Not a tool? Then why, when the establishment media told him to denounce his pastor of two decades, the man who officiated his wedding, baptised his children, and helped him find his black identity, did Obama dutifully follow orders and trash the man?
Not a tool? Then why does he ingratiate himself to white audiences by blaming the problems of black America on black Americans. Why does he rationalize the politics of civil rights leaders as the residue of anger and frustration instead of speaking the truth about the problems of racism in America?
Obama is the epitome of a tool. It's the heart and soul of the Obama personality cult. He's a tool of whites seeking to dissimulate racism in America. Obama is the sacrum in the white liberal establishment's post-racial civil religion - colorblind racism.
Remember, it was Obama himself who said that his "vision" is "much more hopeful" than Martin Luther King Jr. - much more hopeful because we aren't going to do anything about racism except pretend that it's no big deal. Obama's "vision" is about wearing rose-colored glasses that makes whites feel better about taking no responsibility for their skin privileges.
Obama's Struggle With Typical Liberal Hypocrisy
From the beginning it's been fairly clear a big chunk of supposedly liberal America hasn't been ready for Barack Obama. Their unease obvious in the shock and awe of Joe Biden, and in Newsweek's inane, aloud wonderings of whether or not Obama was "black enough." "Black enough" for the liberals being people of color in the Sharpton/Jackson mold; Old Schoolers devoutly wed to the regressive ideology of loud haranguing and low expectations. Obama -- early on in a Pound Cake-esque fashion urging people of color to do better and questioning race-based affirmative action -- was clearly not "black enough" for the Liberal Plantation.
Any doubt that Obama was from the jump fighting not only for the presidency, but also against Lefty hypocrisy was shattered into a million pieces by Geraldine Ferraro's "lucky" black man remark. Those pieces then again refined by Clinton's talk of "hard-working Americans, white Americans."
Clearly much of the liberal Left has long seen...oh, your average non-hard-working black, as nothing more than a piece of a loyal voting bloc. Keep us anesthetized, they feel, with promises of hand outs and government mollycoddling and we will mindlessly check the "D" box on Election Day.
Conservatives are, of course, not a hair less bigoted in their hearts (nor are Independents or anyone else for that matter). But unlike Democrats, Republicans have found a way to play nicely with the ideologically aligned, regardless of the color of their skin.
That, perhaps, is part of the problem; Obama is more his own man than merely a Democratic tool. That he refused to put up a show, and then capitulate, makes him all the more frustrating to those on the Left used to their people of color playing by pre-prescribed rules.
In that regard it's too bad Obama's not an anti-war Republican. His "Yes We Can" message of hope, his Morning in America redux, would have worked much better had it not be drowned out by the typical gloom and doom drum beat of the liberal machine. And all that clack about him being elitist? Well, the Right's managed to sneak in a "down to earth" Ivy League president two cycles running. As both sides make a grab for the middle, imagine what the Right could have done with the likes of Obama.
Which is not to say that Obama won't still be elected president. At this point I think there's nothing that he can't do. Though, if so, he will do it despite the best efforts of the typical hypocrisy of the Left.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Lets hope he's black enough. Then when he is elected we can tell all the African American poverty pimps to shut the hell up about equality and oportunity in this country....I smell reparations ....
Wow! This was a hard article to consider. With all due respect to the racism we know exists in this race I think Obama has often been given red carpet treatment by the press and the DNC. In the meantime the millions and millions of us who ALSO care about sexism are absolutely stunned and saddened by the treatment Hillary has been receiving! I'm saddened to be part of a country and party that 1) is unaware of the signs of sexism and/or 2) doesn't care. For example, I've spent months watching Hillary be chastised in the name of "she's a Clinton." I watched as people I thought were educated and progressive adults go along with these statements, utterly unaware how their decision to tie her identity with her husband (i.e. highlighted by those who call her Billary) is, itself, an incredibly sexist statement. This is NOT the 1800s and a woman is NOT defined by her husband. This is one of MANY, many sexist remarks (she is often called a b**tch and a wh**re without ANYONE speaking out against it!) that have emerged during this race that was SUPPOSE to be a historical time for TWO reasons.
You don't have to have African American in your family tree to see the luminous greatness in Obama. When he's packing stadiums (stadia?) full of all ages all colors it's not because he has this or that heritage or clothing or accessories. People have come to be close to the light in him. Ever since that first speech at the convention, people are asking more from him. Do you know the risks he is taking in this polarized nation? it's not my risk but if I had to choose between safety for his young family and a luminous White House I would have a really hard time being selfless. I want that generosity and luminosity in government. Why not? We just need to grow up and get on with being real, knowing one another by the content of our character. Delivering selflessly to make this a better place. To demonstrate what the Creator has given to all of us. The capacity to reflect and choose.
BTW: Typical ditto tactic is to escalate a nuanced statement into a GLOBAL JUDGEMENT. Obama so far as I can tell was not making a Globalistic statement (in other words ALL PEOPLE), and neither was I in referring to it-- and certainly not "defending," per se. I am personally living in California, and I am bitter clinging to my version of God and praying daily for sanity to return to our nation! It doesnt mean I am dour in my daily activities, or unable to work, or lack typical American enthusiasm or PATRIOTISM FOR THAT MATTER.
However, Noucant, Mr. Ridley WAS MAKING A GLOBAL STATEMENT THAT ALL AMERICANS ARE INHERENTLY RACIST!
I honestly have no idea what the hell you just wrote.
Not a single assumption was correct and the whole thing was missing a basic necessity... a point.
The point is that despite popular opinion white liberals are just as racist as white conservatives are!
Ridley, as usual, doesn't really have a point. He starts the piece with his usual hobby horse of liberal hypocrisy, but ends it with an astounding flip of logic. If Obama isn't black enough for the "liberal plantation," how can Ridley incorporate the fact that Obama is most likely going to be the Dem candidate? Well, this doesn't slow Ridley down in any way. He just persists with his smarmy tone and "predicts" Obama's success.
What was said in West Virginia against Barack by the voters has always been the camoualged motivaton of the Liberal establishmnt: as long as you're like us or play the role.
Malcolm is the gold standard litmus test for Liberals, as it is the lightning rod for everyoneelse. Can you take an outspoken person of color, let alone black man? Even Clarence Thomas with his wanna-be self suffers from the same "figuretive-lynching". He didn't play into the expected role. That role is to be someone's surrogate, second-fiddle validator who's propped up and rolled out as the black hyperbole of their position.
So like Clarence Thomas, Barack stepped out of his place and has committed the blasphemy of spoiling the narrative of the poster child of established white liberalism being THE best friend of the NEGROES. But the first black President crap with Bill Clinton never washed after Sistah Souljah. The br'er's been off the reservation and are rediscovering what Malcom discovered when he did his pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina-there are non-racial experinces BEYOND THE BORDRS OF THE UNITED STATES!! Need only the internet now.
Let them submarine his candidacy. Racisms and Racialisms have the same effects whether it's a conservative or a liberal. We'll start looking for other means necessary, rather than the latter-day gospels of another political triangulation.
hand outs and government mollycoddling???????
The civil rights bill and other laws gave oppressed people and open door to college and education that was denied them.
If I am not mitaken it is the Republican Right that denies you jobs and even housing if they can get away with it. Now they have done away with the step up for college entrance. So who are you supporting or ARE YOU BEING PAID LIKE OTHER JORUNALIST TO SUPPORT THE RNC?????
It's funny. You criticize the old school for nursing old grievances and world views, but the "Obama black enough?" controversy you dredged up for this post is also effectively ancient history. It seems you may have some baggage you're reluctant to part with yourself.
Wrong again, Ridley. Hillary Clinton is a Republican like you.
Also, I will never kiss the ground Obama walks on like you do. After all, he is only another politician.
He voted to fund the Iraq war because he thought it was good politics. He spoke against impeachment because his is ambitions.
I want him to win because he has the most integrity of any of the candidates left, but after that, he can expect a lot of criticism if he doesn't learn to stop coddling the wing-nuts.
HUH
I wish Molly Ivins were here to weigh in on some of hese topics. God I miss her.
I REALLY ENJOYED READING ALL THE COMMENTS REGARDING RIDLEY'S STATEMENT.AS A BLACK WOMAN AGE 56 BORN IN AMERICA .LIVING AND HAVING 4 KIDS AGES 17 TO 36 , THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT JIM CROW AND ALL WHAT WENT IN THE 1900- 1960's ALL KIDS OF ALL RACES HAVE COME TO MY DOORS AND I LOVE THEM THEY ARE MY CHILDREN . I AM HONEST WITH THEM I LOVED THAT HILLARY IS RUNNING BUT OBAMA IS ABOUT CHANGE AND I AM PROUD OF THIS YOUNG MAN AND HIS WIFE AND THEIR GIRLS. WHAT HE HAS TO TAKE FROM PEOPLE THAT IS SO HATEFUL AND MEAN BECAUSE HE IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA. THIS IS OUR, HIS COUNTRY I SAY RUN OBAMA AND KEEP ON PUSHING , KNOCK THOSE DOORS DOWN KICK EM IN .HE HAS MILLIONS BEHIND HIM HILLARY WILL BE TOO SHE LOVE THIS COUNTRY AND WANTS THE BEST AND HE IS THE BEST GOD BLESS YOU SEN OBAMA.
Why doesn't he "love" Michigan, Florida, West Virginia or Kentucky? And if he loves this country why doesn't he know how many states there are or that the Great Lakes are not in Oregon? Why does he think Arkansas is closer to Kentucky than the bordering state of Illinois? Why does he disrespect working professional reporters by calling them "Sweeite"? Why does he use race-baiting to inflame his own people? Why does he always blame the US mail, emails, geography, his staff, other people like voters, or anyone and everyone except himself for his own mistakes and bad judgement? And if he can't debate Hillary he will certainly not be able to debate McCain...it was obvious from the last one he needs the practice. Why does he have to repair relationships with 7 defferent demographic groups in order to win? Why would anyone elect him, he's a disaster?
I look forward to you and your friends taking responsibility for what a McCain presidency will do to the rights of women and working people you claim to believe in. And by the way, your snarkiy lies about Obama don't do any credit to Hillary. You proudly admit that after Hillary, you're for McCain. So why should anyone on a site built on progressive principles take what you say as relevant to our interests?
Noucant,
This is in reply to your comment below (because there's no way to reply directly to your comment).
You said: "Assuming one who dislikes Obama will choose McCain is an absurd leap, one I thought would not be made by the supposedly superior intellect of Obama supporters (which they try to point out obsessively at every chance they get...is this some inferiority complex???)"
I'm not assuming anything. If you check ginnypoo's profile, you'll see that she adamantly states her intention on other threads to vote for McCain if Hillary isn't the nominee. But don't let that stop you from insulting me.
I support Obama too, but are your caps lock stuck?? Please don't yell,that is what caps indicate. Plus it is very difficult to read.
He's our man, and he is going to win in November!
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, all men are created equal."
". . .judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Mr. Ridley's right. Some of us don't like it but it's true, and it's largely a compliment not an insult to us.
What he's saying is Republicans simply ignore differences (be they gender, ethnic, racial, sexual, whatever) and hence rarely have in-party racial difficulties. In other words they just assume white is right so they have no problems.
Democrats, on the other hand, don't. We try to really understand and appreciate people's differences. Naturally, sometimes this can lead to a sense that we've all somehow "done enough." And that we're tired of the bickering. The truth is that's the only way to bring change.
These are things we have to work through. It's to our credit we're trying and succeeding as well as we are. But we cannot simply be content to stay where we are. To sit on our butts and do no more. This is a change year, it's a change election and even some of us who have worked so hard and known that from the beginning need to accept that it is a work in progress and just maybe WE have more changing to do as well.
Please don't stop halfway. Become the change you want to see in the world.
Liberal Plantation? Let us know who runs the Liberal Plantation. And remember I'm a field worker.
But, really does that analogy help anybody? After, a week of rehashing Munich can we ever look at political events as a unique event without an analogy? It sounds very damming to connect Liberal with Planation but I think this is a cheap analogy by an otherwise good writer and good guy.
John we know this already, how about writing something positive. If you don't won't to write about Sen O, write about Mccain or Hillary. Sen O has enough people pointing out the challenges facing him. Righ now Americans just need to hear more positive talk coming from you guys in the media. My Mom says if you don't have anything good to say about someone........
WE need to hear different views and make up our own minds. If we really believe in diversity than we also believe in a diversity of opinion... think big tent.
Yes, in a republic brought right to the brink of ruin by fascist lies, greed, power lust and cruelty, "liberal hypocrisy" is the problem, all right.
Another hit job on "liberals" by Ridley. Does Mr. Ridley realize that Obama is WINNING against Hillary? Doesn't that tell you that most liberals are voting for him? And for Ridley to quote Ferraro, a Clinton camp surrogate, as the voice of the liberals is simply ridiculous.
I've begun to notice some strange resentment in some black people that happen to be in the public eye. It's a tone of resentment. Perhaps the thought of letting go of the crutch, racism, Ridley's ambled about on his entire life, is about to be taken away. If this country stands up and elects a black man for President, those who raise their fists and rant to the sky about this unchanging country of unrelenting racism will have the biggest weapon from their quiver removed once and for all. If this country stands up and elects Obama, you will all be forced to admit that this country IS changing - and for the better. Will there still be racism? I think West Virginia proved that. But we are making headway and electing a black man for President is going to usher in a new age, a better era for this country.
The old canard that racism is 'just as bad as it's ever been' will have to be discarded once and for all. Ridley and his ilk are simply going to have to find some new meme to rally around.
Wow, I am no Ridley fan at all, but you have severly misunderstood where he is coming from. John Ridley is a Center-to-Right leaning commentator. He DESPISES people who, as you say, can't let "go of the crutch" of racism. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson - in his mind they are symptoms of the Liberal disease. He's got that puritanical strain of rightwing ultra-patriotism that will brook no badmouthing of the USA.
I can understand you being confused by the inscrutable argument in this post of his. It makes no sense. He just wants an excuse to bash "liberals", so suddenly Hillary Clinton and her Beltway posse are transmogrified into Ciny Sheehan and Znet.
He may be winning against Clinton, but he will lose against McCain.
Take a look at the polls from Rasmussen, who decided to no longer track the Democrats, because they feel it is over. Nevertheless, they still ask in statewide polls how voters would decide between Obama-McCain and Clinton-McCain.
Tell you what, she does much better than him. Not only would she beat McCain 279-242, Michigan tied (latest winning poll from New Mexico not included, so add 5 for her and substract 5 from McCain), she polls better than Obama, who actually loses against McCain 237-290, Indiana tied (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Obama/Maps/May17.html).
If you include New Mexico, which both win based on Rasmussen, she wins 21, Obama 19.
She wins southern states Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia, he would lose them all.
She polls better than Obama in places like Kansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Alabama, Mississippi or Missouri.
Wasn't he supposed to be the one who redraws the political map?
Just words?
Way too early to poll, But in the polls that counted Obama won Missouri, Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi.
Clinton might take Kentucky, she probably won't get Oregon.
McCain probably will lose against either.
Don't put too much stock in any polls taken before September. A week is an eon in politics.
The problem with these polls is that there is a contingent of bitter ANTI-Feminist females who claim they're about equality, when in fact they're expecting PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT for their candidate because she is a woman.
Both candidates this year were minorities, and both faced great odds. One of them ran a spectacular campaign and the other exhibited poor judgment in advisors and horrific management skills.
And if they feel that the caucuses are so "un-democratic", why weren't they complaining of this before? Better yet, would they have stood together to complain had Obama lost all caucuses?
The hypocrisy is stunning and the selfishness disgusts me. I keep thinking I should "reach out" to Clinton supporters, but these incredibly vicious and self-destructive women would rather hand the country over to the party that put us in the dire straits we're in, than accept the fact that their candidate lost.
The problem with your analysis is that Clinton is no longer a factor. Once she's officially out of this race (I predict next week) you'll no longer be able to quote polls that include her. Polls, by the way, are total bunk. If you took into account who is turning out in droves for Obama, 18-24 year olds - those people are never polled. They were never before even a part of the process. People who are polled are those who own phones inside their homes - hardwired. The people in the demographic I've just quoted have only cell phones to their names. Even the people in that age bracket who live in apartments generally have only their cell phones. Cell phones aren't listed in the white pages, in case you hadn't noticed. I'm a 40 year old white male and my only phone is a cell phone, and I've never been polled about anything in my life. Mortgage Readjusment calls are another story...
The same type of polling was just predicting the Republican as the winner down in Mississippi and the Republicans were routed there - not only in a massive Republican stronghold but even after they put out commercials tying the Democrat (Childers) to Obama and brought Cheney down to fight for their guy.
The political map will be redrawn this year and it will be done completely by the youth of this country.
Relying on polls now would be naive. There are so many factors that will come into play when it's Obama v. McCain and we saw a taste yesterday. Mc Cain attacks, Obama blasts right back. These polls mean nothing and I would go so far as to say if Hillary became the nominee, the Republicans would be rallied to defeat her easier than her having to overcome pissing off large chunks of the Democratic party she will need. She's get creamed.
it will be FUNNY - HILLARIOUS to watch not only McSame (3rd term Bush) get beat come fall but those 30 seats go Democrat too !!!!!
Last time I watched a Republican Convention, I could count the people of color in the crowd on the fingers of both hands. Yeah, they would have greeted Obama with open arms, and asked him to get them a drink.....
I notice that Mr. Ridley tends to go after prominent black people with more notoriety than he.
He also disparaged liberals in this odd, reverse psychology kinda way.
I am still a fan, and when you are on Morning Joe, everyone better hush when you speak.
Posted May 16, 2008 | 05:19 PM (EST)