The Unquestionable Barak Obama
Several days ago Glen wrote my exact feelings on Cullman, Alabama’s election of a black mayor. I thought a few more questions needed to be asked so here’s a little ditty I wrote this morning on my site.
Thanks Dean-O:
About an hour from my hometown of Florence, Alabama is the city of Cullman. Cullman is a typical sleepy deep South town, with barber shops, diners, and old men on Court House steps. As I’ve traveled the world a little bit, I have often been informed of the shame that I should carry about on my shoulders because I hail from the heart of Dixie. Apparently we all still hate black people, and just about any other non-white face. News to me.
It’s news to Cullman as well. The city, which is 96% white, just elected their first black mayor. Interestingly enough, it didn’t take an awareness campaign or a march. People simply listened to the issues and voted.
“Really, I never realized he’s black,” said a woman in a restaurant, smiling.
“He’s black?” asked Lou Bradford, a Cullman police officer, jokingly.
It didn’t make national headlines, but this moment of enlightenment came to the world not through legistlation, or agitation, but simply through good people paying attention.
Ooooh. Ahhhh.
Unfortunately, no one will be paying attention this fall when the State’s electoral votes go to John McCain. The facts will be spun to say that Southern States are still being run by white suit kingfish politicos who only live to sip mint julips and reminisce about the “good ole days.”
Not a bad thing to do by the way, minus the white suit.
I’ll admit I like Barak Obama. There’s no way in hell his policies would win my vote, but I’d have a beer with the guy. He’s charismatic, clueless about reality, but full of energy. He’s simply likeable. The driving force on the left however simply can’t look beyond his skin color. The superficiality of the Demoratic party now forces them to promote Obama. Not only is he a socialist, but by God, he’s black too!
Here’s to progress.
Sadly, Barak Obama, due to the racial sensitivies of our age is untouchable. Non-black people can not criticize a black public figure in America without being instantly labeled. Nevermind the fact that it was largely the Democrats in the ’60s who supported segregation to the end. Senator Obama has some huge questions to answer about where exactly he and his supporters are coming from on some issues. Many, he himself will never be asked to answer because it’s simply too politically incorrect.
It has been widely documented that his church is “black first.” Is that racist in and of itself?
The Pastor as well as the membership of Trinity United Church of Christ is committed to a 10-point Vision:
- A congregation committed to ADORATION.
- A congregation preaching SALVATION.
- A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
- A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
- A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
- A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
- A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
- A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
- A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
- A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.
Or perhaps he might explain why supporters in Houston link his campaign with Che Guevara, the noted Cuban socialist murderer?
There was a time when the Civil Rights movement was needed (led largely in Washington by white people I might add). Affirmative action in the right context was appropriate. These movements were meant to level the playing field. They were never intended to flip the teeter-totter the other way. If any noteable black person is unquestionable simply because of the ramification of offending his skin color, then one must wonder if the Civil Rights movement did fail after all.
It remains the only question that can be asked.
Great ending. They are going to lynch, I mean jump all over you for this one though, Nathan.
Like that’s new?
What you said was true though. Any candidate that fits into minority or victim status is the perfect candidate for the Dems to run. They probably have extra people monitoring the Internet, making sure people say stuff like “I’d have a beer with the guy”, instead of “I would have a malt liquor with the guy.”
Maybe I’m not paying close enough attention, but I don’t see what’s so horrible about Obama’s Church.
I looked into it a while back, because on the surface it sounds like Marcus Garvey/Black nationalism stuff. But after checking it out, I don’t think it is. It actually sounds like a positive influence for young blacks. The pastor’s association with Farakhan isn’t good though. But still, it doesn’t worry me that much. Just speaking for myself, of course.
The biggest worry point for me is number 10, which smells like left wing theocracy. But that’s pretty common for “progressive” Christians, you know, the nobleness of having the state confiscate wealth at the point of a gun and then redistribute it.
Perhaps the meaning isn’t ill-intended, but how about that delivery huh? Try making a church tout its commitment to its European ancestry, or their white roots? (Whatever those might be =)
That’s a good point. Also, a Democratic Strategist working for Hillary Clinton made a good point the other night about his failure to initially reject Farakhan’s endorsement. She said, and btw she was black which shouldn’t matter but for some reason does, that if a similar person had made similar comments that were anti-African-American, he would have surely rejected his endorsement outright.
I really don’t think it’s fair to say that Obama can’t be criticized because he’s black. I mean, that’s just a fairy tale. Hillary Clinton has attacked Obama on any number of issues, and I’ve heard no one suggest that there are racial motivations for any of it. Similarly for John McCain’s criticisms of Obama.
His skin color might make him “immune” to certain kinds of criticisms, but those are almost exclusively criticisms he wouldn’t be subjected to were it not for his skin color.
So I guess I’m confused as to exactly why you think he’s immune to criticism. Perhaps you could list specific examples of criticisms you believe are fair criticism, but which are supposedly off-limits because of his race.
I can’t speak to Obama’s particular congregation, but I’m quite familiar with his denomination, the United Church of Christ. My wife is a member. They hardly seem like radicals to me.
As to the Che thing, I’ve never understood his continued popularity (especially among young people), but I don’t think the guilt-by-association argument holds a lot of water. Hordes of conservatives buy books claiming that McCarthy was an American hero, or that internment camps are an idea whose time has come again, but we don’t smear the Republican candidate with those ideas, do we? Not unless he actually advocates them. I don’t see why the Democratic candidate should be held to a different standard.
And I still don’t know why everyone keeps calling Obama a socialist. I haven’t seen a single plank in his platform that could be even vaguely construed as an intent to nationalize the country’s manufacturing and distribution facilities.
One more thing:
Nevermind the fact that it was largely the Democrats in the ’60s who supported segregation to the end.
Democrats like Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond? Say, what ever happened to those Democrats, anyway?
Democrats like Robert Byrd and George Wallace.
I think a lot of people have criticized the Clintons for using race, and they did too.
Democrats like Robert Byrd and George Wallace
Believe me, I’m glad we’re rid of Wallace, and I won’t shed much of a tear when Byrd retires, either. But those are still the exceptions rather than the rule; most of the anti-civil-rights Democrats defected to the GOP when the Democratic platform embraced the civil rights movement, and the GOP welcomed them with open arms. In any case, bringing up the history of half a century ago while ignoring what has happened since is a tired rhetorical trick. The Republicans used to be the big government, tax-and-spend party. I assume you don’t still hold that against them. “What have you done for me lately,” as the saying goes.
I think a lot of people have criticized the Clintons for using race, and they did too.
Well, yeah, except that those were actually legitimate criticisms, wouldn’t you agree?
Absolutely. Though I don’t think Bill or Hillary are racists, just populists which is probably worse when you think about it.
I guess you have to be born in AL to believe and continue to circulate a story that a Che Guevara Flag was on the wall in an Obama campaign office. It’s incredible how desperate the wingnuts are to swiftboat Obama… in an era that has seen very very seldom any good news about GOP policies and Bush, it’s understandable why they’d be grasping at straws, even petty straws. The fact is that the alleged photo was not of an Obama campaign office and had nothing to do with Obama’s campaign, MSNBC debunked this story 2 nights ago yet half the wingnuts in America believe it to be true. Propaganda is insideous, it’s really worse than ignorance, it’s a sign of weakminded shallow people who base their politics on slogans like “cut n run” … “empty suit”… “educated as a Muslim” … playing upon peples ignorance, bigotry, fear.
If you’re a Republican, especially a young Republican, you’re likely just too ignorant to the realities around you and have not really thought too much about the GOP’s record in this last 7 yrs.
Glen:
That leaves my original question unanswered, then. Can anyone produce even a shred of evidence that anyone has unfairly been labeled a racist for an otherwise fair criticism of Barack Obama’s policy positions or experience (or lack thereof). The “untouchable” meme is widespread in Right Blogistan, but I have yet to see anyone produce even a scrap of evidence to substantiate it.
Whole different game when he is running against a Republican.
Except that the two remaining Republicans have already been critical of Obama, and I’m not aware of anyone leveling any allegations of racism against either McCain or Huckabee.
Seems like this entire meme exists only in the imaginations of the right-wing, at least so far.
William–
If the Che Guevara bit was debunked, then I made a mistake. Not my first, and I’m in like company I’m sure. I’m not aware of any debunking, but then again I have a job. Paying taxes for 30% of America gets a little time consuming.
If I made a mistake, here’s to admissions. If not, roll on. The bottom line is that I still think many of Guevara’s boys would love an Obama Administration. Isn’t every American unknowingly a socialist after all?
…and I sir, am no “young Republican.” While you label that “group” as ignorant, your typical liberal patronage comes bleeeeeeeding through.
You probably haven’t paid attention to the realities of liberalism in America over the last 40 years.
Paying taxes for 30% of America gets a little time consuming.
It’s an outrage. You should pack your belongings for the first steamship to… well, surely some country has lower taxes and a higher quality of life.
.
In the complete and total absence of any examples of the sort of unfair labeling conservatives are complaining about, after asking a few times for such examples, I’m forced to conclude that this “problem” exists only in the imagination of the right-wing.
You’re right comrade Prestonian, I’m wrong. For being a working class, tax paying white American I am truly sorry. Who wants my kid’s lunch money? It’s tainted with my work ethic and I can hardly stand the guilt.
You’re right comrade Prestonian, I’m wrong.
And yet, you’re bright enough to have figured that out in less than one day!
.
I was merely suggesting that you, Nathan, bootstrap yourself into lower taxes and a better quality of life. Surely you’re not dependent on America to create your utopia. Go do it; make Reagan’s ghost proud.
.