The Republican governors have constituencies too, and while unemployment and bankruptcy, homelessness and insolvency are being cast as a national malaise, the states are the arenas wherein these sorrows are being acted out. State governors are anxious to get about the business of healing the masses and have no time for their Republican counterparts in Washington to stall over political squabbles and agendas designed to retard the progress of an aggressive, energetic president who happens to be a Democrat and... Black.
Voices no more unexpected in this turnabout of support include Bobby Jindal (NO) and Sarah Palin (AK). They are under pressure to get the money flowing in their states and are forced to appear in support of Barack Obama's efforts as they stand without further delay. It's an amusing alliance of opposing platforms made all the more absurd by a recent statement from Governor Jindal who said he'd probably vote against the bill if he was in Congress, but as a governor he want's to see it pass, and soon. This from a man who may be one of the front- running challengers to the Obama Kingship in 2012.
Everyday, the list of the unemployed grows longer and sooner or later, Congress is going to have to put aside their political differences and get busy. The last thing the Republicans want is Barack Obama growing a halo over his head while the economy begins to turn around. 2012 looms in the not-too-distant future as their chance to avenge their loss of 2004. The priorty of money and jobs may just cloud their vision of victory in the midterms and in 2012 and that's a good thing for a president who needs re-election more than any other in history.
A loss in 2012 sends the wrong message to America and the world about a black man working the White House. It will forever tarnish a great historical moment with the asterisk of one-term presidency which is never easy to overcome. It's never too early to stay involved.
BH
The Republicans have made an incredibly potent maneuver in the choice of Michael Steele to head the RNC. Placing a black Republican in such a position of power and prominence in the wake of the Barack Obama victory signals a return to politics after a brief excursion in the lane of emotionalism and racial unity.
The Republicans are not fooled by the overwhelming black support of the Barack victory, nor are they willing to believe that the movement has reached its zenith just because a black man has been elected president. This party is looking beyond the ebony mirage to tap the resources of pleuralism within the black community and the American public at large. The Steele move seems to be aimed at diluting the accumulated energy of the African- American constituency still caught up in the rush of the Obama ascension.
Add to this timely move, the recent jabs thrown by the defeated John McCain in regard to the upcoming Senate consideration of the bailout bill. Senator McCain is positioning himself as the point man to take the momentum away from Barack Obama and give the Republicans a voice with which to stand against the rushing tide of Obamanism which seeks to create a bipartisan unity in government. The potential losers in this chess match are the victims of this ailing economy who must wait for political horseplay to run its course before getting much needed relief.
A decisive overturn of the Democratic majority in the mid-term elections; a highly visible Black RNC chairman, and a Democratic Party caught off guard in 2012 spells darkness for the Obama sunrise. As I mentioned earlier, 2008 is not sufficient to establish the success of Barack Obama as a black American president. Defeat in 2012 will erase a lot of the meaning from the victory of 2008. Winning in 2012 is more important than winning in 2008 in many ways.
The Repubilcans are on the move as should be obvious to anyone smelling the coffee. I only hope that concerned Democrats, undistracted by the pressing concerns of running this country and saving it from complete economic collapse on their watch, will set their sights not just on mid term elections but on 2012. It is not too early. Soon enough, it may be too late.
The economic crisis seems negotiable in favor of what apparently was a more pressing agenda to make sure President Obama didn't get the bi- partisan support his change initiative sought during the campaign. It may be premature to speculate on a hidden agenda at this point, but that's all the more reason to turn up the awareness and think about 2012. Jimmy Carter and George Bush 1 would have a lot to teach the Obama machine and the Democratic Party.
Not only is it of dire importance to keep the the Democratic momentum going in the coming congressional elections, but to make sure the nuts and bolts are in place for another Obama victory in 2012. Given the extra effort Black Americans have always had to bring to their jobs, nothing short of a victory for Obama in 2012 will serve to validate this election and make the country safe for more African-American presidents down the line.
Hopefully, in future considerations concerning the economy or other pressing issues, the Republican Party will concern itself more with people in need than with avenging their painful loss of 2008. All it takes is the right candidate, a war that won't go away, and an economy that just won't rebound. I would not put it past the Republicans to viscerate this historical moment by continuing to block vote against Obama's bills and initiatives. It's never to early to get involved.
"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," -Hillary Clinton
It’s easy to give Senator Hillary Clinton the benefit of the doubt regarding her confused reference to the assassination of Bobby Kennedy. Easy, but dangerously naïve. Easy because conscience demands resilience against the inevitability of human nature to err. Dangerously naïve because malice aforethought is hardly dismissable given the vitriolic energy of this primary campaign. The easy way out leads us to the remaining contests of the primary season and on to the serious work in advance of November. To forget is not yet to forgive, however, because this is May. The comments still reverberate with a lasting turbulence. In the event of the unmentionable, the Senator’s comments could conceivably form the basis of an FBI investigation.
This is a nation of mental diversity. The mix, in general is a good idea for the world, but it includes psychological profiles capable of acting out of suggestion, serving ends conceived in delusion. Even conclusions drawn in minds more sane and intellectually sound could act upon the motivational force nested within such irresponsible observations. More overt results could truly render her remarks far less benign than the excuses of fatigue and misspeak seek to characterize them. If such explanations are to be held as sufficient to clean up the mess, then we have to consider what kind of administration she would run given her vulnerability to the pressures of the job.
Giving Mrs. Clinton the benefit of the doubt could be the least deserving action called for by her statements. It was a dangerous and threatening pander to the worst of potential strategies designed to win the nomination for her. An official reprimand would serve only to raise the profile of the comments and impede their inevitable fade from the sound bytes of media intrusion into the public mentality. It could be best for the continued safety of Senator Obama to let the matter disappear. The Obama campaign wisely used the term, "unfortunate" and moved on. For now, this is the best course of action.
RWH 5-26-08
"God says in Jeremiah 16 - 'Behold I will bring them the Jewish people again unto their land that I gave unto their fathers' - that would be Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - 'Behold I will send for many fishers and after will I send for many hunters. And they the hunters shall hunt them' - that will be the Jews - 'from every mountain and from every hill and from out of the holes of the rocks.' If that doesn't describe what Hitler did in the Holocaust... you can't see that. So think about this - I will send fishers and I will send hunters." -Pastor John Hagee
This profound display of theological buffoonery approaches the outer limits of incredulity. This is the Mecca of relativism as regards scriptural interpretation. Jeremiah 16:16 has been related to the Egyptians of antiquity, the Chaldeans, the Persians, the Medes, and even the Apostles of Jesus. The reference to the holocaust is just one more addition to the litany of scriptural assessments that have amassed to cloud the original meaning in a lasting and eternal doubt. Whatever Jeremiah had in mind, we may never really know. The best take would be to relate something in the immanent future or recent past within the time of this prophet. That would favor the Egyptians or the Chaldeans. Taking it to the Hitler regime is going beyond the irrational to pure conjectural stupidity.
At the crux of this resounding idiocy lies the eternal bid to align a loving God with the existence of evil. Trying to legitimize a fallacy yields repugnance. What is even more repulsive about John Hagee's remarks is the mental captivity of the thousands if not millions of people who regularly listen and attend to this lunacy. As if there is no further to go, we have the ambitions of a man seeking the presidency of the United States driving this high office into associations that border on insanity, explained and excused by the pragmatism of national politics. Stranger bedfellows have rarely surfaced. Despite the belated rejection of Hagee's endorsement, John McCain exposed a sickly and dangerous rift in the fabric of human intellect bogged down by the ignorance of the masses which demands capitulation to the irrational dialogue of religious intransigence.
To signal the absence of an end in sight to this madness, Hagee goes yet another furlong by bringing in an aging Jewish "authority" to stand with him and rubber stamp the catastrophically ridiculous mix of the holocaust with the prophecy of Jeremiah. I thought that church and state were to be separate entities within the framework of a government dedicated to freedom of speech and protection from religious incursion. I still think that and shudder each time the ugly head of religious insolence rears itself in politics at the national level.
John McCain is not a religious fanatic seeking to trumpet his zeal to a spiritually thirsty constituency. He's at best a moderate looking to win a campaign. He, like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and anyone else seeking the office of president must find a connection to the hundreds of millions of Americans who live by faith one way or another. This violates Article 6 of the Constitution which shields office holders and seekers from any test of religion. Article 6 continues to be overlooked in elections which constantly demand from the candidates, a high profile salute to the seemingly immortal reign of religious intolerance.
RWH 5-24-2008
" …The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. -US Constitution, Article 6
" …The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
-US Constitution, Article 6
As a former Divinity School student, in the 70’s, I have a fair amount of knowledge about the history of black religion and its inseparable association with the politics of social justice. Slaves were not allowed to worship with their white masters even though it was from them that the religion came. At best, they were allowed to sit in the balconies of the churches and keep their silence. It wasn’t long before slaves began to worship their own unique form of Christianity, seasoned with the religions of their African homeland. Soon, the black spiritual became a venue for secret messaging which aided and abetted the success of The Underground Railroad. The black spiritual, born in the spirit of black Christianity, became most useful as a communication tool for enabling the escape of slaves to freedom in Canada. From the moment it was taught to the slaves, Christianity became a beacon of hope and a tool of justification for throwing off the shackles of slavery and every social inconvenience that has come in the wake of it’s abolition in 1863.
This is not intended to be a lecture on black religion. It is my intention here, to describe the nature of black religion as expansive. It includes not only the worship of Christ and the hope of salvation, but in a very real sense, it accommodates just about all aspects of life in the experience of being Black in America. The black church became far more fundamental to the lives of African Americans than just a place to go on Sundays and worship God. The black church is the apex of the community. Its association with freedom movements and resistance to the government of the United States came with the package. In confronting the thinking of Barack Obama’s pastor, the more fundamental question even more primary than First Amendment consideration, is the interpretation of Article 6 of the US Constitution.
Article 6 came along because the founding fathers did not want the same restrictions placed upon Americans that they escaped from by fleeing the Anglican Church of England. A test of religion implies a prerequisite based on the choice a candidate has made regarding the manner in which he practices his religion. Article 6 is an open statement that could produce a great deal of intrigue at the level of the US Supreme Court as regards interpretation. In the Arizona Debates of 2004, the questioner was clearly testing the measure of belief. One could argue that since the moderator was not a government official, the tone of Article 6 did not apply. One could also argue that if the answers given by the candidates were not satisfactory to the voting public, they would be denied the ultimate public service position; the presidency of the United States. If by failing the test of religion, an aspiring candidate loses the election, then I personally believe Article 6 has been violated by the moderators. I would leave it up to the Supreme Court to make a final decision.
In the case of Barack Obama, who has, for his own reasons, chosen to belong to the church pastored by Jeremiah Wright, the exposing of Wright’s thinking in such a way as to inhibit Mr. Obama from succeeding to the presidency, brings up the same question regarding a violation of Article 6. I know it could be a stretch to see it this way, but for the last week we have been bombarded by Jeremiah Wright’s sermons, not as they apply necessarily to a judgement of Rev. Wright, but as they apply to the candidate that belongs to his church. Questioning Barack Obama’s affiliation with the United Church of Christ as he runs for president is administering a test of his religion. It is, in effect, saying "You, Mr.Obama, belong to the wrong kind of church with the wrong kind of pastor and therefore the public has the right to dismiss your candidacy on the grounds that you may, with your religion, be associating with Anti-American sentiment."
It seems that before we elect a person to the office of president, we want to know what his religious beliefs (or lack of such) are all about. The voting constituency of the American population acts as the administrator in offering the job of the presidency to the candidates seeking that office. If the US Constitution forbids a test of religion"as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States", then any undue scrutiny of a candidate’s association with his choice of religion, church, synagogue, temple, mosque, tent in the open woods or whatever, raises valid issues regarding the meaning of Article 6.
Now obviously, one might raise the example of devil worship, or witchcraft and so forth as a valid reason to question a candidate’s association with those "religions". Chances are, a voodoo priest could get elected president if objections to the practice of Voodun were not allowed in debating forums.
How many times did the Mormonism of Mitt Romney get thrust into the consideration of his becoming president? Maybe Article 6 needs to be amended. Maybe it wasn’t intended to allow Satanists or Frog Worshippers to inhabit the office of the presidency, or any other office of the US Government for that matter. Maybe a test case, or a class action suit needs to be brought before the Supreme court if it can be concluded that Barack Obama’s candidacy was offended by questions pertaining to his pastor’s sermons or the church he chose to join.
Obama’s recent speech on racism, Jeremiah Wright, and the ills of American society, attempted to link the rhetoric of preaching to the overall experience of being Black in America, reaching back into slavery. Since there is a clear connection between black religion and social activism responding to accumulated consequences of the Black experience, it should come as no surprise that Jeremiah Wright chose the pulpit to exhort his opinions about American Policy at home and overseas. His sermons were not anti-American. They were "anti" the America that has ducked under the radar of the US Constitution as well as the Declaration of Independence. Wright’s sermons were a call to what America can and should be, in his opinion. They were a calling of American policies onto the carpet and a suggestion that quite possibly, the actions of American governments over the years have violated moral justice and the thought of the Founding Fathers.
Barack Obama became associated with Wright’s United Church of Christ when he was organizing and advocating for the rights of dispossessed, disadvantaged Americans, most of whom happened to be black. They lived in the worst areas of Chicago and were too poor to matter to that city’s government at the time. The United Church of Christ belonged, at that time, to a council of churches which funded support groups and active efforts to respond to issues of heat, asbestos contamination, single-parent familes, unwed mothers, incarceration issues, HIV-Aids administration and so on. Barack Obama gave up a promising legal career to work for those people and it was the churches in that area that provided money and meeting places as well as other support facilities. If Jeremiah Wright and his congregation hadn’t the heart and spirit to reach out and assist people whom the government ignored, perhaps the association would never have come to fruition.
It could be argued that the facilitation of Obama’s mission in the Chicago housing ghetto was a more fundamental reason for his joining that church. It could be argued that despite the flaming rhetoric of his pastor, he was attracted to the willingness of Jeremiah Wright to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Barack Obama found a comfort zone in the religion of the church he decided to join and enough political activism in the ideology of Reverend Wright to form a relationship with him, which suited Mr. Obama and his family. Now he is being handed a test of his choice as he continues to defend his religion against those who seek one thing: The discrediting of his candidacy for the presidency of the United States.
The ongoing exposé of the ideas and sermons of Jeremiah Wright is a masquerade; a sleight-of-hand operation to deny the presidency to Barack Obama by manipulating the mind of the electorate. If the sermons of Jeremiah Wright were so caustic and abrasively damaging to the character of America, then why NOW are they being paraded in the media and on the opinion pages of publications all over the land? This is not even a violation of Wright’s right to speak his mind. It is simply an effort to obstruct the path to the presidency of Barack Obama, using a test of religion.
Somewhere in the future of presidential campaigns, an agreement of protocol is going to have to come about which adheres to the thinking of Article 6. Hinting at his Muslim and Atheist background was a clear consensus of the idea that a person cannot be president unless his religion satisfies the public conscience. Linking him, through Jeremiah Wright, to Louis Farrakhan, a proud and prominent practitioner of Islam was designed to motivate the fears inherent in the current age of terrorism and anti-Semitism. If religion is to play a deciding part in the election of a US president, then Article 6 must come to the attention of the Supreme Court in terms of revision or official interpretation because it sure sounds to me like we have an infringement here.
The attempt to derail Barack Obama’s candidacy with the ongoing debate over the content of the sermons of Jeremiah Wright has hit its mark. There has been a drop in the Nominating polls along with a rise in the general election polls favorable to Hillary Clinton. If this association between Barack Obama’s faith choice and his chances for winning the presidency prove to be detrimental then bringing a challenge before the Supreme Court regarding Article 6 could be a reasonable consideration.
RWH
The Clinton team is currently suggesting that they would consider a "Clinton-Obama" ticket. This latest insult has gone the distance in repugnance, conceit and presumptiveness. It is clearly designed to manipulate the remaining contests by using cheap psychology on the minds of voters having a tough time trying to decide between the two in the remaining contests. The strategy says, "It's ok, vote for Hillary because she will bring Obama with her." The old "two fer". It is a double-edged sword because first of all, they aren't serious. They know that a Barack Obama IN HIS RIGHT MIND will reject the offer. That will leave them free to chose Joe Biden or somebody like that who will shore up the conservative wing and add a tone of experience to the ticket. Why would they want Barack Obama after making it known to the world that they don't feel he's "experienced" enough to be president? Why would they want him one heartbeat away from the job? This is deception reaching a point lower in decency than anything the Clinton camp has thrown at the Obama campaign to date.
Prudence, wisdom, and clear thought mandates a Barack Obama rejection of any teaming up with the Clinton Brigade, even if she DOES miraculousy or through nefarious invention, manage to win this nomination. The rank-and-file Democratic public has spoken loudly about who they want to be the nominee. Barack Obama has solicited money and support from the public, not from his pocket or powerful special interest groups. To counter the overwhelming success of this strategy, Hillary Clinton has had to reach into her own deep pockets and those of her backers to come up with the money to struggle back to a tenuous state of credibility. To win the nomination and offer the VP slot to Barack Obama would be to negate the meaning of the Obama campaign. It would be taking the money this "people's campaign" has donated from their own personal resources and using it for the opposition. I can't think that Barack Obama or any of his high level staffers would not be able to see through this transparency.
This is a campaign to change the way government works in Washington. This is a campaign to get the people who are outside of the system, a voice in the inner workings of the government. This is not a campaign to win the White House for the Democratic Party by any means necessary. This is a campaign to elect Barack Obama PRESIDENT, not vice president. I would prefer for Barack Obama to sit out the general election and take his chances with a failed McCain presidency in 2012 or even 2016. If Hillary Clinton can't win without Obama, then let her LOSE! I have suggested before that the failure to support John Kerry-John Edwards with enough enthusiam to overcome the small gap that defeated them in 2004 can be blamed in large part on the Clintons whose influence in 2004 was probably ranking if not outright dominant. The 2004 loss enabled the Clinton candidacy of 2008, and this was no accident. This did not happen overnight. The Kerry-Edwards loss was Hillary Clinton's gain. BUT!! Along came Barack Obama and his audacity to believe.
The Clintons miscalculated not only Barack Obama, but the public which has flocked to his side and filled his campaign coffers with personal donations amounting to record-breaking numbers. This effort is not to fizzle out in a vice presidential win for Obama. The eye is on the prize. There is no reason to capitualte to the misdirection of the Cinton campaign by acknowledging any interest whatsoever in the vice presidency. Considering her lackluster performance in the primaries, using all her money and power, I hardly think she can win a national campaign against John McCain. Why enable her win with the resources Barack Obama has managed from ground zero? Why direct the casg flow of ordinary individuals towards a win for the powerful and wealthy? It would be unfair. It is a double-edged trick which brilliant minds should be able to see through and reject out-of-hand, any alliance with this team, win or lose, in August. In plain language it is a deceitful work of deception designed to grab votes from the undecided as the remaing contests stand to make-or-break either candidate. Please, Barack. Just say NO!!!
Robert Hamilton
As a reply to all, let me say that I too, am happy with the Iowa results. The real work is ahead. I am looking forward to a good showing in New Hampshire, a state not unlikely to go Clinton. As for the electability issue, well, that's just another code word signifying that the man is black, therefore he can't win. Same thing with the "experience" word. What experience does Hillary Clinton have to be president? Because her husband was president? That gives her the experience to be president? Does that mean when she hits the wall, she'll call on Bill? Is Bill Clinton trying to edge his way back into the White House as a shadow president? As far as experience goes, both Clinton and Obama are short - term senators and that evens the playing field as far as I can see. The experience offensive and the electability issue are just smokescreens to hide the real deal. Barack Obama is a Black man. Let's just all get used to this.
Now why is it that so many white folks seem to think Obama is electable and so many black folk think not? This is a tragic shame that blacks still don't get the point. They still want to ride in the back of the political bus and not sieze the destiny being offered here and now. Why blacks, in mass, would support Hillary Clinton is not a mystery given the "strange bedfellows" nature of politics. Charles Rangel is indebted to the Clintons and has made Civil Rights the issue here, not electing a black candidate. Him and others like him are singing the electability serenade to cover their primal instinct to deny the ability of a black man to run this nation. Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton, simply don't seem to know WHAT to do. They too, have grown fat on the food trough of Civil Rights and are afraid that if they don't back Clinton, she won't feel obligated to honor any commitments to a Civil Rights agenda; at least not with any sense of urgency. Those of us who have read Dreams From My Father, by Barack Obama KNOW how committed he is to the rights and needs of the underclass, be they black, white, red, or yellow. He has far more hands-on experience dealing with day-to-day issues facing the disadvantaged, the poor, and the elderly. What track record does Mrs. Clinton have in this area?
Barack Obama can't afford to involve a high-profile Civil Rights agenda with his mission to change the way government works in Washington. To win, he needs the white vote. Is this not a no-brainer? Civil Rights issues have characteristically been confrontational, Black vs. White, and the melody of the struggles lingers on. Openly voicing his support of Civil Rights and pushing it to the forefront of his campaign is simply not politically expedient. Jesse Jackson made good use of it in his campaign, because he didn't have to win. All he had to do was bring respect to the idea of a black president and expose the existence of a "rainbow coalition"; people of all backgrounds committed to the social ideas implied by Civil Rights ideology. To this end, Jesse's campaign was a huge success. He won in Spirit, and his legacy is now being realized in the more realistic and winnable campaign of Barack Obama.
Barack Obama is a consummate politician and that's what it takes to win the game at the presidential level. It takes knowing the man and understanding his political concept to realize that Civil Rights is fully compatible with his platform. He is the first truly credible black candidate to seek the office of President of the United States. Who, ascending to this office, has been experienced? John F. Kennedy? Ronald Reagan? Jimmy Carter? George Bush? Al Gore was electable and lost. You can't allow these catchy sound-byte phrases to rule the outcome of an election as critical as this one. And YES, it is critical to the history of Black people in the United States. This is our moment. This is our time. This is our prize. This is the the goal of our struggle; the pinnacle of our legacy. To throw it away because of a persistent second-class mentality that still trusts the white establishment and rejects the rise of blacks in a crabs-in-the-barrel manner, is a tragic capitualtion to business as usual. If nothing else, Barack Obama brings the credibility, validity, and exoneration we have so long deserved in our history here. It may seem trite, but that alone is reason enough for every black man and woman in this country to get behind Barack Obama and help him gain the highest office on the planet.
Robert W. Hamilton 1-5-2008
It was the book Dreams from my Father that transformed my opinion of Barack Obama. I, like many blacks, was holding out for a "valid" slave descendent Black to be "first" in the White house. I Prejudged Obama. What all of us experience is the conflict stage. We all have to come to terms with who we are individually, and who we are as blacks. That is a tough road to travel, and many of us simply suffer silently. Obama had to endure his own share of identity shock through his bi-racial parentage, his absentee father, life in Hawaii as well as Indonesia, and going to school where both blacks AND whites took him to task about who he was. He received all the same outward epithets and slants that any black person gets just for being black. He was routinely called into account for his measure of "blackness" from both sides, and he ultimately took it upon himself to go find his father's people.
Once in Africa, the entire connection of being from Africa was brought to light as he traced through the cities and towns of the motherland discovering long lost relatives living and dead, putting the pieces together to reconstruct his ancestral past; So many pieces long scattered by the passage of time and indifference. With both parents deceased, it wasn't an easy task. He has to be commended for making the effort and telling us about it with his gifted skill as a writer. The political/economic reality of Africa under siege from Europe is the link back to the slave trade that brought us "legitimate" blacks to this country. In that link, the Obama validation is won with an indelible stamp of approval. He is as much a product of the rape and plunder of Africa as any of us are. He is a real player in the struggle and his background qualifies him as a true child of America with a Blackness fully accountable and ready to deliver genuine concern for issues that face us.
The economic issues are obvious, but for every Black who has gone ahead of the pack and become affluent, there is still that gnawing identity crisis that hits home when you see all those stranded and helpless black folks beaten down by hurricane Katrina. Obama is the metaphor for the millennium black who MUST make a pact with the America that enslaved him if he is to continue to rise and prosper. Many of us are getting "paid" today, and some paid in a big way. Yet there is still that daily reminder that we are who we are, individual by individual, and this election season is making it painfull obvious that we can't agree in group omn who that is. We can never agree, yet it will always be there for us to ponder, and that was the feeling I got from Barack Obama describing his encounter with the face in the mirror.
There is a mandated value in working things out within the system and refusing to be conquered by the inner hatred that stems from the slave days. We have to overcome that obstacle, and Obama is fortunate to have a White mother because he can never hate white folks out of hand. To hate what you are is madness. His "blend" so to speak is his calling to bring Blacks into the mainstream of the American promise without alienating whites who may have identity issues of their own which we never consider. That's the long story.
What impressed me most about the book is his ability to write with such clarity and feeling. It was like reading the best of novels. RWH 3-5-2007
If the issue is simply the fact of a Black individual being president of the United States, that in itself is a valid reason to vote for Barack Obama. Now true, this may be seem, among intelligent people Black AND White, as the last reason to vote for him, but I say this: Blacks in America have a legitimate opportunity to say YES to our legacy. YES we believe that we are capable of running this country and representing it before the world. YES. We have arrived. YES the dream is now a waking reality. YES We HAVE overcome. No more "shall". YES we ARE the man. Obama's victory would be our victory long in coming.
This is not a barnstorming preacher seeking to politicize his self-righteousness. This is not an isolated Black attention-seeker looking to make a point. Barack Obama is a real candidate with enough experience to know that the people of this country are not getting heard on the national level. This is a man willing to work with the system, and prove once and for all that the our founding fathers set up a nation that was truly destined to serve the best ideals of humanity far into the future of this planet. He has a good platform, is young, and could wake up this country like no other politician since John F. Kennedy. AND he is BLACK. This is our chance as Blacks to say yes. It IS a good thing to vote for Obama because he is Black. Many people will be doing just that anyway, so let's be open. Let's go ahead and encourage this. Let's turn a presumed liability into an asset of hope.
Plenty of voters white and black will vote against him because of his race. That is a sad truth. Sadder still for the Blacks who will make that their decision to vote against him. There will be "crabs in the barrel" who will not want to see one of their own make it to the top. Booker T. Washington said it then, it is true today. This is no time to be trusting Hillary Clinton. We need her liberalism (maybe) but she's not our mommy. We need to hold out a Secretary of State role for her or an ambassador-ship to some foreign nation, but we do not need to follow her maternal overtures into the White House only to end up waiting to be served while her money takes precedence over her agenda. We have one of our OWN in the race. Many Whites are on this bandwagon.
This is not a vote against white people. It is a vote against racism, bigotry, government deadlock, misapplication of federal money, and moribund attitudes that maintain the racial status quo each and every time we elect a president in this country. It is a vote for change. Every Black person in America should send at least $100 to Obama's campaign. Every Black Person in America should get at least five White friends to do the same. Every White person in America should follow suit by getting their Black friends send this man money. More or less as circumstances allow.This is the time to close the deal. Get behind this man because our heritage demands it.
The blood of Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Medger Evers, the murdered civil rights workers down through history, and all other human beings who died in the struggle cries out for this level of justice. It is not only timely for a Black President, but right. A Black president will brighten the future of Black children coast to coast and around the world. Black kids need a wider spectrum of "Can Be" when planning their lives. A Black president will say YES, we are more than entertainers, preachers and sports professionals. We are leaders of the free world. We can make policy that affects the global future We can be trusted with the decision to use nuclear force. We can lead the world and set in motion the eradication of that force. We can respond to the hunger, deprivation and misery in the world with humanitarian aid. We can bring all parties to the table and open a new era of dialogue among people of different religions and opinions. We can make policy that works in the United states to answer the domestic needs of our people Black, White, Red, yellow, whatever. We can make the rainbow a colorful truth, not a distant mythical figure of speech.
We can show history our time is here. The pot of gold is the presidency of the United States. The worst thing a Black voter can do is vote with his head only. This is a time to apply the heart and soul and stand by our man.Barack Obama himself would more than likely disagree with the above. That is his nature. That is his legacy. That is his right. Many well-thinking intelligent people will disagree with me and that is ironically a good thing because Barack Obama has the substance to overcome the racial issue that will make or break him in this election. The sad fact is that the racial issue is a real issue. If we could vote for Senator Obama without thinking about his race, wouldn't that be grand!? Yet the media has already made this a confirmed impossibility. We have no choice but to take a stand on his racial identity.
We can't afford to be color-blind. In the future, it will be our best course, but as long as color becomes our disadvantage, we must use color to win battles defined in part, by color. Since color IS an issue in this campaign, thanks to the media, let's make the best of it. Let his race work FOR him, not AGAINST him.
