Blog Widget by LinkWithin
Search
Sponsors

The artist behind the blacksnob logo!

Learn how to get pregnant fast at ConceiveEasy

Sponsors

FOLLOW THE SNOB:

Get the RSS@blacksnob on TwitterFacebookEmail the Snob

Subscribe to The Black Snob Feed by Email

 


blog advertising is good for you

Like Me, Really Like Me

Keep The Snob Alive!
Get Your Swag On!

snob swag 220 animated

Sponsor

Sponsor


blog advertising is good for you

General Snobbery

Entries in Obama (150)

Wednesday
Apr162008

Yes We Can Do 'The Colbert Report!'


The Obama campaign didn't waste a minute getting up Michelle Obama's appearance on The Colbert Report. But I thought I'd wait for the show to get their video up because I knew it would be of better quality. (And if you want to see even better quality, click here.)

One. I already raved that she looked beautiful.

Two. I found it both hilarious and a little cringe-worthy when Stephen started fake hitting on her.

Three. I thought she did a decent job considering she was doing her best not to fall into Stephen's elaborate comedy traps. I would have liked her to loosen up a little and let more of the funny fly as she has a deft sardonic wit, but considering how every "um" and "urh" coming out of her mouth is scrutinized I don't blame her for playing it safe and rattling off some talking points. Although the "yes we can" bit was classic Michelle, being that it was both kind of funny and had some unintentional sexual energy behind it that I'm sure was really about "Yes we can, wash the dishes" and "yes we can take out the garbage." Not "yes we can" whatever my lizard brain was picking up on.

Four. Way to show some leg. Those stilts were long. If you got it, flaunt it and my God, she was flaunting it.

Five. It really would be awesome for Barack to come on the show and administer a beat down on Stephen for his lewdness, but we know that's not going to happen. Barack isn't Dennis Kucinich or Mike Hucakbee, who both had free range to act a damn fool on Colbert every time.

BTW. Did anyone see Chris Matthews on The Colbert Report earlier this week? Talk about cringe-worthy. He went all earnest and started talking about running for senate from Pennsylvania in 2010. Dear sweet Joseph, Mary and Jesus, there are already too many whack jobs in Congress. It's bad enough he's on television.

Monday
Apr142008

I'm still on break! Honest to God!

This is just a request for input. Not a real posting. I swear, Moody! I'm totally not going to blog anymore today!

By popular demand (including you, Constructive Feedback! Feel special!) I will likely be doing another "Opinions on Obama" series since the one with black Conservatives did so well. The folks at DailyKos were listing POV's they wanted to hear left and right. So the next one will include some members of the CBC as well as black literary, media and famous figures.

Send me an e-mail with the names you want to read about. Constructive Feedback, try to keep it under 50 names, pretty please. I'm only human. ;)

Here are some names thus far. Feel free to toss in what you like and I'll count up who everyone desires the most:

Rep. Maxine Waters

Rep. Charles Rangel

Former Ambassador Andrew Young

TV host Tavis Smiley

Rep. John Lewis

Rep. William Lacy Clay, Jr.

Cornell West

BET founder Robert Johnson

Author/Activist Kevin Powell

Author Alice Walker

Author/feminist bell hooks

Poet/Author Nikki Giovanni

Author Michael Eric Dyson

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan

Poet/Author Maya Angelou

Author Toni Morrison

Washington Post columnist Eugene Washington

Washington Post editorial writer Jonathan Capehart

Newspaper columnist Clarence Page

Democratic strategist Donna Brazille

I know I'm forgetting some other good ones, so tell me about five people who you like off this list and add who you think I forgot and would be good to look at too.

Thanks! I'm going back to NOT BLOGGING, for real this time!

Sunday
Apr132008

Fear and Loathing in Black America: Clarence Thomas and Barack Obama

This is the last in a series I started two weeks ago on black conservative opinion on Barack Obama here at The Black Snob. I appreciate everyone reading the series even if the people I wrote about made you want to froth at the mouth. I hope everyone learned something from it.

While I do not always agree with what many black conservatives have to say, I do not believe them to be the racial bogeymen they are often made out to be. I wanted to hear what they had to say about Obama and the presidential race because all too often we put ourselves in individual echo chambers where the only views we ever hear are our own. This last piece is on Clarence Thomas. Justice Thomas has never divulged any opinion from what I could find on Obama, but that wasn't entirely necessary. This last piece is more on the sickness of racism and the self-imposed racial prisons we put ourselves in. Thanks again for reading.

It would be easy to demonize my last subject. Mostly because he rarely says anything so people often free to project whatever amount of craziness they desire.

Sex crazed schemer? A white wannabe? Uncle Ruckus from Boondocks? Mad man riding Justice Antonin Scalia’s coattails? Captain contradiction?

He is a caricature on both sides of the political aisle. To Republicans he is a refutation of affirmative action, discrimination and racism, although he has never said racism was dead and remains scarred by it.

And he’s been labeled by many black Democrats as a turncoat, a Judas, a sell-out, an Uncle Tom, an Oreo, an uppity “House” Negro and a host of other symbols of betrayal and black self-loathing.

A lot of that comes from Thomas’ objection to Affirmative Action. The common charge is that he’s a hypocrite because he benefited from the program through a minority scholarship to Yale. In 1996, discontinued black political magazine Emerge went as far to feature a cover illustration of Thomas as a grinning lawn jockey. Next to him read the words “Uncle Thomas, Lawn Jockey for the Far Right.”

Thomas attempted to confront this hostility in a frosty 1998 reception at the black lawyers’ National Bar Association’s convention in Memphis. He told the group that he wanted to “assert my right to think for myself, to refuse to have my ideas assigned to me, as though I was an intellectual slave.”

I've found during my almost 20 years in Washington that the tendency to personalize differences has grown to be an accepted way of doing business. … I for one have been singled out for particularly bilious and venomous assaults. These criticisms, as near as I can tell, and I admit that it is rare that I take notice of this calamity—have little to do with any particular opinion, though each opinion does provide one more occasion to criticize. Rather, the principle problem seems to be a deeper antecedent offense. I have no right to think the way I do because I'm black.

 

During the speech, Thomas said being spurned by his own pained him “more deeply than any of you can imagine.” He said all his efforts were meant to help black people, not hurt.

Thomas is the patron saint of black conservatism.

Enigmatic and tortured, his life story, detailed in his biography “My Grandfather’s Son,” is one about succeeding at everything, and failing anyway. No matter the fight he puts up he can do nothing because everything is tainted with his blackness. He can’t win living amongst the racism he can not change.

I selected Clarence Thomas as they last person I would look at in this series because he and the person who started the series, political strategist Amy Holmes, were the individuals who made me want to write it in the first place.

Thomas’ biography convinced me that while I don’t agree with his political ideology he truly believes he is doing what is best for black Americans. Therefore his ideas should be attacked, not his intent. And Holmes, despite being labeled quickly as a sell-out was among the chorus of black conservatives who wanted shock jock Don Imus fired after his made lewd comments about black players on the Rutgers' women's basketball team.

After that I began to notice that most black people, on a sliding scale, were in agreement on what racism was. The debate broke down along perception. It devolved into a childish shouting match of black conservatives calling black Liberals hustlers, fearmongerers and schemers while black Liberals called their conservative halves hypocrites, sell-outs and tools.

Despite being more than 22 million of the US population, blackness can be very rigid in thought. Hundreds of years of racism and isolation has created real and manufactured boundaries to keep everyone on message all the time. It's not always successful and while some get a pass others catch hell. There is not a lot of wiggle room for dissent and the slightest thing can put you on the outs.

This isn’t just the case with black conservatives. As a black “Liberal” I’ve received nasty looks for being pro-gay rights and I've been called a Lesbian for saying I was a feminist. There are so many suffocating, confining rules of blackness I was curious to see who among these loathed black conservatives, right-leaning centrists and Republicans were really “dangerous.” How many of them held views that were actually harmful to black Americans and how many were like me, simply going against conventional wisdom?

That’s sort of where the “Obama test” came from. Too often people label individuals they don’t agree with as if they are a monolith. In the case of Thomas Sowell, Larry Elders, Armstrong Williams, et al, I had some people write me that every individual on my list were irrational puppets of their white masters.

But there was another side to this test. Barack Obama was once considered not “black enough” by the grand doyens and doyennes of blackness because he did not come out of the black protest movement tradition. He was biracial. And because his father was Kenayn he was accused of not being a real black American. Obama did not have the historical DNA of slavery built into his conscious.

For many, that was enough of a reason to ignore him.

It’s very strange to say, but Clarence Thomas and Barack Obama have a lot in common. Their political beliefs are incredibly different, but their struggle with both acceptance of and rejection by the most exclusive North American cult of identity. In their quest to find themselves they asked to be judged as men and were promptly told no, by everyone, regardless of political ideology, ethnicity and financial status.

That’s the paradox. How can you be judged as a “man” in racialized American culture? How can you be post-racial when you may be the only one who thinks that way? Who but other blacks can understand what it is like if you are dark and hated like Thomas or biracial and beloved like Obama? Our experience in America is singular and no amount of fame or money can allow you to fully escape racism. You cannot escape discrimination and you can not escape the binds placed on you by worlds both white and black. You only have two choices: Ignore it or jump through the hoops.

Obama’s running for president, so obviously he’s chosen some perilous hoop hoping. Thomas’ leaping days passed long, long ago, but both still combat the famed “twoness” WEB Du Bois once wrote about.

When I was in elementary school I was taught and memorized this poem by Paul Lawrence Dunbar, “We Wear the Mask.”

We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes
This debt we pay to human guile;
With torn and bleeding hearts we smile

When you look at Clarence Thomas and Barack Obama you are looking black America squarely in the eye. You are looking at the past and the present, the pro and the con, the good and the bad, the id, ego and superego. You are looking at all the contradictions and contortions, truths and lies, loves and self-hatred.

We beat these internal beasts because we are these internal beasts.

If we purport to believe in Democracy, as we black Americans claim, we should be able to handle a cadre of conflicting black intellectuals without ululating Judas over and over. We should be able to have a reasonable debate and choose to dislike them without reducing the discussion to name calling and taunts. If their ideas are bad, attack the ideas. If you think they are in bed with other diverting interests, attack that. But I gave up damning the psychology of minds I could not read long ago. It seemed odd, myself who has been accused of not being black enough, to call someone the worst of the worst, a Judas, unless I had some proof to back up that vision of grease paint faces grinning like Cheshire cats in the dark, gaining pleasure off the pain of folks dark as they, then curl up like Tomcats at the toes of their masters.

It’s sort of like calling a person who’s for universal healthcare a Nazi – it’s both historically inaccurate and a gross hyperbole.

Clarence Thomas wouldn’t vote for Barack Obama, but I hope he wouldn’t call him greasy, Chicago-style politician benefiting from black misery either. I’d hope he’d just call him wrong and leave it at that.

I know I can call Thomas wrong and leave it at that too.

Have no life? Read all the previous entries on The Black Snob!

Sunday: Amy Holmes
Monday: Condoleezza Rice
Tuesday: Ward Connerly
Wednesday: Shelby Steele
Thursday: Alan Keyes
Friday: JC Watts
Saturday: Colin Powell
Sunday: Armstrong Williams
Monday: Michael Steele
Tuesday: John McWhorter
Wednesday: LaShawn Barber and Herman Cain
Thursday: Star Parker and Eric Wallace
Friday: Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell
Saturday: Juan Williams
Sunday: A final analysis, “Who Would Clarence Thomas Vote For?”

Sunday
Apr132008

End It On This!

Is this really what they're fighting about?

At issue are comments (Barack Obama) made privately at a fundraiser in San Francisco last Sunday. He was trying to explain his troubles winning over some working-class voters, saying they have become frustrated with economic conditions:

"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

The comments, posted Friday on The Huffington Post Web site, set off a blast of criticism from Clinton, Republican nominee-in-waiting John McCain and other GOP officials, and drew attention to a potential Obama weakness — the image some have that the Harvard-trained lawyer is arrogant and aloof.

Of all the things to fight over we're arguing about how "offensive" it is call people in rural America "bitter" because their jobs dried up and blew away, never to return.

This is pretty pathetic argument where it sees there is no "there" there, i.e. this is trumped up bullshit. My fellow brother in the struggle, The Field Negro, thinks this was a major gaffe by Obama, one that opened him up to a lot of criticism that could be parlayed into a little story that goes a lil' sumpthin' like, "Obama can't buy a clue."

I honestly was not going to blog about the "O" man until after the debates next Tuesday, but apparently the "O" man went and put his foot in his mouth while talking to a bunch of fundraisers. So here we go again. Just when it seemed like white A-merry-cans were ready to forget his preacher, he goes out and tell a bunch of fat cat fundraisers that small town A-merry-cans are bitter, and ( I am paraphrasing here) that they are preoccupied with things like guns and religion

I don't think this is that big of deal. This is just piling on of a narrative that Obama is an "elitist" which is like Republican code for "I Heart Fudgepackers." Sort of like "nigger lover" but that's rather redundant when you're talking about a black candidate.

While this is one of the most closely watched campaigns in recent memory I simply do not think the bulk of the American public are watching this damn close to notice that gaffe or for it to stick in some harmful way. Some might not even think it was a gaffe, like me. Others will forget about it because it's not a very "sexy" faux pas.

Neither was the "3 a.m. call" affair. Neither was "the man (and woman) who could not bowl" and I didn't even find "Bosnia Sniper Fire Commando" tall tale particularly interesting. And they've been running for so long now. I don't have Clinton fatigue or Bush fatigue--I've got Election 2008 fatigue. End already! Why isn't January 2009 yet? I can't take anymore fake drama.

I couldn't decide at first which song best described how I feel about the race for the Democratic nomination--Mary J. Blige's "No more Drama" or No Doubt's "End It On This" from the "Tragic Kingdom" album (back before Gwen Stefani started testing my nerves.)

I went with Gwen. Let's end this shit, people. I'm not saying Hillary needs to drop out, but dude, it's over. Stop stalking the nomination or the nomination will get a restraining order against you. If you don't stop writing crazy notes to it saying how ya'll belong together and she's going to leave Bill to be with you and only you and about how no one could love the nomination like she can.

She's gonna put that whip appeal* on it.

I'm like, that's really charming, but saving Obama calling the white man the devil while wearing a 'do rag and sippin' on sizzurp with Ice T and Coco, the nomination is not going to give her the time of day.

Let's end it on this!

*Side note: I forgot how good that video for "Whip Appeal" by Babyface was. I loved that video as a kid. I totally wanted a long pair of satin gloves and to be all glammed up dancing with Kenny "Babyface" Edmonds. And let's be real. 'Face was sexy in that all white suit. This video was proof that back in the day being a video girl could sometimes be classy. The women are basically a throwback to the Harlem Renaissance/Jazz Age of white-owned "black clubs" only hiring light, bright and almost white girls to be "tall, tan and teasing" on stage.

(See Francis Ford Coppola's much maligned but not that awful "The Cotton Club" for more. Like "The Human Stain," the film really should have focused on the racial issues because the better stories and actors lied there.)

Also, if you were loving 1990s love jams you loved Babyface. He knew his audience all too well. Nearly all his songs were about how great women were, how much he loved women, how the women got him whipped, how he will pay your rent, buy you clothes, and cook your dinner too as soon as he gets home from work. It got kind of comical by the time "For the Cool In You" came out. I know that he's "women are my world" shtick didn't always endear him to the menfolks, but he and Keith Sweat were running neck and neck for filling women's heads with unrealistic expectations for romance.

Saturday
Apr122008

Juan Williams Thinks Barack Obama Is Kissin' Way Too Much of Your Black Ass

All this week, and all the next, The Black Snob is taking a look at the views of black conservatives on Barack Obama. We’re examining who likes him, who doesn’t. Who will vote for him and who won’t. So far we’ve looked at the views of Amy Holmes, Condoleezza Rice, Alan Keyes, Colin Powell, Armstrong Williams, La Shawn Barber, Herman Cain and more.

Before I go into this piece on Juan Williams and his statements on Barack Obama I have to offer a brief disclaimer. This series is primarily about black conservatives, right-leaning centrists and Republicans. I don’t consider Juan Williams any of those things. Williams has never explicitly said what his political affiliation is as he still considers himself primarily a journalist and author. To speculate what his party affiliation or political beliefs may be would be purely that, speculation.

There are other things Williams could be considered to be. I sometimes find him a tad elitist, a little annoying and kind of boring but a lot of people apply to those labels. As an acquired taste, I don't have much of one for Williams' freckle-faced prose, but he does challenge the intellect, for better or worse.

Williams holds different views on the black protest movement as it remains today, he does not appear to hold any other “traditional” conservative positions (i.e. anti-abortion, pro-free market economy, anti-gun control, etc.) He merely appears to be a critic of current black identity politics and public assistance programs. But since I had so many people who wanted to hear about his views on Obama and my take on them I decided to write a special entry on him anyway. Freckle-faces and all.

That said. Let’s learn a bit about Williams the man first before we get to Williams on Obama.

How you feel about Juan Williams often depends on how you were introduced to him and his work. If it was through his early books and documentaries there tends to be a degree of admiration for the philosophy major who became a leading political journalist.

If you discovered him after he joined the FOX News Network as a regular analyst and expressed what could be perceived as conservative views on the state of black families, you may see him as some sort of Racially-charged Judas, playing the Liberal pantomime on FOX News Sunday.

Almost any black person who shows up on FOX with any frequency is labeled a turncoat or tool, kissing up to a network seen as neglectful of black interests, a network seen as insensitive, indifferent or even racist.

Before he became a favorite FOX News whipping boy, Williams was that accomplished journalist mentioned above. He regularly appears on National Public Radio as a correspondent and writes for The Washington Post.

He’s won an Emmy for his television documentary writing and he won critical acclaim for documentaries Politics—The New Black Power, and A. Philip Randolph: For Jobs and Freedom. He is also the author of the non-fiction bestseller Eyes on The Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965 and Thurgood Marshall—American Revolutionary.

Despite these accolades, Williams’ official break with much of the African American intelligentsia came in 2006 after the release of Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America—and What We Can Do about It. In the book he criticizes current black leaders and politicians, arguing that black Americans should take more responsibility for their present situation and reinvest in their communities using economic and political policies that are most conducive to advancement in the black community.

Like other critics of policies born out of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, Williams pushes the need for a reinvestment in education, monogamy, marriage and self-sufficiency. He’s an advocate of family planning, birth control, oral contraception, condoms and the morning after pill to combat unwanted and teenage pregnancies.

The common complaint regarding Williams’ book is that it seems to discount the effects of institutionalized racism and demonizes lower-class blacks.

When it comes to Obama, his views are more opaque but his criticism is sharp and unrelenting. What starts out as an admiration for Obama breaking from the 1960s mold turns to a seething disappointment built on what Williams’ sees as pandering for the black vote that Obama once had a difficult time captivating.

In The New York Times, November 2007:

Barack Obama is running an astonishing campaign. Not only is he doing far better in the polls than any black presidential candidate in American history, but he has also raised more money than any of the candidates in either party except Hillary Clinton.

Most amazing, Mr. Obama has built his political base among white voters. He relies on unprecedented support among whites for a black candidate. Among black voters nationwide, he actually trails Hillary Clinton by nine percentage points, according to one recent poll.

But the good times die here. After video surfaced of Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s, and his more incendiary sermons Williams questioned the plausibility of Obama never hearing the words of one of his closest mentors.

