Can President Elect Obama Help Us When Wisdom, Honesty, and Judiciousness No Longer Seem to Matter

By

Dr. Wilmer J. Leon III, Ph.D.

It has not taken long for the criticism, skepticism, and second guessing to begin. Barack Obama has not even been sworn in as the 44th President of the United States and his critics on the so-called progressive left are angry that his cabinet selections suggest a shift to the center or to the right. Meanwhile, critics on the right claim that his actions in response to disgraced Illinois Gov. Blagojevich are politically motivated.

There are few political realities that Obama’s detractors need to appreciate and respect. There is a difference between campaigning and governing. During the primaries both candidates, McCain and Obama played to their bases in order to win their parties nominations. In the general election both candidates had to move closer to the center than their bases preferred in order to have any chance of winning. Many would argue that McCain’s failure to move closer to the center, i.e. selecting Gov. Palin as his running mate to placate the conservative base, cost him dearly.

Now that Senator Obama is president-elect Obama, he has to focus on governing. He can’t effectively govern from the progressive left. America is not as liberal or progressive as the left would like nor as conservative as the right would claim. These political realities are compounded by the practical realities of the housing crisis, banking crisis, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, auto company crisis, etc., etc., etc.

For the most part, president-elect Obama has chosen to fill his cabinet with competent administrators and not ideologues. He seems to be focused on real solutions not theory, conjecture, or philosophy. He is selecting individuals who understand how Washington works and will be able to help structure legislation, pass legislation, and implement effective policy. Obama decided to retain the services of Robert Gates as defense secretary in order to ensure continuity in defense strategy in these very perilous times. While this does not sit well with the progressive left, no one has greater first hand knowledge of the complex issues that face America today.

Granted, not all of the individuals selected have unblemished records. For example, Senator Clinton or “Billary” voted for the war and brings Bill with her. Much to the dismay of progressives, during the Clinton administration Congressman Rahm Emanuel helped to get NAFTA, the Crime Bill, and welfare reform passed. In private practice Eric Holder has represented some questionable corporate clients. In spite of these issues, if president-elect Obama is as strong willed as a president as he was a candidate, these appointees and others will be implementing his policies and not allowing the interests of others to control him.

During the primaries and general election, Barack Obama was criticized by Senator’s Clinton, Biden, McCain and pilloried in the media for not having the requisite experience to “answer the 3:00 AM call” or respond to a real crisis. Gov. Palin questioned his experience as a “community organizer” by saying, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities…" Now that he is selecting experienced and qualified people to serve in his cabinet, including some of his former detractors the criticism has changed from a lack of experience to whether he has abandoned the progressive left. Some progressives are even calling into question his commitment to their issues and his honesty.

As if the attacks from the left are not enough, the right has launched their attack as well. As a result of Illinois Gov. Blagojevich, a fellow Democrat, being charged with conspiring to sell president-elect Obama’s now-vacant Senate seat, political vultures are circling overhead trying to tie him to the scandal.

In spite of the fact that U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has said prosecutors were making no allegations that Obama was aware of any scheming; Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia is on record as saying, "The serious nature of the crimes listed by federal prosecutors raises questions about the interaction with Gov. Blagojevich, President-elect Obama and other high ranking officials who will be working for the future president,…" Why does this raise questions when no connection, direct or indirect has been made? Just as in a time of war, America is in such dire straights that now is not the time for partisan “gotcha” politics of past.

In spite of the fact that Blagojevich himself, is on record having said, "they're (the Obama team) not willing to give me anything except appreciation," Robert M. "Mike" Duncan, chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), states "President-elect Barack Obama's comments on the matter are insufficient at best." President-elect Obama has stated, "I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening" and the U.S. Attorney has made no allegations to the contrary. What else is Obama to say? The truth is its own defense.

Instead of contributing to the media feeding frenzy, president-elect Obama and his team are being measured, judicious, and practical in their approach to this issue. Obama said on Friday, December 12th that he would release the results of an internal investigation into what conversations his aides and advisers may have had with Blagojevich in a matter of days. "What I want to do is to gather all the facts about any staff contacts that may have taken place between the transition office and the governor's office," Obama said. Instead of allowing Obama time to determine the facts, Duncan levies criticism by saying, “Americans expect the highest degree of transparency from their elected leaders, rather than promises of openness on the campaign trail." As chairman of the RNC Duncan is the spokesperson of the party and speaks for every Republican who does not say otherwise.

According to the Wall Street Journal, “President-elect Barack Obama's transition team said it had completed an internal review of contacts with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich -- but wouldn't release its findings until Christmas week, at the request of federal investigators.” In a written statement released by his office late Monday, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald confirmed that he asked for the delay, saying he wanted more time to conduct interviews. Conservative journalist Britt Hume says, “It is curious that Obama has been so cautious about it. He is a cautious man, but you do wonder, don't you? Wonder about what? Even though the Obama team does not have to comply with the request, why would they not?

The one thing that president-elect Obama and his team can not do is get caught up in the conservatives questions or the media’s frenzy and start to put out statements that later prove to be inaccurate. They must remain disciplined and not allow the desire for short-term responses to cause long-term problems.

I am in no way trying to insinuate that president-elect Obama and/or his team are above reproach or should not be questioned. Democracy demands that our representatives be held accountable for what they say and what they do. For the progressive left to question cabinet appointments and claim that they’ve been abandoned or betrayed before the first executive order has been signed or the first piece of legislation proposed is premature, reactionary, and some what naïve.

For the conservative right to try and create a story where there is none is just republican politics as usual. This just demonstrates that they have not learned a lesson from the recent election; the American electorate is tired of their politics as usual.

It is important to understand that many of the causes of the countries problems are grounded in flawed ideology designed to consolidate power and wealth into the hands of a few while the majority in this country are left to suffer. The solutions to these problems will not be grounded in ideology; they will require vision, wisdom, honesty, judiciousness, collaboration, and cooperation. All of these are qualities that president-elect Obama has demonstrated through out his life and career. If they were good enough to get him elected president why can’t people be patient enough to see if they will also help him govern?

Ask not what a President Barack Obama will do for you; ask what you can do to help a President Barack Obama address the tremendous issues that this country is facing.

Dr. Wilmer Leon is the Producer/ Host of the nationally broadcast call-in talk radio program “On With Leon,” a regular guest on CNN’s Lou Dobb’s Tonight, and a Teaching Associate in the Department of Political Science at Howard University in Washington, D.C. Go to www.wilmerleon.com or email: wjl3us@yahoo.com.

© 2008 InfoWave Communications, LLC.

Your Black World: Hillary Clinton, White Greed, and the Rage of White Female Racism

“… When Hillary was crying, and people said that was put on, I really don’t believe it was put on. I really believe that she just always thought, ‘This is mine. I’m Bill’s wife. I’m white. And this is mine. I just got to get up and step into the plate…’ Then out of nowhere came, hey, I’m Barack Obama. And she said, ‘Oh damn, where did you come from? I’m white. I’m entitled. There’s a black man stealing my show.’”

-The Rev. Father Michael Pfleger on Hillary Clinton

“For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and help ensure Barack Obama's defeat, as a way to protest what you call Obama's sexism (examples of which you seem to have difficulty coming up with), all the while claiming to be standing up for women... Your whiteness is showing.”

-Tim Wise on Hillary Clinton’s white allegiant female supporters who oppose Obama.

It was quite a scene to behold at the DNC last week: White Women in their 50s, letting the world (or at least whoever cared to listen) know just why Barack Obama would not get their votes. No matter what he did or didn’t do, they made it explicitly clear that Sen. Obama would never have their support. They staged incoherent protests in the name of their cause: putting Hillary Clinton on the ballot for nomination. It wasn’t until Hillary Clinton posed a timely question to them – in her Tuesday night speech - that they began to see the virtue of not voting McCain. In a highly self-promoting speech, Sen. Clinton paused to query her anxious fans and supporters, “I want you to ask yourselves: Were you in this campaign just for me?” The truth Hillary is much aware of is that a majority of that faction was indeed in the campaign for the sole reason of voting for her. Not for a woman, not for a white woman, but for a “Hillary Clinton type of woman”: white, elitist, rich and powerful.

When Barack Obama embarked on the prestigious journey of selecting a V.P, Sen. Clinton supporters all-but-informed him, that if he dared pick a female as his running mate, they would muster up whatever muscle amassable, and destroy his campaign. It was regarded as an “insult,” for Sen. Obama to bypass the competent Hillary Clinton, and launch for an equally qualified female politician such as Kathleen Sebelius, current Governor of Kansas. Mrs. Clinton’s hubristic supporters had suffered the irreparable loss of defeat one time, and believed that a worthy compensatory prize would be an automatic offer for the Vice-Presidency. It was not enough that, as purported Democrats, they had a candidate with an impressive chance at sweeping the election come November. It seemed as though those supporters were unwilling to accept history repeat itself a second time.

White, female Clintonites often touch upon the 50 year disparity between the granting of voting rights to Women vis-à-vis Black men. What they fail to mention however, is that most of those Black men who wished only to exercise their legal and God-given rights were lynched, burned, murdered, castrated and maimed. For Clinton supporters, Hillary’s nomination as the Democratic Presidential candidate would be a way to repay history and affirm their legacy as second in command to the hierarchy of prestige in this society. It would be unacceptable to accept this fair loss with dignity and grace. To make up for their defeat, derailing Obama’s candidacy would be satisfactory reparation – even if it means advancing the lie, myth and falsehood that Sen. Obama approved of the unavoidable sexism, misogyny and patriarchy that dominated the slow-witted beast’s coverage of Clinton’s campaign. The spokesperson for the leading pro-Hillary-anti-Obama-group, PUMA, would later remark that, “The Democrats are throwing the election away. And for what? An inadequate black male?”

If we flipped the script, and put the shoe on the other foot, one can only imagine the amount of vitriol that would be hurled toward the numerous Black Males who would rightly claim that Sen. Obama had -- and still has – a more challenging campaign as a result of his blackness. Those exact same staunch Hillary supporters would, at the drop of a hat, pull the “Blacks complain too much” card. In reality, the same case can justifiably be made in discontentment with the high level of covert and overt racism which has plagued the 2008 presidential race. Legitimate News organizations have licensed death threats, invective-filled rants, toxic-insinuations, and blatantly false-mischaracterizations made against Sen. Obama. I would humbly suggest that if certain frustrated Black people saw no offense in taking to the streets as a result of this full-frontal assault upon Black folks in general, the expected media outrage that would boil over should be discounted as illegitimate. If Hillary Clinton supporters regard any and all criticisms of her campaign as patently sexist, Black, Brown and Native-American supporters are more than certified to equate any harsh-analysis of Sen. Obama’s campaign as a racially-inflamed insult.

The pretense Hillary Clinton’s adamant fans use in justifying their hatred of Sen. Obama is laughable because they exposed their true colors when Michelle Obama was undergoing a dilemma that was, at the very least, unbearable to watch. Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama, a bright, lucid and well-educated Woman, was, on a daily basis, subjected to the lowest standard of journalism ever experienced in the history of Broadcasting. So-called journalist upon journalist pounded the character, merit and temperament of Mrs. Obama, all in the name of “Investigative Journalism.” From FOX News to the Huffington Post, they expressed anxiety over the possibility of seeing a Strong Black Woman in the White House. She was reduced to a caricature that would make Sara Baartman blush. Hillary Clinton’s “feminist” supporters were nowhere to be found when this façade of folly was being executed by the Right wing and neo-liberal media. Just as in 2006, when Cynthia McKinney – present Presidential Nominee for the Green Party – was being scurrilously assaulted by the News Media, so it is now with Michelle Obama, and once again, white female racism rears its ugly head. Many are aware of Sojourner Truth’s landmark 1851 “Ain’t I a Woman” address, but few are willing to acknowledge that the majority of Truth’s impassioned words were directed at white Women who had placed the priority of their race over that of their gender. Looking back at history, it is saddening that so little has changed.

Grand Author, Essayist and Philosopher, Ralph Waldo Emerson once quipped, “I Have Said So Poorly What I Have Seen So Clearly.” Now is the time to incorporate the mantle of “parrhesia,” and speak the unmitigated truth to power in which ever form it comes in.

Re-posted from Black Commentator

Barack Obama predictions before he became big - Dr Boyce Watkins, Oprah Winfrey, CNN

This video was shot on CNN before Barack Obama became a powerhouse candidate for president. It appears that Dr. Boyce Watkins was on the money when mentioning back then that he would eventually challenge Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. At the time, the pundits thought he was off base.

Hillary Clinton Banking on Assassination

“People have been trying to push me out of this ever since Iowa…there has been this urgency to end this and historically that makes no sense. You know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June. We all remember that Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California…I don’t understand it.”

What an evil, wicked, vile utterance from a former First “Lady.”

They can say what they want about Michelle Obama but, this statement by Clinton, to a newspaper editorial board no less, deserved far more airplay than the “proud of my country” remark. And whether the media hypes it up or not, if anyone thinks they are going to give Hillary a pass on this one, they’ve got another thing coming. There is no explaining away these comments and even her dimwitted apology, where she didn’t even mention Barack, wasn’t good enough.

Black people were so incensed by her blatant malevolence that references to her snatched whatever pedestal she had previously enjoyed within the community and most comments were nothing short of vulgar. My personal fury raged for almost three days and just the sight of her face makes me cringe with an unbelievable revulsion. If Barack is contemplating placing her anywhere in his cabinet, he’d better realize that she wants him gone at all costs. Period.

In the article, Will Hillary Clinton Please Go Away, it was asked what in the world would she do next to sabotage Barack’s inevitable nomination. Not even a week went by before she made the ghastly comments to a South Dakota newspaper and in so doing, put all her cards on the table allowing the world to see just how disturbed she truly is.

Hoping, out of sheer desperation, that the super delegates will steal the election from Barack Obama is dismal enough, but to spend millions of dollars on a failing campaign anticipating or hoping for his murder is just diabolical. I knew that this was the motivation behind her staying in the race but, I dared not publish my suspicions. My thought was, “being right could hurt Barack.” Little did I know that she would be dumb enough to say it herself.

The fear of Barack being assassinated has never left the minds of many who support him, especially within the Black community. We are all too familiar with our shining stars being killed and it has played out in life and played upon our psyches since slavery. That’s why we love Barack and all those who have found the courage to press on. It is usually hard to compliment the media but, in this case, they did a good job in not playing on these fears even when history shows that most assassins and serial killers picked their victims from television and newspapers.

Barack has maintained his dignity throughout his campaign and beaten Hillary fairly. As a result, she has become a woman undone. The White House is her right, not his. Watching the nomination slip through her fingers, she has wittingly or unwittingly called for Barack’s assassination. I tend to believe that she knew exactly what she was doing. I can’t forget about when she accused Barack of plagiarism and the loop of a portion of his speech, “…just words,” played on and on and on. Clearly, she knows and understands the weight and impact of words.

It seems that Hillary and Bill Clinton consider everyone stupid except for them. They have been throwing out harmful statements to inflict damage on Barack only to apologize later for it all to go away. Not this time.

Hillary Clinton is the embodiment of evil and a disgrace to all women. She has not done us girls any service by riding the coattails of her husband, running a despicable campaign, and hoping her opponent is killed. She has made the most destructive female stereotypes come alive; menopausal, mood swings, multiple personalities, crazy, irrational, vindictive, etc..

The time for her to bow out gracefully has long been gone and she is now in a head-rotating demonic fit. She changes personalities on a whim, lies, and spews contempt filled venom as a substitute for pea soup. Barack and his holy water is only making it worse. Now she wants him dead.

There is no other explanation and there is no apology. Any Black “leader” or politician who gives Hillary a pass for this one needs to consider his own credibility and future. If the Democratic Party is not united against John McCain, it will not be the fault of the people, it will be Hillary’s fault for being thoroughly disgusting. If the DNC and Black leadership are wondering how to do damage control, I have four words for them - GET RID OF HER. No vice-president, no nothing. Send her back to New York and let them vote her out of the Senate.

Hillary Clinton has called for the death of Barack Obama and no one should expect unity without sacrifice. She touted this same assassination mantra to Time Magazine but it went virtually unnoticed so, why not give the green light again? The would-be assassins must not have me heard the first time, “Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June!” Otherwise, why in the name of Almighty God, would she say something like that?

It is illegal to yell fire in a crowded room and it should be illegal for Hillary to harp on RFK’s assassination during a volatile presidential race and racially charged atmosphere. Specifically, when above all, the Obamas have received horrible death threats since the announcement of his candidacy. It was reported this morning that as many as 36 super delegates have pledged privately to announce their support for Barack after the June 3rd elections. Hillary is done but, desperation has taken over.

Is Barack and his family really safe? What will happen if harm comes to him? What will come of Florida and Michigan? Is this really going to the Convention? It is impossible for the DNC to please the supporters of both candidates who have voted in record numbers, so how will this play out? Tumultuous times are undoubtedly ahead and the horizon shows a long, hot summer.

One thing is for certain, if anything happens to Barack Obama, his blood will be on the hands of Hillary Clinton and no apology will make it better.


Leila Khaled
Bronzeville Metropolis
www.bronzevillemetropolis.com

Hillary Supporter Pooh-Poohs the Mention of RFK’s Assassination

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE Hillary Supporter Pooh-Poohs the Mention of RFK's Assassination While DNC Continues to Slumber In his Huffington Post article, "Clinton and RFK Deserve Better", my good friend, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, Pooh-poohs Hillary Clinton's mention of Robert Kennedy's assassination in the context of this election, and all the while the DNC slumbers. What is he suggesting , that she's sleep deprived again? I think that's getting kinda old, and I also think that it's way past time for the DNC to come out of hibernation. On May 11th while appearing on Meet The Press Hillary's campaign chairman, Terry McAuliffe, made the same kind of statement to Tim Russert. He said that in order for Hillary to win the nomination "something big" would have to happen. Then Russett asked, "An act of God, or something catastrophic?", and he said, "Yes, something big would have to happen–absolutely." Hillary's behavior has betrayed her to be nothing less than America's version of a Third World demagogue–a woman who is so desperate and hungry for power that the thought of seeing it slip through her fingers has caused her to slip into her own private realm of reality. Personally, I'm seriously concerned that she might have left the ranch and gone camping on us. So at this point it behooves us to take her every utterance dead seriously. Yet, nervous over the growing fracture in the Democratic Party, the DNC is vigorously reminding Democratic voters of the importance of backing the Democratic nominee in order to win the November election. The problem with their position, however, is the DNC is placing all of the responsibility for Democratic success on the voters, while skirting its own responsibility to act in an appropriate and decisive manner. They don't seem to recognize that party loyalty goes both ways. In light of what the nation has gone through in the past seven years, political parties can no longer expect the voters to just fall in and march in lockstep to the party line. That's what's gotten us to where we are today–involved in a senseless war, without jobs, losing our homes, and with the very pillars of our society under attack. The Democratic Party is sure to argue that it is for precisely these reasons that we must stick together, however. But that is only true if you're prepared to accept the proposition that everything that's gone wrong in the past seven years is solely the fault of the Republicans, and that is clearly not the case. While it is true that our current condition is primarily due to Republican greed, shortsightedness, an ineptitude, it is also true that we find ourselves in this condition as a result of the total impotence of the Democratic Party. Democratic politicians have been absolutely gutless for the past seven years. Instead of fighting for the soul of this nation and the ideals they profess to believe in, Democrats have been basing their actions on the direction of the wind; and instead of standing up for what was in the best interest of the nation, they were cowering in the basement on Capitol Hill, desperately trying to protect their own political careers. But now that the Republican Party has all but self-destructed, the Democrats have chosen this moment to come strutting out to tell us all they want to do to protect our interest. Where were they before the Republican Party all but dropped dead of gluttony? If the Republican Party is indeed in the throes of death, it's only resulting from Democrats allowing them to gorge themselves to death. And even now, the Democrats don't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to two egomaniacal Republicrats, as the wreak havoc within the Democrats' own ranks. The DNC should have told Hillary Clinton initially that changing the rules regarding Florida and Michigan in the middle of the game purely for her accommodation was out of the question. They should have been unequivocally emphatic that the decision was made in the beginning of the primaries, and everyone agreed, including Hillary, that the delegates from those states would not be counted due their violation of DNC rules. Case closed. Had the DNC been immediately decisive when the Clintons initially sent up their trial balloon, they would have recognized that they were stepping over the line of fairness. But when the DNC was indecisive, and showed a sign of weakness in carrying out its responsibility, the Clintons smelled blood, and now their trial balloon has become a demand. So catering to the Clintons and dragging its feet in this matter is only going to complicate things further. The Clintons have no intentions of allowing the Democratic Party to remain unified. Before the Clintons decided upon their course of action, they not only took into account the affect it would have on Obama supporters, but also how it would affect all fair minded voters across this land. They then decided upon a gamble. They knew that due to Obama's popularity, Hillary would never become president unless he was brought down. So they decided they were going to do whatever they had to do to tear Sen. Obama down, then even if Hillary didn't get the nomination this year, Obama would still be so damaged that he would lose the election, in which case, she would run in 20012. They've already accepted the fact that their course of action would deeply divide the party, but, ironically, they're depending on Sen. Obama's good character to help rally support for Hillary if, and when, she's allowed to run. They're also gambling that Democrats are so desperate to get the Republicans out of office, that they'd hold their nose and vote for Hillary in spite of her behavior when the time comes. They realized it's a big gamble, but they calculated that a slim chance was better than no chance at all. Of course, there are those who will say that not even the Clintons could be that Machiavellian in their calculations, but look at the facts–this is a woman who agreed not to count the votes of Michigan and Florida, then even while ahead, managed to leave her name on the ballad in Michigan as an insurance policy. And we mustn't forget that one of Hillary's earliest influences was radical organizer Saul Alinsky. In fact, she did her colleges thesis on him–a document that the Clintons have managed to be kept securely under lock and key at Wellesley College. But now, Hillary's current tactics are right out of Alinsky's 1971 book, "Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals." Among Alinsky's rules is to always "personalize " the issue. He taught that "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have." He also says that "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." That rule comes to mind in Hillary's declaration that "all Obama has is a speech." Another one of Alinsky's rules is, "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Thus, Hillary's threat to divide the party. Alinsky goes on to advise that you "Maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition", and "push a negative hard and deep." And finally he instructs that you "pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it"–thus, Hillary's comment, "Hard working, White voters." Hillary has held to Alinsky so snugly that it's almost as if he's her campaign manager, post mortem. But I think even Alinsky would frown upon this campaign. So the DNC might as well make its stand now–and the earlier the better. Because there is nothing they can do to head off a crisis within the party short of handing the nomination to Hillary. It is part of Hillary's game plan to polarize the party, because she knew from the very beginning that if all else failed, her end game would involve a scorched Earth, and a Hail Mary. Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com Stay on top of what's going on around you. From Hip Hop to world and national news--stay informed about those things that impact both the Black community and the entire world, as interpreted by Dr. Boyce Watkins, and some of the nation's top Black writers. Stay in touch with Your Black World www.yourblackworld.com/. It's our piece of the net.

Goose that lays golden eggs on life support

by John Eidson

Over the last seven decades, vote-seeking politicians of both parties have made a succession of self-serving, but short-sighted, Social Security and Medicare promises that seriously threaten the nation’s financial solvency:

• Social Security’s unfunded liability stands at more than $11 trillion.

• Medicare’s unfunded liability stands at more than $65 trillion.

With a combined unfunded liability of more than $76 trillion -- that’s $76,000,000,000,000 -- Social Security and Medicare are unsustainable without draconian benefit cuts and/or unprecedented tax increases, the costs of which are being irresponsibly passed on to our children.

In spite of massive unfunded liabilities, the federal government continues to spend in a manner that pushes the nation closer to the brink of eventual financial collapse.

How much more can the golden goose take before it finally exhales its last breath?

The unfunded liability figures shown above were taken from The Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59227-2005Mar23?language=printer

John Eidson is a white conservative who takes great pleasure in black success. In addition to postings on YourBlackPolitics, he also contributes money-saving ideas to YourBlackMoney.

Hillary & Family: YAAAY BEER

Congratulations, Hill. You've done it. You've rallied your support base to win a supremely unimportant primary, proving to everyone that you still need to sit down.

Y'know, a lot of people were offended by her comments that she is supported by white people. I don't think she really wanted to say it though. I listened to the sound byte and she really stumbled while trying to speak around it. I, on the other hand, was deeply perplexed by her willingness to point out that her supporters are basically, dumb hicks.

“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” Hillary said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among [working-class] white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

True, you don't have to attend college in order to be intelligent. I've met plenty of wise old people who weren't able to attend because of short money. Still, we're talking about West Virginia. Kentucky. Yes, plenty of smarts to go around there! Or maybe it's me who's being elitist now. I'm out of touch.

No, Mrs. Clinton is clearly the one out of touch here. She feels that she has a broader support base from "uneducated whites," yet Obama won more of these whites with Wisconsin, Virginia, Maryland, Oregon, Washington state, Connecticut, Vermont, Iowa, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North
Dakota, Minnesota, Kansas, and Missouri. Oh, I'm sorry. I've misremembered. All of those states are financial centers bustling with people that are college-educated and rich.

Let's get real here. The people in Kentucky and W. Va. vote for Clinton because they're bigots. Any brown person - or white friend of a brown person - knows this. There are plenty of non-collegiate whites across the country and many still voted for Obama, because they're aware of the issues. They know that Hillary's a lying witch who'll do whatever she can to hold on to power. They may also remember how badly she and her other half screwed things up in the 90s.

Clinton's actual base is merely a clot of xenophobes. Take, for instance, Leonard Simpson of Mingo County, West Virginia. He stated in an AP interview that he is a lifelong Democrat. But given a choice between Barack Obama and John McCain in November, the 67-year-old retired coalminer said he'd vote Republican.

"I heard that Obama is a Muslim and his wife's an atheist," said Mr. Simpson, drawing on a cigarette.

Is that what Hillary is proud to claim as her base? There's nothing I can even say to punctuate that. These people obviously don't even watch TV, let alone read. Otherwise, they'd've been able to see Obama clearly state on multiple debates that he's Christian - even though religion isn't supposed to have anything to do with our election process. On the other hand, Mr. Simpson hasn't been able to see all the crap about Rev. Wright. The truly sad part, however, is they weren't able to see Hillary freeze when George Stephanopoulos asked her how she'd enforce the mandate that is her "Universal Healtchare Plan." And as I read the article about West Va's upcoming primary, I just wondered how many of the people they talked to had teeth.

An Obama Bumber Sticker Changed my World

One of my favorite things to do on a Saturday in Central NY is to go to the Regional Market and pick up all of my fresh fruits and veggies for the super athlete I've been growing for a while now, and to help with the diet thing that most of us ladies know too much about. It is my happy place full of flowers, spices, fresh herbs and our favorite wheat bread made by the nice Mennonite people. So it just added to my enjoyment when I saw a booth full of ladies asking me if I was registered to vote. I pride myself on having voted in every major election and most of the smaller ones that have come my way, so I politely said no thank you I'm already registered. But, wait! They did have something I could use, Obama 08 bumper stickers! They had stickers and buttons and wonderful Obama themed items that almost made me drop my reusable market bag of parsnips.

Could it be? Finally! People publicly ready to say we are moving on? Let's move on to the real business of kicking McCain's buttocks. I was elated. I got two bumper stickers before I realized, as I was walking away, that hey, I could help them I should go back. I went back to introduce myself but since I had been up since 5:30 with no caffeine, I wasn't making any sense at all. I finally got it across that I was part of my area's Democratic Committee and was looking forward to the next few months helping get Barrack elected. We exchanged information and I gleefully finished my shopping and picked up some coffee from the volleyball/track family that has a pizza stand so if I ran into anyone else I could at least remember who I was this time.

That experience was a turning point in my thinking. I went from really irritated that Hillary is refusing to give it up already, to felling pity for her because she just looks so pathetic, look at her still trying, how cute. Up until that point I was offended that the DNC was allowing this spectacle to continue. It seemed to me that by not pressuring her to stop it was like they were saying, "Come on Hillary we can't let the Black guy get it". I couldn't imagine them sitting idly by while two White men tore each other and the party apart for no good reason while the Republican candidate just sat back and took notes. But I understand now the power the Clintons formally wielded would cause pause to anyone who defied them and went over to the other side.

Now the superdelagates are abandoning the sinking ship and even switching allegiances to save themselves. I find the incessant commentary on CNN amusing instead of infuriating. Even their pundits are saying why are we even talking about this anymore, lets move on to Obama vs McCain, or when Hillary is gone can Obama pull the Clinton's constituency? Obama is hanging out in jeans playing Taboo and Hillary is raiding the family coffers to try to continue in her futile attempts to do what again? Before you know it there will be nothing left to leave Chelsey. And we will never know how she feels about it,because even though she is pushing 30, she still isn't allowed to talk to the media except to give snippy little evil comments. She gets that from Dad's side I'm guessing.

Here we are Tuesday, West Virginia primary day and Hillary is favored to win that state by a landslide and she is all excited. Somewhere in the back of her deluded little mind she still thinks there is a chance, while the rest of the world has moved on. Her own party is even placating her. "Okay Hillary if you won't stop playing at least try to be nice so you don't break anything, okay". And all the while everyone contemplates what kind of special care she might need when all of this is over. It is funny and sad at the same time. Here was this woman with a great family and prestigious educational background, that some people may have even looked up to once. To be reduced to nothing more than a joke. Her best hope is to be vice president to the man she had spent months trying to decimate and discredit.

Let's explore that idea. Although some people think that would be a great idea to have an Obama/Clinton ticket, I'm thinking that is the height of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer. After months of sitting back and dealing with the Clinton attack team, now Obama is supposed to turn the other cheek and let the wolves in the house? They are so desperate for power they don't even realize the damage they have done to their own party. Bill may have been the come back kid but Hillary is no Bill and she ain't comin back. What she should do is just concede and throw her support behind Obama unconditionally. Doubt that will happen though, that would be a gracious act. I also heard that other front runners have paid off some of the campaign debts of their rivals in order to gain the rivals support. Let's think about that, Obama paying off Hillary's debts to make her play nice. Debts that were incurred running arguably the nastiest campaign ever at this level with 99% of that nastiness pointed directly at him. Coming from one of his minor donors, Oh hell naw!

But now I have my Obama 08 bumper sticker and all is right with the world. For me it is more than just a sticker, it is a symbol that the Nation is listening to and accepting the numbers and that we are now moving on to more positive things ahead, a Democrat in the White House. People are ready to stop giving the Clinton's the attention they crave and start doing things to bring about the change the Country has asked for. It means I can put away some of my dislike for the Clintons, Okay, maybe not quite yet, and look forward to the future. Supporting the Democratic nominee Barrack Obama and helping him defeat McCain. I would like to take time to thank the Market Ladies for being my ray of hope between the maple syrup and the wine. You have restored my faith and rejuvenated my spirit. Hopefully I see you again soon because I'm gonna need some more of those stickers!

This Isn't 1982, Idiot

I was told about another talking-head Larry King show, where Carole Simpson (some of you may remember her as the first black woman to anchor ABC news back in the late 1970s/early 1980s) was on babbling about how white people won't vote for Obama because of the Tom Bradley effect.

Now, for those who don't know, the Tom Bradley effect is simply the instance where voters tell pollsters they'll vote for one candidate, and then the voters vote another way. In that particular case, Tom Bradley was a black California politician who logged a jillion poll survey yeas, especially from white voters, but lost because they presumably voted for his opponent. Although it could've been that they just didn't go vote.

At any rate, the media blabbermouths are trying to dredge all this up about Obama so they can pigeonhole him as "the black guy," when it's evident that people care more about what he's saying. I just don't understand these folks who will not move out of the 1950s. They speak about the Bradley effect, while clearly overlooking recent history: Deval Patrick was elected GOVERNOR of Massachusetts in 2006 by a landslide. I guess they attribute it to Massachusett's huge black population - all 5% of them! And what of Wellington Webb in Denver? Elected 3 times in a row as mayor. Or Willie Brown in San Francisco? Places that are chock-full of white people who got off their rumps and voted for black candidates over and over and over again. I wonder how they explain that when floating the Bradley Effect?

Or perhaps people are voting for "the Black guy." A group of Stanford law students did a very simple, yet powerful, activity: they gave 'grades' to law firms based on the "face" the firm presented to the public. When the law students walked into the firm for interviews for summer internships they examined one key factor: did they SEE diversity when they walked in the door? They did this exercise because there was a really interesting research project conducted by Fortune magazine about millenials (aka Gen Y; those born from 1980 to 1994) and what motivates them in the workforce.



The number one thing they said was that they must SEE diversity when they walk into the office, not just in the mailroom or answering phones, but at the decision-making tables. The fact that "seeing diversity" logged as the number one thing the respondents stated to a FORTUNE MAGAZINE survey was big big news. The write-up of the research only reflected what anybody with eyes can see in the census reports - the population has shifted already. Barely into the 2nd decade of the 21st century HALF of those entering the workforce for the first time will be of color. So who's voting for Obama? The open-minded parents and older siblings of these kids; the friends of their families.

To GenXers and Millennials, Obama isn't merely "the black guy." He has meditative rhetoric and even-handed stances - a marked change from the knee-jerk politics of the last 60 years. It's as if America has been on auto-pilot since it's inception. Everyone non-white or non-American is somehow anti-American. Make no mistake: McCain is a war pig set on fighting "the commies," "the terrorists," "the Mexicans" or whomever suits his backers' needs, and Hillary will too because she's backed by similar forces.

Younger voters don't want to hear all that crap. They're friends and children children of immigrant families and come from multi-cultural experiences. They read international news. They know that "everyone" is not an enemy. And let's not forget that Obama is not just black, he's bi-ethnic: the child of a black man and a white woman, raised by his grandparents, without knowing his father, and has an Indonesian sister. A bona fide "other" category. He's lived in states and countries that most Americans haven't even seen. These halfwit pundits shouldn't gloss over white awareness or underestimate Obama's appeal. The face of America is changing, and so its "face" must change too.

This Isn't 1982, Idiot

I was told about another talking-head Larry King show, where Carole Simpson (some of you may remember her as the first black woman to anchor ABC news back in the late 1970s/early 1980s) was on babbling about how white people won't vote for Obama because of the Tom Bradley effect.

Now, for those who don't know, the Tom Bradley effect is simply the instance where voters tell pollsters they'll vote for one candidate, and then the voters vote another way. In that particular case, Tom Bradley was a black California politician who logged a jillion poll survey yeas, especially from white voters, but lost because they presumably voted for his opponent. Although it could've been that they just didn't go vote.

At any rate, the media blabbermouths are trying to dredge all this up about Obama so they can pigeonhole him as "the black guy," when it's evident that people care more about what he's saying. I just don't understand these folks who will not move out of the 1950s. They speak about the Bradley effect, while clearly overlooking recent history: Deval Patrick was elected GOVERNOR of Massachusetts in 2006 by a landslide. I guess they attribute it to Massachusett's huge black population - all 5% of them! And what of Wellington Webb in Denver? Elected 3 times in a row as mayor. Or Willie Brown in San Francisco? Places that are chock-full of white people who got off their rumps and voted for black candidates over and over and over again. I wonder how they explain that when floating the Bradley Effect?

Or perhaps people are voting for "the Black guy." A group of Stanford law students did a very simple, yet powerful, activity: they gave 'grades' to law firms based on the "face" the firm presented to the public. When the law students walked into the firm for interviews for summer internships they examined one key factor: did they SEE diversity when they walked in the door? They did this exercise because there was a really interesting research project conducted by Fortune magazine about millenials (aka Gen Y; those born from 1980 to 1994) and what motivates them in the workforce.



The number one thing they said was that they must SEE diversity when they walk into the office, not just in the mailroom or answering phones, but at the decision-making tables. The fact that "seeing diversity" logged as the number one thing the respondents stated to a FORTUNE MAGAZINE survey was big big news. The write-up of the research only reflected what anybody with eyes can see in the census reports - the population has shifted already. Barely into the 2nd decade of the 21st century HALF of those entering the workforce for the first time will be of color. So who's voting for Obama? The open-minded parents and older siblings of these kids; the friends of their families.

To GenXers and Millennials, Obama isn't merely "the black guy." He has meditative rhetoric and even-handed stances - a marked change from the knee-jerk politics of the last 60 years. It's as if America has been on auto-pilot since it's inception. Everyone non-white or non-American is somehow anti-American. Make no mistake: McCain is a war pig set on fighting "the commies," "the terrorists," "the Mexicans" or whomever suits his backers' needs, and Hillary will too because she's backed by similar forces.

Younger voters don't want to hear all that crap. They're friends and children of immigrant families and come from multi-cultural experiences. They read international news. They know that "everyone" is not an enemy. And let's not forget that Obama is not just black, he's bi-ethnic: the child of a black man and a white woman, raised by his grandparents, without knowing his father, and has an Indonesian sister. A bona fide "other" category. He's lived in states and countries that most Americans haven't even seen. These halfwit pundits shouldn't gloss over white awareness or underestimate Obama's appeal. The face of America is changing, and so its "face" must change too.