Obama! Oh Bush! Oh, my.

So I guess Cueball agrees with George that There Is No Alternative to letting the racists have their way in the USA.

"Joe Bageant" - 1 new article

1. AMERICA: Y UR PEEPS B SO DUM?
2. More Recent Articles
3. Search Joe Bageant
4. Prior Mailing Archive

AMERICA: Y UR PEEPS B SO DUM?

If you hang out much with thinking people, conversation eventually turns to the serious political and cultural questions of our times. Much of the world, including plenty of Americans, asks that question as they watch U.S. culture go down like a thrashing mastodon giving itself up to some Pleistocene tar pit

Obama: The Republican’s Reliable Interlocutor

Quote:

With the Democrat Party, particularly the First Black President, so thoroughly and deservedly identified with Wall Street, the Republicans were empowered to pull off what would have previously been thought impossible: the GOP’s brown-shirted wing, the white supremacist-based Tea Party, which purports to abhor government and, therefore, regulation, claimed with some success to be the anti-bailout, anti-Wall Street party. Meanwhile, Obama guided the Democrats to pass a fraudulent financial regulation bill that left the derivatives casino-economy intact, if not more strongly entrenched.

Black Agenda Report

What Progressives Don't Understand About Obama

For those skeptics who haven't been able to draw the connection between President Obama's manner and his colour.

[url=http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/in_latest_compromise_obama_agrees_he... Latest Compromise, Obama Agrees He Is a Muslim[/url]

Quote:

WASHINGTON - In his latest effort to find common ground with Republicans in Congress, President Barack Obama said today that he was willing to agree that he is a Muslim.

Differences over his religious orientation have been a sore point between the president and his Republican foes for the past two years, but in agreeing that he is a Muslim, Obama is sending a clear signal that he is trying to find consensus. "The American people do not want to see us fighting in Washington," Obama told reporters at the White House. "They want to see us working together to improve their lives, and Allah willing, we will."

But Obama's willingness to back down on his claim of being a Christian does not seem to have satisfied his Republican opposition, as GOP leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, today insisted that the president must also agree that he was born in Kenya. While Obama did not immediately agree to Boehner's demand, he hinted that yet another compromise might be in the offing: "My place of birth has been, and will always be, negotiable."

NY Times wrote:

“This case is not about health insurance, it is not about health care,” Mr. Cuccinelli said at a news conference in Richmond. “It is about liberty.”

They are fighting for the right of every American to be sick and die in poverty in any corner of the country if they want to. And the insurance companies only want to skim the cream off the healthiest part of the working population. Millions are written off as having lives not worth living. Republicans want Nazi style health care in America, and Liberal Democrats are too weak and unwilling to do anything about it in or out of government.

Jingles wrote:

 

Quote:

The modern counterpart of black-face humour in #13 aside,

I have my doubts the George even knows what "black-face" means. And again we see him try and smear Obama critics as racist. 

George would be more at home in the Obama fluffing world of Huffpo or Kos than here. Seriously, if you equate legitimate criticism of a far-right corporatist thug with Jim Crow racism, you really don't belong here. There are plenty of blindly partisan Democrat message boards you could inhabit.

 

I first read of the origin of black-face humour in a work of historical non-fiction, I've Got a Home in Glory Land.  If you google it , you'll find  its beginning in Kentucky, with a stage performer who imitated an old African American's singing and dancing at the stable where he worked. It was the first expression of Jim Crow for mass audiences.

I think that that particular piece mocking Obama is indeed a modern replica of that putdown... perhaps by someone as ignorant of its origins as yourself, and unaware of its modern form among "progressives."

Adding this: "you really don't belong here. There are plenty of blindly partisan Democrat message boards you could inhabit." and coming from a fella who just shit-disturbs for the fun of it, is really rich. Try reading something besides your own prattle for some depth of understanding.

Ah, alQ.  I believe that concocting stories about Obama's "acceptance" of Tea Party tales about his origins  IS an insensitive form of humour. It likely originated with a racist blogger.  At this end, its use only reflects a lack of knowledge of the whites' need to laugh at African Americans in the 19th century.  Folks should know that it ain't funny. Not one damned bit.

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Calling those who raise legitimate criticisms of Obama racists in the way you do is akin to accusing critics of Israeli policies as being antisemites.  And no, there isn't much depth of understanding accompanying such slurs.

That's some parallel you draw there, Mr.   I'm sure you could explain the tortured and convoluted thinking by which you arrived at that conclusion.

Try this one again :

What Progressives Don't Understand About Obama

George Victor wrote:

 

That's some parallel you draw there, Mr.   I'm sure you could explain the tortured and convoluted thinking by which you arrived at that conclusion.

It seems rather direct to me.  I'm just waiting for you to call the leftists from Black Agenda Report who I quoted upthread "self-hating African-Americans."

Slumberjack wrote:

al-Qa'bong wrote:

And no, there isn't much depth of understanding accompanying such slurs.

It's not for a lack of effort when it comes to the plumbing of new depths.

Don't ever expect not to hear back when you drop crappola like this out of the blue, jack. You did the same yesterday.  Becoming a habit, I guess.

"We"

"We progressives?"

From that probably still-unread link:

"When these progressives refer to themselves as Mr. Obama's base, all they see is themselves. They ignore polls showing steadfast support for the president among blacks and Latinos. And now they are whispering about a primary challenge against the president. Brilliant! The kind of suicidal gesture that destroyed Jimmy Carter - and a way to lose the black vote forever.

Unlike white progressives, blacks and Latinos are not used to getting it all. They know how it feels to be unemployed and unable to buy your children Christmas presents. They know when not to shout. The president, the coolest man in the room, who worked among the unemployed in Chicago, knows too."

Try harder. Read something besides you own philosophical musings.

I hope babblers will pardon me for drawing so often on the NYTimes op-ed columnists, particularly Krugman,  in discussion of the U.S. president. While prone to bend opinion for profit, it's the last liberal news sheet in America.  I find there is always something to learn from native sources. It took an African-American writer's commentary to firm up my growing suspiciion that those folks don't/can't easily chastise/berate a mostly white community.

The innocence of "the public" in the face of concerted propaganda attacks remains the very biggest question. Because if they don't understand what they are being fed, all the rest is rather pointless. Sock puppets are solid, thinking citizenry by comparison.

Anyway, in making a lengthy defence of an individual (certainly not a patently corrupted political system functioning to maintain a military-industrial complex and market dominated economy) who is honestly trying to make a difference, and searching for evidence in his defence, I'm learnin'.

The problem with laying all of the blame on the president, without mentioning the bedlam of the political system, or any of the structural faults in a military-industrial complex, is that that is the most shallow, ahistorical form of political analysis. Firstly because America would not have elected an assertive black. The "progressives" do not understand that. And if you don't believe that, there's little point to this discussion.

And as for a two-party system where EVERYONE is dependent for the buck from the defense industry and its job-dependent workforce, and in a court-crippled nation where the Supreme Court has just ruled that those donations don't have to be revealed (nice timing, eh)...well.

No, they (and we) are in deeper dung than the well-meaning but politically naive, progressive community could ever believe because of structural failure, ignorance, and a greed that defies imagination...almost bringing the world to another Depression. And I know that this will only be dismissed as more elitist thinking, but until the (what was the acceptable term...oh yes) the "ordinary masses" can sort their asses from a hole in the ground, we're all looking at a catastrophe in the making.

And that, Ghislaine, is the level of "thinking" that dismisses history, social and political structure and race without even understanding what it has left out. It's all a plot. 

And along with Ralph Nader this week on Common Dreams. org (he had no chance of being elected in the America described)

Get the day's top  --  progressive     --news articles, views, and press releases

Most Popular This Week

1. Rabbis Say 'No Housing for Arabs'
2. Cold War vs. Modern Day US Propaganda
3. Crazy People Are Sure God Hates Elizabeth Edwards

Your sources, like yourself, have created a fictitious America.  No wonder you don't want to deal with reality.

What reality, George; the Teaparty mob being manipulated by the political and corporate elite that runs the USA, an elite whose propaganda machine has been so successful in dumbing down and brainwashing 'Murricans since the Reagan presidency? 

They're too easy a target, as they're so obviously the enemy.   Proving they're dangerous and destructive is rather begging the question, isn't it?

Which babble are you reading?

I don't recall many voices around here saying Obama is a solution to any of what I mentioned.  Moreover, one would have to be delusional to think Obama represents even a semblance of a threat to the new order.

Sarcasm? 

Do you think Obama is going to change the rightward trend in the USA? 

Like your opinion on the Obama presidency, for instance?