I Just Can't Put My Finger On It

Lois Coar, the mother of two grown children, supported Mitt Romney this year and is undecided for November. She cannot see voting for Obama -- "not because he's black, but I just can't put it in words." She likes McCain as a person, but "I can't understand why he keeps talking about this Ayers guy" -- William Ayers, the 1960s radical who became an occasional colleague and supporter of Obama in Chicago. "He should be focusing on the economy and real terrorists; that's what people worry about," she said. Washington Post

    If you are white and you do not consider yourself a racist, a wing-nut, or rich and your answer for not voting for Senator Barack Obama is, "It isn't because he's black, but I just can't put my finger on it." I have sad news for you; it is because he is black! I read this response and I was immediately struck by the number of people who share this same sentiment. With our economy experiencing a "China Syndrome" meltdown, the war in Afghanistan on the verge of defeat, and a whole host of other problems besetting this country anyone who would even consider supporting the Republican brand in this election needs to have their voting rights revoked. What this election has finally shown is just how bankrupt the Republican Party is, of course after they have bankrupted most of the free world. I mean there are only so many ways you can screw the public and get away with it. The sad part is that there are still those who would allow the divisiveness of race to keep them from supporting an obviously more qualified candidate.

    It is reminiscent of the people on the Titanic after it has hit the iceberg and they are flailing around in a frigid ocean and refuse to get in the lifeboat because a black man is steering it. Well my friends my response to those folks is let them drink sea water. Anyone that stupid and stubborn probably deserves to drown. Anyone who had any doubts about John McCain's judgment needs to look no further than his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate. Fortunately there aren't enough of those folks to prevent the inevitable from happening. Despite the Fox News poll that has McCain down by 2 points, this election is over. It won't even be close. Anyone remember the Reagan revolution? We are about to experience the Obama revolution.

For his part, Reagan, the charismatic former Governor of California, repeatedly ridiculed Carter, and won a decisive victory; in the simultaneous Congressional elections, Republicans won control of the United States Senate for the first time in 28 years. This win marked the beginning of the "Reagan Revolution." Wikipedia

    McCain has run one of the worst general election campaigns in my memory. He has stumbled and fumbled every step of the way. I guess a campaign run by lobbyists isn't the best campaign money can buy. Of course to be fair McCain did have a difficult task to overcome. All of the major issues in this campaign favored Obama and the Democrats and how hard is it to run as the agent of change candidate when you have been sitting in Washington for the last 25 years? Though most liberal journalists and pundits are too afraid to state the obvious for fear of jinxing the election, many of their Republican counterparts are already heading for the exits. Every day we are treated to another Republican mouthpiece laying the groundwork for a major Republican defeat. It's as if the Republican Party is disintegrating right before our eyes. You have half the Party wanting McCain to go really negative and throw everything including the kitchen sink at Senator Obama and the other half watching in disbelief as this election becomes historic. The problem with going really negative is that the polls are showing it isn't working, but more importantly the damage that it would do not to Senator Obama but to the office of the Presidency. And God knows we don't need the office diminished anymore than George W. has already done.

    The problem for McCain is two-fold. The first is that if Mr. Ayers were the American equivalent of Osama bin Laden as he is being compared, why is he still walking around a free man? Surely any man as dangerous as him would have to be on his way to Guantanamo not sitting in some mansion is Chicago dispersing 100's of millions of dollars for educational foundations. Not to mention that Senator Obama was all of 8 when this Mr. Ayers was committing these acts of terrorism and probably not even in the country. It is hard to compare a man that we all see on television walking around free to a man that is living in caves while there is a worldwide manhunt for him; the symbolism kind of gets lost somewhere.

