Filed under: PoliTricks as Usual, That Sh*t Is Racist, White Men Gone Wild
Last winter, when the Clinton/Obama battle was nearing it’s crux, the MSM was transfixed on the whole “Race vs Gender” issue. At it’s core, this artificial argument seemed to insinuate that black women were being forced to choose between their skin color and their uterus when it came to choosing which candidate they’d back. As if those were the only criteria a person would consider.
The flipside of this argument, especially after Obama started to gain traction in the black community. The media likes to note that this happened after South Carolina, but reality is Nevada, which Obama lost, was the first indication that he’d have more success than expected with black voters. When he pulled 75% of the black votes there, the chatters went into full gear, openly groveling about whether or not black folks were voting for Obama just “cause he black“.
I don’t personally vote for people just because they’re black. But then again, I’d like to consider myself a somewhat enlightened voter. I didn’t vote for Sharpton in 04′, I voted for Edwards. I’ve voted against black politicians (and Democrats) locally when I didn’t feel they were sufficiently equipped for the job. But I’m understanding enough to know that not everyone cares about the issues, and that not everyone cares enough to look past skin color when choosing their candidates.
To each his own. If you wanna vote for someone just “cause they black“, you get what you deserve in the end. And more times than not, you get a Kwame Kilpatrick, not a Deval Patrick. It is what it is.
Of course, the media keeps harping on this “cause they black” angle, and Fox News especially loves to pull poor folks (black and white) off the street and ask them what they know about Obama’s policies, usually with comedic results.
I suppose these folks have it coming, even though they’re certainly entitled to their opinions because hey, voting is a quintessentially selfish act. A socially acceptable selfish act, but still selfish. You vote for whom you want, and don’t have to justify your rationale to anyone.
That said, I’m wondering why the same bastions of voter rights that embarrassed Obama supporters for following Barry “cause he black” aren’t similarly slamming the legions of white women who are suddenly getting behind Tina Fey Sarah Palin “cause she got a vagina“.
No, seriously, think about it. For many white women, especially lifelong Democrats, Palin’s stances on issues are diametrically opposed to the views their party of choice advocates. Completely opposed.
But I’ve still yet to see this equally stupid BS called out for what it is.
And while we’re at it, how about the legions of folks who vote for white men (Dems and Republicans) year in and year out “cause they white“? How about them?
It seems like the only time it’s socially unacceptable to play identity politricks is “when they black“. Interesting to say the least.
On the other hand, there’s some black votes Obama could prolly do without.[1]
Question: Do you think identity politics are harmful? Do you vote for a person solely because you can personally relate to them on some level, be it race, gender, or age?
[1] All jokes aside, I know this was little more than a promotional event for his album, but props to Jeezy for registering voters.
Filed under: Go Sit Down, Judge Joe Brown Says : "DO BETTER.", PoliTricks as Usual
…if Cotton Hill McCain meets an untimely demise and Tina Fey Sarah Palin somehow becomes leader of the free world. Cause if it goes down like that, we are soooo screwed.
I’m sitting in my hotel watching live coverage of a townhall meeting in Grand Rapids, MI on Fox News.[1] This woman must have Cheez Whiz for brains. Someone in the audience asked her a question about the energy crisis, offshore drilling and oil production, which is allegedly her area of expertise.
She proceeded to recite the GOP Talking Points 101 Flashcards she’s been cramming to memorize for weeks, and midway through her explanation, she clearly drew a blank. She then proceeded to “freestyle” her answer, which sounded something like this.
You could literally see John McCain thinking “awww sh*t! I knew I shoulda picked Romney” as he rushed in to grab the mic , cut her off, and completed the thought she so terribly fumbled.
Palin, looking visibly flustered, simply took a few steps back and assumed the usual position.[2] I actually did feel momentarily sad for the woman.
[Editor's Update: I also happened to catch her circle jerk interview with Sean Hannity. He tossed softballs and kept staring at her legs the entire time. Very creepy.]
Momentarily.
In a perfect world, Sarah Palin’s only future relevance would be on the back of a Trivial Pursuit card, not one melanoma away from The Number One Spot. We’ve heard a lot about “empty suits”. Can we all agree to just refer to Palin as an “empty skirt”, or is that just me being incredibly sexist as usual?
Question: Did you see the Palin/McCain townhall I’ve speaking of? Did it frighten you as much as it did me?
[1] I guess I should get a Twitter account for short messages like this. Do any of you Twitter? Could you dumb-down and explain it to me?
[2] And by “usual position”, I mean standing behind McCain, to his right side, looking smarmy and overdressed.
Filed under: AvB Instant Classics, AvBro GuestPost, Barry 4 Prez, PoliTricks as Usual, That Sh*t Is Racist, White Men Gone Wild
[Editor's Note: I don't usually like using other folks posts without getting pre-approval, but this was too good to not use as a guest post. Tim Wise is a white guy whom the MSM hates because he tells it like it is, especially as pertains to white privilege in America. I've constantly harped on the outlandish double standards seen throughout this year's campaign, but Wise breaks it down to the very last compound. Digest and discuss, you know where.]
For those who still can’t grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.
White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because “every family has challenges,” even as black and Latino families with similar “challenges” are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.
White privilege is when you can call yourself a “fuckin’ redneck,” like Bristol Palin’s boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you’ll “kick their fuckin’ ass,” and talk about how you like to “shoot shit” for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.
White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.
White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don’t all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you’re “untested.”
White privilege is being able to say that you support the words “under God” in the pledge of allegiance because “if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it’s good enough for me,” and not be immediately disqualified from holding office–since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the “under God” part wasn’t added until the 1950s–while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.
White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you.
White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was “Alaska first,” and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you’re black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she’s being disrespectful.
White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do–like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor–and people think you’re being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college–you’re somehow being mean, or even sexist.
White privilege is being able to convince white women who don’t even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a “second look.”
White privilege is being able to fire people who didn’t support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.
White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God’s punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you’re just a good church-going Christian, but if you’re black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you’re an extremist who probably hates America.
White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a “trick question,” while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O’Reilly means you’re dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.
[Editor's Note: Black privilege is being able to say "the N-word" with reckless abandon, telling "white folks are sooo..." jokes on Comic View, and.... and.... uhmmm, that's about it.]
White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a “light” burden.
And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren’t sure about that whole “change” thing. Ya know, it’s just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain…
White privilege is, in short, the problem.
Question: Do you agree with Tim Wise that the double standards confronting Obama are prime examples of white privilege?
More from Tim Wise [TimWise.org]
* Props to DP for sending this along.
Filed under: Barry 4 Prez, PoliTricks as Usual, Web Junk, White Men Gone Wild
The Obama campaign announced that they were taking the gloves off and proceeding to get all up in that ass on Friday. Thus far, they’ve lived up to this promise, seemingly releasing a new attack ad everyday. I liked the “Maverick” spot, and the “Deception” piece was great too.
But today’s “Fundamentals” ad sorta rubs me the wrong way.
And here’s the McCain/Palin retort (why is she in every ad?), which oddly enough is “issues” focused and doesn’t mention Obama. Hell, it looks like the sort of ads Barry was running himself last week.
So, I guess these guys set the table for their own demise.
But let it be known, I don’t like this latest Obama ad one bit. This one deploys the very same “we distort, you decide” angle as most GOP ads. Hitting hard is fine, just make sure you’re accurate in the process.
Question: Do you think McCain’s “strong economy” statement was taken out of context? Do you think these sorts of ads will be effective for the Obama campaign or is this a bad look?
Filed under: Barry 4 Prez, C.Y.I.N., Nigga Nonsense, PoliTricks as Usual, That Sh*t Is Racist
In short, I’m on board.
[Editor's Note: If you're on board, click on some of them AdSense links so I can cop myself a fresh pair of New Balance for the Fall.]
That’s not to say I haven’t had my share of issues with Mr. Obama, and I’ve used this forum to make equally strong critiques of his campaign. His unwillingness to consider offshore drilling, before reversing course without a thorough explanation didn’t rub me the right way. Ditto for his support of FISA, which I don’t personally object to (it’s not like I’ve got anything to hide), but apparently enough others do. But perhaps my biggest qualm with Barry is the very characteristic that many (myself included, just to further confuse you) cite as his greatest attribute: his unflappability.
I’ll give it to dude. Through six tough months of battling The Clinton Machine, he consistently showed class and never stooped to their level of mudslinging. His family, his faith, his patriotism, and his church were under constant attack, but he never “lost it”, and he certainly never went into full C.Y.I.N. mode. I didn’t care for this approach at the time, but in retrospect, I get it. Obama was new on the scene, and more importantly, he was facing an opponent whose views on the issues were essentially identical to his. When that’s the case, as it was during the Democratic primaries, the way to distinguish yourself is with your personality. In short, his coolness under fire drew a huge contrast to Hillary Clinton’s constant displays of crying and unbridled rage. It was essential, and well, it worked.
The fullblown campaign vs McCain is a different game altogether. It’s like going from winning your conference tournament to trying to make it to the Final Four. You’re no longer taking on familiar opponents in familiar environments. Sure, it’s the same game fundamentally, but the intensity level rises, and with that, your approach has to adjust. Thus far, Obama has failed to effectively do this.
After he secured his party’s nomination, the GOP started picking him apart like we knew they would (despite McCain’s promises to run an admirable campaign) and unleashed the dogs. They’ve painted him as a hollow celebrity, played the race card against him, pulled up his past associations, sicced a programmed Pitbull in a skirt on him, and through it all, purposely distorted his views and experience to comical proportions.
Obama’s response: play it cool. The polls: not so much.
Now, with his back to the wall and Americans oddly transfixed on Sarah Palin, it seems like Barry’s finally, finally, finally figured out that the way his current campaign is running is virtually guaranteeing a one-way ticket back to Capitol Hill. It took him some time, but he even admitted as much last week.
Sen. Barack Obama and his campaign launched a promised counterpunch against Sen. John McCain on Friday, portraying him as an aging, out-of-touch politician who would cater to “fat-cat” lobbyists and continue President Bush’s economic policies.
With two new television advertisements, a campaign memo to supporters and a two-day trip through New Hampshire, Obama sought to regain his footing amid faltering poll numbers, a continuing assault by his Republican presidential rival and rising worries among Democrats about his campaign.
If Democrats were expecting a dramatic change in words, tone or temperament, they did not get it. While McCain attacked him as a pampered, fading celebrity, a sexist and a desperate bully, Obama stuck to familiar themes linking the senator from Arizona to Bush and Washington lobbyists.
Even after being prodded by the audience in Dover, Obama appeared reluctant to get too aggressive. Glenn Grasso, 39, a doctoral student, pleaded: “When and how are you going to start fighting back?”
Obama responded by calling McCain’s ads “just fabricated” and “just made up,” an answer that spurred some to shout out: “Lies.”
In a memo to supporters, Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said: “In recent weeks, John McCain has shown that he is willing to go into the gutter to win this election. His campaign has become nothing but a series of smears, lies and cynical attempts to distract from the issues that matter to the American people.”
Plouffe assured supporters that “we will respond with speed and ferocity to John McCain’s attacks and we will take the fight to him, but we will do it on the big issues that matter to the American people.”
Then of course, there’s the race thing, which brings me to the point of this post. Many have said that if Obama suddenly C.Y.I.N.’s and morphs into DMX, he runs the risk of being labeled an “Angry Black Man” and blowing the whole wad. I’ve heard this uttered so often it makes my head hurt, but 99% of the time, it’s usually another black person who’s saying it. Never mind the fact that 99% of those in the media challenging Obama to grow a pair happen to be white.
So, I guess I have to ask you guys, why in the world do we think that Obama showing some guts and fighting back would suddenly regulate him to “Angry Black Guy” status and deep-six the whole campaign? Are there well-documented public examples of such a thing that serve as evidence for why he shouldn’t? I’ll admit, I’ve occasionally thought the same, but I wonder if this isn’t one of those things black folks fabricate say amongst ourselves without any real evidence to back it up. Sorta like how we say “Black folks don’t swim” or “if that was a black woman, you know…” and whatnot. Seriously, how do we know how the world would respond?
I don’t ask this being facetious, I’m really posing the question because I’d like to hear some legit examples. If you’ve got em’, do tell.
Question: Does Obama run the risk of being labelled an “Angry Black Guy” if he starts whoopin‘ a$$ and takin‘ names? If you think so, why? Can you think of any real life examples of this audacious double standard?
In the interest of being non-biased (as if), I figured I’d toss out a little red meat to my resident GOP stans. Enjoy.
Go ahead and pick on the guy. This was a pretty dumb assed gaffe.
In the interest of being non-biased (as if), I figured I’d toss out a little red meat to my resident GOP stans. Enjoy.
Go ahead and pick on the guy. This was a pretty dumb assed gaffe.
Filed under: Barry 4 Prez, Go Sit Down, Grand Hu$tle, PoliTricks as Usual, What A DoucheBag
Ok, the media fast is over. I tried, but after I read this nonsense, I just couldn’t take it no more.
Seriously, can we go ahead and do away with the charade that Tina Fey Sarah Palin is somehow qualified to become President? The moment they let the Pitbull In Lipstick (her words, not mine) off the chain (aka: following a teleprompted speech written by Karl Rove), she comes out the yard (aka: media seclusion) and bites us with this stunner.
Gov. Sarah Palin linked the war in Iraq with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, telling an Iraq-bound brigade of soldiers that included her son that they would “defend the innocent from the enemies who planned and carried out and rejoiced in the death of thousands of Americans.”The idea that the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, a view once promoted by Bush administration officials, has since been rejected even by the president himself. But it is widely agreed that militants allied with al-Qaeda have taken root in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion.
No, seriously. Even The President has since admitted that 9/11 and the Iraq war don’t have any real tangible connection. But Mrs. Palin, who lives so close the Russia that Nikita Koloff is her pilates partner, obviously is about 7 years late in receiving that message.
And this is who we want running the country in the unlikely event that a 72 year old with a history of battling cancer should meet his untimely demise?
Wigga please.
Let’s call this whole Palin/McCain 08′ candidacy (yeah, I said it!) what it is: a sham.
When pressed to name one substantial area where John McCain differs with George W. Bush on one of those Sunday morning news shows last weekend (yeah, I cheated), McCain Ace-Boon-Coon Ricky Davis couldn’t even fake it, and reverted back to that lazy “this campaign isn’t about issues” BS. And I for once happen to agree with Davis: of course this ain’t about issues, because if it were McCain would be getting his dusty clock cleaned.
But the GOP is so smart, they figured out a way to sidestep issues altogether, and make this campaign more about Palin than Obama in the process. Brilliant! Instead of being about gas prices, unemployment, the war, the housing market, education, crime, and vocoders, election 08′ has somehow morphed into an indictment of American sexism.
Never mind the fact that McCain used the same term himself describing Hillary Clinton just last Fall.
So, Palin can call herself a pitbull in lipstick, but when Obama merely hints at the fact that The McCain policies are tantamount to putting lipstick on a pig (a spot-on analogy), suddenly Obama’s a sexist who wants Palin barefoot, pregnant (again), and cooking Mooseburgers? Never mind that when the entire quote is listened to in context. Obama doesn’t even remotely mention Palin, unlike McCain, who mentioned Hillary in the same sentence. And perpetual victims (riiiight) that they are, white women (and some men) flock to her defense, as if white women somehow aren’t valued enough already in this country.
I’ll admit it, I thought McCain was on the edge of dementia when he chose Palin as his running mate. And if you look at her qualifications, it would be hard to disagree with my assertion. But the GOP is so wily, and knows how to prey on the ignorance of Middle America soooo well, that they successfully flipped the script and turned this into an actual contest. They pulled the ultimate sleight of hand and somehow made this about “Government Reform”, conveniently overlooking the fact that McCain’s been part of that very Government for nearly 3 decades. Kudos for them.
Let’s not get caught up in superficial nonsense. Just as in 04′ when the GOP Swiftboated a man who had valiantly served his country at war, in favor of a man who ducked the draft, they’re trying to run game on us yet again. I’ll admit, Obama’s milquetoast demeanor and lack of consistent fire is beginning to wear on me. He’s more concerned with not losing than he is with winning, and he needs to switch his game up quickly. But when you’re talking issues (and let’s not get it twisted, we are talking issues, not pigs) as much disdain as I hold for the Democratic Party, they’re on my side of the ledger more times than not where it matters.
Besides, what’s the alternative? Lipstick on a pig? I’ll pass.
Question: How will the GOP spin Palin’s 9/11-Iraq comment? How in the hamsammich can soooo many Americans be soooo stupid?
Palin Links Iraq to Sept. 11 In Talk to Troops in Alaska [WashPost]
