not as intelligent, have the reasoning power and can see the way things should be, we could save the world".

Only we, the Intelligent Elitists of the Left, know what is best for the masses! Only if........

You're obviously uncomfortable about the fact that some conservatives, as I once was, grow up at last to become liberals. You interpret that reality in a way that simply demonstrates that you have some serious issues. Ever considerd therapy? Really.
 
 
+6 # fredboy 2010-10-25 12:03
Amen.
And he's quite courageous also, knowing full well that millions of frightened, bitter white racists despise him.
Yes, in all honesty he is too good for the present-day America, a nation fractured, gutted, and splintered by industries of hatred, ignorance, and fear.
 
 
-6 # Douglas 2010-10-25 14:47
LOLOLOLOLOL Oh wait, you were serious. LOLOLOLOLOL

Pardon me. I am just one of those unsophisticated Americans.

Smart. If he was so smart. Show me the school records. and shut people such as myself up.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:51
Actually, President Obama was the President of the Harvard Law Review and:

He not only got a degree from HARVARD LAW, but

GRADUATED MAGNA CUM LAUDE!

In idiot talk, that translates to: he's A LOT smarter than you.

Don't take it up with me. Take it up with Harvard.

For the record, baby bush not only DIDN'T graduate Magna Cum Laude, but only got in because he was a legacy applicant back in the 60s when that mattered, after going A.W.O.L. from the national guard and after NOT BEING ACCEPTED to the University of Texas business school.

I kept up my end of the bargain (to prove you wrong). Do you promise to keep up your end (to shut yourself up)?
 
 
-8 # DW 2010-10-26 10:17
How do you know he's smart? How do you know who he's smarter than? The only thing you know is that he has a diploma from a school. What-the-hell does that have to do with intelligence? You compare "your guy" to the "other guy" and end up proving your ignorance by validating a corrupt and degenerate duopoly posing as an actual political system. But don't fret, you can still gloat over how clever you were in supporting the "smarter than you" guy. Meanwhile, the political wheel continues to turn and tools like you continue to cheer for your team....and nothing changes. How many times do we have to go through this crap before realizing who's the dupe here?
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 11:52
You're right DW. There are no teams here. Just a giant squishy middle that's neither here nor there. There are no differences between left and right, right? There's really no point in voting, right. If the right wins, we lose social security and public schools and get more no-bid contracts for Haliburton. If the left wins the opposite happens, but hey, you're right. Both philosophies are virtually identical! Left! Right! Left! Right! It's all so confusing! Just give me someone who gives me everything I want without angering anyone else!

First, the argument was that President Obama wasn't as intelligent as people seem to think, and if he was, show us the proof.

The proof was given, to the best of Earthly ability (I'm not God but I'm pretty sure Harvard is a pretty good judge of intelligence).

Now suddenly, the argument is, "Oh well, intelligence is not really something that can be measured by any objective criteria anyway.

Maybe intelligence is the ability to change intellectual strategies in the middle of an argument. If so, YOU'RE A GENIUS.
 
 
+5 # Phil Bateman 2010-10-25 20:42
Try listening to yourself. If that doesn't shut you up, nothing will.
 
 
0 # Sukumar 2010-10-25 14:55
While I fully agree with the characterizatio n of America having become a near-dysfunctional society, I'm tired of media pundits repeating the conventional wisdom that Obama is so smart (and that Bush was so dumb). Bush was smart enough to fool the majority of the country for years, get re-elected and get Congress to do his every bidding. For all of Obama's supposed smartness, he has been continuing some of the worst of Bush's policies - and defending even those that he claims not to support. He can not get his own democrats to follow him and spends much of his time attacking his base and pandering to some hypothetical moderate republican. That he is still following Geithner seems to indicate that he is no judge of people and lacks either the wisdom or the guts to take real action on the economy. If this is what smart gets us, is it any wonder that a large fraction of the electorate seems to prefer dumb?
 
 
-11 # rrjenn 2010-10-25 14:58
This article is just so much BS it's hard to know where to start. You say his lack of popularity is due to him being black? We voted in a black man who we thought was going to fix the problems from within, instead we got a communist that is trying to destroy freedom long cherished here in America. Canadians, we know you love your socialism, but stay the heck out of American politics cause you are all dense as bricks.
 
 
+10 # mark 2010-10-25 23:01
Communist? he's a friggin moderate, a politician trying to survive an absolute stonewall from the right, who's only agenda is to see him fail, because as far as their talking points go, he was a kenyan communist nazi before he was born, and probably doesn't have the papers to prove that he wasn't created in a test tube by liberal space aliens.
 
 
-4 # Realist 2010-10-25 15:06
It is not a matter of Barrack Obama being smart or black or pink or orange. It is a matter that HE DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO LEAD. He thinks by wanting something done it will happen, He compromised on a ridiculous healthcare bill because he doesn't know how to button-hole congresspeople, feed them breakfast, cajole them-that's how a good president gets congress to act on his behalf. Intelligent, yes, great thinker, probably, great orator, definitely, leader no, no, no. If he figures this out and starts pushing for his programs, and working with congress to get them behind him, he will be a great president, but as long as he is pussy-footing we will continue going down the drain.
 
 
-11 # DAR 2010-10-25 15:39
LOL is right! I feel as though I've stumbled into a Victorian parlor simply stuffed full o' snobby "intellectual" elites feverishly rubbing the patches off each other's elbows whilst sipping trendy herbal tea! Too funny, these self-absorbed, self-conscious, religiously spell-checked meanderings of the faux Mensa crowd.

Thanks for the laughs, suckers! BTW, yer emperor's nekkid as a jaybird.
 
 
+9 # billy bob 2010-10-25 18:00
DAR,

You're right. You ARE out of place.

By the way, OUR PRESIDENT will still be in office after November. Who do you think will beat him in 2012?

I don't think we have to worry about Palin or Huckabee fooling anyone into thinking they belong to Mensa.

But you're right, the Presidency of the United States of America is best left to full-blown idiots who make President (get over it) Obama look like the most popular President (get over it) since President Washington.

BTW, what's palin's current approval rating?

BTW, yer empress is stupid as a dodo bird.
 
 
+8 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:16
Ok. I agree that the undercurrent of racism against President Obama is out of control, but it is just an undercurrent. It is the REAL reason The President is so hated by some of the TEA-HUGGERS...

BUT,

Here's an observation for ya:

President Obama - DANGEROUS because he may be a Muslim and he may not even be an American and he may secretly want to impoverish the U.S. so it will look more like Africa and he may be a fascist-communist-terrorist-pirate-Limberg baby kidnapper.

President Clinton - DANGEROUS because he's secretly a hippy trying to dismantle the military and create a socialist state and he hates America and he represents the loose morals of the 60s and hates the American family.

President Carter - DANGEROUS because he's a simple peanut farmer who doesn't really know what he's doing and wants to dismantle the military.

President Johnson - DANGEROUS because he's trying to turn America into another Soviet state through socialistic programs and wants to cause the decline of the white race through the voting rights act.

cont.
 
 
+6 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:17
cont.

President Kennedy - DANGEROUS because he's a papist and will be taking marching orders directly from Rome and he's too weak and naive to stand up to the Ruskies.

President Truman - DANGEROUS because he refuses to drop the bomb on China and is unwilling to take orders from an American general.

President Roosevelt - DANGEROUS because he wants to remove people's incentive to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work for a living reducing our once great country to godless communism and his wife is ugly and secretly calls all the shots and he secretly wants us to get involved in European wars while we have enough of our own problems to deal with, mostly caused by people like him who refuse to make people work for a living.

Are ANY of you seeing a pattern here? "johnny henry"? If you think this is really about skin color, just ask any tea-hugger what he thinks of President Kennedy or President Roosevelt. Believe me, you'll get an ear-full and don't be surprised if you hear it slip out that they think Kennedy's assasination was a GOOD THING.

cont.
 
 
+7 # billy bob 2010-10-25 17:20
cont.

If you honestly believe there's ANY Democrat who could be currently occupying the White House without going through this from the right, you must be aware of a MAGICAL candidate from a land of peppermint raindrops and lollypop tree tops. The right ALREADY thinks President Obama has magical powers to have even gotten himself elected. I think they refer to him as the "magical negro".

They hate his race. They hate his name. BUT, MOST OF ALL, they hate the fact that he's a Democrat and that he won!

Is it still ok for me to think he was the most qualified candidate we have available, BUT that it's too bad he's either too conservative to represent the people who wanted "change", or that he's too spineless and weak to actually stand up and fight for the people who elected him?

You see, the biggest threat to Democratic Presidents is NEVER right-wing hatred (Roosevelt said he "welcomed it").

It's apathy from disappointed potentially Democratic voters who elected them to FIGHT.
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-26 03:58
Wonderful analysis billy bob! And your concluding comments are simply priceless. Now if johnny will now just jump in!
 
 
-4 # john henry 2010-10-26 11:20
Daniel, are you still here. I rather thought you would have gone to visit family in exotic lands by now. Billy Bob set up a line of straw men and congratulated himself for knocking them down mostly with derision and name-calling. Meanwhile since 2007 America has increased its debt by $5 trillion+.
Companies now find they cannot keep employees on private health insurance. Violence on the southern border is spilling over. Terrorists cross the border in unknown numbers from unknown places. The Democratic Party is in meltdown. Republicans are faced with reform within or face extinction. Sports fan mentality reigns in the decision process to choose leaders. Literacy is in decline. Joblessness grows. No one audits the Fed. The book keeping methods of the US govt would, if practiced by a businessman, land him in jail. Billy bob still prefers the terms, idiot, hate, race, stupid, and tea huggers to measured, supported discussion.

Everything is normal in the neighborhood.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:57
Who was the last Democratic President you have respect for johnny, and why?

Who was the last President who balanced our budget?

Were you paying attention to the national debt in the years between 2001 and 2009 while bush was in office?

Have you noticed that the right wing is capable of name calling? Or is that the right's exclusive prerogative?

Again, could you be more specific? What did I say that you specifically disagreed with and why?
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 15:28
Billy bob, so many questions, so little time.
Since you asked, Grover Cleveland was the last president who took seriously his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and who did not seek to expand presidential power.

Presidents do not have the power of the purse; Congress does. The last time we balanced the budget and paid off the debt was 1835 under Andrew Jackson’s presidency. We have not been debt free since. And, yes, bb, under Newt and a Republican congress during the Clinton Presidency the balanced budget amendment passed the house and failed by one vote to pass the Senate. Bush spending has been a disaster. His family share the same globalization vision that possesses the Dems these days. And yes, all kinds of ill mannered people call names and wheedle and dishonor themselves publicly with extraordinary frequency. Does that excuse ill manners? You answer that one.
With which of your statements do I disagree. Well, bb, I am hard pressed to find total agreement with any of them since they are all or almost all sullied with anger and emotional baggage. Address an issue and let us see how we differ or agree.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 18:05
1835 was the ONLY year in U.S. HISTORY we were out of debt. Yet when President Clinton produced a budget surpluss (for the first time since before WWII), the right was saying we needn't be so concerned with balancing it.

You're right, presidents don't have the power of the purse.

THEY WRITE BUDGETS.

Congress either passes them or rejects them. repugs shut down the government because President Clinton wanted to raise taxes on the rich, to help balance the budget. I don't recall the repug congress rejecting baby bush's budget for his first 6 years in office. Do you think bush's debt didn't begin until that time?

As soon as bush took office his team immediately went on the talk show circuit and faux "news" to tell us that "a little debt" was not a bad thing. Several trillion dollars later, here we are.

So, Grover Cleveland is the last Democrat who you think was "worthy" to hold office after having won an American election. I think that says more about your insults to the current President than anything else.
 
 
-4 # john henry 2010-10-26 19:45
bb, if you cannot follow the conversation, I will not continue. You misunderstood everything I wrote.
Goodbye.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:33
Woo Hoo!!!

Is that a promise?
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 18:06
Apparently, bush and his cronies DIDN'T seek to expand Presidential power? Google BUSH UNITARY EXECUTIVE. Apparently, you are too young to remember 8 of the last 10 years.

You're right on one point johnny. I am angry. If people like you can be filled with as much anger as you obviously are, why not the rest of us?

Is that another one of your exclusive rights, like the one about hurling insults?
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 13:34
How do you reconcile making the comment that I only knock down people like you with derision and name-calling after referring to the President of the United States as "B.O." Here are two other insults I read of yours to people you disagree with just from this thread alone:

"people of no faith in God and a narrow vision of mankind's ability to thrive in liberty"

"Tolkein's orks"

Pretty harsh words from someone who suddenly acts like he wants to restore civility to the debate.

I'm sorry that you made a straw man out of yourself and I'm sorry if you're offended by the idea of me using your own words against you.
 
 
-7 # john henry 2010-10-26 15:32
billy bob,

BO for president. you may call me JH and I will not be offended.
""people of no faith in God and a narrow vision of mankind's ability to thrive in liberty"

"Tolkein's orks"

Little space for words requires brevity. Some realities are harsh. Is ist an insult to recognize that some are godless and of narrow vision? Have you never observed orkish behavior. Tolkein had that behavior before his mind's eye as he wrote his classic.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 17:40
Is it an insult for me to note that some people are hate-filled, arrogant, hypocritical, or ignorant?

I have a feeling you don't call the President of the United States "B.O." because it's an abbreviation. I didn't just call bush a chimp because he looked like one either. You don't know what's in the hearts of other people so the idea that you can ascribe values like godlessness to the people you disagree with is narrow, shallow and derisive.

Have I observed "orkish" behavior? ABSOLUTELY. I'm engaged in a conversation with someone who, on the one, hand sees it in his enemies, and on the other, defends it when it's useful to his own cause.

What about "when the Pelosi hits the fan"? What word in that phrase did you replace with the name of the Speaker of the House?

Some realities are harsh. One of them happens to be that you're a pompous hypocrite.
 
 
0 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 17:31
So nice to know that everything is fine in the neighborhood. So you picked up on the fact that my family is presently (always was) well traveled! We've all lived for some spans of years somewhere. It's good for some kind of perspective I suppose.
And yep, everything still normal in the neighborhood. Ya' haven't changed a bit! Hope you read my earlier post on respect!
 
 
+6 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 08:14
billy bob, Helluva job! And a lot of typing to boot. I believe we are in a state of evolutionary digression and painting pictures on the walls for the art challenged will do nothing except infuriate them. This is why the constant attacks on "intellectualism " and the reason Texas and Kansas and who knows where else are trying to re-write history to fit their dim-witted ideologies. Ain't gonna be nothin' but war, from within, from here on out.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:36
DaveW.,

Ever heard of the phrase, "kicking and screaming"? That's what the right will continue doing as it's dragged into the 21st Century. Right now, it's still having a hard time coping with the 20th even though it wielded nearly absolute power for last half of that century.

Think LONG TERM. Think like a left-wing Rove. If he was one of us he'd tell us to always be looking ahead and thinking of LONG TERM strategy. It's NEVER really just about ONE election, and this won't be the last one to occur. The world really won't end in 2012.

But, here's something right-wingers know instinctively, that most lefties don't: In 2012 the country will slip just a little bit further left. In 2014, a little bit more, etc. There's nothing to do to stop the flow. It's a LONG TERM demographic shift, and it won't stop even if the right-wing closes our boarders completely. Within the next 15 years Texas could go DEMOCRATIC. Imagine the implications to the right.

cont.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:42
cont.

Through this lense, EVERYTHING they do makes PERFECT SENSE. They're trying to get their last few licks in before many of their ideas go the way of the dinosaurs permanently. Frankly, I think most of them are surprised they held on to as much power as they have for as long as they have. baby bush's tenure was an anomaly.

Here's the mistake the left is committing in my own opinion: The right keeps winning despite the demographic reality because they have a strategy of being BOLD (to the point of abrasiveness) about they're philosophy. They KNOW that the middle is really not paying attention and will always side with whoever it thinks is more fired up. Many in the middle think the more passionate you are, the more you actually believe what you're saying. If you seem sincere and your opponent doesn't, people in the middle will vote for you, even if your sincerity is just good acting and your opponent’s timidness is just because he's a wuss. The facts don't matter. Impressions are EVERYTHING.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:43
By compromising with the right, the left just looks like someone who doesn't really believe in ANYTHING. By shutting down the government and throwing a toddler's conniption, the right appears to have more convictions. This is how a brazzen loon like Sharon Angle can be ahead of a pathological wuss like Harry Reid.

My point is that, if the left wants to actually take advantage of some of that demographic energy, they'll have to start talking about LONG TERM values that will last for decades to come, and they can't be stuff like, "looking out for the little guy". The left will have to start complaining about things that are currently taken for granted and TAKE BOLD OFTEN UNPOPULAR STANCES. The right didn't just start wanting to dismantle Social Security. It's been in the works for 65 years. They were crazy when they first thought about it, but they're insanity is now part of the national debate and the left is forced against the ropes, trying to defend the most popular government program in U.S. history.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:43
cont.

In other words, NOW IS THE TIME to discuss things like:

-ELECTRIC CARS.
-A COMPLETELY SOLAR AND WIND POWERED ENERGY GRID.
-MAKING COLLEGE TUITION FREE AND FORGIVING OLD COLLEGE DEBT.
-MAKING HEALTH CARE SINGLE PAYER.
-FORCING COMPANIES THAT MOVE JOBS OUT OF THE U.S. TO PAY A HEAVY TAX PENALTY.
-NOT JUST RESTORING, BUT RAISING TAXES ON THE RICH.
-CUTTING DEFENSE SPENDING DRASTICALLY.
-RE-EVALUATING THE C.I.A. AND F.B.I.

These are stances the Democratic Party won't make unless they become OVERWHELMINGLY popular, but they won't become popular at all unless a politician is willing to MAKE THE CASE.

I promise not to comment on this thread any more! It just struck a nerve with me and brought out the strongest political pet-peeve I have, namely that the "left" is currently being represented by moderate/conservatives, the "center", by hard-right conservatives, and the "right" by extreme loons.

My apologies for my long-windedness.
 
 
+5 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 16:46
billy bob, Don't apologize my friend! We both got long winded on this one for a good reason.It's "our" country too and it's going down a corporate owned shit hole. It's a Social Darwinist ideology promoted by the wealthy and consumed like cherry flavored cough syrup by a cadre of angry (cause the days of total white supremacy are over) middle aged and older, white entitlement users who can't seem to get it through their heads that they are simply tools to be discarded at a later date. It's hard to watch and say nothing if you are a person who cares about not only our country but the world and the things (both flora and fauna) that live upon it. So this is my last warning! lol No more apologizing!
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-26 18:13
Well, I'm obviously a hypocrite anyway, since I've spent the last half hour responding to johnny boy.
 
 
+5 # Gere 2010-10-25 17:32
MJ, I think "simply put" should also include the FACT that the Tea Party activists you mentioned may be listed in history along with the very worst of scoundrels. Those Wall Street lackeys have been very successful delivering lies to discredit Mr. Obama. They have also tarred the world’s mainstream climate scientists. Yes MJ, we do need to support President Obama and yes I agree 100% with your message that we do need to work together before it's too late. We must help him lead humanity’s march away from the cliff of irreversible climate change. He is uniquely very intelligent (possibly more than any past US president). I know he understands the message being delivered by the world’s mainstream climate scientists calling for the replacement of fossil carbon energy dependency. In the meantime, I am leading a small group myself as we learn how to build sustainable Climate Arks for all our children either way it goes.
 
 
0 # genierae 2010-10-26 08:15
Mr. Gere, is your first name Richard by any chance?
 
 
+2 # stanley r. 2010-10-25 18:14
I noticed that about 50 comments down there's suddenly a wave of about eight short lame comments from right wing nuts. Where were the eight of you yesterday? Almost no comments then all of the sudden every other one?
 
 
+5 # Europe calling... 2010-10-25 22:40
Hello all dear American intellectuals. I see your country in decline since loooong time. Every now and then a democrat president comes to put things in order and then a Republican president comes to spread the riches of the country to Republican electrorate and rich opinion leaders and oil industry and create an undescriptible mess.

Yes, USA looks SPOILED, and maybe for good?

I wish to WELCOME all US intelects tired of this all to Europe where we still believe in true societal development, true democracy, the benefits of sharing of the wealth and the value of human being.

Leave US to the Tea party. They will be that big (and very stupid) guy in the crowd of the modern world. We others will take him as a senile big brother that sometimes needs attention (we will know how to deal with him), but is truly toothless with no moral power left.

WELCOME, US intellectuals, the rest of the world is waiting for your kind!
 
 
+3 # DaveW. 2010-10-26 08:17
Europe, I'd love to take you up on the kind offer. Perhaps, with some luck, I will someday. And the sooner the better.
 
 
0 # Stanley M 2010-10-26 00:54
I love how people from lilly white canada criticize the US for racism. Especially after electing a black president and handing him a supermajority in both houses of congress. Face it, Obamas failings have nothing to do with race and everything to do with him perpetuating the status quo. Including continuing to hand bucketfulls of cash to his banker friends.
 
 
-4 # ConcernedJ 2010-10-26 02:43
It takes a good deal of intelligence and more importantly humility, to be in charge. Author: here is your fundamental problem. He is supposed to be working for the people. Although, I assume that your political bent is that we are all too stupid to make decisions and therefore need to defer to the Anointed One. By the way, if white people are afraid because he is black, we would never have helped to elect him in the first place. Afraid... my left foot.
 
 
+6 # billy bob 2010-10-26 07:02
The irony here is that baby bush himself (our last Anointed One - LITERALLY by the Supreme Court), thought President Obama's life was so much in danger while he was still a candidate that he suggested Obama be the first candidate in HISTORY to make use of the Secret Service BEFORE even being elected!

It was a good idea too, since he received literally HUNDREDS of death threats almost instantly, as soon as he announced his candidacy.

So, ONCE AGAIN, the white people who elected him aren't the ones afraid of his race. If you don't think the white people attacking him are atleast a little bit racially motivated, then I'd suggest you get out of ethnic diversity land and start talking to a few people in lilly white Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, etc. I know rural white America EXTREMELY well and find it hillarious that ANYONE WOULD EVEN DOUBT the level of racism there.

If you aren't aware of the level of racial hatred you either:

a. have never been to rural white America, or
b. are in denial, or
c. live in a cave in Afghanistan, or
d. all of the above.
 
 
+2 # genierae 2010-10-26 08:28
ConcernedJ: I agree with your first sentence, humility is essential for being a good leader. However, the majority of white voters did NOT vote for President Obama, he was elected because he got the minority vote. He is a transitional president because he was elected without a white majority. America is changing, and white Americans must share this country with people of other races. This is exactly why they are so frightened of Obama, he is a harbinger of whats to come.
 
 
-8 # Shaun 2010-10-26 05:24
This is a comedic satire right?

LOL

We really are in a time of third-rate writers. This guy probably never read a journal in his or her life.

I would suggest goig back to school (In america) and learn a little about your language. You are 4th rate.
Chump.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-26 06:49
Shaun,

Could be a little more specific? Give us some examples that prove you actually read the article?
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 07:22
By the way Shaun,

Another right winger on this thread pointed out that us liberals are too interested in spell-checking, but it's interesting that it's the righties who keep pointing out everyone else's lack of language skills:

"america" is usually capitalized by true patriots that love our country.

"goig back to school"? Do I need to point it out?

The point isn't who can spell better. Obviously, I make mistakes as well. I'm just pointing out the arrogant stupidity of questioning the English skills of others in a misspelled rant.
 
 
+5 # genierae 2010-10-26 08:30
Attacking the messenger doesn't make the truth go away, Shaun. Open up your mind and look at things in a new way.
 
 
-10 # john henry 2010-10-26 12:35
A Guy goes into a bar, there's a robot bartender.

The robot says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini."
The robot brings back the best martini ever and says to the man,
"What's your IQ?"
The guy says, "168."
The robot then proceeds to talk about physics,
space exploration and medical technology.
The guy leaves, but he is curious...
So he goes back into the bar.
The robot bartender says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini."
Again, the robot makes a great martini gives it to the man and says,
"What's your IQ?"
The guy says, "100."
The robot then starts to talk about Nascar, Budweiser and John Deere tractors.
The guy leaves, but finds it very interesting,
so he thinks he will try it one more time.
He goes back into the bar.
The robot says, "What will you have?"
The guy says, "Martini," and the robot brings him another great martini.
The robot then says, "What's your IQ?"
The guy says, "Uh, about 60."
The robot leans in real close and says,
"So, you people still happy you voted for Obama?"
 
 
-5 # john henry 2010-10-26 15:35
This is a warmed over Bush joke.

Lighten up.
 
 
+2 # genierae 2010-10-27 05:44
John Henry: "Lighten up", is what my brother used to tell me. He did this in order to avoid facing facts, I think that you may be doing the same thing. There is no more serious time than the one we are presently living through. Our country is on the verge of collapse, and half the population want to continue the policies of the Bush administration, the very ones that got us into this mess. I am held hostage to the tyranny of the majority, and because of their willful ignorance, my world is being threatened, my grandchildren may have to grow up in an environmental hell. I would be the first to admit that Democrats are not perfect, but they are a damn sight better than the Republicans who want to take away every government program that contributes to the common good, while at the same time, reward corporations for outsourcing our jobs overseas. Do you really think that Republicans care about the common good? Are you a rich man, John Henry? If not, than why are you supporting the party of the rich by your attacks on Obama and the Democrats? The day that the common good of the American people becomes the top priority of this country, then I will "Lighten up".
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 11:20
It's also pretty comical to read the phrase, "lighten up" from johnny boy.

He's the one who keeps lecturing us on our morality and civility, when he's not hurling insults himself.

He's also the one who's concerned that the values shared by most of the people on this thread (and most of the people in this country) are going to take away our liberties (even though he's no fan of our liberties), make our milk sour, turn our daughters into illegal aliens from Mars, and our sons into lesbians.
 
 
+1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 18:45
Quoting
This is a warmed over Bush joke.

Lighten up.

Warmed over Bush joke? Try ice cold and not funny, wot?
 
 
+3 # Foxtrottango 2010-10-26 07:11
It could be that after eight years of greed, wars, uncertainty life styles generated by a conservative Congress and a unconcerned Administration for it's people, America became dislusional and began to believe it could never become great again. The coming of Obama gave the nation hope only to see it disintregate by the hatred and racism simmering in the halls of Congress and in the bible belt for decades.

Powerful forces in the conservative right wing support by greedy corporate, banks, dysfunctional industries, lack of moral and human emotions has led us to the point where the American people have become more confused and ignorant than ever before.

Next week, November 2, we shall find out how ignorant, hateful our nation has become.
 
 
-2 # Eric Reality 2010-10-26 07:28
I voted for Obama and continue to hope for his success, but this is a very poorly written, simplistic article that ignores far too many relevant points. This is the type of thing that's best suited for a high school or maybe college newspaper. The pulling of the race card is ludicrous, especially since it so conveniently ignores the fact that Americans elected Obama in a landslide. This is the type of blind, one-sided sentiment that plagues the article. I do agree that politics have been infested by morons, (was that ever not the case?) but to pretend that the same thing hasn't happened to the media is pathetic. Reading this article was like sitting in a coffee shop and listening to some hubris laden blowhard loudly squawk into his cell-phone. "There's only me. There's only what I want and what I see. Nevermind all these other people around me. blahblahblah..."
 
 
-4 # LL Dunbar 2010-10-26 07:45
Well said. Ever thought of becoming a journalist?
 
 
-7 # LL Dunbar 2010-10-26 07:43
Full disclosure: I'm American. You're argument is wrong. His unpopularity is due to the fact to the fact that he sold us on a vision of hope and positive change. Instead, we've run future generations of Americans into the deepest debt to EVER be thrust on a population of people. Obama is a lying, arrogant, deceptive super-politician and nothing more. He, and his party, deserve to be thrown out of office.
 
 
-7 # Huaman 2010-10-26 08:01
Aside from his love for Obama, Gwyn has nothing truthful to say about him nor the American people. I'd vote for six other blacks who are far more qualified than the con-man mafioso sitting in the White House now. He's done more to hurt this country than to save it, other than saving it for himself as spoils of his personal jihad. We're not into personality cults in the U.S. and haven't been since 1776 when we kicked out the Royals. This is America, and will always be unless we let this guy and his minions tear it down to rebuild as a socialist 3rd world country.
 
 
-7 # Alexandra 2010-10-26 08:17
If Obama's so smart, why does he hide his school records?

The ignorance from this writer is ASTOUNDING. Obama's not even QUALIFIED to be president! Don't Canadians understand that only natural-born American citizens qualify?

Race aside, Obama is a Marxist and has been on record saying that he hates his white background.
 
 
-7 # Thor 2010-10-26 09:22
Obama is not black, he's biracial. He's not smart, he's a clown. Worry about your own country, Canada is in far worse shape than the US. You gave your country up to interlopers a long time ago. There's still some hope for us.
 
 
-7 # TT 2010-10-26 10:48
My, my, I have stumbled onto the last bastion of liberalism. Trying to boil down all of Obama's problem to being black is just so, oh, I don't know, NPRish (just think Juan Williams). Heaven forbid, you look at the facts, like taking over health (unless you complain loud enough McDonald's and others). Running up the debt to an astronomic level that even elite, educated liberals might have a hard time counting that high. I wish his poll ratings were because he was black then maybe our future would be secure. I am praying (hoping, for you liberals) that we make it though these times as an intact country.
 
 
+5 # billy bob 2010-10-26 12:47
Heaven forbid you actually READ THE ARTICLE and the OTHER PEOPLE'S COMMENTS before rolling out the stale right wing talking points.
 
 
+4 # Stanley R. 2010-10-26 13:06
Do you remember what Bush's poll ratings were? Wasn't it around this time yesterday when we were suddenly hit by a barrage of conservative comments from out of nowhere? The comments are all short hit and run comments and mostly resort to lame insults rather than facts. Interesting...
 
 
-4 # yogiman 2010-10-26 11:11
It being said he is the first black president of the USA. Why isn't pointed out he is the 44th white president of the USA?

But the main question to most Americans is: Who the hell is he? Why is he so secretive of hid identity?
 
 
+4 # sandyh 2010-10-26 11:47
..."That something is that the U.S. today is clearly in decline. This shouldn't be exaggerated..." Well put! I also like Prof Cornell West's assessment, "the United States is having a nervous breakdown". That's exactly how I feel about the state of this country right now.
 
 
-5 # Tom Cox 2010-10-26 11:57
A tired and threadbare lie, Mr. Gwyn. I voted for a guy who is twice as black, and at least twice as smart as Barry. I wrote in Alan Keyes.
 
 
+4 # Stanley R. 2010-10-26 13:08
It seems that today's sudden barrage of conservative commentary is reusing the exact same insults and lack of substance from yesterday. Interesting...
 
 
-7 # rhill 2010-10-26 16:19
"Billy Bob", I too know a lot about rural America and Americans and especially those in rural America or the "Bible Belt" are the least racist in the world bending over backwards trying so hard not to be "racist". Obama was elected partly because he was Black by Whites who wanted so badly to have a Black president. Problem was, Obama didn't have a clue as to what he was doing and no experience. If he were White, he NEVER would have been elected. People now see that he is in fact, destroying the country. He pushed through "health care" reform that most didn't want, he has tripled the debt, wants Cap and Trade which will further destroy the economy, wants amnesty against the total will of the people among other things. Americans don't want Marxism and that is what Obama is. As far as the author of this article is concerned, as a Canadian, he doens't have a clue as to how any American views race and Canada has very few Blacks so Canadians have no experience and understanding so he needs to shut up.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-26 18:24
I've lived in 3 states of the "Bible belt" and saw the complete opposite. Of course most of these racists DID bend over backwards to not APPEAR racist around people they were afraid of, but their attitude changed sharpley as soon as they thought it was safe to speak their minds. This isn't just anecdotal. Most people can admit this is the truth when they don't think their political motives will be called into question.

Actually, Toronto is more racially diverse than New York City and filled with people who genuinely tolerate each other in a way I've NEVER seen in an American city.
 
 
-7 # lawrence 2010-10-26 19:03
This is the worst article I've read in a long time, and I've read a lot of bad articles. I think this guy must be living in a parallel universe, or is just a blatant liar. BO is no smarter than GWB, and is probably a worse president because at least GWB didn't push through bills that the majority of the population was against, even though they both passed terrible bills for the country.
 
 
-7 # rhill 2010-10-27 02:15
Well Billy Bob, I saw the opposite. People in the Bible Belt, just like the rest of America, bend over backwards for minorities. I mean it's common to see Black mayors or police chiefs in the Bible Belt but for all its' "racial diversity", you don't see minorities in high level positions in Toronto, they only seem to drive cabs. Actions speak louder than words, and you just don't see minorities in Canada having the power they do in the USA.
 
 
+4 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 17:47
Bull rhill. I see you don't have a problem being racist.
 
 
-8 # Karie 2010-10-27 02:53
I think this whole thing of who's more racist is ridiculous. Comparing Canada to the American South is ridiculous. There is no comparison. The South/Bible Belt has large numbers of Blacks as well as Mexican illegals. Canada has a tiny amount of these two groups so it's like comparing apples and oranges. People in the Bible Belt have lived around Blacks for generations and know them very well. Whatever views they have are not due to racism but experience up close and personal. Face it, different races can have vastly different levels of crime and welfare usage and people who live around large numbers of those races with high crime levels etc. will have more negative views justifiably based on more negative experiences. This is not racism but reality. Canadians, on the other hand, are naive and childlike when it comes to Blacks. Having no exposure, they think all Blacks are just like Bill Cosby. Canadians, unlike Southerners, also don't have Mexican illegals causing gangs and crime all over the place. It's quite easy to be liberal and tolerant when you don't have the problem. Let the Bible Belt send up their minorities and Canada would open its' eyes real quickly.
 
 
+3 # genierae 2010-10-27 06:50
Karie: And I'll bet your a Christian too. Pretending to love Jesus yet expressing in your actions the very opposite of his teachings. If he walked the earth today, (as I think he does), he would be living with those minorities you are demonizing, they would be his beloved companions. Since you "love" only your own kind, you are missing out on real love, the kind that includes everyone, no one to be left out. I feel bad for you.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:49
genierae, Thanks again for pointing out the hypocricy of the self-anointed holier-than-thou "God's Own Party".
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-27 10:46
"People in the Bible Belt have lived around Blacks for generations and know them very well"

In fact they've owned a few.

Can you name me a majority white city in the south with a black mayor?

Actually, I live in the urban Northeast now, after having lived in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas (among other states), and for the first time in my life I can see what Cosby was all about - treating blacks as though they were actually human beings. Where I live there's a strong black middle class and blacks and whites get along with each other in a way that I NEVER saw in the South (I lived in Texas and Oklahoma for over 10 years). Comparing the South to Canada is a lot like comparing the South to the other 2/3 of the UNITED STATES.

It doesn't surprise me that you can't see racism in the South. Your own comments sound pretty racist.
 
 
-5 # John Henry 2010-10-27 14:59
http://www.blacksuccessfoundation.org/black_mayors.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_African-American_mayors
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-27 17:08
johnny boy,

I checked your "facts" going back to mayors elected within the past 15 years. Here's what I found:

Philadelphia, MS. 55% white no repug
Balch Springs, TX. mayor is Carrie Gordon NOT Cedric Davis Sr.
Lancaster, TX. 37.63% white
Greensboro, NC. 55.49% white Yvonne Johnson voted out after 2 years
Baltimore, MD 30.6% white Sheila Dixon has been under an investigation politically motivated by repugs since she took office.
Anderson, SC. 63.12% white
Shreveport, LA. 46.66% white
Leland, MS. 32.01% white
Asheville, NC. 77.95% white Terry Belamy
Mobile, AL 42.2% white
Pine Bluff, AR. 32.3% white
Baton Rouge, LA. 39.9% white
Greenville, MS. 29.92% white
Atlanta, GA. 38.4% white
Selma, AL 28.77% white
Houston, TX. 27.9% white
Jackson, MS. 29.8% white

YA GOT ME. THERE ARE 3!!
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 17:14
cont.

There are 18,443 cities and towns in the U.S. and only 3 of those (going back 15 years) in the South with a majority white population have a black mayor.

One of those was elected because there was no repug to oppose her.

Another was elected for her hard right stance against homosexual civil rights.

If we assume 1/3 of the U.S. is in the deep South we get an estimated 6,148 towns in that area. This means you have a 1 in 2,049 chance of living in a white majority Southern U.S. city with a black mayor - or that the chances of becoming mayor in the South as a black person in a white community are .049%.

HARDLY PROVES THE THEORY THAT THE SOUTH IS NO LONGER RACIST.

By the way, you told me earlier that you didn't want to talk to me anymore because I was responding to you correctly. What happened? Decided to give me another chance?
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-27 18:46
gotta luv ya' billy bob!
 
 
+2 # genierae 2010-10-28 11:07
John Henry: You didn't answer my question. Why would anyone who is not rich, vote for a Republican? I have asked this of many pro-Republicans, but I have yet to get an answer. What about it John Henry?
 
 
+5 # TStarr 2010-10-27 20:37
I am Black. My grandfather and all his siblings earned at least Bachelor's degrees (during the Jim Crow era). Several-including my grandfather-earned Master's degrees. Two of my great-uncles earned Doctorates in mathematics, including one who worked on The Manhattan Project. A cousin of mine is retired from extended foreign service in the U.S. Government. He is also fluent in several languages and he was one of the last Americans to make it out during the fall of Saigon. So, you are right, Karie-some of us Blacks *are* like Bill Cosby and the Huxtables.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 07:13
THANK YOU.
 
 
-4 # Gary Fridell 2010-10-27 13:21
Mr. Gwyn, There must be a surplus of funny weed up there in the north. Obama smart, yes. Also devious, shrewd, two faced and mendacious. Yes, many Amerikans co not like Mr. O because he is black. However, there are many other reasons to dislike this shyster: Obama is a WAR CRIMINAL! OBush has followed and enhanced most of W's violations of civil rights, constitutional rights, and human rights: continued torture, detention ithout charges or limit, kangaroo courts without basic rights to examine evidence or confront charges and testimony, use of coerced (by torture) confessions, etc. Obama continues unconstitutiona l searches. Then there is the use of drones to kill civilians in a country we are not at war with. Plus, the expansion of Bush's wars. And, the tyranny of being the "decider" of who lives or dies sans charge or conviction. The USofA executed Germans and Japanese for doing what the "Peace Laureate" is doing. Finally, Mr. Gwynn, I invite you to the US to try and make sense of the health care plan Obama has given us. Well, except for the insurance industsry. They are delighted.
 
 
-5 # Karie 2010-10-27 16:31
No,I'm not a Christian, I'm an agnostic. I see we have prejudice against Christians, I'll bet you'd never make such a comment against Muslims. Billy Bob, I live in Texas and we have a very strong Black middle and upper class and so does the rest of the South. Atlanta has had a Black mayor and there are plenty of police chiefs etc. Blacks and Whites get along a lot better in the South and hold higher positions than they do up North or in Canada or anywhere else. Up North, it if far more segregated than the South, the North is the most segregated part of the country. As far as slavery, the North had slavery first and brought most slaves over. Anyways, my comments are not racist or demonizing, they are TRUE. It is not hating other races to point out true facts. I don't see people up North or anywhere else in the USA buying homes in Black neighborhoods or sending their kids to a Black school. I'm just saying aloud what everyone else knows is true.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-27 18:07
I apologise. I accidentally left you a thumbs UP.

I lived in TX longer than I've lived anywhere else, and I couldn't disagree with you more about that state. Have you ever lived anywhere else?

The only people I knew in TX who agreed with you were other whites. I worked at places that were half white and half black and the racial tension was CONSTANT. The town where I lived had over 100,000 people and still managed to have a STRONG KKK presence.

The neighborhood I live in in the North is about 30% black and 20% Asian. The kids ALL play together, no one is moving out or worried about property values (other than what deregulation did to the banking industry causing a bubble). The neighborhood is incredibly safe and close-knit.

It's funny how many conservatives are coming to this thread to argue against daily facts experienced first hand by a majority of Americans. Much of it seems to be nothing more than DENIAL.

Check out my response to john henry. What do you think about the facts that HE INADVERTANTLY helped me prove?
 
 
+3 # genierae 2010-10-28 08:36
Karie: It is not prejudice to expect Christians to practice what they preach. I have never met one genuine born-again Christian, and so I have to suspect their motives. If you aren't a Christian, than I am not speaking of you, though you seem to share the attitudes they have toward blacks. I lived in rural Virginia for two years and I never saw blacks and whites "get along". What I saw was a voluntary segregation, where each race had its own society, and I never saw any coming together. And whites definitely had a superior attitude, they were rabid in their hatred of Obama. His signs were stolen from our yard, we were verbally threatened, and the brake lines on my car were cut. Racist? Nah!
 
 
-6 # Karie 2010-10-27 16:34
I'll add I don't believe in political correctness or denying the truth as it helps nobody including Blacks. My comments are politically incorrect but brutally honest.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-27 18:31
Karie,

If your comments are "politically incorrect" you must assume they are offensive to someone. Who could be offended? If everyone is getting along so well on Lollypop Lane, then what are you worried about? Where's the controversy?

The problem I have with your comments is that they are either intentionally "brutally" DIS-honest or that you live in a fantasy world.

The fact is that, deny it as much as you want, BUT POLL AFTER POLL SHOWS THAT AMERICANS ARE EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE AROUND OTHER RACES AND THAT THE SENTIMENT IS WORSE IN THE SOUTH. My comments aren’t “demonizing” either. They are true.

For instance, the Daily Kos did a survey showing that 69% of all "birthers" are Southerners.

On the other hand, only 13% of all whites consider THEMSELVES racist. Racism is really more about actions than words. Three out of 6,148 towns in the South having a black mayor with a white majority says a LOT about actions.

cont.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-27 18:34
cont.

The fact that such a high percentage of black people are still victimized (yes I use THAT “politically incorrect” word) by, what they perceive as white racism says something. Maybe most blacks are delusional, but then, if you think that, doesn’t that ALSO prove my point. Who are you to argue with their FIRST-HAND accounts?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5967942/Barack-Obama-faces-30-death-threats-a-day-stretching-US-Secret-Service.html

President Obama receives 30 death threats A DAY according to the Secret Service. Perhaps the Secret Service has a LIBERAL AGENDA!!!! Believe me, NO President in U.S. history has had to deal with ANYTHING of that caliber. You don’t suppose 30 DEATH THREATS A DAY (STARTING AS SOON AS HE ANNOUNCED HIS CANDIDACY) could have something to do with, oh I don’t know… RACISM? DO YOU? His approval rating is about TWICE as high as bush’s so it can’t be that.

cont.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-27 18:35
cont.

Maybe it's not about racism. Maybe it just means that CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT TREASON.

It's one or the other, so WHICH IS IT?

So, it's not really about your comments being "politically" correct. It's about them not being correct AT ALL.
 
 
+2 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-28 23:01
Quoting
cont.

Maybe it's not about racism. Maybe it just means that CONSERVATIVES ARE MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT TREASON.

It's one or the other, so WHICH IS IT?

So, it's not really about your comments being "politically" correct. It's about them not being correct AT ALL.

Your words certainly resonate. I appreciate your passion. Odd that passion begets criticism at times but I'm sure you'll agree that passion motivates the search for knowledge and you are proving it. And some of your lines are quotable zingers! I won't but I'd be tempted to take credit for some of them! You're a capable communicator and I admire that!
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-29 18:05
I'd be FLATTERED if you'd steal my one liners. I don't write them to get rich - unless you know a way I could...?

DO YOU?
 
 
+2 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-30 09:32
Quoting
I'd be FLATTERED if you'd steal my one liners. I don't write them to get rich - unless you know a way I could...?

DO YOU?

Well, if I publish any of them and actually make some money from it I'll let you know! I'll have to figure out a way to cut you a check!
 
 
+3 # dale wald 2010-10-27 18:12
If there is any question about the "dumming down" or decline in America, read Tom Friedman's article from Oct. 27th. It is soooo disappointing and yet, not surprising. The U.S. is decling in so many areas and this so frightening. Anyone who thinks there is no racist component to the Tea Party Movement is delusional. Racism is alive and flourishing. For anyone to say that our country "just insn't ready for a black president" is insulting.If not now, when? I feel our President is articulate, bright and wants only to do what is right for our country. I support him in everything he stands for.
 
 
+1 # genierae 2010-10-28 11:01
dale wald: Bravo! Its great to hear a voice of sanity where Obama is concerned. I also support him, he is an extraordinary man.
 
 
-4 # rhill 2010-10-28 01:53
You missed a few mayors Billy Bob:
Cities with or that have had Black mayors 1970-present: These aren't all, just some.

Dallas,Texas
Houston,Texas
Lancaster, Texas
Balch Springs, Texas
Jackson,Mississ ippi
Philadelphia, Mississippi
Columbia,South Carolina
Anderson, South Carolina
Greensboro, North Carolina
Raleigh, North Carolina
Charlotte, North Carolina
Baltimore, Maryland
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Shreveport, Lousiana
New Orleans, Louisiana
Richmond,Virgin ia
Tallahassee, Florida
Birmingham, Alabama
Selma, Alabama
Atlanta, Georgia
Memphis, Tennessee.

Happily this proves you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about.LOL
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:18
rhill,

Dallas,Texas: 30.1% white
Houston,Texas: NOPE it’s on my list
Lancaster, Texas: NOPE it’s on my list
Balch Springs, Texas: NOPE it’s on my list
Jackson,Mississ ippi: NOPE it’s on my list
Philadelphia, Mississippi: NOPE it’s on my list
Columbia,South Carolina: 49.22% white
Anderson, South Carolina: NOPE it’s on my list
Greensboro, North Carolina: NOPE it’s on my list
Raleigh, North Carolina: Mayor is Charles Meeker (HE’S WHITE)
Charlotte, North Carolina: 49.9% white (close but not a majority)
Baltimore, Maryland: NOPE it’s on my list
Baton Rouge, Louisiana: NOPE it’s on my list
Shreveport, Lousiana: NOPE it’s on my list
New Orleans, Louisiana: 28.05% white
Richmond,Virgin ia: 41.6% white
Tallahassee, Florida: Most people don’t consider Florida to be a Southern state because it doesn’t represent Southern culture and didn’t exist during the civil war
Birmingham, Alabama: 24.07%% white
Selma, Alabama: NOPE it’s on my list
Atlanta, Georgia: NOPE it’s on my list
Memphis, Tennessee: 29.5% white
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:18
-Did you ACTUALLY READ my list before you responded? You just wasted 10 minutes of my time all because you couldn’t be bothered to read my comments before responding to them.

-UNHAPPILY THIS PROVES THAT YOU CAN'T READ.

-LOL
 
 
+1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-28 23:05
rhil, heck, if you know so much, name them. Forget about going back to 1970 even. How about right now? Care to look that up?

Are you a poser? Or are you for real?
 
 
-5 # rhill 2010-10-28 02:01
Oh and Billy Bob, I don't believe you have ever lived in the South. Your comments about a lack of a Black middle class show that or the utter nonsense that Blacks aren't treated like human being also show that. I lived in Dallas, Houston, Atlanta and now Charlotte and there are huge middle and upper classes of Blacks. When I was in Texas, that state was spending 5 billion a year on FREE medical care for non-White illegals. I can tell you Canada wouldn't do that. In both Texas and Atlanta, you pretty much HAD to be a minority to get on with the city, county or state government and in both Texas, Georgia and NC, many Blacks who couldn't afford college were given grants(free college)whereas Whites who couldn't afford it got loans that they had to pay back. So I hardly think the South is racist in any way, shape or form today. I've lived in Illinois, Michigan and New York and found up North they quickly engage in "white flight" if the neighborhood gets a few dark people. I've found better race relations in the South by far than up North or Canada or anywhere else and I've been all over. However, if you wish to believe the myth that the South is "racist" go for it.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:27
Apparently you're a product of TX public schools, since you incapable of reading.

While in TX. I lived in McKinney, Gainsville, Killeen and Dallas. Maybe your lack of experience is due to the fact that you never left large cities. I also lived in Ardmore, OK and Lawrence, KS. It sounds an awful lot like my experience with the "Bible" belt was more diverse than yours.

I agree that there is racism EVERYWHERE in the United States.

I keep responding to your commentary with provable facts. You keep re-responding with personal opinion. Why is that?

But don't let me stop you. Keep plugging away with your agenda and junior high comebacks.

If you wish to believe you can keep coming back with EASILY disproven "facts" go for it.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:35
rhill,

-By the way, thanks for FURTHER proving my point. By going back as far as 1970 and not finding ANY OTHER EVIDENCE of black mayors in white Southern communities, you managed to show that in the South racial progress means moving from a 0% chance to a 0.049% chance of a black mayor in a white community.

Once again, I wasn’t arguing there wasn’t any racism up North. I’ve experienced that as well. The difference is QUANTITATIVE NOT QUALITATIVE.

Also, the point of the article was that America was racist. The subject was changed by commentary to focus on the South. You disagreed with the article itself, and then set about PROVING THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE by ranting on about how racist THE NORTH IS.

To further quote YOU:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL OLOLOLOLOLOLOL! !!!!!!!
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:51
rhill,

Here's a suggestion for ya to help make arguments rather than just random snarky comebacks: Go watch the Monty Python "argument sketch". It's educational. It points out the fact that an "argument" is "a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition", and that it's "not just contradiction".

Translation: don't just cut and paste from wikipedia to prove a point. Make sure what you're cutting and pasting ACTUALLY PROVES YOUR POINT FIRST.

Also, acting high handed and making constant "LOL"s and third grader insults doesn't prove anything other than your own inability to argue like a grown up.
 
 
+1 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-28 23:20
Now I know you're full of crap rhill. I grew up in Chicago, have lived in Michigan and have lived in the south. Racism is bad all over, but there is something special about the south. The southern flavor of racism is quite unique. I will take this middle ground. I recall that King was startled at just how bad racism was in Chicago when he visited and I concur, and white flight has been obvious in both Chicago and Detroit, but that aspect leveled out, oh, say, about 35 years ago. Present relatives in North Carolina tell me about how things are, and my time in Texas recently informs me somewhat. I have never seen more blatantly racist public behavior in my life than what I witnessed daily in 2007. When I went as a consultant to a public agency in Dallas I was simply appalled. When I then went to the New Orleans area to help rebuild a number of public services I was shocked. I'm on the west coast now and I can tell you that in comparison, the south seems to be in a different country. I have lived in Canada also and you abuse the money numbers badly. Canadian subsidy per person is far greater than per person assistance in the south, by far. You're delusional...at best.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-29 17:58
Don't kid yourself Daniel. White flight is STILL alive and well in TX and Georgia.

A lot of people in the South have never left there and are very defensive about the facts. rhill appears to be one of them. All the talk about the "new South" is nothing more than over-compensating.

The bit about the South being a different country hits the nail on the head. Many in the South are still interested in seceding. TX likes to say, "it's like a whole other country" for a good reason. Many Southerners hate America.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-28 06:52
The irony rhill, is that I could argue YOUR point better than you have.

Would you like me to?
 
 
-3 # thedavehaze 2010-10-28 09:33
Obama is a conservative, a Republican in all but name. How do I know? The majority of his actions (not his words cause he can talk a fair liberal line) are as right wing or to the right of Bush the Lesser. Espec. on foreign policy, war, torture, domestic spying.

Name one liberal or progressive thing Obama can claim. Health care? Yeah, really! Education? Still Republican personal responsibility, charter schools and trash the teachers. Oh, I got one. He gave money to the Veterans Administration that most Republicans -- including John McCane frowned upon. But many Republicans in House and Senate concurred on that one.

Beyond time to look for an alternative for 2012 election. And progressives, a little advice, stop making excuses for Obama it makes you look foolish.

P.S. No one has ever taken my advice.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 10:38
I agree completely. The only problem is that we weren't presented with a choice between him and a true liberal. I knew he wasn't a real liberal when he ran, but I voted for him anyway.

My only defense is this: The tide is only beginning to turn. Conservatives pretty much dominated American politics from 1968 to 2008. Forty years was a pretty good run. They didn't become quite as off the psycho deep end until gingrich put a contract on America. It took several elections and confidence building for them to start showing their TRUE colors. The difference is that, as liberals, our true colors are actually MORE sane and ethical than the people who represent us. We still don't have the ability to elect a true liberal. The problem is that the "debate" has already been framed FOR US, by faux "news". Something will have to be done by politicians not worried how much they will be attacked by the right - politicians with a little conviction. Right now, the pool of potential candidates is pretty empty or filled with those with no charisma.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 10:38
I really think it will get better over the next few elections, but I'm not arguing we should be patient.
 
 
0 # thedavehaze 2010-10-28 15:17
bb, Hey, for a moment I thought Obama was an alternative. It was a short moment. But I took bets -- 22 bucks a shot -- that he would trounce Clinton and take the Presidency because he was so superficially believable. (like myself sometimes.) And I was happy to collect the cash -- and that's all I got from the Obama administration -- some superficial cash instead of Hope and Change. Chump change.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2010-10-28 18:17
Who would you have voted for instead? Or who did you vote for?
 
 
-1 # thedavehaze 2010-10-28 19:23
The Presidency? Never voted for a Democrat or a Republican. Tho... I might have voted for Carter. But probably once in the voting booth at the last second pulled the lever for Gus hall or Laura Fillani (sp.? was that her name?) or any impotent alternative. Never really thought anyone would represent me until Nader.

The answer is Nader. Every chance I got.
 
 
-4 # rhill 2010-10-28 16:27
You must be a product of the Northern school system. No, Billy Bob you haven't argued anything better than me and you are the one with 3rd grade insults, I've never insulted you. Your statistics prove nothing. Your statistics are today's stats and many of these mayors go back before today's stats. Also,I stated that those were some, not all. You forget most larger northern cities, the actual city, also have majority non-White people too. However, Blacks only make up 11% of the US population and though larger in the South are still a big minority so of course they are going to be far fewer Black mayors as there are far fewer Black people.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 17:56
-"I've never insulted you" vs. "this proves you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about" - you should go back and read your own posts.

-My statistics prove nothing? Statistics is what we're arguing about. The only way to prove the validity of a statistic is with STATISTICS.

-My comment was to name a Southern mayor in a majority white community. You took the challenge, acted like they were too numerous to count, but could only come up with examples that PROVED MY POINT. If there are others you should have used those instead. Why didn't you?

-Yes blacks make up 13% (not 11%) of the American population. In cities with a population that's 11% black, what are the odds of a black mayor? In the South a WHOPPING 0%. One would expect, all things being "equal" that they would represent a percentage of mayors EQUAL to their percentage. In other words, a Southern city that is only 60% white should be represented by white mayors only 60% of the time following your logic. What percentage of Southern cities with more than 50% white population have a black mayor? A WHOPPING 0.049%.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 18:35
rhill,

I have to comment further about how "my statistics don't prove anything":

1. They were YOUR statistics, not mine. I just actually studied them. You didn't bother. Now that you realize YOUR OWN statistics disprove your point, you want to change the rules of the argument and say that they suddenly "don't prove anything".

2. What we're arguing is statistics. Your personal experience is PERSONAL and, therefore subjective. Statistics are facts. I'm sorry that facts don't prove anything. I'm sorry that your personal experience doesn't jibe with the facts, but without facts you have no argument to make.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 18:37
I'm glad you live in the South where you can be happy and there is no racism. "THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN!!!"

Apparently, you agree that the REST OF THE U.S. is pretty racist though, huh?

What a minute...

YOU said, "I too know a lot about rural America and Americans and especially those in rural America or the "Bible Belt" are the least racist in the world"

YOU ALSO said you, "found up North they (whites) quickly engage in 'white flight' if the neighborhood gets a few dark people."

You don't suppose some of those "rural Americans" are there due to white flight do you?

NAH!!!! BECAUSE THAT WOULD CONTRADICT YOUR AGENDA WOULDN'T IT?!?!
 
 
0 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-28 23:29
rhill...blacks make up only 11% of the population? Now please cite a source for that. I keep reading 16-17% which, if true means that you're missing a third of the black population. So what source are you getting that from?
 
 
-4 # rhill 2010-10-28 16:36
I also don't believe you lived in Texas. Maybe back in 1940 but certainly not today. I lived all around Texas and never once saw or heard of the KKK and people's views of it were that it was awful. I worked with Blacks,Hispanic s and Asians there, in Georgia and now here in Charlotte, again no problems. When I was in Texas, as I said, minorities were given grants(free) college far more than Whites who couldn't afford it, Texas was spending FIVE BILLION a year on free medical for non-White illegals at the expense of Whites and many places in the Texas are sanctuary cities, you pretty much had to be a minority to get on with the city, county or state. So cut the nonsense Billy Bob, a racist place would NOT do that. As far as size, most Northern towns that are smaller are mostly White and run by Whites. Your neighborhood it the exception Billy Bob, most Northern Whites live in the burbs far from Black neighborhoods and are far more segregated than Southerners, who interact with Blacks all the time.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 18:12
I lived in TX from 1987 to 1999. I'm sorry that you were unaware of the klan's presence there. Apparently, you didn't pay any more attention to LOCAL news than you do national news. Maybe you lived there before the 1870s when the klan was first originated.

I don't believe you ever lived in TX.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2010-10-28 18:14
NOW, LET'S RECAP THE TRAIN OF LOGIC YOU'VE USED IN THIS DISCUSSION rhill:

POINT #1 - THE U.S. IS NOT RACIST (REMEMBER THE ACTUAL ARTICLE WE'RE COMMENTING ON?).

There is no racism behind the rampant hatred directed toward President Obama since he declared his candidacy, and the fact that he receives 30 death threats a day, is just because he has an approval rating in the high 40s to low 50s (even though bush's was in the low 20s and he didn't have this problem).

POINT #2 - THE NORTH (2/3 OF THE U.S.) IS VERY RACIST.

I'm having a difficult time reconciling your argument that this article is b.s. because the U.S. isn't racist, yet in defense of the South, your argument is that ACTUALLY THE NORTH IS FULL OF RACISTS.

SO "CUT THE NONSENSE" rhill. Let's get back to the point of the article.

Is the U.S. racist, or do you retract your last several comments?
 
 
0 # billy bob 2010-10-28 19:01
To put things in perspective, rhill, I used YOUR STATISTICS again to look at NORTHERN cities with black mayors, and here's what I found:

Festus, MO 93.66% white
Mansfield, OH 76.77% white
Blue Springs, MO 93.18 % white
South Harrison Township, NJ 93.09% white
Wichita, KS 75.2% white
Youngstown, OH 51% white
Cincinnati, OH 52% white
Buffalo, NY 54.43% white
Columbus, OH 65.4% white
Saratoga Springs, UT 98.2% white

We can argue whether or not Missouri or Maryland are Northern or Southern. My experience is that the Northern 2/3 of Missouri follows Northern culture. In fact, in my experience (since I've traveled extensively in both states) Maryland is a NORTHERN state. The mayor of Baltimore (Sheila Dixon) doesn't really count anyway, because she was appointed not elected.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2010-10-28 19:01
If we take MO out of the equation the North has 8 white cities with black mayors. As far as I know, there were no extenuating circumstances in any of these cases either (as there were in 2 of the 3 Southern mayors).

For the FOURTH time, I'm not arguing that the North is beyond racism. It's ALMOST as racist as the South - BUT NOT QUITE.

Your argument is that the South isn't racist at all!

To quote you: LOL
 
 
-3 # Richard Edwards 2010-10-28 20:06
"Brilliant"? No. Obama is nothing but a pretty loudspeaker on the communist truck, driving down the streets of America, delivering the same old socialist propoganda. He is told, daily, where to go, who to meet, what to say, and when to return; a puppet on a string. He, himself, is not evil, though his message is. But his handlers are pure evil, and purely communist. Ohama thinks he is the leader. Most think he is at least "in on it". But he is only being used by murderers, who will in the end, move on to the next phase of their conquest, leaving behind the discarded remains of their camp. Almost everyone who made the apotheosizing comments about Obama in this forum will look back in two years and realize they've been had.
 
 
-4 # rhill 2010-10-29 02:14
Billy Bob, most of those places in the North are smaller towns or in Middle America ie. Kansas. However, the percentage of Black mayors means nothing. The truth is Blacks and Whites in the South offer differ politically big time. Southern Whites are much more conservative on average when it comes to taxation and spending by far. Blacks in the South are more leftist about these things. This comes down to mayors. Whites in the South, outside of large cities will usually vote for the White candidate because s(he) is more fiscally conservative than the Black one, not out of "racism". Blacks will vote for Black mayors etc. because they are more likely to share their beliefs. There is a wider divide between conservative and liberal in the South. Of course you think the South is more racist I think it's less or certainly no more but we'll just have to agree to disagree.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-29 17:51
Changing the strategy of your argument again, I see.

This whole subject is too complex for you. You appear incapable of actually reading other people's comments before responding to them.

How would you like to measure racism OBJECTIVELY? Since no amount of facts will sway your opinion, it's becoming pretty obvious that facts have nothing to do with how you form your opinions in the first place.

It's a good thing you're not a sports announcer:

"Team A is behind on points, but points don't matter. Team spirit is more important. Besides, Team B has better helmets so what do you expect? Also, Team A has a cold. Anyway the score is 412 to 7 - if you're into things like score keeping. I mean you can prove anything with statistics. It's what's inside that counts."
 
 
-4 # rhill 2010-10-29 02:23
Is the USA a racist country, South or otherwise? I'm not talking about a few racist individuals, you have them anywhere. The answer is NO. Minorities today are given preference over Whites in all kinds of jobs, loans and grants for college or small businesses, university admissions and other types of government aid, affirmative action. White Americans have transferred more than a trillion dollars of their wealth in the form of taxes to pay for things such as section 8 housing, medicaid, food stamps,WIC etc. to support single parent minority households. American citizens, mostly White, have spent around 300 BILLION on non-White Mexican illegals at their expense. In the USA, it's ok for non-Whites to criticize Whites but Whites are severely censored, say the slightest thing considered remotely racist and you lose your job if you are a public figure etc. Attack a non-Whites, it's a hate crime, attack a White, nobody cares. No "racist" nation would do all of the above. The USA along with Canada and the UK are the LEAST racist countries on the planet. No non-White nation would ever put a White minority first like that.
 
 
-6 # Karie 2010-10-29 03:37
BB-"The problem I have with your comments is that they are either intentionally "brutally" DIS-honest or that you live in a fantasy world."

Nope, certain racial groups, especially a particular one, has much higher crime rates per 100,000. That's simple fact. Also, look at any "no-go" area in any city, nine cases out of ten, it's not White. It would be better if a certain minority group admitted they had a problem in their community and worked to solve it rather than denying reality.

"BUT POLL AFTER POLL SHOWS THAT AMERICANS ARE EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE AROUND OTHER RACES AND THAT THE SENTIMENT IS WORSE IN THE SOUTH"

Nope, not true but polls a lot of times aren't they can be easily manipulated for an agenda. In the South, they're exposed to more crime and obnoxious ghetto attitude from a certain race so that can cause more negatives understandably. However, I do know that people of all races, anywhere in the world, prefer in general to be with their own race, it's just human nature.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-29 17:39
So you're saying that Southerners ARE more racist, but that they have a good reason to be?

Everything isn't as "black and white" as you paint it. Do you think there are many social factors at work here? Are people individuals?

Maybe your point is that the U.S. is too racist as the article asserts, but SO WHAT? It's human nature.
 
 
-5 # Karie 2010-10-29 03:45
"generaie-" I lived in rural Virginia for two years and I never saw blacks and whites "get along". What I saw was a voluntary segregation, where each race had its own society, and I never saw any coming together. "

I see voluntary segregation everywhere on the planet where you put large numbers of peoples of different races together. As I said, there are cultural differences between Blacks and Whites and Blacks too in general prefer there own people and culture, just like Asians, Latinos, Muslims,Whites everywhere do. Look at all the "China Towns" the world over, the Pakistani communities in Europe etc. Multiculturalis m is a failure the world over. This doesn't mean that people of different races aren't ever friends or come together and such, it's just that people everywhere in general, prefer there own. It's human nature, not racism or hatred.
 
 
+2 # billy bob 2010-10-29 17:36
So your point here seems to be that America IS TO RACIST for President Obama and that racism DOES play a role?

I wish you'd make up your mind, Karie. You can't play both sides of the fence forever.
 
 
0 # genierae 2010-11-01 05:05
Karie: I agree that when people relocate to a different area, they feel more comfortable with their own cultures. But prejudice also plays a part, because most people are suspicious of those who are different. As for blacks, they were slaves, and this is a whole different thing. They had no choice, they were forcefully brought here, and they were considered inferior by whites for centuries. This mindset is still rampant in all parts of the country, but more so in the south. They are still fighting the civil war, and this resentment, I think, plays a part in their treatment of blacks.

The only reason that multiculturalis m has failed, is because of bigotry. If we were to open ourselves up to their cultures, and learn all that we could about them, we would find that we are more alike than we are different. I worked in Washington state for a year, with Hispanics, Asians, and Russians, and it was one of the most enjoyable times of my life. Once they saw that my interest was genuine, they warmly welcomed me into their world. They were beautiful people, very family-oriented, and hard workers. And yet I was the only white person who treated them as equals.
 
 
-4 # Karie 2010-10-29 03:51
geneare-"It is not prejudice to expect Christians to practice what they preach. I have never met one genuine born-again Christian, and so I have to suspect their motives. If you aren't a Christian, than I am not speaking of you, though you seem to share the attitudes they have toward blacks."

I'm never stated any attitude towards Blacks, just facts, and I realize there are many good Black people. However, it is not sexist or having a bad attitude towards males to say that they have much higher violent crime rates than females, same for race. As far as Christians, if you've never met a true born-again Christian, how would you know what attitude they had towards Blacks. As far as Christians, they are the ones who rushed to Haiti to help, who give money to Africa, who preach equality,they've done more than any religion to help Black people so I hardly think they have a bad attitude toward them.
 
 
+1 # genierae 2010-11-01 05:24
Karie: You are ignoring three centuries of slavery, when you talk about black crime. If the white race had gone through such tragedy, maybe we would understand them better. For centuries, the black family was pulled apart, the father couldn't protect his wife and children, the black mother wasn't able to create a loving home, their heritage was stolen from them and they were treated as livestock! Then after the civil war, Lincoln was killed, and his benevolent plans for reconstruction died with him. Blacks were used by both parties for political advantage, and most ended up in slums. It is amazing to me that so many did make it into the middle class, with all the strikes against them. This says a lot about their courage and endurance. Taking this sad history into account, a higher rate of violent crime should not come as a surprise. White society must accept a large share of blame for this.
 
 
-5 # Karie 2010-10-29 03:57
generaie-""And whites definitely had a superior attitude, they were rabid in their hatred of Obama. His signs were stolen from our yard, we were verbally threatened, and the brake lines on my car were cut. Racist? Nah!"

You were in an area where a lot of people totally disagreed with his policies, disagreement does not mean hatred. I live in a city that was very pro-Obama and one guy had his Mccain sign stolen and his car egged and there was a fist fight or two against a McCain supporter. Yes, there are a few vandals or jerks who on occasion who will do that during an election, and I think it's ridiculous either way as this is a democracy. As far as the brake line on your car, I find if very hard to believe someone would do that over which way you vote, it certainly is rare in any part of the country. If said person really did this, this is a serious crime but in no way reflective of the region just of some psycho loon, people all over the South(often Blacks) had Obama signs out and nobody had their brake lines cut.
 
 
+4 # billy bob 2010-10-29 17:34
So, the difference is that repugs and tea-huggers are incapable of acting like American citizens and are only sending the President 30 death threats a day because they're more likely to commit treason?

I can agree with that.

Conservatives aren't more racist. They just HATE AMERICA.
 
 
+2 # genierae 2010-11-01 05:42
Karie: I was in an area where the confederate flag is flaunted, once a hotbed of the confederacy. And the hatred of Obama had nothing to do with his policies, and everything to do with his skin color. After all, his policies are in their best interests, why should they be against them? I was shocked that my brake lines were cut. I had to have my car towed to the garage. I didn't take the situation as seriously as I should have, thought it was just talk. My grandson heard a lot of racist babble, and there was a threat to run my daughter's van off the road, there was this terrible Obama sticker on it. I guess our indifference toward this only made them more angry.

Whether you believe me or not, is irrelevant, but you need to stop your willful blindness, take your head out of the sand, and see things as they really are.
 
 
+2 # Glennace Kirn 2010-10-29 05:37
It seems to me that the Republicans have forgotten who got us into this financial mess - an unjustifiable war for the most part and that President Obama inherited the whole fiasco. The Republicans are still having a tantrum about losing the 2008 election, and when I hear statements such as "he hasn't done anything," I want to respond, "How could he? The Republicans have voted a resounding "No" to every good thing he has proposed." I'm from such a conservative, Republican state that Democrats are terribly intimidated by expressing an opinion or supporting any of good proposal. I do believe Democrats in our area need to take responsiblity for not being more outspoken and more aggressive.
 
 
+4 # thedavehaze 2010-10-29 14:17
Ah, Karie, re: certain racial groups have much higher crime rates per 100 thousand. Pure bunk. Most statistics are taken by white folk who discount their own criminal element, like mortgage brokers, bankers, politicians, war mongers, fast food and pill-pushers to children, HMOs, Developers, oil companies, destroyers of the environment, date-rapers, computer hackers, con artists, cigarette companies, CEOs in general, Fox News, on and on. Discounted. Also note that white folk do not generally get arrested for any malfeasance that would put other folk behind bars.

What else did you say that annoyed me. Oh, "no-go" areas, that bad neighborhood myth. Did you know black folk fear and avoid many areas both city and rural where they are unwelcomed because of the color of their skin and can be stopped and searched, insulted, or assaulted for just walking down the street in broad daylight.

But please just keep believing that your group is virtuous and their group needs to face up to reality that they are criminals.
 
 
+3 # Daniel Fletcher 2010-10-29 15:51
I agree with you completely thedavehaze. I've done ethnographic studies in large urban areas for some time now. I am white and walk around Watts comfortably when I visit. My Creole wife's family and mine get along just fine. Blacks are prosecuted disproportionat ely for crimes committed compared to whites. White crime in the suburbs is, by comparison, handled very differently. When I travel to those "no-go" areas, gee, all I have to do is walk around like I'm just another joe, smile and act friendly and be polite. So small an investment and I have yet to have been bothered even once. Yes, I've had some names thrown my way a few times (as in 2 or 3) but so what? In my younger days I also served in law enforcement in some mighty tough "no-go" areas and never once felt uncomfortable or was treated badly because I was white. In non-uniform work I had no problem blending in no matter how white I was simply because I was curious, friendly and polite. As for the consequence of monetary/property theft crimes, absolutely nothing beats white white/collar crime. The cost to society far exceeds the cost of crimes committed by blacks and I am even taking into consideration prison costs. I agree.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-29 18:32
Daniel,

You can quote me any time you like. Without knowing it you just made the same point I made. My similar comment hasn't appeared yet, but I guess it will in a few minutes since yours just has.

"BE POLITE". That's as quotable as anything.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2010-10-29 18:24
WELL SAID. I'd like to add a few comments as well.

I now live in an urban Northeastern city with a large black population. A higher than average number of blacks in this city and metropolitan area are middle and upper class. Those that are, avoid "the hood" just as much as suburban whites. The "hood" is mostly (although not entirely) black. I used to drive through the "hood" EVERY DAY and did a lot of work there. I wouldn't live there myself (of course I could afford not to), but I quickly learned something that the thousands of conservatives I saw on the freeway with NRA bumper stickers and "no fear" bumper stickers on their Hummers couldn't learn (SINCE THEY WOULD NEVER GO NEAR THE "HOOD"). I learned the POWER OF COURTESY.

That's right. It's AMAZING how well black people (EVEN IN "THE HOOD") are willing to treat a white man who says things like, "PLEASE" and "THANK YOU", and "YES SIR" and "YES MA'AM". It was like MAGIC.

I began to notice how much power I had over situations that I used to be afraid of simply by treating other human beings as I'd like to be treated.

It's a crazy idea, but sometimes it actually WORKS.
 
 
+2 # Joe Holdner 2010-10-29 15:13
Re: comment by Faye Frost:
" If it was about color, how come tea party people can't stand Pelosi, Reid, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd either? Pelosi is white Italian Catholic and Reid is Mormon. And they are all as white as the tea partiers!"

The point is how many people of color are in the Tea party
 
 
0 # ken Haltenhoff 2010-11-01 00:23
It's hard to believe that any rational US citizen would argue that the US is colorblind. Check out incarceration rates, infant mortality rates, longevity, unemployment statistics, sentencing disparities, death penalty anomalies, then (try to) tell me that racism has ended in the US. No way! And it IS more pronounced in the US south; I lived in VA for thirty years and can attest that the one time capital of the rebel (pro-slavery) faction hasn't changed their allegiance.
 
 
0 # genierae 2010-11-01 13:33
Thank you Mr. Haltenhoff, you have affirmed my observations while living in VA.
 
 
0 # Anita 2010-11-08 10:20
Republicans and tea party members hide behind Christianity when in actuality they are hypocrites like the Pharasees in the bible. Christianity is not about saying you are pro-life,but when that little life gets here you turn on it and threaten the social services that maintain a certain quality of life.Christianity is about serving others, not yourself. They are all hypocrites and should be ashamed to say they are of the Christ that I know.
 
 
0 # Leslie Dewitt 2011-05-10 08:29
"Brilliant"
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.