Williams repeatedly questioned Obama’s honestly on this issue and calls him on trying to have it both ways, appealing both blacks and whites while apparently laying claim to nothing.

A recent Op-ed by Williams for the Wall Street Journal:

So far, Mr. Obama has been content to let black people have their vision of him while white people hold to a separate, segregated reality. He is a politician and … his goal is winning votes, not changing hearts. …

Here is where the racial tension at the heart of Mr. Obama's campaign flared into view. He either shared these beliefs or, lacking good judgment, decided it politically expedient for an ambitious young black politician trying to prove his solidarity with all things black, to be associated with these rants. His judgment and leadership on the critical issue of race is in question.


Williams charges that Obama’s message to black people has changed incredibly in the course of a year, comparing his statements on personal responsibility during the March on Selma remembrance in 2007 to now where Williams believes Obama has purposely muted his criticisms of problems in the black community to pander for their votes.

Therefore Williams has never let up on Obama in regards to the Wright controversy.

(W)hen Barack Obama, arguably the best of this generation of black or white leaders, finds it easy to sit in Rev. Wright's pews and nod along with wacky and bitterly divisive racial rhetoric, it does call his judgment into question. And it reveals a continuing crisis in racial leadership.

What would Jesus do? There is no question he would have left that church.


Analysis:
It’s hard to tell how Williams actually feels about Obama. I know this may surprise some who can’t get past Williams obsession with the Wright controversy, but his criticism could come more from disappointment than Williams’ sprinkling the haterade on an Obama presidency.

Williams is still a journalist, he offers both praise and criticism, but no real clear views. Still, I can see how his harping on the Wright issue could be seen as a severe case of the "Gas Face."

Now, what is apparent is Williams really, really, really didn’t like Obama’s race in America speech. He has been explicit in his belief that Obama’s most recent moves are all about ass-coverage and protecting his lead among black voters.

But a huge weakness in that argument is that while Obama has made purposely convenient remarks in light of the scandal, he has also done things that irked members of the black community.

As William notes in some his Wall Street Journal column there were numerous black people in Obama’s church clapping in agreement with Wright’s words. Many of these same black Americans did not understand why Obama was apologizing and making excuses for Wright when in their opinion he said nothing wrong. Obama has also avoided the State of Black America event hosted by journalist Tavis Smiley for two years in a row. And there were plenty of individuals miffed that Obama did not appear in Memphis like candidates Hillary Clinton and John McCain did for the anniversary of Martin Luther King’s death this past week.

To me, there’s a better argument that Obama is playing it safe, walking a perilous racial tight rope where he can’t afford to make one false move, rather than claim he’s pandering to an African American base.

That said, here are my two usual questions and their answers based solely on hunches.

Chances of endorsing Obama: Not likely. Williams will probably want to keep his journalist credentials.

Chances of voting for Obama: Sure. Why not? Williams may have hated that speech, but you never know what a person will do in a voting booth alone.

One more to go on The Black Snob, check back tomorrow for my final analysis!

Sunday: Amy Holmes
Monday: Condoleezza Rice
Tuesday: Ward Connerly
Wednesday: Shelby Steele
Thursday: Alan Keyes
Friday: JC Watts
Saturday: Colin Powell
Sunday: Armstrong Williams
Monday: Michael Steele
Tuesday: John McWhorter
Wednesday: LaShawn Barber and Herman Cain
Thursday: Star Parker and Eric Wallace
Friday: Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell
Saturday: Juan Williams
Sunday: A final analysis, “Who Would Clarence Thomas Vote For?”

Saturday
Apr122008

Tavis Quits Tom Joyner Over Obama?

The African American Political Pundit is reporting that Tavis Smiley is quitting The Tom Joyner Morning Show because listeners are all up on his jock about Obama.

As we all know Tavis got a little indignant over Barack not showing up for his "State of the Black Union" event for two years in a row now and is very critical of him. He's warned black people to not get so fanatical without knowing the man position on the issues. He said these things on the radio and we know that Tom Joyner's audience is very pro-Obama.

Tavis says he left for personal reasons, but Tom put that answer on blast.

Tavis Smiley has resigned as a twice-weekly commentator on the syndicated "Tom Joyner Morning Show" after 11 years on the air, citing fatigue and a busy schedule in a personal call to Joyner. Joyner disputed that on the air and in his blog, however, writing: "The real reason is that he can't take the hate he's been getting regarding the Barack issue -- hate from the black people that he loves so much."
Read more about Tavis leaving here.

I can't say I'm surprised Tavis would leave for that reason. Tavis' feelings and ego are likely bruised and when you're an egomaniac it's doubly bruising. People are really on edge over anyone who criticizes Barack Obama. No doubt Tavis was feeling the heat. As you all know, I don't have a problem with other black people who are not hot for the Hope Man. He's not for everyone and if you can't have a debate about his merits and flaws you really need to remove that chip from your shoulder. I voted for Obama in the Missouri Primary, but the man isn't perfect and even though I understood why he didn't show up at either "State of the Black Unions," I can see why some people, including Tavis, would be upset.

They don't speak up very often for fear of a verbal beat down, but there are black people who feel like Barack is getting a pass on answering the tough questions about issues that affect black people. Some would argue he has to do that to run for president. I don't know how many time I've heard pundits and reporters on TV say Obama can't be painted as the "black candidate." The phrasing is lame, but it makes the point that there is a such thing as being "too black" for white America.

Obama can't afford to be that thing.

Of course, everything in Obama's background is about black people. He went to an Afrocentric church, married a black woman from Chicago's South side, worked as a Civil Rights attorney and did volunteer work in the black community. He's drenched in blackness, so to speak. If it weren't for his polite, baritone voice and Harvard Law demeanor he wouldn't seem much different from other black American politicians.

You can argue about Tavis' motivations, but the real argument is with the facts on hand. Tavis hasn't made ad hominen attacks on Obama, he's criticized him for avoiding "blackness." It would make more since to argue (or defend) why Obama did what he did than go into pique over a few harsh assessments.

The Washington Post wrote of Tavis and his critiques:

Days after Obama's win in the Iowa caucus, Smiley warned on Joyner's show: "Don't fall so madly in love [with Obama] that you surrender your power to hold people accountable. . . . I'm not saying overlook Senator Obama, but you now better be ready to look him over." ...

He also rebuked Obama this month for not traveling to Memphis for the 40th anniversary ceremonies marking the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., and for Obama's decision to distance himself from controversial remarks made by the Obama family's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.

I do think Tavis' quitting is rather childish. As a journalist, reporter, pundit and commentator you are going to deal with criticism. I get criticized. Everyone gets criticized. You're asking for it the minute you put your opinions out there. I'd respect Tavis more if he'd simply slugged it out and didn't like the heat get to him, but this reaction is simply pathetic and cowardly.

If we as a people can't have a responsible debate about Barack Obama without resorting to bitching and personal attacks we should either grow up or shut up. And I'm talking about both sides. In that same Washington Post article fellow radio taker and CNN commentator Roland Martin admitted he was surprised by Tavis departing the show.

"You have to expect to get heat the moment you decide to offer critical comments about politics or social issues," Martin said. "You have to be tough enough to take it."

Added Martin: "For a long time, Tavis was used to people applauding him for taking tough stances. . . . This was the first time he had taken a position that flat-out ticked off his core audience. But [criticism] comes with the territory."

But some at the Huffington Post was more sympathetic to Tavis' decision.

(A)uthor and political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson suggested that Smiley was the victim of "the black Obama thought police," which had subjected him to "a verbal public lynching" for comments that ran counter to mainstream black opinion.

I'm standing by my opinions that black Obama critics should just take the heat. Black people are not always going to agree with you and they have the right not to agree with you. It's true that some people take any critique of Obama too personally and do turn into the "Obama thought police," as Hutchinson said, but by quitting you're essentially giving up, taking your toys away and going home. Emotions and tensions are high in this campaign. Everyone is edgy. Everyone is excited. Everyone is tightly wound up. But that's reason more so not to quit if you truly believe Obama needs to be critiqued.

If journalism is what you profess to love you have to love it for better and for worse. You're in the "for worse," Tavis. We've all been there before, so suck it up.

Friday
Apr112008

Libertarians Reserve the Right Not to Vote for Obama

Radio Talk Host Larry Elder (Left) and Economist Thomas Sowell.

All this week, and all the next, The Black Snob is taking a look at the views of black conservatives on Barack Obama. We’re examining who likes him, who doesn’t. Who will vote for him and who won’t. So far we’ve looked at the views of Amy Holmes, Condoleezza Rice, Alan Keyes, Colin Powell, Armstrong Williams, La Shawn Barber, Herman Cain and more.

While the term “black Republican” gives some the heebie jeebies, the term black Libertarian mostly gathers shrugs. This is largely because if pressed most Americans couldn’t tell you what a Libertarian is, let alone what they believe in. That was part of the reason for Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul’s success. He was a Republican for low taxes, less government and was staunchly against foreign entanglements. He was anti-militarism and anti-imperialism. He wanted to bring back the gold standard and wanted to get rid of the Department of Education.

The Libertarian beliefs of low taxes, staying out of foreign entanglements and less government, were co-opted by the Republican Party over time (and quickly discarded, if you ask Paul.)


Economist Thomas Sowell and Radio Talk Jock Larry Elder don’t like political labels. Neither are Republicans in the traditional sense (although Elder recently converted). Both see themselves has having more Libertarian views than anything else, hence making them more like Alan Greenspan and less like Alan Keyes.

Both are writers. Sowell, who's been at it since the 1970s, is especially prolific. In his cultural and racial analysis he believes in on only using “measurable facts” to determine the cause of the many maladies that plague black Americans. He argues that much of the conventional wisdom on race is flawed and based on beliefs that do not hold up when applied to statistics and other measurable truths.

One of his most interesting views is that more of the downgrade, “Lil Wayne,” aspects of black culture are not relevant to blacks at all. Sowell pawns this buffoonery off on poor whites, labeling it as mere mimicry of “Rednecks.”

Such a dysfunctional white culture Sowell maintains, in turn derived from the ‘Cracker culture’ of certain regions in Britain, mainly the harsh English borderlands, origin of many 'cracker' migrants. Sowell gives a number of examples that he regards as supporting the lineage, e.g. “an aversion to work, proneness to violence, neglect of education, sexual promiscuity, improvidence, drunkenness, lack of entrepreneurship, … and a style of religious oratory marked by strident rhetoric, unbridled emotions, and flamboyant imagery.”

Sowell also provides figures to support his argument that there was a far bigger divide between the cracker/redneck culture of the Southern and Applachian regions and the culture of more northerly Americans, than between whites and blacks. E.g. Northern blacks tried to stop redneck blacks coming up from the South, and the same happened between northern whites and redneck whites. This thesis is the title essay of Sowell's book Black Rednecks and White Liberals.

It’s a jarring, likely controversial view, but it’s one that made me want to read the book just to see what facts he had to back that one up.

Elder started calling himself a Republican in 2003 when he came out in support of the Iraq War. The Libertarians were against the invasion, so Elder started referring to himself as a Libertarian with a small "l." He often calls himself a Republitarian to explain his views. He has a radio talk show and has done some extensive work on television. He was even in the running for Don Imus’ morning slot on MSNBC, but was beat out by former politician-turned-pundit Joe Scarborough.

When it comes to Obama, Sowell takes to him like he takes to everything--If Sowell can’t see it with his own two eyes or touch it with his two hands, you’re going to have a hard time convincing them the Great Hope Mongerer is the one.

Sowell had this to say in The Orange County Register Wednesday:

Sen. John McCain could never convince me to vote for him. Only Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can cause me to vote for McCain. …

Whenever I see one of Barack Obama's smooth performances, it reminds me of a saying from my old neighborhood in Harlem: "An eel is like sandpaper compared to you."

There is no question that Barack Obama is a clever and glib fellow. There is also no question that some of the most foolish, dangerous and horrific things done around the world in the past 100 years have been done by clever and glib fellows.

Sowell has endorsed conservative Shelby Steele’s view of Obama as a racially confused man, grasping for black acceptance, leaning to the far left only to recently repackage himself as a man of all seasons for his presidential run.

In other columns Sowell writes that Obama’s candidacy is “both poignant and galling.” And in the case of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scandal, Sowell announces Obama “has been leading as much of a double life as Eliot Spitzer.”


Below a Townhall.com column Sowell wrote after the Rev. Jeremiah Wright scandal broke:

In Shelby Steele's brilliantly insightful book about Barack Obama -- "A Bound Man" -- it is painfully clear that Obama was one of those people seeking a racial identity that he had never really experienced in growing up in a white world. He was trying to become a convert to blackness, as it were -- and, like many converts, he went overboard. …


The irony is that Obama's sudden rise politically to the level of being the leading contender for his party's presidential nomination has required him to project an entirely different persona, that of a post-racial leader who can heal divisiveness and bring us all together.


The ease with which he has accomplished this chameleon-like change, and entranced both white and black Democrats, is a tribute to the man's talent and a warning about his reliability.


There is no evidence that Obama ever sought to educate himself on the views of people on the other end of the political spectrum, much less reach out to them. He reached out from the left to the far left. That's bringing us all together?


And again in Townhall, Sowell makes these observations about the speech on race Obama gave in response to the Wright controversy:

Like religious converts who become more Catholic than the Pope, such people often become blacker-than-thou. For whatever reason, Barack Obama chose a black extremist church decades ago -- even though there was no shortage of very different churches, both black and white -- in Chicago.


In the end Sowell puts down any serious consideration of Obama as Commander-in-chief, announcing that the Wright situation proves he's flunked the test with flying colors.


Senator Obama has been at his best as an icon, able with his command of words to meet other people's psychic needs, including a need to dispel white guilt by supporting his candidacy.


But President of the United States, in a time of national danger, under a looming threat of nuclear terrorism? No.


Elder is also very critical of Obama’s relationship with his incendiary pastor. He’s gone in-depth on Wright and how Obama will be harmed politically by this relationship. He's made the cable news circuit from CNN’s “The Situation Room” to FOX’s “Geraldo” to talk about Barack Obama.

Elder’s main contention against Obama is his “Liberal” voting record. Elder told Wolf Blitzer that he “applauds” Obama for “not playing the race card the way Jesse Jackson has and the way Al Sharpton has,” but he does not support his candidacy.

If you are sincere that the war has kept us safe how can you want a commander and chief (who) wants us less safe? … He is a liberal. He wants bigger government. He wants taxes raised.

Analysis: I don’t think either Sowell or Elder would support or vote for Obama. Sowell’s anti-Obama points are clear, well-thought out and organized. Elder’s are all buzz words and shouting. But they say the same thing. Ideology trumps any emotion over Obama's run.

I have to admit a bias here. I hate talk radio people. All of them. It doesn’t matter the political affiliation, I hate anyone who has to yell their point of view in the crudest terms possible. Sowell would have an easier time converting me to solipsism than Elder getting me to tell him the time. I don’t like it when people talk over others, not letting them finish their sentences. I don’t like seeing the English language turned into a contact sport. I like wit. I like a good verbal joust or masterful sparing. Political debate as a fencing match (or a pithy Daily Show-esque pun) is better than someone yelling shut up then cutting their mike.

It’s just childish.

So Larry Elder is childish to me. I also can’t tell how authentic his interests are in the betterment of black people. One can have their criticisms of Sowell, but you can’t argue against the fact that he is well-read and researched. He’s not just making things up. Elders often comes across that he’s merely spewing what’s politically convenient at the moment.

Vlog “News In Color,” looked at Elder’s recent book “Stupid Black Men” and put my concerns about Elders into a humorous perspective wondering if his views were more about making money by selling books that ridicule black people rather than actually wanting to help impoverished blacks.

I can disagree with Sowell, but I also think I can learn from him. I’m not sure what there is to learn with Elders other than “he who bashes loudest gets the best book deal.”


Check back to The Black Snob all this week and next, the series concluding on April 14th.

Sunday: Amy Holmes
Monday: Condoleezza Rice
Tuesday: Ward Connerly
Wednesday: Shelby Steele
Thursday: Alan Keyes
Friday: JC Watts
Saturday: Colin Powell
Sunday: Armstrong Williams
Monday: Michael Steele
Tuesday: John McWhorter
Wednesday: LaShawn Barber and Herman Cain
Thursday: Star Parker and Eric Wallace
Friday: Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell
Saturday: Juan Williams
Sunday: A final analysis, “Who Would Clarence Thomas Vote For?”

Thursday
Apr102008

Obama Is Not A Star in Star Parker's Show; Eric Wallace Agrees

All this week, and all the next, The Black Snob is taking a look at the views of black conservatives on Barack Obama. We’re examining who likes him, who doesn’t. Who will vote for him and who won’t. So far we’ve looked at the views of Amy Holmes, Condoleezza Rice, Alan Keyes, Colin Powell, Armstrong Williams, La Shawn Barber, Herman Cain and more.

Only a few more minds to go in this series on black conservatives and their views of Barack Obama. Today it’s a pair who may have flown under your radar – Illinois Republican and publisher Eric Wallace and conservative author Star Parker.

They’re two Christian conservatives shaped by their environments through experiences good and bad.

An Illinois native, Wallace is an ordained minister and businessman. He’s keen on his Republicanism. So keen that when George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004 he started the African American Republican Council of Illinois and currently serves as chairman. Then after seeing the success of other minorities in the Republican Party he became politically active, running and losing a state senate seat in 2006.

He now publishes a black conservative online magazine called Freedom’s Journal, named for the first black newspaper.

Being from the same state as Obama gives Wallace a certain POV and that POV is that of opportunity … an opportunity to reach a wider range of potential black conservatives through Obama-fever.


From the Illinois Review:

The Barack Obama phenomenon has created a tidal wave of excitement and enthusiasm within the African-American community, and it's understandable.

But there's a growing voice within the black community that warns "all that glitters is not gold." Obama's answers to the nation's ills will force us all to be more dependent on the State, they say, which will demand more and more of our hard-earned dollars.

And when he’s not operating with that view, Wallace sees Obama as a pure politician by the most stereotypical of standards – a lying charlatan.

Wallace writes extensively about this for the Illinois Review after the controversy surrounding Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor.

Now that the fairy tale veneer has been removed, the real Obama appears. He is nothing more than a slick talking Chicago style politician, who will say anything to get elected. This is not change, especially for those of us who live in Illinois. His association with Rezko and endorsement of Mayor Daley speak to his Chicago style politics. We have had enough of it and the corruption that breeds this style of politics (Blago and Ryan).

This is not change I can believe in. Nor is it change at all except that it comes from a black man who transcends race and a politician who has the audacity to hope that we don’t catch him in a lie. It is clear he lacks the integrity of faith, which would lead him to the discover truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help us God!

Analysis: Unlike some more prolific writers, conservative and not, I didn’t have as much on Wallace on Obama, but I found his pounding of the “Chicago style politics” label telling.

When I hear “Chicago-style politics” my mind drifts back to a time when I didn’t exist. Back when the first Mayor Daley was holding up the ballot count to make sure Illinois went for John F. Kennedy in the 1960 presidential election. I think of mobsters and kick-backs. So I had to suppress a chortle on Wallace because Obama sounds more River North than Bridgeport.

It’s not that Obama doesn’t suffer from the usual political failings of lies, exaggerations and egos that come with their own entourages. But I don’t see Obama telling Johnny Two Eyes to take Short Tony out for a long walk. Obama’s the egghead. He totally has guys for that. And if he actually is crooked Obama would be Phillip Green from Casino. He’d have plausible deniability.

Wallace’s “integrity of faith” talk sounds a lot like some guy who couldn’t get elected state senator. That is something you totally say about your opponent when you want to convince other people that you’re the safer bet.

Don’t be surprised of there’s a Wallace in 2012 exploratory campaign running around.

While Wallace described his childhood as relatively nurturing and idyllic in a recent bio, author Star Parker came down the road less traveled (or frequently traveled depending on your tax bracket).

Parker’s story is one of a former unemployed mother on welfare, arrested in her teens for shoplifting who has had four abortions. After converting to Christianity she transformed herself into a successful Christian conservative author and speaker.

She is the reformed sinner, born anew through hard work and God’s grace. And in return, she shares her views and personal truths with the world, no matter how brutal. She is the founder and president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education and she regularly hits the speaker circuit, once snagging a one-time-only sub job on ABC’s “The View.”

She’s cranked out books with a Pentecostal fire, including some vividly entitled barn-burners like “White Ghetto : How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay,” “Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It” and “Pimps, Whores and Welfare Brats: From Welfare Cheat to Conservative Messenger.”


Just makes you either want to rip right into them or rip right into them with outrage, depending on where on sit along the political divide.

Parker is long on damnation and short on the sympathy. When it comes to Obama she wants to see the meat, the red meat specifically, to back up all that hope hype she’s been hearing.

From the Kitsap Sun:

One fourth of blacks are entrenched in poverty at twice the national average, and so far we have not a single reason to believe that Obama has a clue, or even an intention, about seriously dealing with this problem … As astounding as Obama's fundraising success is, it is equally astounding that he has been able to do it by being virtually indistinguishable from Clinton on issues. And how he can run as a breath of fresh air without putting a single new, creative idea on the table.

The above statement from Parker was written in 2007, but even after winning Iowa Obama was still too good to be true for Star, so she attempted to deflate Barack’s popular fictions.

From Townhall.com:

Obama not only obliterates the lines on race, but he also obliterates the lines on everything else. The end of the racial line is a great achievement. But the other points of demarcation we do need.


I am talking about the lines that define right and wrong in the sense of our religious traditions. The lines that define family and establish the standard by which we measure its health and breakdown. The lines that we have used in the past to instruct our children about how to manage and direct their sexual impulses.


Analysis: Parker reminds me of fellow Christian Conservative, anti-abortionist La Shawn Barber who I wrote about yesterday. Her militancy on abortion gives Obama no wiggle room. It is very different compared to Amy Holmes and Colin Powell who are moderate on social issues.

Parker, also like Barber, is of the opinion that Liberalism and the Democratic Party have done more to harm blacks than help. Parker sees a vote for Obama as a vote supporting a racist system that treats minorities as victims and places more government into our lives.

As for whom Wallace or Parker would vote or support for, I don’t know enough about Wallace to make that judgment call. I want to say no, but that’s because the little that I do know of him makes me thinks he’s just a tad bit bitter that Obama’s getting to do what he hasn’t yet. As for Parker, I don’t see her giving up an inch for anyone who doesn’t uphold her standards of a perfect anti-abortion, pro-Christian candidate. In her current writings she’s struggling with John McCain and before he became the Republican front-runner she was rather fond of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.


Check back to The Black Snob all this week and next, the series concluding on April 14th.

Sunday: Amy Holmes
Monday: Condoleezza Rice
Tuesday: Ward Connerly
Wednesday: Shelby Steele
Thursday: Alan Keyes
Friday: JC Watts
Saturday: Colin Powell
Sunday: Armstrong Williams
Monday: Michael Steele
Tuesday: John McWhorter
Wednesday: LaShawn Barber and Herman Cain
Thursday: Star Parker and Eric Wallace
Friday: Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell
Saturday: Juan Williams
Sunday: A final analysis, “Who Would Clarence Thomas Vote For?”

Wednesday
Apr092008

A Placator and a Polemic: Two Black Conservatives on Obama

Conservative blogger La Shawn Barber and Republican talk-radio host Herman Cain


All this week, and all the next,
The Black Snob is taking a look at the views of black conservatives on Barack Obama. We’re examining who likes him, who doesn’t. Who will vote for him and who won’t. So far we’ve looked at the views of Amy Holmes, Condoleezza Rice, Alan Keyes, Colin Powell, Armstrong Williams and more.

Black conservatives Herman Cain and LaShawn Barber draw two starkly different figures despite the tendency of many black to paint black conservatives with a broad brush.

Cain is a Republican who once ran for senate and is now a talk show host. He believes in the ideals of the Republican Party but laments the fact that the party has been weak in reaching out to African Americans.

Barber is popular blogger and speaker who is Christian and staunchly against abortion rights. While she is a conservative she doesn’t hold Republicans in much higher regard than Liberal Democrats. She writes that she's disgusted by anyone pandering to her based on her race.

Cain is the familiar. The often teased black Republican, taunted allegedly for staying with a party that does not support him.

Barber is the teaser of anyone who signs on to the two-party-system. Mocking the desire of blacks to be placated by a power structure designed to fail.

And their views on Obama are just as far apart, truly getting to the core of my black conservatives on Obama series which asks, "When confronted with the bait of an attractive candidate who appeals to your heart, but is counter to you reason who do you support?" Obama is a self-made man of intellect who is no one’s victim. But he’s also a dreaded Liberal. Which would have more pull if the wanting for Martin Luther King’s “dream” of racial harmony were still supplanted in our minds? What will these individuals do when offered a black candidate who shares their skin tone, educational background and sometimes similar backstories but otherwise shares nothing else?

Let us begin with Cain.

In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution Cain describes how the Republican Party dropped the ball in 2006 when numerous black Republican candidates were up for vote. He said the party support wasn’t there, dooming their candidacies to failure. Cain added that any “breakthrough” black conservative candidate is “going to have to break through on his own,” the Republican Party “is not going to push him.”

When asked about Obama’s candidacy, Cain is impressed with the ingénue, replying that Obama has a “gift of oratory.”

That's not just the ability to speak, but the ability to connect with people. But I think that he's going to be severely challenged in the coming months to put some meat on the bones.

When asked if he would support Obama, Cain continues his wishful train of thought.

I could under the right circumstances. If he showed me that he really was serious about reaching across the aisle.

While Cain has a bleeding heart for Obama, Barber is not one to be swayed by racial sentimentality. Her eyes stay steady on the game at hand and not on what she sees as racial fictions.

Barber charges that Obama is not The Great Black Hope, claiming it was the “white Liberal media” who crowned him as such. And she states this adoration of Obama on the left is based more on racial novelty than his intellect or talent.

And she finds both a little lacking.

She posits that he is only successful because he is a well-liked, media darling. She had this to say about publicity for Obama’s book, “The Audacity of Hope,” released last year before he announced his campaign.

With a fawning and easily infatuated leftist media, liberal authors don’t need to waste money paying publicists. Every major newspaper and magazine is a publicity machine, cranking out the kind of copy that would cost the author an arm and a leg if he/she had to pay someone to write it. I should be so lucky!

The man owns the current issue of TIME magazine. I mean, come on! He hasn’t done anything in the Senate to distinguish himself. He’s just…black.

Barber is a strong believer that Democrats, Liberals in particular, use their welcoming of diversity to hide the racial conflicts that still exist. Her blog posts support the argument that the Democratic Party is inherently racist, if not more racist than the Republican Party, and that the adulation over Obama by white Liberals if further proof of that racism.

She touches on this in a post entitled “Democrats in Blackface.”

Even when I was still voting for Democrats, I noticed how condescending they and other white liberals tended to be. Trying to appear comfortable around black people, they usually ended up saying something dumb. Being yourself must be difficult when you’re trying to pretend you care about or even know any black people.

In her posting on Obama’s book publicity she also wrote of Liberal whites placating blacks through Obama.

Back in 2004 when I was still working a day job at a heavily Democrat-voting organization, the word “articulate” was uttered frequently as white co-workers described Obama’s big speech at the Democratic convention. It wasn’t so much what he said, as I discovered when I read the text of his speech, but how he said it.

… He’s a liberal who doesn’t like to be called a liberal. His speech contained nothing breathtaking, groundbreaking, or worth the hyperventilating hype that resulted from it.

Barber’s hostility was much more fascinating than Cain’s dull fealty. She wrote about her disdain for Democrats, but she wasn’t much gentler with Republicans. Unlike other black conservatives who stick with the party, Barber remains politically unaffiliated. She have voted for Bill Clinton twice and she may have voted for George W. Bush twice but she makes no allusions about either's intentions.


This also from “Democrats in Blackface.”

(A)nyone who’s read more than a single blog post knows I detest when Republicans pull the courting-black-voters scheme. I don’t campaign or write for politicians, and I’m not the least bit interested in trying to persuade blacks or anyone else to vote for Republicans (I’m not a Republican, by the way). I couldn’t care less these days why 90 percent of black voters keep voting for liberals, and Republicans should stop wasting valuable time trying to get the “black vote.”

If you can’t pull in people with race-neutral ideas, don’t bother. If you have to resort to skin color pandering, pack up your stuff and go home.

Reading her sometimes angry words reminded me of Clarence Thomas’ autobiography, “My Grandfather’s Son.” Many reviewers were surprised to hear how angry Thomas was and about how much of that hostility was still in regards to racism and the racism inflicted upon him by whites--both Liberal and conservative.

If you read Thomas’ writings, a lot of it sounds none-too-dissimilar from the writings of slain black nationalist Malcolm X before his storied trip to Mecca. Malcolm X did not believe racism could be eradicated and that any allusion as such was a harmful fantasy. The only way black people could make a better life for themselves was to separate from the United States as a whole and develop our own independent institutions.

This mindset is considered “militant,” but it isn’t that different from conservative “revolutionaries” like Barber arguing that government programs and social welfare are destroying the black community. She is a believer in the notion that racism and Liberal largesse cannot be separated from the government that creates it.

Which brings us to Barber and Obama.

Unlike Cain, who is a Republican partisan with centrist views and is willing to still work within the system, Barber is more likely to believe in the founding principals of the US Constitution and little else.

Barber’s objection of Obama is purely based on the issues at hand. She’s not as affected by the romanticism and is focused on voting for the candidate who best shares her views.

Despite my pro-Democrat leanings, I respect people who don’t chuck their ideals for a one-night-stand in a voting booth. I’m affected by the sentiment of a black president, but I also want that black president to share my views. Racial solidarity only gets you so far with me. After awhile I’m going to go all Janet Jackson and start asking, “What have you done for me lately?

Barber doesn’t necessarily bash Obama. But she doesn’t praise him either. She’s an anti-abortion, war hawk who thinks our immigration policy needs more stick and a lot less carrot. On paper she shouldn’t back Obama and she doesn’t.

Unless her blog is filling me with lies.

Chances on endorsing Obama? Cain, si. Barber, no.

Chances on voting for Obama? The same as before.

Side note: While I’m more than willing to agree that racism is a problem in both parties, color me perplexed about the reasoning that having a more diverse representation of blacks means the latter party is the most racist of them all.

This view doesn’t explain those black people who helped vote Obama and other blacks into office in Chicago and other parts of Illinois. But that’s often the flaw in this sort of argument. For it to work you’d basically have to argue that the white leadership of the Democratic Party is a shrewd manipulator who “allows” black voters to elect black politicians that the party establishment has already pre-approved.

That, of course, lead me to two questions:

1) So the Democrats are able to pull off this coup with black people and the Republicans can’t? Because that’s typically what their party is accused of doing, accused plucking black ringers from obscurity to game the system and get them elected. I’m a Democrat and I know our party is no where near organized enough to pull that off. Just look at this current election for proof. But if for some reason this is the case, my second question is …

2) Who vetted Cythnia McKinney before she went Green?

I realize it’s hard for some people to believe, but black people vote for their representatives, not the other way around. There’s no way the Democratic Party establishment wants a viable percentage of its power brokers believing the earth is 6,000 years old, but that’s what you end up with amongst black Democrats who are more likely to be socially conservative.

Hugging up on gay people and talking about global warming will get you about one vote in Southside Chicago.

This argument rather insulting and racist in itself, the notion that black people are somehow duped by these racist, white Liberal super geniuses. Black politicians, like their white counterparts, suffer from the same degree of intelligence, savvy, flaws and corruption. This isn’t Zimbabwe where someone screams “It’s all the white man’s fault” and people begin murdering anyone who can’t tan. You might get a couple of stray “amens” out of the choir, but most people will go back to complaining about the price of gas.

Check back to The Black Snob all this week and next, the series concluding on April 14th.

Sunday: Amy Holmes
Monday: Condoleezza Rice
Tuesday: Ward Connerly
Wednesday: Shelby Steele
Thursday: Alan Keyes
Friday: JC Watts
Saturday: Colin Powell
Sunday: Armstrong Williams
Monday: Michael Steele
Tuesday: John McWhorter
Wednesday: LaShawn Barber and Herman Cain
Thursday: Star Parker and Eric Wallace
Friday: Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell
Saturday: Juan Williams
Sunday: A final analysis, “Who Would Clarence Thomas Vote For?”

Page 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 17 Next 9 Entries »

better people

Blog Widget by LinkWithin