Jack & Jill Politics

SOME OTHER POVs ABOUT OBAMA


FROM PAUL STREET, ZMAG:





NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT”



We know that the technically black Obama has political reasons to avoid threatening the white electoral majority. Still it is too much for him to absurdly claim, in his power-adoring 2006 campaign book The Audacity of Hope (3), that “what ails working- and middle-class blacks and Latinos is not fundamentally different from what ails their white counterparts”(Obama 2006, p. 245). Also rather audacious is Obama’s praise of the U.S. for historically possessing “an economic system that, more than any other, has offered opportunity to all comers regardless of status, title or rank”(Obama 2006, pp. 231-232) – including apparently the many millions of black chattel “comers” who came in chains, carrying literally subhuman “status.” Just to make sure that no Caucasians fear he’s about reawaken the tragically unfinished revolutions of Reconstruction and the Civil Rights Movement, Obama calms white anxieties further by claiming that black Americans (who suffer from a median household wealth gap of seven cents on the white dollar in the 21st century United States) have been “pulled into the economic mainstream” (Obama, 2006, pp. 248-49).



He also apologizes for whites’ indifference to the persistence of profound racial inequality and discrimination in the U.S (see Street.2007c and Brown 2003) by explaining that “white guilt has largely exhausted itself in America” as “even the most fair-minded of whites…tend to push back against suggestions of racial victimization and race-based claims based on the history of racial discrimination in this country” (Obama 2006, p. 247). This statement of understanding toleration for white racism-denial deftly consigns racial oppression to the supposedly finished past, cleverly deleting its continuing and deeply cumulative (Brown 2003) relevance in the living historical present (4).



http://www.radicalleft.net/blog/_archives/2008/1/7/3450857.html



Hope is a powerful aphrodisiac. America is falling for it again. Obama is another political hustler in a long line of snake-oil politicians. Why are Americans so gullible? Why are they so easily conned? Because they're still hoping for a savior?I watched the beginning of Barack Obama’s victory speech and immediately dropped into deep cynicism.



Surrounded by supporters waving “CHANGE” signs, the Illinois senator went on for what felt like five minutes about how his success in the Iowa caucuses was a vote for “hope” and “change.”



Those are very nice sentiments, but without substance, they’re meaningless advertising slogans, the revolution of Chevrolet and the eternal youth of Mountain Dew.

I loved the list but nothing could change the opinions of our friends over at Black Agenda Report who think Obama is the worst thing for black people and would sell them out in a second for corporate interest. They are entitled to their opinion and I respect them and agree with them on many matters but I feel that they are just exteremely critical of him and unfairly leaving certain things about him out.

I Just Voted for the Next President of the United States BARACK OBAMA!


Can we get a roll call please?



Georgia's coming home to Obama Tonight!

Have you seen this? The Yes We Can Song

I sent this to TPM on their take on this issue...




Com'on Guys....



After going out of the way to ensure that an earlier Clinton statement (re:

Pres. Johnson) was considered in it's full context, and an even more recent

catch of a reporter's misquote which yau also made sure to put in context,

you are uncharacteristically sloppy on this issue... What gives..



Your head ...



Michelle Obama: "I'd Have To Think About" Supporting Hillary As Nominee



In the lead...



Michelle Obama went on Good Morning America today and sent decidedly mixed

signals as to whether she'd back Hillary, should she become the nominee.



But both mischaracterize what was said.



The question was " Could you see yourself (Michelle Obama) working to

support Hilary Clinton should she get the nomination?"



There is a big difference between "working to support" and "supporting" or

"backing" a nominee. The former is active, the latter two passive. It is NOT

unusual that a leading member of the party to back, but not "work to

support" a former adversary. Lots of folks won't campaign actively for a

member of their party with whom they don't get along. There was no

implication that she wouldn't "back" the parties nominee... But for a woman

who only reluctantly began to campaign for her husband, why is it somehow

news worthy that she may not want to campaign for someone whom she may feel

slighted by.



Let's either be more precise or realize that it's a non-story!

CF,


I can't believe something so positive from you..LOL



You keep on coming here, CF.

Tonight I visit your site to give Mr. Obama CREDIT!


I was just listening to the Bev Smith show. For the first time in recorded history (in my estimation) a Black guest was on the show detailing the LIES about the Clinton Administration being the best thing that ever happened to Black people in the past 100 years.



I must admit - THIS NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED were it not for Barack Obama running against the Clinton Machine for the Democratic nomination.



THANK YOU BARACK OBAMA!!!

You have earned my respect for bringing out the TRUTH among people who NEVER, NEVER, NEVER would have voiced certain words absent your drive in this election.