Why Am I So Disappointed with Obama? Is It Because He's Black?

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
I have been in firm agreement with Cenk on the criticism of Obama for tacking hard right as he sails to his nomination.  And, I also agree that FISA is the big one – the one where he really fucked us, and for small, if any, political gain.

But I am stricken by the deep level of disappointment that I feel.  I mean, I don’t really believe (at least, don’t like to think I believed) that I thought he was “the one,” that is, the consummate transformative political figure of our time.  But I did buy into some of the hype, literally – I sent him 25 bucks!  And I also thought “this guy really is different!”  And I feel this shared pain when I read other white liberals decrying Obama’s sell-out of our Constitutional freedoms.

And he is different.  He’s a black man with a good chance to be president.

As a white liberal who whines about politics much more than he engages in them, I started thinking about the other would-be candidates.  What would they have done?  Jayar summed it up on the show the other day: Hillary would have flipped her vote in a minute if she had been the nominee.  I bet Edwards, had he been in the Senate, would have sold us out in a hot minute.  And most of us wouldn’t have been surprised at all.

If Hillary, or Edwards, or Biden or any other seasoned politician of the Democratic party had sold us out, we would have raised hell for a couple of days, and would have totally expected it.  It would have been the most obvious thing in the world.  But when Obama did it, we felt a sense of shock, a deeper betrayal.  Why should we?  

I have read accounts of African American professionals who state that to compete in corporate America, or even in civil service, they have to be better than their white counterparts to be treated equally.  They have to over-compensate for the drag factor of 400 years of institutional racism in America.  And if you think about it, Obama has done just that.  He has sold us out faster and harder than any of the potential white nominees could have, and still probably polls better after they would, had Hillary or Edwards done it.  His capitulation to the neocons was a 9.8 average on Democratic advisor scorecards, or so I imagine.  My problem was that I expected the 9.8 for the people.  At my age, I should know better to expect such high marks from a Democratic Party candidate.

So, as a white liberal watching my first black candidate for president since Jesse Jackson, and the first ever who had a real chance, am I disappointed because I really thought Obama was going to change the way things are done, or did I just expect more from the black guy because he needs to do more to earn my esteem?  Are white liberals pissed because we can’t deal with the notion of being ‘sold down the river’ by a black man?  Think about it: an African American had a notable role in taking away the rights of millions of white people.  

Maybe he is the candidate of change.

< Is Ben still doing Wednesday? | Who the hell is this guy Obama? >
 Display:
I don't know what race you are, and I don't really care. He may overcompensate in his efforts to appear unthreatening, sure. But there's no evidence whatsoever that Obama sold anybody out any "faster" because of racial compensation. I agree with you that his performance on this issue is a major dissappointment, but let's be honest with ourselves, shall we? He is only behaving exactly the way he did in his early senate career right up to when the primaries got heated. The truth is, he's always been a little light on action on the hotbutton issues, and maybe took a left turn for show during the primaries. Now he's right back to caving with the rest of his colleagues. There's been a lot of overheated rhetoric on this site lately.

by hazmat on 07/12/2008 12:39:06 AM EST


about expecting more from a black guy...is nauseating. KenTX should have a field day with you.

by hazmat on 07/12/2008 12:42:49 AM EST


"KenTX should have a field day with you."

I've been reading ridiculous statements from liberals in this room for four years now, so I've become inured to the idiocy. It's getting to the point where one stupid comment does not sound more stupid, or less stupid, than another stupid comment.

I now save my ammunition for engagements that force liberals to think, while they struggle mightily to formulate a response.

Since you seem like a good guy, I'll admit the obvious truth to you: I'm a very average guy, with very limited communication skills. The reason I link so many references, is because the facts and the truth knock liberals on their asses every time.

They think they're debating me, when they're really arguing against the truth. I never grow tired of watching it. It's better than waterboarding.

by KenTX on 07/13/2008 04:42:01 AM EST

[ Parent ]
on what qualifies as a reference.

by hazmat on 07/13/2008 01:38:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]

I think I'll save it. It's very rush-limbaughian.

They think they're debating me, when they're really arguing against the truth.

You obviously believe that there's an absolute truth and that you, with your limited experience must be on the right side of it. That explains the closed-minded nature of your debating style. When Mr. Fred schooled you on ANWR, you avoided his basic point, which was devastating. You're not really debating or exchanging ideas. You're simply putting "the truth" out there as you see it. The plebs can do with it as they wish.

The consequences are that most people debate you like they would a clown. Of course, its entertaining, but I wonder if you're aware of this.

by hazmat on 07/13/2008 01:54:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
“When Mr. Fred schooled you on ANWR, you avoided his basic point, which was devastating.”
Fred’s point? That drilling in ANWR will have minimal impact on the economy? You better take another look at the thread. If you can’t recognize the ass kicking I dealt Mr. Fred, it’s because you’re as non-technical and uneducated as an elementary school girl. I proved that drilling EVERYWHERE will have a profoundly beneficial effect on the economy, until we can convert the nation’s energy demand from oil to nuclear and coal alternatives.

I destroy the arguments of liberals everyday in this forum, and it’s certainly not because I’m a smart guy. I readily admit that I am only very average. No, the reason I can defeat all comers is because liberals are inherently stupid. If they were smart, they wouldn’t be liberals.

Here are a couple of recent examples. In this thread, some guy named gnomeklepto claimed to be the world’s most brilliant college professor. He challenged me on a couple of points, and I beat him like a rented mule. He limped off the field in shame and humiliation.

In this thread, some guy named Tullius was demolished.

It’s hard to say if these characters are phony identities created by regulars because they are tired of being defeated in their own name, or if the “new guys” are really newbies looking to tangle. Either way, I’m here to please.

by KenTX on 07/13/2008 06:13:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the ability to continue arguing with tyt novices doesn't make you right, or mean that you wooped some ass. It just means you're obsessed about arguing.

by hazmat on 07/13/2008 06:16:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm just a guy with average, limited ability. Twba is ten times smarter than I am. He kicks liberal ass in this forum everytime he shows up. It is truly amazing to watch him in action.

Twba is not a superman, but he wins consistently because he's not a liberal.

by KenTX on 07/13/2008 06:20:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]


SUCK IT , BOY

ha ha

by YAHWEH54 on 07/14/2008 07:10:34 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Wait your turn, Yahweh.  The man's only got one mouth on him.

by OneHitKill on 07/14/2008 11:54:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Ken defiantly kicked all those peoples asses.

Now excuse me while I buckle over in laughter. 

by z1p101 on 07/14/2008 01:16:22 AM EST

[ Parent ]

"Think about it: an African American had a notable role in taking away the rights of millions of white people.  "

 

I just don't understand this last comment. Please explain what you mean. 

by Andrew Koenig on 07/12/2008 03:02:05 PM EST


Im not sure, but I think he meant that by voting for FISA, Obama essentially took away the privacy rights of basically every American, Black, White or otherwise...

Kinda scary thought...

by bobo1 on 07/12/2008 07:45:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
having higher expectations of a black politician is a product of a need to validate what you think is your freedom from historical american racism by amplifying obama's good qualities. this, i think, is condescension. and when those higher expectations aren't met, your righteous indignation gets an extra boost from a wounded ego that thought it was powerful enough to overcome racism (yours and everyone else's) with intellect and compassion alone. but all of this is a sidebar. as disappointing as o's fisa vote was, i don't think it was a vote for political expediency. yes, it mau have been a preemption of the 'soft-on-terror' tack that mccain will doubtless try. but i think it was a form of proactivity that put a law into place where there was none, allowing for revision and reconciliation with the constitution when he, a constitutional scholar and bipartisan activist, is in control of the agenda. so... instead of getting too hung up on this decision (the only real reversal he has committed) and wailing on obama, let's all change our cell service to qwest and do what we can to empower congress (and, believe me, that takesten times what you think it will with this sorry lot) to make something of the investigations that will undoubtedly come when there is hard testimony that bush spied on americans for political reasons.

by silence donothing on 07/12/2008 08:54:18 PM EST


 Display: