Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 24, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size


The Key to 2014




The Divide


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

Will Black Voters Respond to Obama’s Needs?

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 11, 2010

By Eugene Robinson

At a high-spirited rally in Philadelphia on Sunday, President Obama challenged the mostly black crowd to defy pundits who purvey the conventional wisdom. “They think, ‘Oh, well, Obama’s name is not on the ballot, maybe they’re not going to turn out,’” he said, referring to African-American voters. “You’ve got to prove them wrong.”

Delivering the same message at historically black Bowie State University in Maryland a few days earlier, the president got downright personal: “Don’t make me look bad, now.”

How the president looks on Election Day will depend in part on his ability to fire up the constituencies in the Democratic Party’s base. With different groups, he’s taking different approaches.

For progressives who have criticized his administration from the left, he has a stern lecture that might be paraphrased like this: “Come on, people, give us a break. Have you noticed that we don’t exactly have a liberal majority in Congress? Yet look at all we’ve managed to accomplish.” For centrist Democrats who might have wanted him to spend more time on jobs and less on health care, Obama’s message is essentially apocalyptic, although it’s delivered in his customary no-drama way. Something like: “You’re right, things aren’t as great as we’d like. But just imagine the disaster if the Republicans take control of Capitol Hill.”

With African-Americans, his appeal has been simpler and more direct: “I need you.” The response he gets from black voters may determine the outcome of some of November’s key races.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The president’s overall approval rating, according to the latest Gallup survey, is a middling 48 percent—not great, but roughly comparable to that of Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton at this stage of their presidencies. His approval among African-Americans, by contrast, is a stratospheric 91 percent.

This despite the fact that black people have suffered disproportionately from the subprime mortgage meltdown, the tidal wave of foreclosures and evictions, the worst recession in decades and the agonizingly slow “jobless” recovery that economists say we’re experiencing—problems that have their roots in prior administrations, but that many other Americans seem prepared to blame on Obama and the Democrats.

The national unemployment rate is 9.6 percent. For African-Americans, it’s a punishing 16.1 percent—yet African-Americans remain the president’s most enthusiastic and loyal constituency.

There are two reasons. For at least two generations, black Americans have been faithful supporters of the Democratic Party in general. And specifically, their high regard for Obama has to be because he is the first African-American president of a nation that not long ago consigned black people to second-class citizenship.

So when Obama runs again in 2012, I can predict quite confidently that African-Americans will be there for him. But black turnout is especially low in midterm elections. And given the state of the economy right now, I wonder how many middle-class black voters find themselves “exhausted.”

That was the word that Velma Hart used in a town hall meeting last month to let Obama know of her frustration. Hart told the president that she was “exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change I voted for, and deeply disappointed with where we are right now.” She talked about the toll the recession has taken on her family, and said she and her husband had joked that “we thought we were well beyond the hot dogs and beans era of our lives.”

I chatted with Hart the following day, and she made clear that her words were not intended as any kind of anti-Obama screed. She was just expressing the feelings of millions of Americans, of all races, who fear that their once-solid foothold in the middle class has suddenly become tenuous.

Some African-American activists have grumbled, meanwhile, that Obama has been unambitious in seeking to address the problems of poverty and dysfunction in inner-city black communities—such as, for example, the more depressed parts of Philadelphia.

Will Obama’s personal popularity be enough to boost African-American turnout significantly above its usual levels? A veteran of Pennsylvania politics told me recently that this might be the only way for Democrat Joe Sestak to have a chance against Republican Pat Toomey in the state’s Senate race—one of a number of contests nationwide in which the black vote could tip the balance.

It’s not easy to convert exhaustion into enthusiasm. But if Obama doesn’t want to look bad, that’s what he has to do.

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.
   
© 2010, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

mack894's avatar

By mack894, October 16, 2010 at 11:37 am Link to this comment

We worry an awful lot about terrorists since 9/11, but I think corporations have
done more damage to people and their lives in this country. If the govt was as
aggressive with such companies as Enron, banks, Wall St, people would feel
more secure…protected.  I don’t fear radical Muslims.  I fear the corporatocracy
whose aim is to enslave us all.  That SC decision put democracy out of order and
it should be repealed.

I, too, am a victim of the economy, which means we are victims of this
malfeasance.  And the govt is reluctant to appoint Elizabeth Warren to the new
consumer protection agency?  So how serious is the administration on
launching this new war on consumer terror?

Glad we found a point of agreement.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, October 14, 2010 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

mack894

A commendable stance. As I’ve said many times, I don’t just sit
here to blog and whine. And as I have also said, everyone here
should be using this opportunity to juggle the concepts
discussed here to see how its fits in their paradigm so that they
can then go back out into the world and show the Blue Pill
swallowers why they need to get “unplugged”.

You tell four people, and they tell four people, and if we’ve been
paying enough attention and putting our thoughts into a
objective and less subjective framework, we have the potential
for going viral. Until my employment situation changes, I do
what I can do until I need to do something else.

Right now, I’m a victim of the economy, but I agree with you.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, October 14, 2010 at 1:55 pm Link to this comment

“I mean, what STUPID FUCK can’t see what direction that
decision was going to take this country?”

I’m with you on this.  This SC decision took a big chunk out of democracy.  Here
we’ve spent decades espousing the value of a vote to “we the people.”  What’s the
saying—one man, one vote?  Now voting is no longer needed.  “Office for sale.” 
Corporate funding has replaced the value of the human vote.  It dictates who will
even be able to run for office.  Candidates should wear jerseys with corporate
logos on them…like tennis players or race car drivers do when they compete.

This needs repealing.  Maybe suggest to Christine O’Donnell who was hardpressed
to think of any recent SC decisions in her debate the other night.  I say we start a
campaign to repeal this decision.  Are you with me BR?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, October 14, 2010 at 5:37 am Link to this comment

mack894, October 14 at 1:20 am

I guess all those members on the SC who had voted for corporations being able to
have uncontrolled political contributions ........ I guess none of them have any
children or grandchildren. I mean, what STUPID FUCK can’t see what direction that
decision was going to take this country?

It made no sense to me why they voted so. A person who is a citizen can vote, a
non-human person (a corporation) cannot, so how is it that an entity that can’t
vote be able to have such an impact on the entire voting process? All this does is
allow those individuals who DO run those corporations to exceed legal donation
limits.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, October 13, 2010 at 9:20 pm Link to this comment

“There are too many uninformed voters. The reasons you gave(they did not
think he could win and because they like bill clintion) are not good reasons to
vote for someone. If they would have said “I do not like his postion on foreign
policy or I do not like the fact that he is so appealing that he is like a blank
slate and you could market him anyway you want, then I would not be
concerned. But thats not the case here.”

Well, yes, there are too many uninformed voters; I’d say 80% of them from what
I read on sites, papers, hear on shows.  It’s sad that most people vote based on
what they’ve been told convincingly that makes sense to them based on their
life experiences. But many people vote for a power line—who will give them
access to power, raise their status, etc. etc. The lack of informed voting has
nothing to do with race—it afflicts all kinds.

In presidential elections, you have to pick somebody, usually this one or that
one.  And after the nominations have been cast, it usually makes sense to vote
for the person you hope will acknowledge your issues. For whatever reason you
vote at this point, you have two choices.  Heck, presidential elections are
stacked against real choice given the money that has to be raised to even get
on the ballot.

The races that really count are local and statewide.  That’s where the revolution
can start.  In towns of 100,000, it’s shocking to see someone elected with about
1000 votes. To institute real change in this country, strategy has to focus on
the bottom, the local.  Our only chance.

Of course it’s insane to vote for Clinton not Obama for the reasons I listed. But
watch people’s eyes glaze when you get into the real information. They’ll nod
politely but won’t change their minds. But whites voted for Obama because he
was their hope and change candidate. Heck, Republicans crossed over for this
guy and made him a real candidate.  Dumping on blacks for their emotions on
history has nothing to do with why and how Obama got elected as blacks didn’t
even put him in the presidential crosshairs to begin with.

That said, Hillary Clinton was equally undeserving of the presidency.  She had
no experience in politics except as a wife to Bill Clinton. But people got caught
up on her gender in the same way others may have been caught up in Obama’s
race. Presidential politics has deteriorated into a non issues race.

The closest we came to an informed vote was with Nader and the growing
strength of the Green Party. But I truly believe if Nader had pulled off an upset,
corporate America would have unleashed the Pinkertons on him.  There’s a lot
of stuff wrong with presidential politics, but the voters are out of it especially
now that the SC allows corporations to pick the president.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, October 13, 2010 at 7:03 pm Link to this comment

mdgr, October 13 at 6:16 pm

I doubt many Americans would have given a rat’s ass had Obama actually
started to fulfill his Hope and Change strategy. Black, White, Native American,
Hispanic, or Jewish, if a president with any one of these ethnicities had any
integrity and actually took charge of the situation and been honest in
explaining the truth to the people, the population would have all been busy
getting on with their lives and feeling that, for once, perhaps the president was
going to help them do just that.

Obama either couldn’t or wouldn’t help them. He’s either been threatened with
a Kennedyesque going-away party OR he has no sense of the oath he swore to;
no integrity or national loyalties. He’s a ship without a compass, at the mercy
of whichever members of the corporate banking mafia that are jerking his
rudder cable.

If the legislature were to continue pulling more of its sophomoric and
clandestine handling of the country’s affairs, the president could let the people
in on what was stifling progress in this country; the greed and the corruption.
The only problem is that the level of social disconnect in the legislature is so
poor that its corrupt members would have no problem in helping coordinate an
early demise for any president that stepped out of line.

When M. Scott Peck wrote his book, “The People of the Lie; the Hope for
Healing Human Evil”, he was describing politics perfectly.

Report this

By Lou, October 13, 2010 at 6:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Here yea, here yea.” It’s official, a “militant,” Black nationalist, Leftist is hereby giving all guilt-less White Liberals, Leftists and Progs a “Get out of jail card,” or eternal free pass if you like to CRITICIZE THE HELL OUT OF WORTHLESS BLACK POLITICIANS.

No longer will the “Left Critique” be held hostage to fears of the “Right Critique,” while giving Obama and his ilk a free pass we’ve basically f***ked ourselves, what has it gotten us, all of us: red, yellow, black and white?  I’ll tell you what it’s gotten us: a beautiful sepia version of George W. Bush with “class,” “culture,” who reads a teleprompter superbly, not much else. Oh, I forget he likes Jayzee and basketball. HA!  Big f***king deal, on certain days I like Sinatra and the WHO, and hurling.  What does that mean?

If a Black person gets offended with your “Left Critique” of Obama, then lay that shit out like a Philly Lawyer, bust them down to a private, it ain’t rocket science folks, it is what it is.

By the power invested in me I now declare an “Emancipation Proclamation” for all guilt-filled White Liberals.  For your failure to use critical thinking skills and prove that your not racist you get a mulligan. If the “Brother” or the “Sister” ain’t about shit, give them a friendly reminder.

Come on folks, look at the Congressional Black Caucus, more feckless and irrelevant than Obama, no liberal force putting the brakes on RW agenda and pols, going along to keep getting elected. What good has that down for us, all of us, regardless of ethnicity?  The CBC could have operated as a BULWARK to the Right Wing dipshits, but instead, for fear of offending the racists who are neutering them in the first place, they practice the old rule:  “silence is golden.”  Look, if you believe in affirmative action then you must believe that suck ass, worthless, right-leaning Black politicians litter the landscape as well.

Now, don’t you feel so much better? LOL

Report this

By hawki21, October 13, 2010 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

“Obama didn’t get the full support of the black community until he won the
democratic nomination. Most black people before then didn’t even support him
because 1.  they didn’t think he could win and 2. because they liked Bill Clinton.
Obama’s support was hugely white from the get go. I volunteered for Obama
early on, went to a training camp, and black support was hard to come by.  In
fact, at the camp, black people were rather minimized in favor of young white
kids and star-struck ex-Republicans!”

This I am very well aware of since the result after the election showed that nearly 70% of the people who voted for Obama were not black. This I understand very clearly. That right there is the reason as to why I think it is a good things(aside from the systmatic manipulation, which is another issue) the E.C decides to vote. There are too many uninformed voters. The reasons you gave(they did not think he could win and because they like bill clintion) are not good reasons to vote for someone. If they would have said “I do not like his postion on foreign policy or I do not like the fact that he is so appealing that he is like a blank slate and you could market him anyway you want, then I would not be concerned. But thats not the case here.

Report this

By mdgr, October 13, 2010 at 2:16 pm Link to this comment

Lou wrote:

>For the record, there are oodles and oodles of Black sell-out, kiss establishment booty politicians out there.  No more excuses, they get no more “five on the black hand side” or “fist bump” pass. I mean, who gave a shit that Powell or Rice were Black?  Or look at Susan Rice, she’s Black too, but no better than the last Black person named Rice at State Dept.

The ones who gave a shit were themselves mostly racist, but often secretly so. It’s very much a “token thing,” but insofar as it leveraged White guilt—to give these Black shills a free pass—it became especially insidious.

Nor was it just just a sad but fortuitous thing. I’m not suggesting that Rove himself had planned it, but it involved that same “signature” kind of thinking. It was both strategic and brilliant (a Machiavellian use of realpolitik)—even if it was unrelentingly evil.

In contrast, the problem with the left is it has no strategic thinkers whatsoever. Instead it has Eugene Robinson and Arianna Huffington. They’re all well-meaning but they sell us bromides (your specific term and it fit) and they always stop short of the mark.

Anyway, the installation of Obama as a Manchurian Candidate” involved a very canny sense for psychological profiling and an audacious willingness to elect a “Black” as President.

And here we are as Americans, and not unsurprisingly, we’re all tied up in knots. We continue to say that we “like” him. We continue to deny the reality of that which is right in front of our nose.

Report this

By Fran, October 13, 2010 at 12:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

So now it’s about how the electorate must serve the needs of politicians? 

With Party control of both houses of Congress and, perhaps more importantly, control of the Party money, how can anyone believe that Obama is being pushed into doing what so-called conservative Democrats want to do?  To take this argument seriously, one has to believe that Obama is the most ineffective, hapless president ever or the most stupid.  I think that Obama and Congress are doing exactly what Obama and their corporate masters want them to do.  Not only that, I think this was the plan from the start.

Name one area where Obama has substantionly deviated from the policies of his predecessor (anemic stimulus packages that are heavily weighted towards tax breaks and corporate-written health insurance bailout laws don’t count). If Bush wasn’t good enough to support, then Obama and the Democrats who rolled over so easily for Bush and now do the same for Obama aren’t good enough either.

And about that unemployment rate: try 17%. (E-6) or as high as 22% (SGS Alternate).

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

Report this

By Lou, October 13, 2010 at 10:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I hate to say this, because I don’t mean to get “personal,” but it’s shocking to me that Eugene won a Pulitzer Prize, sort of like the President who expands Bush’s military footprint winning a Nobel Peace Prize.

In rereading the article I found it vacuous, shallow, and specious. Eugene’s basically saying there should be automatic Black voting bloc solidarity with Obama because of his pigmentation and historical loyalty to the Dummocrat Party.

Let me say that while racism is alive and well, healthier than EVER in this “Information Age,” more open and viscous than anytime since Bull Connor, I personally don’t give a damn about someone’s skin color.  The elected official could be a two-headed, green, hermaphrodite that eats guppies for lunch as long as “its” policies are progressive.  For the record, there are oodles and oodles of Black sell-out, kiss establishment booty politicians out there.  No more excuses, they get no more “five on the black hand side” or “fist bump” pass. I mean, who gave a shit that Powell or Rice were Black?  Or look at Susan Rice, she’s Black too, but no better than the last Black person named Rice at State Dept.

Report this

By Lou, October 13, 2010 at 10:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

concurring with mdgr:

As an African American who DID NOT vote for Obama because Black Agenda Report and a few other blogs had exposed him as a Blue Dog Puppy and unprincipled shill, let me concur with mgdr.  Obama is pathetic as a Black man, and as a man in general, he’s weak and unprincipled which is why a “Haa vud” Law Prof. would be so goddamn stupid as to push for “bipartisanship” with pukes far worse than the pukes who spent 20 years destroying the Clinton name and paralyzing Washington D.C.  There was nothing “audacious” about this, it was rank stupidity to the highest power.


Just so I’m not confused with Tea Bag scum, or have my words twisted, let me say that my politics are both Leftist and Nationalistic in the sense that it is abundantly clear to Blacks of all people, and should be clear to most Americans, the elites and oligarchs and the dominant White Establishment will not solve African American’s problems.  With that said, Eugene’s “plea” or bromide is actually quite racist, or if not racist “tribalistic.” Because he assumes, against all evidence and reality, that Obama has actually done a damn thing for Blacks.

It assumes that all Blacks are beholden to the president because of race loyalty notwithstanding he’s been both a Rich White WASP and Jewish President all rolled into one, not a “Black” one by any stretch.  It’s fucking insulting that anyone would expect Blacks to ignore Obama morphing into GWB,or worse.

America’s military footprint has increased under Obama, and the assault on working class has accelerated.  The “Waiting for Superman” charter school scam is but another example. Government deprivations of private rights and concilliation to Bush War Criminals continues.  In fact, Obama NEEDLESSLY keep Bush war criminals close to his side and in ALL of his Administrative branches.  He didn’t even have the nuts to appoint his own Attorney’s Generals for god’s sake.

Sad but true, a sad truth Robinson discerns, is that far too many Blacks have not familiarized themselves sufficiently with Obama’s record or, perhaps more significantly, they misguidedly equate All White Critique as racist.

I tried to explain to acquaintances more than a year ago, that the Media CENSORED THE LEFT CRITIQUE, and AMPLIFIED THE RIGHT CRITIQUE. It explains how a regurgitated group of wealthy republicans could morph into a “national movement,” all 20+ % of them.  Or how Palin would remain a national figurehead, despite being rejected by 60% or so of the populace.  By not familiarizing themselves with the “Left Critique” Blacks have assumed that all forces against Obama are reactionary.  It is this aspect and frankly racial pride is the only glue that holds this sham marriage together.

However, I believe that when Blacks get the news that there won’t be any new Social Sec. COLAs or when Obama’s “Catfood Commission” makes deeper cuts to S.S., medicare and medicaid after the Nov. elections, perhaps then the veil will be lifted, until then, unfortunately we are left with myriad and pathetic versions of: “If only they’d let Obama be Obama.”

Report this

By mdgr, October 13, 2010 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

Psychological Profiling/Strategic Plan 2008-2012:


>Can any black person state whether there are any real positives that can be taken out of this Obama Presidency, to date? If yes to this, then yes to the question, otherwise….......

Yep. Like, what has he done for Blacks? Cornel West has been asking that same question, I bet, as have a lot of other Blacks.

The interesting thing is the “double bind” in which it’s put just about everyone. God know, we’re still a very racist nation. So Obama’s rise to glory was, in fact, a victory for Blacks. They understandably wish to cling to that victory, and the numbers of Blacks supporting him is still in the high 80’s and 90’s.

Whites might predictably fall into two large groups:

The first is driven by racism. We’ve all seem the caricatures of Obama by Tea Party people. It arose quickly after he was elected (before, actually), and since since Obama is actually Whiter than most Whites, he not only didn’t successfully dispel it, but it subsequently grew like a cancer.

Then there are Whites like myself who celebrated his election, but who almost immediately felt betrayed. Racial issues aside, I have no problem calling him contemptible, but many people would because, well, he is Black. I might add that liberals had no such trouble calling Johnson contemptible—or Nixon, or Bush—but there seems to be a subtle form of deference extended to Obama in such matters.

Liberals could be relied on to carry more White guilt (a term that literally means that, as used in the Black community) than not. They would be more likely than not to “like” Obama rather than react negatively and viscerally (I’m reminded of Lyndon Johnson, who was actually a much more fearless liberal on social matters than Obama).

I think that in late summer 2008, it became clear to Wall Street and America’s White corporate masters that having Obama in the White House made much more sense than having McCain. McCain was recognizably demented—he couldn’t even complete sentences and wandered aimlessly on stage—and the captains of iundustry knew than Obama could be relied on to obey their orders. Under Obama, they could have their cake and eat it too. So the DNC and Obama struck a deal with them—and Bush/Cheney (non-prosecution)—probably just before the staging of the Lehman Brothers fall in September 2008.

Moreover, these corporate masters also knew that Obama and Vichy (the Dems) were being set up to take the blame from 2009-2010. At that time, they could begin electing Berlin (the R’s) to Congress and thence to the presidency in 2012.

Many liberals—because of their White guilt—could be expected to support Obama even if he was destroying the country, and before anyone was the wiser. Same with Blacks, though for a different reason. Their Manchurian Candidate could be relied on to do what he was he was expected to do. They would thence be in full control over all three chambers of government.

Be it as it may, things are actually unfolding according to that script.

The question now is how can we destroy both Vichy and Berlin. I think it is possible—due, ironically, to the rise of the Tea Party and all the horrors it presents. That brings us to the “third party” subject, but, alas, that’s a different subject.

It’s posted under previous items in my name.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, October 13, 2010 at 10:02 am Link to this comment

” for black voters they were more concerned about making history and getting
sympathy before they were worried about the politics(now before I continue
and people began to think I’m a racist prick I am actually half black). “


Obama didn’t get the full support of the black community until he won the
democratic nomination. Most black people before then didn’t even support him
because 1.  they didn’t think he could win and 2. because they liked Bill Clinton.
Obama’s support was hugely white from the get go. I volunteered for Obama
early on, went to a training camp, and black support was hard to come by.  In
fact, at the camp, black people were rather minimized in favor of young white
kids and star-struck ex-Republicans! 

Once Obama won the nomination, black people voted the way most always do-
-democratic.  Was there any choice?  McCain & Palin…really?

Oh, and I’m fully black, at least as black as one can genetically be in this
country given its history, which means about 75%..

Report this

By raykeith7, October 13, 2010 at 9:37 am Link to this comment

O is making lots of deals, his bottom line worth, & getting wealthier.
His golf game has not improved that much but if he can get a second term his golf game should improve a bit more.
Don’t expect much more from this misplaced centerfold.

Report this

By Cynthia, October 13, 2010 at 8:51 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The divide in America is no longer about the color of your skin, it’s about how much money you have. So unless you’ve got lots of money, Obama will never look out for your interests, regardless of your skin color. Whites would never believe that having a white president in power will automatically cause more money to flow their way, so there’s no reason in the world for blacks to ever believe that having a black president in power will automatically cause more money to flow their way. And to believe such nonsense only causes blacks and whites to become even more divided—the very thing that those with lots of money want to see happen. After all, there’s no easier way for the rich to get richer than by keeping blacks and whites fighting amongst each other.

Report this

By doublestandards/glasshouses, October 13, 2010 at 8:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obama goes out one day and tells blacks he needs them and the next day he announces that he won’t support a moratorium on foreclosures.  There’s a serious disconnect there.  To call it tone deafness would be quite an understatement.

Report this

By tedmurphy41, October 13, 2010 at 6:56 am Link to this comment

Can any black person state whether there are any real positives that can be taken out of this Obama Presidency, to date? If yes to this, then yes to the question, otherwise….......

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, October 13, 2010 at 5:42 am Link to this comment

Eugene Robinson asks:
“Will Black Voters Respond to Obama’s Needs?”

Gene, baby, I think your looking through the wrong end of the binoculars. No wonder that those rocks on the horizon looked so far away. That’s what happens when you’re an apologist who just can’t admit that the ship is sinking. You should be asking, “When will Obama start responding to black voters’ needs”, (actually to the needs of the citizens and THIS country).

As long as Obama keeps pushing this Patriot Act nonsense, all of these airy-fairy attempts to straighten out the economy are just lip service.

Report this

By Orlando Hawkins, October 12, 2010 at 9:31 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I am still perplexed as to why people still participate in indirect voting? Not to sound pessimistic or anything but it really does not matter who turns out at the election polls and summit their ballot; the votes would not count anyways because the Electoral College ultimately decides. When will we learn that such a system does not need our input? If you ask me these elites really got us believing that our opinion matters when it comes to politics. These government officials will still pass laws without our consent. They will get voted into office based off manipulation(Propaganda). Any third party that wants to participate in the election will lack in publicity. Taxes will get raised even if the tea party members protest. Its really forlorn.

As for black voters they were more concerned about making history and getting sympathy before they were worried about the politics(now before I continue and people began to think I’m a racist prick I am actually half black). This article already gives the impression that it is about color and not the politics and this my friends is actually scary

I will say this thou. I think this anger and animosity that every has towards Obama has to do with their own ignorance. If they were more concerned about the politics and not so worried about making history and being caught up in his rhetoric they would have realized that Obama did say that he would not be able to solve these social and economic ills over night. If I remember correctly he said that it would take more than one term. The propaganda model was at its finest during the election of President Obama and it really did fool everyone. Now these same people are the one who complain. They should blame themselves for not being more open-minded and the government for systematically manipulating them.

Report this

By mdgr, October 12, 2010 at 8:24 pm Link to this comment

JDmysticDJ:

Actually, I’m on the far left side of the aisle. You and I have already crossed paths, however. As long as we are trading insults, I find you an incoherent and pretentious (starting with your moniker) ass.

Report this
JDmysticDJ's avatar

By JDmysticDJ, October 12, 2010 at 7:32 pm Link to this comment

mdgr

Contemptible, really? It’s all a matter of perspective I guess. Personally I find your post contemptible.

My perspective is that the vast majority of politicians are far more contemptible than Obama, and that the most contemptible are found on the right side of the isle.

Report this

By AT, October 12, 2010 at 6:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

(TO be continued)
SO if you are diagnosed with PSP ( a sister of Parkinson’s disease like I do with three years to live(PsP stand for Progressive Supecranial Palsy and only progressives sem to contract it, get it, very unromantic sounding, undoubtedly drummed up by a low level careerist at Langley,without cure except maybe stem cell.(to be continued). So if the august republican senator fronm Utah, faile to solve the riddle: cheap labor vs investment, he ‘s just another failed corrupt politician, not the super patriot he claimed to be.(To be continued)

Report this

By rollzone, October 12, 2010 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment

hello. i repeat: vote out all incumbents. when
lobbyists write laws for mis-representatives to sign,
but not read: above the will of the people ...; now let
me be clear about the article. if there was an honest
vote without vote buying, nor voter fraud, and the
“Black” people account for about 12% of the voting
population- what would it truly matter how they vote?
they have no legitimate power, unless they were to pool
their votes into a third party swing position. that, is
where they would have their largest voice: voting Tea
Party.

Report this

By mdgr, October 12, 2010 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

>Delivering the same message at historically black Bowie State University in Maryland a few days earlier, the president got downright personal: “Don’t make me look bad, now.”

Uncle Tom (our president) has been repudiated by no less a brother than Cornel West—not to mention many other Black Voters and their coalitions.

There’s a word for him in Harlem where, unlike Obama, they know something about the urgency of a New York Minute.

They would call him the consummate Oreo.

Thus it is that the first Black president, who ought to have been a shining beacon of pride to Afro-Americans, has prostituted himself to White America, specifically to Wall Street, and not unsurprisingly, both progressives and the Wall Street Journal hold him with disdain.

To use an intentionally charged word that is totally appropriate in this particular case, he is nothing more than a glorified houseboy for the White establishment.

Summing it up in a single word, the man has shown himself to be nothing less than contemptible.

Report this

By Flummox, October 12, 2010 at 10:09 am Link to this comment

I think the title of this article sums up the problem best of all, and also suggests the answer. When will black voters, or any other voters for that matter, respond to Obama’s needs? Obama’s needs, indeed. The answer is simple—and is why voters put him there—as soon as he starts responding to voter’s needs. In fact, it’s how the system is supposed to work.

Report this
mack894's avatar

By mack894, October 12, 2010 at 9:42 am Link to this comment

“y Go Right Young Man, October 12 at 11:29 am Link to this comment
Let us turn the tables and imagine for a minute how Mr. Robinson would
respond to the following.”

Black voters, women, American Indians, gays…these are minority groups in the
U.S., small groups tenuously united by the sharing of certain issues, small
groups that don’t have the kind of power or favor attributed to the majority in
this country, historically the white majority.

Appeals for a white vote based on fear of an “alien power” are often racist.
Nowhere in Robinson’s essay does he say the president is asking black people
to vote in order to crush the white person.

Where do you see the racism in this article?  This is hardly a black power
rally…not from Obama, believe me.

Report this

By Hammond Eggs, October 12, 2010 at 9:37 am Link to this comment

Delivering the same message at historically black Bowie State University in Maryland a few days earlier, the president got downright personal: “Don’t make me look bad, now.”

Don’t worry, you accomplished that all by yourself.  No help needed.

Report this
peterjkraus's avatar

By peterjkraus, October 12, 2010 at 7:50 am Link to this comment

In a perfect world, we voters would consider the
needs of our society and our own when choosing our
representatives.

In our non-perfect little world, we are bombarded
by lies, by threats and by entreaties that will
forever remain in the verbal stage. And, sometimes,
we hear the truth,which is seldom as gripping as
the 24/7 spin.

Obama, for all his faults and our stratospheric
expectations of him a few years back, usually
speaks the truth. His administration is not
perfect, but it beats the hell out of any
combination of politicians imaginable on November
3rd. And that is the best reason in the world to
elect every Democrat on the ballot.

Report this
Go Right Young Man's avatar

By Go Right Young Man, October 12, 2010 at 7:29 am Link to this comment

Let us turn the tables and imagine for a minute how Mr. Robinson would respond to the following.

-

Will White Voters Respond to Bush’s Needs?

At a high-spirited rally in Philadelphia on Sunday, President (Bush) challenged the mostly (white) crowd to defy pundits who purvey the conventional wisdom. “They think, ‘Oh, well, Bush’s name is not on the ballot, maybe they’re not going to turn out,’” he said, referring to Europeans-white-American voters. “You’ve got to prove them wrong.”

Delivering the same message at historically white Brown University a few days earlier, the president got downright personal: “Don’t make me look bad, now.”

How the president looks on Election Day will depend in part on his ability to fire up the constituencies in the Republican Party’s base. With different groups, he’s taking different approaches.

-

If those precise words had come from the mind and mouth of Sarah Palin this would be absolute evidence of white racism.  And Eugene Robinson would be leading the charge.

Report this

By Realist, October 12, 2010 at 3:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I don’t blame Obama for causing our economic distress. That clearly is the property of the Republicans. What I do blame Obama for is doing so little to change things. He was given the power and threw it away in a futile search for bipartisanship. In doing so, he allowed the Republicans to continue to rule as if they were the majority. He thus has no one to blame for his pending electoral disaster except himself. It is too late for anyone to save him now.

Report this
BarbieQue's avatar

By BarbieQue, October 12, 2010 at 1:24 am Link to this comment

Unbelievable. When the Glorious Leader needs votes, it’s the responsibility of the hapless raped citizenry to supply them. Question not.

Eugene doesn’t ask “Will Obama Respond to Black Voters Needs”?

A Pulitzer prize winner stoops to this.

Obama’s Needs? Seriously? Is this what the “Washington Press(titute) Core” has become?

Can Eugene go any lower?

I’d be afraid to bet.

>>”...How the president looks on Election Day will depend in part on his ability to fire up the constituencies in the Democratic Party’s base. With different groups, he’s taking different approaches…”<<<

speechless. The Change Candidate could have actually begun to Change some of the things that matter to the serfs, but he didn’t. Don’t concentrate on that, look at how he looks. Let the Citizenry remember that Obama’s Democratic party is the party that arrests advocates of Single Payer Health Care.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/13/baucus_raucus_caucus_doctors_nurses_and

But what does Eugene care. He’s set for life, even if Babylon collapses, he will never have to cook Top Ramen, or worry about the IRS attaching his wages because he didn’t purchase “acceptable health insurance, proof to be filed with your 1040”

Send a Message in 2010: Vote Out All Incumbents!

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook