Obama Win More Hysterical Than Historical
There is less here than meets the eye.
Yes, the election results are notable. But they don’t mean as much as people think.
First, the important stuff: The first black president has been elected. And not just elected by a majority of voters, many of whom were black and/or first-time voters, but by nearly half of white voters. Twenty-eight years after the Reagan Revolution, the electorate has repudiated Republican inaction—on Iraq, in New Orleans, most of all on the economy—to an extent not seen since Watergate. Americans delivered a proxy impeachment of George W. Bush, holding McCain less to account for his policies than his association with a (cough) leader they blamed for their troubles.
It isn’t quite fair. George W. Bush, lest we forget, had a 90 percent approval rating during the fall of 2001. Now that Bush’s support is down to a Carrot Top-like 22 percent, it’s only fair to remember that he’s the same guy in 2008 that he was in 2001. And, for that matter, when a majority of Americans thought he was doing such a good job that they voted for another four years in 2004
Nothing much has changed. The economy sucks, but that’s been true since 2000. It’s been one continuous meltdown since the dot-com crash. We lost Afghanistan the day we invaded it; ditto Iraq. Doing nothing to help New Orleans during Katrina—well, that was just Republicans being Republicans. The difference now? There is no difference.
Don’t be fooled by the electoral college rout. The popular vote reveals that United States remains a deeply divided country. Bush got 51 percent of the vote in 2004; Kerry drew 48 percent. Obama defeated McCain 51-48. A surge of newly registered voters, including many African-Americans energized by Obama’s candidacy, accounts for the three percent difference.
No one’s mind has changed. People who voted for Bush in 2004 voted for McCain. If everyone who voted for Obama had shown up at the polls four years ago, John Kerry would be president. Obama’s victory is the triumph of retail fundraising, computer metrics, and a team of smart, focused advisors who knew how to exploit them.
It helped to have a weak opponent. McCain ran as the new Bob Dole—cranky, out of touch, and untelegenic. “That one” was a terrible speaker. Every aspect of his campaign, from his fascism-influenced slogan (“Country First”), to a Silver Star logo that riffed on his POW experience to a public tired of war, to picking a vice presidential running mate with whom he’d spent 15 minutes (less than you’d need to get hired at Wendy’s), was tone deaf. As so many American elections do, this one came down to fear. People were scared of losing their jobs, their homes, and their 401(k)s. McCain, his mindset stuck in the ’60s, thought they were more worried about the Weathermen and the SDS.
All things considered, McCain did well.
If he follows his win by closing Bush’s gulag archipelago of black sites, secret prisons and concentration camps at Abu Ghraib, Bagram, and Guantánamo (and don’t forget Diego Garcia and the prison ships), if he quickly orders a withdrawal from Iraq and reconsiders his foolish campaign pledge to double down against Afghanistan, Obama will be good for the United States’ international image.
If he acts to restore economic confidence with two vast infusions of federal money into people’s pockets—first, with a new WPA-type national infrastructure program to create jobs and, second, with a bailout of homeowners and renters in danger of foreclosure and eviction, he will still have something of a country left to run four years from now.
But no one should delude themselves into believing that racism or its kissing cousin conservatism are dead. Barack Obama, after all, is only half-black, and not even half-African-American at that. Jeremiah Wright aside, Obama had a white upbringing. A product of the elite, he went to an Ivy League college (the same as mine, at the same time). If we were looking at President-Elect Sharpton, I’d believe in this change. (Too scary? Exactly.) As things stand, the rich white people who own and run the country have little to fear.
Meanwhile, very nearly half of the American electorate voted Republican. After seven years of not finding (or looking for) Osama. After five years of horror in Iraq. After eight years of shrinking paychecks. After everything that’s happened, nearly half of voters wanted more of the same.
If the Republicans had picked a better candidate, they would have won. If Obama had presented a truly distinct alternative to conservatism—socialized healthcare, say, or opposing both stupid wars rather than the least popular stupid one—he would have lost. Conservatism? Dead? Not a chance.
A change is gonna come. But this ain’t it.
COPYRIGHT 2008 TED RALL
38 Comments.
Ted: Very interesting to watch this unfold. I am a small business owner and a family man–for me, a lot of research went into my voting decisions and priorities. My random observations on the election and events leading up to it:
1. It didn't matter what Republican candidate was on the ticket–they would have lost (it's the economy, wars, and Katrina-effect stupid–I think I heard that somewhere)…voter's 'fired' the Republican party for their out-of-touchiness and responsibility for the country's major woes.
2. Jesse Jackson didn't belong anywhere near Chicago last night…that POS, old school, racist windbag amazingly showed up for Obama's speech after running his mouth against Obama early on…Jesse has no class or integrity, and now he's weazeling his way back. Go away, take Alec Baldwin with you, and stay there.
3. The media is a biased shitpile. While Palin may not have been qualified for the position, the media circled like vultures on roadkill. Wardrobe spending–is that all they've got? The Palin effect on the election–see #1 above…she was a risky pick, and should have been prepared better to handle the media. The media clearly demonstrated their lack of respect for candidates that may not share their views. I saw the way Katie pounced on Palin, yet threw fluffy, marshmallow-filled questions at Obama the day before the election. Fair and unbiased–not even close…
4. Diane Sawyer was the equivalent of 'election day Dan Rather' (random phrases of stupidity)–they should have let Kokie Roberts run the show because Sawyer kept trying to take a political event and turn it into a human interest story. Kokie's political knowledge and experience would have given the report credibility. Better yet, Kokie and George Stephanopolis. I flipped to PBS–much more qualified and unbiased coverage…
5. I have a lot of respect for McCain and am thankful for his service to the United States, but the fear-mongering and hate-based political ads spewed forth by the RNC (and approved by McCain) are inexcusable. It demonstrated the RNC's desperate attempts to 'scare the vote.' The sad truth is that the RNC just doesn't get it or understand anymore.
Well, enough for now. The near future is going to be interesting, to say the least…
Troop 813 Eagle
The result ended up being more like 52-46, not 51-48.
Ted, you couldn't have read my mind more clearly. With all of McCain's fear pandering, Obama is just slightly left of center- that's it. I doubt he will go much further away from the center due to re-election concerns. I keep thinking that the real reason for the republican smear tactic was to keep Obama from straying to far, since if he actually did something like healthcare or higher minimum wage he'd be branded SOCIALIST. Or if he stopped the war he's a terrorist
I love being the cynic and skeptic too. And you're awesome at it. But Ted, can we BRIEFLY be happy and demand the best until we're dissatisfied? Give him a day or two?
We can kvetch and complain a lot about the misdirections of the past 8 years. The moral stain on all of us will not wash away. That's for life and beyond. But, at least the criminal, nasty, tone MIGHT be moving away from Washington. That's worth a sigh of some relief.
And to the poster above: Palin deserved every lick she got. If you employ the rhetoric she does, your ass goes on the wall. I agree the media's motives were selfish. (She violated the Commandment "though shalt grant access".) But her other sins make any hardship she suffered quite tolerable.
Gotta love the current headline at the online edition of "Le Monde":
Barack Obama sera-t-il à la hauteur ?
Good luck trying that one, WSJ!
Another expected diatribe from Ted "Obama Schlobama" Rall.
I know you won't post this because you hate being wrong, so between you and me:
Sorry, Ted. Obama won the popular vote by 6%, not 3%. That's staggering. Virginia going Obama – staggering. If you want to believe that is only due to new voters and the youth vote, go ahead. Yet another delusion.
Republicans voted for Republicans. Wow. Deep insight. The fact that so many red states tipped blue is serious shit. The campaign strategy is about electoral votes, not a popular vote. By any measure this is a fucking landslide for Democrats and a repudiation of failed conservatism.
You expect too much Rall. Get real for a change.
Quote: "After nearly eight years…half the voters wanted more of the same."
Reminds me of a story about a Brother in a Catholic parish who was getting on in years. His senses weren't as sharp as they used to be. Someone carelessly put anti-freeze in a glass in the refrigerator in the garage. The Brother thought it was grape juice, and drank it. The person who told me this story said, "What surprised me was that after taking one drink, he went ahead and took another drink. That could have been the difference that caused his death."
Not apples and oranges. America is doomed. We have a diehard half of America who insist on "taking another drink" of the Bush poison. I add that the Bush poison began with the Reagan poison. The more ridiculous and cardboard his so-called leadership, the hotter the American Republican lemmings were to keep him in office. There's really no explaining it except that, historically, every civilization that ever existed inevitably plans its own destruction. We are at that point. It's only a matter of one more Republican administration, and after a few years of Obama, we'll see Republican candidates (they will have not learned a god-DAMNED thing) coming at us with more small-town, folksy, nice-to-have-a-beer-with-Joe-the-alcoholic-mechanic-mantra, rolled up shirt sleeves, illiterate, inarticulate, NU-QUE-LUR pronouncing (with pride and a smirk) boy from, where else?, Texas. The Republicans will NOT give Obama a chance to do any repair or damage control to the Bush conflagration. The Republicans remaining in office will continue to stonewall and vote against every single attempt to fix Bush's eight-year 'legacy' of criminal incompetence. And they will not, for one second, be able to see what they are doing to their own country, because they all were dumb as cow flop the day they all first went to Sunday School and learnt (sic) the earth was bilt (sic) inna week an' no elitist egghead is agonna turn 'Merica into a communist state. Oh, yeaahhhhhh! Can I get a witless WITness?!
Ted,
Wouldn't bailing out homeowners be a uniquely Republican interpretation of socialism?
I live within modest means and I rent rather than buy because it was obvious that local real estate was overvalued. Why should my money go to someone who may be more affluent than me? Its too big to fail applied at an individual level. You're accepting that there's a class of people who shouldn't experience economic hardship.
The rest of us have been dealing with housing shortages and substandard housing for years. The burst real estate bubble may alleviate these problems.
The establishment has bent and will continue to bend over backwards to subsidize and otherwise cover the asses of the mortgaged "homeowner" class because it's their status as faux owners that convinces them to support the system at all. A nation of renters is a nation with no loyalty to private ownership or private owners. Of anything.
WOO-HOO!! we win! we win! we elected a pro-war, pro-corporate, pro-imperialist, pro-police state, anti-gay marriage… ummm… wait…
why is everyone so happy again..?
oh yeah! he's black!! who cares where he stands on the issues!! he's a brutha!! WOO-HOO!! we win! we win!
(and ted, to prove your point that conservatism isn't dead, or even sick– let's not forget that the voters in CA took the opportunity yesterday to prove without a doubt that small-minded, hateful bigotry is alive and well in america, even out here on the "left coast.")
Incitatus says that Le Monde says:
Barack Obama sera-t-il à la hauteur ?
BabelFish says:
Barack Obama will be it with the height?
I say: Does this make more sense in French than it does in English?
Thank you, anyone who can explain this to me.
Kate
The housing market crisis isn't about poor people who buy modest homes….it's about people who decided to speculate. That's why they didn't care about the terms of the mortgage, it was day trading with houses. That is what really downed this. People lose jobs or get divorced and have to move out all the time, this was something different.
Economic collapses are generally speculation that doesn't pan out.
As for Obama…..I think it's real change, but not the change Ted Rall would be satisfied with, so he says it's none at all, or that it's symbolic and therefore doesn't matter. The youth vote and the new vote only increased 1% each….that's only 2%. Virginia and Indiana (birthplace of the KKK) went for Obama because he ran a deliberate campaign and had a good message.
To read Rall's conclusions is to think that Obama is Reagan.
hey Ted,
Can you think of a way to get your books on Afghanistan and Silk Road to Obama or a member of his inner circle? I wonder if they could be swayed to approach things a little differently than otherwise knowing what one of the few Americans to travel independently in the region has to say on the subject. Might be they are too enmeshed in the military-industrial complex and mindset for it to make a difference in their policy, but seems worth a shot.
Ted,
Not all the Bush voters supported McCain. In my precinct, McCain got 36 votes fewer than Bush, while Obama got 107 more than Kerry. There were under 100 more voters than in 2004. I'm sure Obama got a small number of Bush's 2004 voters. In addition, other Bush 2004 voters may have voted for Barr or Baldwin. (While Baldwin is definitely Religious Right- more so than Bush(!)- his Iraq War view is short and simple: "Unconstitutional, Ungodly and Wrong.")
Ditto. Ted, what about the renters?
Hey, me again. 🙂 Lotsa folks will consider you an old killjoy, as usual, but no matter what, you say what needs to be heard. Thanks for doing your part to keep our feet on the ground (dancing in the streets or otherwise).
Michael Moore (he's not going away, folks, get used to it) said it best, that we really needed a blowout, an absolute one-sided annihilation, to completely and irrevocably refute Bush policy for all time. Obama got a decisive win, but not a blowout, which means that he's going to have to fight to get our troops out of the nightmare that is Iraq, end torture, end warrantless wiretapping, increase taxes on the obscenely wealthy (which really just reverses the never-ending cuts they've received under Republican administration), and other critical things that by right should be slam dunks.
So what we're left with is optimism, relief, the future looking brighter (sheesh, how could it not), but at the same time more than a little trepidation that our man might not be able to do what absolutely needs to be done, or else will be simply overwhelmed by the ungodly mess he's taken control of. Sure, he could surprise me. But at this point, it would definitely be a surprise.
Here's hoping, something we haven't been able to do for too long.
Obama is already getting us to lower our expectations. "we may not get there in one term".
Ok, you are right, but you need to say we will have X, Y and Z by date T.
We wanted to go to the moon for no reason at all. It bugs me to no end that it is off limits to compare that to attaining euro style healthcare.
one more thing. No has been more safe and boring than Obama.
"they can have a seat at the table, but they can't buy every seat."
Woa, hold on there Lenin…
so yeah, when he gets called socialist makes it come out of me at both ends.
Kate,
Babefish is so 90s. Google is much better at online translation, even thouh it too sucks. What Le Monde's headline was asking, in plain English, was: "Will Obama be up to the job"?
I don't think even the NY Post might get away with that.
Well, that was certainly a downer. While I am ecstatic with the Obama victory, I am concerned about the points you raised. How does this jibe with "Wake Up, You're Liberal"?
to anonymous poster calling this a "Landslide" (of electoral votes). you obviously have only watched the last 2 elections. go here to see what a real landslide looks like. Even Bush 41's win was WAAAY more lopsided than Tuesday, and his campaign was considered no great shakes….
Let's save the hyperbole for other things, shall we? Watch that you don't overuse the word Awesome while you're at it, too.
Today, I accidentally overheard George W. Bush suggest that his hair is grayer, I assume, due to the stresses of his job. Could Bush be any worse a liar than he has already demonstrated?
George W. Bush, speaking to his hairdresser: "Forget the highlights, Sweetie. I need to look like I've been working and worrying for my public."
I feel like Billy Jack in the Ice Cream Parlor: "You know, I try. I really do. I try to control my anger and violence like Dolores and the kids at the school asked me to. But when I see and hear George W. Bush, I…..go……BERSERK!" Perhaps (p)Resident Bush's ratings with the public will dip to ZERO before he escapes from the scene of his crimes.
Ted, you are contradicting yourself from your past articles in this one very crucial manner:
The Bush regime STOLE the election in 2000, and STOLE it again in 2004. Why are those of us to the left of the center so quick to forget that? I would think, Ted, with your association with Greg Palast, this would not be too hard for you to remember. So how do you know that the votes that appeared to go to McCain actually went to McCain?
McCain might have stole the 2008 election, too, if he had carried Virginia and Florida. Jesus, I don't think the Republicans saw that coming, did they? The rednecks and the Cuban exiles didn't pull through this time. They either stayed home or voted for Obama. Imagine that.
The thing is, the neo-conservatives had constructed this Orwellian bubble-reality that was separate from the true reality that everyone else was experiencing. And they got away with it for a while because of 9/11, and a compliant media that was itself intoxicated with the bubble-reality's promise of wiping out inconvenient people by stripping away their power to be heard.
The bubble-reality shrunk considerably with Katrina, the occupation of Iraq, the economy, etc., but not enough for the Republicans to choose a wise and savvy candidate. In other words, the neo-conservatives' philosophy of reality-creation led them inevitably to pick in their primaries an inept candidate. It wasn't possible for them to do otherwise, Ted, with them living in the bubble-reality they created for themselves.
Not that they learned their lesson. Not at all. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are still cranking out the hot air, even after the election, keeping that bubble-reality blown up. But it's only going to dig their graves faster, the more they stay in the bubble.
And as for Obama, Ted, he may be conservative and imperialist, but he will not be able to go on Empire-building adventures like Bush, or even Clinton. The economy is fucked, and if he doesn't work to fix it starting very soon after taking office, everyone will blame him–the black guy–and not Bush, even though Bush was responsible.
Hi Susan,
I'd like to add to your comment a few points.
"The bubble-reality shrunk considerably with Katrina, the occupation of Iraq, the economy, etc."
Terrorism and wars that are "over there" are bogeymen that are only experienced and lived by the people directly affected by them. People who lived in New York or had family in the planes or World Trade Center that day. The Iraq war is being fought by our military and their families, the rest of us were told to go shopping.
What sunk the neo-cons, as you pointed out, was Katrina and the economic meltdown. Katrina started it, but still didn't actually affect the majority of Americans. The economic meltdown is not a bogeyman, it is very real and in our faces. You can't spin a stock market losing 40% of its value.
John McCain wasn't a bad candidate, he simply had to adhere to a party platform that systemically can't address the problem, and people know that.
Any GOP nominee would have had to sign off on the party platform and any one of them would have been doomed for it.
Aside from the six percentage (not 3, as was pointed out by an anonymous poster above) difference, some seriously red states went swing or blue. Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia. Missouri is still up in the air. Montana was fairly close. And let's not forget the senate and house gains for the democrats. Shit, in South Dakota and Montana (same with Arkansas, but the Dem was running against a Green), they voted a Democrat in by wide margins. This is a clear repudiation of Bush politics. Yes, there are 46% of the electorate who seem to be slow learners. But I wouldn't write this off.
Of course Obama won't change everything in his first term. He'll probably just minimize the damage. I agree that Afghanistan is misguided and wrong, and I hope Obama learns that. Given that he actually has a curiosity about the world, it's a possibility.
By any measure this is a fucking landslide for Democrats and a repudiation of failed conservatism.
you are dreaming. Voters do not know what conservatism is or what liberalism is, or what anything is. So they cannot repudiate anything.
They voted out the last party because things got just a little too sucky, and the Dem's candidate was not a joke. Admit it:
A terrorist attack three months ago, would have changed everything.
To hear the noise coming out of American media and weblogs, one would think that the very act of electing Obama was the end unto itself and that all the problems are behind us now.
Now the wars will end, the economy is going to automatically get better and, best of all, the entire world has to start respecting America again. Once again, Mr. Rall injects some perspective.
Gotta love that guy telling Ted to get "real" and this is all so very "HUGE". No. If Obama manages to achieve HALF of what is expected of him; if he manages to fix HALF of what's currently destroying America from within, that would be HUGE. But don't hold your breath.
Ms. Stark almost seems to say it, but then veers away. Yes, the Republicans stole the 2000 and 2004 elections and the fact is, if they had wanted to win this time around they would have stolen this election too. Period. The fact is they didn't want to win this election. Even rats know when to desert a sinking ship.
More than any nebulous "bubble mentality", this is the reason they put forth so many inept candidates(not the least inept being the POTUS and VP candidates themselves). Don't believe for a moment this was a mistake.
They have spent the past eight years filling the bank accounts of the upper 1% with public money to the detriment of an entire nation. Now it can no longer be denied and it has come time to pay the huge tab. Guess who they hand that off to?
Yes Ms Stark. It is indeed time for the Democrats to take the blame and they are willingly stepping up to do just that. Worse they are high-fiving each other all the way while they do it.
If the Republicans had picked a better candidate, they would have won. If Obama had presented a truly distinct alternative to conservatism—socialized healthcare, say, or opposing both stupid wars rather than the least popular stupid one—he would have lost. Conservatism? Dead? Not a chance.
You're absolutely right, Ted. People are making such a fuss about NC going blue. Please. Obama took it by about 13,000 votes. It's better than not taking it, for sure, but I'm not fooling myself that the rednecks in the hinterlands (and the not so hinterlands of Durham, where I live. It might be a hotbed of lesbian, tree-hugging, rabble-rousing community organizers, but it still has plenty of racists, too) have had a big change of heart.
However, you're not only being a big, old spoilsport, you're being disingenuous. "Hysterical", not "Historical"? Come on, Ted. You're the one who said you were voting for Obama because you wanted black people to know you stood beside them? That's what all this supposed "hysteria" is about. Can you honestly say that this isn't a historic moment? That's a total diss to the African-Americans you claimed you were standing beside, and to a lesser degree towards those of us who are whiter than the Queen and are excited and moved by what happened on Tuesday night.
Being excited that the next POTUS is a man who might actually remember what it was like to grow up without privilege (unlike Reagan) doesn't make me hysterical. I don't think anyone believes Obama is going to usher in a Utopian era. That doesn't mean he's not going to do some good for the country.
Susan,
Many Cuban exiles, and their children and grandchildren, might have voted for Obama, even though they still and justifiably so hate El Comandante, because they're just as fed up of Bush II as the rest of America. Imagine that.
After all, the Jewish retirees did vote for Obama, right?
Incitatus
Many Cuban exiles are mad at Bush because he limited the amount of money that they could send home to relatives in Cuba. And the amount of time they could spend visiting relatives in Cuba (or I believe so). So yes, they're fed up with Bush.
People are making such a fuss about NC going blue. Please.
Hi Maura. I'm here in Durham too–the bluest district in the state (76% for 'Bama). I tend to agree. I was just telling a friend that I'm still afraid to leave our little liberal bubble–49% of the state is still functionally retarded, and rabidly “clinging to their guns and religion”…
I was with most of what you had to say until this:
"Barack Obama, after all, is only half-black, and not even half-African- American at that. Jeremiah Wright aside, Obama had a white upbringing. A product of the elite, he went to an Ivy League college (the same as mine, at the same time). If we were looking at President-Elect Sharpton, I'd believe in this change."
I think it's really, really disgusting how so many so-called progressives are challenging Obama's "blackness." What does it mean to say someone is, "after all," only half black? I don't think privileged, Ivy League-educated white people have a lock-down on "whiteness" — why should we believe that only Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright get to be authentically black?
That kind of racial politics belongs to the 60s. We live in a diverse age, in a diverse country, with all kinds of black people, all kinds of white people, and all kinds of brown people.
While it's certainly true that electing Obama doesn't mean America's gotten over its prejudices — the stereotype that Sharpton embodies for so many bigots will continue to be just that, a stereotype for bigots — but there is a right way to say this, and a wrong way to say this. Challenging someone's blackness (or whiteness or brown-ness) is *definitely the wrong way.*
this isn't a historic moment? That's a total diss to the African-Americans you claimed you were standing beside
The solidarity vote motif is just a consolation prize to people who could not get a real candidate. If a true liberal were running against Obama, Ted would not have voted for Obama.
and, no, Obama is not liberal.
I have to agree with you Ted, as I generally do. The 'Military Industrial Complex®' has put a black sock on it's left hand and let it beat down the now much despised right hand. Great Punch & Judy drama, but the hands in the socks are still in charge.
Angelo mentioned the Space Race- "We wanted to go to the moon for no reason at all." There was a reason. The Rand Corporation advised Kennedy that if he wanted to end war he'd have to find another way to keep feeding the military contractors, and the people's lust for Patriotism. Too bad that one didn't play.
I will disagree with you on one point, though, I don't believe that Bush ever had 90% approval. It's just that at that moment 90% of the people were afraid to say anything remotely disapproving of the good ol' U.S. of A. for fear of lynch mobs. I know I was.
I was just telling a friend that I'm still afraid to leave our little liberal bubble–49% of the state is still functionally retarded, and rabidly “clinging to their guns and religion”…
Grouchy, when we moved here from PA eight years ago, we were told we don't actually live in the south. We live in The Triangle.
I was in the mountains, close to Boone, a few weeks ago. I don't think I saw one Obama sign, but there were lots of McCain signs. Go even 30 miles outside of Durham, and it's an entirely different state.
Angelo, we did have a real candidate. That real candidate won. And I'm really happy about that. At any rate, my point was about Ted's voting for Obama as a sign of solidarity, and that his use of the word "hysterical" contradicted that solidarity. Solidarity being just a consolation prize (which, by the way, it's not) has nothing to do with my point. I don't need a consolation prize anyway.
Ted, you are one of the few people I've seen who has noted the importance of Obama's white up-bringing in making him acceptable to white voters. His birth culture is white American, not black American. Black American culture naturally includes an element of hostility to whites. How could it not? Obama knows black culture deeply and fluently, but it's not his birth culture; he can put it completely aside and exude a comforting, non-threatening, mainstream whiteness which sets off no alarms of unconscious racism. Obama is a black man who doesn't always "feel" black.
I also think it makes a difference that he was raised in Hawaii, where the dynamics of racism are not the same as those of the mainland. For those who don't know Hawaii or don't think much about it, it "reads" like no racism at all. Obama's unusual background makes him much more acceptable to whites than scary Al Sharpton who can't help pushing the racist buttons of even the most progressive white folks.
I don't see how recognizing Obama's unique racial and cultural background is in any way insulting to him– not to the black part of him or to the white part of him. His black heritage, his white family, his up-bringing in Hawaii and Indonesia, his Ivy League education, his young manhood in the black neighborhoods of Chicago– all of these things go into making Obama Obama. Claiming one aspect of Obama's life as a source of pride and another as an insult seems foolish to me. Looking at it in hindsight, it makes perfect sense that America's first black president is so atypical. He could hardly be anything else.
Jana C.H.
Seattle
Saith Will Cuppy: In America everybody's conscience is unusually free. If it isn't, we fix it. We're funny that way.
For those who don't know Hawaii or don't think much about it, it "reads" like no racism at all.
Actually, some parts of Hawaii (like the rural Big Island) are festering with racism; the tension is barely contained. But it's a different dynamic: the whites ("the haoles") hate the native peoples and vice-versa. The black population is very small, and black/white economic tension is non-existent–hence little black/white racism.
Maura, Unless Obama has a very powerful secret cabal of influential insiders hell-bent on changing things beyond recognition for generations, his legacy will be erased by the next Bush.
If Obama and his team do not already have proxies to carry out delegitimization hits on conservative commentators, he is toast.
Finally, I ask you:
What happened when Janet Jackson flashed the cameras on national TV?
The stations that showed the footage were fined punitively, and in all subsequent broadcasts of that footage, the boob was blocked out. We need to treat lies like boobs.
If Obama has not already begun the process of censoring lies the same way we censor boobs, he is one.