    The second problem is that if this gets anymore negative then the McCain campaigns does something that we cannot allow in a democracy and that is too diminish the office of the Presidency. In other words you may disagree with the officeholder but the office is supposed to remain above the fray. You may not respect the man, but you must respect the office or anarchy will prevail. By personally attacking Senator Obama the way the McCain campaign has been doing then even if he is elected Senator Obama as President could not govern. This would be an intolerable condition for all of us. Not only would the man be tainted but also the office itself. I don't have to follow any terrorist sympathizer, Muslim, or ni**er! Any President is only in command for a limited period, but the office must continue to hold its dignity and prestige regardless of its occupant. Let's face it there will already be plenty of people who will resent Senator Obama as Commander in Chief, but we cannot tolerate any public ambiguity about who is in charge. Nor can we give any latitude to those voices of intolerance to reinterpret the law of the land.

    If you dehumanize or devalue the person in such a way then the office is tainted. Mr. McCain is fond of stating that he puts country first, the final days of this election will allow him the opportunity to prove it based on the direction he allows his campaign to take. So, if the best you can do is I don't know why I can't vote for him, then I think we all know why and you are just unable to get honest with yourself.

Truth is not only violated by falsehood; it may be equally outraged by silence. - Henri Frederic Amiel
The Disputed Truth

Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, revolution, Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin, The Presidency, William Ayers (all tags)



I like Senator Obama's analysis

He said he thought that race-based votes will be a washout, that about an equal number of voters will vote for him as those who vote against him because he's black.  Last week, there was polling data, the only concrete evidence we have to date, which tended to confirm this analysis.

The problem with racist-based votes either for or against Obama is that they count the same way as votes cast on principle or a careful analysis of the issues.

I have decided there isn't going to be a "Bradley Effect" that falls outside the existing margin of error.  I am betting that the popular vote on Election Day will fall within the margins of the standard error of polls released on that day.

by Beltway Dem 2008-10-15 04:01AM | 0 recs
"Let them drink seawater..."


by Bob Sackamento 2008-10-15 04:14AM | 0 recs
Re: I Just Can't Put My Finger On It

Let me add "There's just something about him" to mean the same thing as well.

by neko608 2008-10-15 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: I Just Can't Put My Finger On It

I don't necessarily disagree with your opening claim, but I don't agree with it either.  It doesn't make one racist to say that there's something about Obama they don't like, even if they can't put their finger on it.  

And, I really think we need to stop imputing racist motives to people who can't bring themselves to vote for Obama.  It drives an unnecessary wedge between people, and it's just wrong.

I will vote for Obama, but I don't necessarily think he's the best candidate we (Democrats) had from a policy perspective.  In general, I think he's too centrist for my liking (not left-leaning enough), and despite what he says his positions are, I don't know enough about them.  I think experience is overrated in terms of its necessity for qualifying for office.  But, it does give you an idea of how someone will vote on various issues.  For example, I didn't like Obama's FISA vote after he sealed-up the nomination, and he voted in a way I wouldn't have expected.  I could go on and on with examples, but I eat, breathe, study, and live politics.  In short, I don't expect that everyone can put their finger on exactly why they may not want to vote for him, and their inability to do so does not, by default, make them racists.  Hell, there are lots of folks who feel the same way about McCain.

by slynch 2008-10-15 07:08AM | 0 recs
Re: I Just Can't Put My Finger On It

I do not believe that anyone who doesn't vote for Senator Obama is a racist. There are those who have legitimate policy disagreements, personality differences and maybe even social policy differences. The point of my essay is to suggest that if you recognize that the other candidate is not representative of you and yet you still cannot bring yourself to support the other candidate then maybe, just maybe there may be more to this than meets the eye.

No one can look into the heart of another and know what resides there and I would never pretend that I could, however we should all be willing to look into our own hearts and be willing to be honest with ourselves no matter what is hiding there.

by Forgiven 2008-10-15 07:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I Just Can't Put My Finger On It

On a similar note, I found this New Yorker article fascinating as a look into the PUMA mind.  Sure, there's plenty of racism, but there's also deep, hopeless cynicism and fear of change.

by failsafe 2008-10-15 07:22AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads