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.

Comments

[Americanium]

Best ignored for sanity's sake.

[faithfully]

Isn't it time to get rid of the ridiculous terms-right and left-they don't mean much. Let's go for competence, honesty, vision, please

[era996]

Well , the Democrats aren't going that way
They are going with Obama

[sf94127]

The left of the Dem party loves Obama straight up. They regard Hillary as a Republican.

The Dem party leadership believes Dem moderates will show up like sheep to vote for Obama come November. Wrong bigtime!

[Grunty1]

So if the far left likes him and independents like him and even moderate Republicans like him, that obviously means that the left leaners won't???

What kind of logic is that?

[tlhwraith]

No, I believe it is that more people voted for Obama. Obama wasn;t chosen by some unseen force to be the Dem nominee. I can't think of any other way to say it, he won, playing by the rules. At the end of the day, Obama has more people voting for him, has raised more money, and has more superdelegates supporting him. Game over.

As for Dem "moderates" not showing up for him, bull. I am moderate, I've even voted for a Republican or two, and I would vote for Obama, not because I like him, but because I like his ideology. What person do you know that subscribes to the Democratic platform that would find much that is appealing in McCain, especially given his recent shift to the right?

The choice is about party ideology, not just voting against Obama because he didn't bow down and kiss Hillary Clintons feet. Even though the Republicans are not in love with McCain, they will show up and vote for him. At some point the Democratic party will stop chopping off its nose to spite its face. The most telling part of this primary, for me, was how all the candidates left the election. The GOP candidates all left and gave endorsement to another candidate, , the Dems left, and still only half of the candidates have come out and officially endorsed either of the remaining two.

Keep your eyes on the prize, Hillary is gone, time to move on.

[bigbingtheory]

You're wrong big time alright.

Tis true the left thinks Hillary is a bit of a corporatist Republican. It's because of her voting record. Second, Obama wasn't my first choice and I'm certain wasn't many liberals first choice either. Moderate Republicans and independents are actually excited to vote for this guy. Go back into your little hole.

[infix]

I can't be the only one who thinks this post makes no sense at all and has no coherent thesis or argumentative structure, right?

[proudliberal4truth]

Bingo!

[kevinmcd]

Mr. Ridley is confused; not because he is a black man voting Republican. His thought process shows confusion and lack of a coherent argument. So the Left is trying to keep that Black man down by affirmative action? What? That makes no sense. You might argue it is a misguided effort to help Blacks (though I don't think so) but how can it be a way to keep them down. You lump the left together as being against Obama-but most of his biggst supporters of late have been the ones who consider themselves "liberal" or "very liberal." The ones who don't support him call themselves "conservative" Dems, or "Reagan" dems, you know the guy who, like Nixon, tried to divide the country by race and always pandering to the quiet majority of hard working whites. And much of the most liberal establishment people are supporting Obama, not Hillary. Like I said, you are confused.

[JamesA1102]

That's because Mr. Ridley is a conservative Repubican (who has admitted to voting for Bush) that can't resist the opportunity to engage in typical right-wing oversimplifications to attack the left.

[Boadicea]

LOL! Hardly.

Actually, Ridley is talking over your head. That's why you don't understand what he's saying. Ridley attacks left and right equally. He's an equal opportunity cynic and critic.

[Amminadab]

I agree. I think it should piss me off, but I can't quite grasp the message.

[bossysooz]

As a conservative, and an Obama supporter, I agree totally. I am sorry Obama is a liberal, but trust him more than most Republicans on the scene. If anyone is capable of recognizing the destructiveness of the liberal plantation, and changing direction, Obama is. It would be like Nixon opening up China.

I can only hope.

[Roses]

You know....I wouldn't describe Obama as a "liberal" at least the way that the Republican neocons have attempted to label the name. They have successfully redefined the name as just another DC bureaucrat who is interested in pork and just throwing money at problems. However, I think Obama is a liberal the way that Truman was a liberal, the way that Teddy R. was and FDR in 1932. He is a liberal the way that Lincoln was liberal. He is a man who is interested in ideas and actual solutions. I don't know if he can wade through the present problems and solve all our problems but I think he just may accomplish some change. That's why I like him. The old labels don't apply.....to his ideas or to his coalition. He is really more of a populist than a liberal. My mother is an 88 year old life-long Republican and she is for Obama. My daughters are young 20 somethings who have never voted and they are for Obama. I am a 50-something progressive and I am for Obama . But just wait, liberal is what he will be defined as.
Obama '08

[politicky]

You're not

[TRYKER]

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."

WTF?!"...oh your average non-hard-working black! Pulleeze. This statement was so out of bounds and just stupid...who do you think you are? Typical liberal hypocrisy ?

john ridley, you make yourself out to be an Ignorant Boob!

The only people in our society who constantly demand handouts and government mollycoddling are the ELITE CORPORATISTS who are robbing this country blind. You can't blame this on po blacks, po mexicans, po trailer trash or any other disadvanta­ged-by-the­-corporate­-thieves minority.

[Rule Of Law]

I think he was making an oblique reference to Hillary's remark regarding hard working white Americans--as though they were the only people working in this country. I'm usually down on Ridley, but hey, let's all support him as he moves toward supporting Obama this fall.

[curiousasheck]

What Obama inherits on January 20th is a giant barrel of shit, and the expectation to turn it into a barrel of roses.

If, he wins.

[Grunty1]

Obama won't be able to fix all the damage in even two terms. No one could. But I do believe that he will get us back on a better direction, where the damage WILL be fixed eventually.

[MsLiz]

Manure is an excellent fertilizer.

[Paz3]

Shame that the writer engages in stereotyping. Haven't black folks had enough of that to not lump people (white liberals, I guess) into a group. We (white progressives, if you will, such as me) have been "you people-d" here.
As to my reality, the only thing troubling me in the Democratic campaign for Prez this year is coming from the Clinton camp. Please go away, Hillary!

[proudliberal4truth]

I've been a LIBERAL supporter of Obama since the beginning and I'm frankly pissed off at your opinion of Liberals as hypocrites. I'm also a white southerner and old enough to remember segregation, the civil rights movement (at its beginning) and Martin Luther King's courageous push to rid the world of racism. I'm hoping you're the exception rather than the rule with your opinion of Liberal America. I guess racism can exist on both sides of the fence. By the way, I support Obama because he's intelligent, principled, throughtful, and wants the best for America....not because he's black. How about you?

[dct1999]

Ridley is NOT an Obama supporter, he's a friend of Hillary.

[cheforacle]

Yes I am a white liberal originally from a small Southern town. Now I live, as I have for many years in the Atlanta area (Decatur specifically). There are many liberals who have supported him from the outset. The division of support for him and Clinton was less ideological and more gender and age based. Si I fundamentally disagree with your main point, John. I don't think you can take a few comments by some people and generalize them to large, ideological groups.

[txbyrd]

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.
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­-------'

You must have some funky White friends.

Someone else dissing me as a 'guilty White person' for my support of Obama. And at the same time accusing me of having a paternalistic and dismissive attitude toward Blacks.

Thanks OK, I'm used to it.
And thanks for your tiny contribution to the snarkiness of the campaign.

[Catharsis]

Well...okay. A couple of points:

1. Your lazy use of Clinton and Ferraro as liberals really damages your argument.
2. I think Obama's "bitter" remarks serve as a reminder that negativity is often an indicator of reality. Perhaps the "typical gloom and doom drum beat of the liberal machine" resonates more in your head than anybody else's.
3. We'll have to wait and see if Obama can be the difference you envision. Let's revisit this piece in a few years, assuming he becomes our next president.

[kohoutek]

Dude, you wanna try that again and make your point a little more clearly?

[RedEyes]

I can:

Liberals are racist and it's hurting Obama.

Does that translation help?

[aforesti]

it sure clarifies how ludicrous this article is

[dapperd72]

I'm unsure how you define "liberal" if you mean "progressive" conflated with racist undertones, which is a bizarre oxymoron. Obama may not be an anti-war Republican, but he's already attracted a wide berth of anti-war Republicans into his fold, such as Lincoln Chafee & possibly Chuck Hagel, who politely laughed off the suggestion that he join Obama as his VP running mate. I may not agree with everything such forward-thinking Republicans believe on other issues, but I'm morally compelled to give credit where it's due. Obama, we should be clear, is not anti-war, as he has no qualms about the Afghanistan war. This one of several areas where I part company with him. Nor was Howard Dean ever anti-war when the MSM pundits falsely credited him this way. Dennis Kucinich can be accurately described as anti-war, along with Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, Alice Walker & others who take a principled stand against war itself. This doesn't mean they're necessarily pacifists, knowing even Mohandas Gandhi openly declared he himself wasn't a pacifist. However, I credit Obama for asserting in some of his public rallies that he wants not only to bring the troops home, but to eliminate the underlying mentality that leads us to go to war. At the same time, he declares repeatedly that he would not hesitate to strike against any nation that attacks the U.S. in order to protect the American people. Article I seems to justify this stand as Commander-in-Chief.

[nellie]

There's more than enough hypocrisy on both sides to go around. What you're really talking about is past versus future, which is what this campaign is really about. Sharpton, Jackson, and Ferraro are all denizens of the past. Obama is the future. Which is where we need to go. Hopefully, with some help, even the press will catch up.

[kalamatiaNO]

Thank you for saying what has gone unspoken for much, much too long.

Obama does not seem to over-identify with minorities, yet he speaks volumes about the American dream. Perhaps I am just an enlightened Californian, but I consider Obama just as white as he is black and rarely think about color when I see him or hear him speak. I am, however, always impressed with his articulate talents and feel in my gut that he is the best thing that can happen to this country in my lifetime.

Why is the country so God-damned polarized to begin with? I am married to someone who STILL will not pay attention to the Bush administration's corruption. corporate greed and , political stupidity. And my husband is an intelligent guy. I remember when you could barely tell a Dem and Repub apart -- and that elections were about were which person you felt you could both put your faith into and who would represent the values of average Americans best on the world stage. What happened?

I don't want Obama to identify with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton just as much as I don't want ANY president of mine to be marginalized by allying with any ONE extreme group.

Can't we have a president that can represent us ALL?

[BEHM777]

Yes. We. Can.

[illlaw1]

Hear Hear.

[timothe]

"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."

A very true statement. There are only three divisions within the Republican party and If you are in one or more of those divisions, then we don't care about your sex, skin color, nationality, or social status.
(Religious conservatives, fiscal conservatives, national security conservatives)

The Democratic party has many divisions and they seem to be inclined to lump blacks into one of those divisions based solely on skin color. That's why it's hard for me to understand how conservatives are viewed as racist while liberals get a free pass when they stereotype based on race.

[NuttyProf]

sensible timothe.

i never thought about it that way.

(no snark)