"I only make my racial identity clear to avoid being race-baited."
So, let me get this right. A country elects a Black guy president with 53% of the vote, he then institutes the most sweeping (and controversial) financial and healthcare changes since FDR, and you feel that you must tell everyone that you are Black because if not, then they won't take you seriously because obviously you must be a racist? Did I get that right?
Are you serious? First off, members of a Party who intellecually and factually criticize thier sitting President usually gets a pass, and are well-respected because it goes against the traditional wisdom of not breaking party ranks. (Especially, in light of Reagan's "Never speak ill of a fellow Republican" mantra which the GOP still follows in step today. ) Whether you love him or hate him, everyone agrees that his policies are sweeping, large-scale, far-reaching, still unproven , and thereby controversial. Some of Obama's changes are not scheduled to reap benefits until 2017. That being said, NOBODY thinks that a critic of the president is racist if he disagrees with the policies: there is a lot to disagree with. Republicans/conservatives disagree with the policies all the time and it is considered the course of the discussion. (Scarborough, Krugman and others come to mind). Democrats slam him on both sides because he remains a moderate. Bush caught heat the same way, though not as much.
There are only two groups that feel a need to insulate themselves from the racist charge:
1. Beck, Rush, Gingrich, etc. People who were regarded as racists prior to 2008, and feel that they need a disclaimer to get their point across. Also, people that don't really have the intellecutual aptitude to dissect his policies, so they hide behind thier thinly veiled xenophobia. (Tea Party, Birthers, etc.)
2. Then there is the last group, Jack. Democrats who for whatever reason, did not want him to win in the first place, even after the primary. I suspect that Jerome Armstrong told you that we were a bunch of Obamatrons, so he hired you to spew his propaganda, thinking that your color would give you credibility/cover. You should ask yourself why. The reason is that Jerome needs a seperate mouthpiece because besides being a HUGE Hillary shill, his hatred of Obama was blinding his objectivevity. So bad in fact, 2 weeks prior to the election he actually said that Barack Obama was the weakest candidate that we have had in decades. This was during the time that he was destroying McCain in debates and NO major poll had him losing.
Look around you man. Nobody cares what your skin color is. At least no Democrat. Obama critics in the Party are a dime a dozen. Some are legitimate, and others are not. You want to be considered credible, then print things that provoke thought instead of being some type of new 'token' "Hey world, look at me, I'm Black, Liberal and I don't like President Big-Ears".
By the way, if you were really plugged into mainstream Black Media, you would know that there is a growing, restless community who are impatient with the President as well. So sorry pal, your 'identity ' is really that unique.
You are a a pretty unique person on this page, though. Congrats!
Then as a fellow conservative Democrat, who happens to be African-American, let me clue you in on this. The 'new' true base of the Democrat Party, (minorities, women, under-40 crowd) will never peel off from Obama in enough numbers to vote for Romney. He screams establishment, $$$$$, and comes across like "Bush 2.0" . Like many strong Republican candidates in the past, he is a white male that appeals strongly to other white males. Unfortunately, that appeal will bode well for him in the primaries, but in a general election he has to move toward the center, and herein lies the problem. The Dems and the various advocate groups will make sure that everybody knows his flip-flop on Health care (as Mass. Gov , then as a candidate) and his personal, on the stump interactions with minorities was a little wierd and out of touch in 2008 . Depending on how bad it gets, I'm pretty sure with all the anti-Muslim hysteria in the U.S, a Mormon won't go over well either. As a side note, you can count on somebody bringing up the Mormons' core belief (held until at least 1977) that Black people are cursed cowards.
He might be a nice guy in person, but thanks to the Tea Baggers , he'll never make it out of the Primary because he 's not conservative enough. If he does, then thanks to the Mormons, becasue he'll never get away from that albatross.
Don't be overly confident that your skin color gives you cover for Obama-bashing. An interesting side effect of Obama's "post racial " world is the hordes of African-Americans who are clammoring to be identified as Democrat, but anti-Obama. And no one is calling them "Uncle Tom" either.
At the end of the day, you would do well to have a better plan than what the President is doing as opposed to being just "anti-Obama". It's been the Republican's battle call for the last 2 years, and you see how it's working out for them....
You touch on another point. A core principle of applied fiscal conservatism is that we don't need the Government to redistribute wealth becasue American's will help others in need, without being prodded. Of course, we know this is hogwash, as our history is riddled with examples of people patronizing a discriminatory business, resources being distributed according to to race, gender , nepotism, wealth, etc.. Rick Santorum once told a woman with cancer that there were some 'neighboorhood programs' that would help provide for her chemo and not to depend on Obam's Healthcare program. I saw the video with my own two eyes.
So Ms. Savage believes that we don't need the government to make us be nice to each other, yet she is against individual charity as well?
This article also is a little slanted toward Baker. John Lewis, was a strong early supporter of Hillary Clinton, and hit Obama hard in the press in the beginning. It wasn't until that it was painfully evident that she wasn't going to make it, did he switch support to Obama. Public support in his own most Black district was swelling against him and he had a re-election to contend with as well.
At any rate, Bill Clinton still is staying activein the political realm, and I'm sure that this was a way for him to guage his effectiveness in Georgia.
You are correct about not running after the teabagger vote. The Republicans are pushing a dialouge that there is a growing number of Democrats who are Teabaggers. That may play into a campaign strategy of trying to peel off some centrist Dems for the fall, but fighting for them is a resource trap , just the same way the Hillary supporters were so concerned about Obama not appealing to the 'Reagan Democrats". Obama didn't fall for for that trap in '08, so instead he GOTV and grew the base instead of appealing to a base that has been lukewarm in recent years or just have left the party alltogether.
At some point in time, Democrat strategists need to realize that Democrats in Western Penneslyvania and Ohio, are NOT the core of the party.
Fall 2010 needs to be about highlighting the immigration bill that the teabaggerslove so much, and going after the Latino vote. Link local Republican candidates to Rand Paul's vision of America where discrimination is unfortunate but legal, and watch them try to distance themself from the tea Party. At the same time, remind minorities and women that it wasn't that long ago that discrimination was legal.Have the DNC run ads where the audio of Rand Paul's interview with Rachel Meaddow is playing while we see a video of a male smacking a female coworker on the butt.
Running against the Tea Party will work everywhere where we want a seat. The places that it doesn't are too conservative for us to care about anyway...
Even after Iraq was starting to go sour in 2004, people didn't want to switch horses so they stayed with the incumbents. This may help us in 2010. But like 2006, methinks that Obama and crew need to be out of Iraq, have seen Afghanistan draw down, unemployment under 10% natonwide and a semblence of a stable housing market by 2012, or else we will be in a load of Barney!
The only problem with that is, Clinton threw the Democratic Congress under the bus and in the process opened the door for the Republican Revolution. With Obama spouiting this new line of " I'm not worried about gettig re-elected", where does that leave this Democratic Congress?
I live in Va, and campaigned for Obama in 08. Creight Deeds was a realative conservative from the Western part of the state , away from the population centers. He was a Democrat in the regular sense of the word, on all the key issues, but he didn't have the the external trappings of a strong,popular Va , Obama Democrat.No real inroads in the Black communities, no connnection to the 30 and under crowd, not a vibrant speaker (stuttering problem), he didn't really promote his own platform as much as he tried to shove a paper that his opponent wrote over 20 years ago (Which didn't get much traction) down everyone's throats. All in all, a rather unspectacular candidate to run aganist a moderate Republican from Norhtern Va.
I voted to sit on my hands, and I don't regret it.
I don't think it's as polarizing as some are making it. If there is anyting that can be learned from the 2020 elections is that the Party's candidates doesn't need to move farther to the Left as so much as publicly supporting Obama.
That guy up in NY-23 ran on a platform of the public option, etc. Creigh "the Idiot" Deeds thought he could run a negative campaign as a conservative Dem vs a 'moderate' Republican who ran on a platform of job creation and public (transportation) projects..
The guy who sounded like Obama won.
I remember my paternal grandfather Simon, a man of African descent and resident of the tiny Carribean British territory of Domenica, who was a loyal British subject ready to do battle for freedom for her majesty, the Queen of England, back in WW I.
I give thanks to my brother Ernest, a retired Lt. Commander of 20 years in the Navy of these United States.
I thank God that neither of these men had to die in defense of thier country, and pray for the families of those who did.
THese COngressional elections will come down to how Obama is doing in fall of 2010, and if local Dems want to jump on his bandwagon. Whatever they do, they need to not take advice from Creigh Deeds campagin manager...
You make an interesting and valid point. While Dems have to contend with pretty clear language in the Bible about homosexuality, religious arguements against abortion are largely in the application of Biblical principles, making it a lot harder to make the issue black and white. This is probably why gay marriage can't pass in CA and ME but at least 60% of Americans consider themselves some form of pro-choice, regardless of religious affiliation.
Just the more reason why there should be some comprimise avaialble when it comes to abortion in this bill.