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)
Obama Too Smart, Too Black for
Declining America
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.
|
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. |











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
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!
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.
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.
As for me, all I know is that I know nothing
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.
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.
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'.
But Amerioa does have a tradition of being anti-intellectual as well as anti-Black. and Obama is both black and intellectual.
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all." GK Chesterton (1908)
I hate my growing cynicism.
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?
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.
http://apathetic-usa.com/
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.
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.
T ahnks for articulating your thoughts so well for all of us who are in complete agreement.
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.
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?
The two million words: you read the wrong assignments. Brian is correct.
No, he isn't. So there. Neener, neener, neener....(yawn)
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.
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.
I think his other problem is he's still drinking WAY, WAY, WAY TOO MUCH KOOL-AID.
Ironically, Mr Vintner's comments confirm Mr. Gwyn's assessment of American dysfunction.
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?
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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!
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.
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?
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)?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You are a person of passion. Passion rightly directed is an asset. Wrongly; it becomes your enemy.
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.
I know the Bill of Rights is a set of Amendments, but it's STILL part of The U.S. Constitution.
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)
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.
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)
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!
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.
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.
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.
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 :>)
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.
Tyranny?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
It should be mentioned that Bill Clinton is also a very intelligent man. Democrats seem to have cornered the market on brains.
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".
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.
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.
Obama has indeed done almost everything he promised.
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?
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!
The point can be made that though they are racist, at least they are honest about it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
Karl Rove could give you some insight into that.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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!!
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?
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.
The problem is that we euphorically expected a transformationa l figure, and unfortunately he is a politician like the rest of them.
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.
Only we, the Intelligent Elitists of the Left, know what is best for the masses! Only if........
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)?
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.
Thanks for the laughs, suckers! BTW, yer emperor's nekkid as a jaybird.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Goodbye.
Is that a promise?
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?
"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.
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.
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.
And yep, everything still normal in the neighborhood. Ya' haven't changed a bit! Hope you read my earlier post on respect!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Could be a little more specific? Give us some examples that prove you actually read the article?
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.
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?"
Lighten up.
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.
Warmed over Bush joke? Try ice cold and not funny, wot?
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.
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.
But the main question to most Americans is: Who the hell is he? Why is he so secretive of hid identity?
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.
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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_African-American_mayors
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!!
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?
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?
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.
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.
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!
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!
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
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
-UNHAPPILY THIS PROVES THAT YOU CAN'T READ.
-LOL
Are you a poser? Or are you for real?
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.
-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! !!!!!!!
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.
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.
Would you like me to?
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.
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.
The answer is Nader. Every chance I got.
-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%.
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.
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?!?!
I don't believe you ever lived in TX.
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?
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.
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
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."
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.
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.
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.
I wish you'd make up your mind, Karie. You can't play both sides of the fence forever.
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.
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.
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.
I can agree with that.
Conservatives aren't more racist. They just HATE AMERICA.
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.
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.
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.
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.
" 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
RSS feed for comments to this post.