The Country proved it could elect a Black President, but didn't say anything about respecting one!

[FrenchieCat]

You see, some believe that since they voted for the Black Guy,
they've already proven themselves to be good people.

Their benevolence ends there, however.

As I see it, some folks think that Obama is their chattel.
Someone who they can order around, and when he doesn't do what they say,
they can disparage him to no end, ignore any of his accomplishment,
and simply remove their support.

The other side who didn't even vote for him,
are doing something quite unprecedented;
voting against him in a block without hesitation,
and protesting him in the street before there is anything to protest.

So it appears that in this country, A Black man can be elected to high office,
he just isn't truly allowed to govern.

If Barack comes out of this Fucked up Bush swamp to win another term,
he'll have to be recognized as a fucking genius.

[Number23]

1. I don't think he'll have any trouble getting re-elected. Contrary to DU, the vast majority of people

know what he's up against and the massive ocean of isht that was thrown on his plate before he even stepped a toe into the Oval Office.

I'm encouraged that it seems as if more and more people on this site (yes, apparently even DUers can eventually learn something) are beginning to understand the constraints of the legislative process, particularly those in the Senate. Don't be discouraged, I don't think he'll have a difficult time being re-elected but to be honest, if he decided one term of this bs was enough I wouldn't blame him.

[firedupdem]

2. Your post along with Roy's post have made for excellent reading

this morning. Wow..

[ecstatic]

3. Who here didn't see this coming...

Let's be real!!! I remember on election eve, despite what all the polls said, my brother and I joked about whether we'd see every state go red for the first time in history. In the back of our minds, we believed it to be a possibility.

That didn't end up being the case though. I guess because of that victory we let our guards down a little and somehow started to believe Pres. Obama would be judged fairly. But at the end of the day--most of us knew what would happen. I didn't know it would happen so soon on DU--that part actually gets me and that part is why I don't really f*ck with this site anymore.

[firedupdem]

4. Amen Sista!

It's like they 'own' him...he better get all their shit done like yesterday. House and Senate mean nothing...HE better do it all himself.

[Fire1]

5. ecstatic you better come back and join the ranks of AAIG!!

We need ALL of us!!!:fistbump:

[Brewman_Jax]

6. Of course not

He can't even talk about issues that pertain directly to black people lest he scare and anger even more (like that can't happen :eyes: ) the "open-minded" white people that voted for him. He can't talk about the statistics of black unemployment or the plight of black job seekers, or the fact that a white ex-con has as good a chance of getting a job as a black college grad, but they have no problem listening to him swing the responsibity hammer on black people. :(

[rebel with a cause]

17. Perhaps I shouldn't be here.

I followed Frenchie's link here and stayed to read what you all were saying. I'm sorry to see some of you doing the same thing that a lot of 'white voters' are doing on DU and that is using a broad stroke when you speak. I am judged to be a white woman by all that see me and I do not deny being one. I do not pretend to be as "open minded" as I would like to be. But I not only voted for Barack but I also worked/volunteered for him in 2004 and 2008. I have met him, liked him, trusted him, started pushing him on here when not many others were. I still support him.

I have no problem with him talking "about issues that pertain directly to black people." or talking "about the statistics of black unemployment or the plight of black job seekers, or the fact that a white ex-con has as good a chance of getting a job as a black college grad." I understood the reason he gave the "responsibility hammer" speech but cringed when he gave it. I hate the fact that he must prove himself to people with light complexions and trust me not many have a lighter complexion than me except Casper. ;)

I don't take offense at anything you are saying, but...well, like my professors use to say...be careful when you write in the absolute. Your audience might not be who you think they are. :shrug:

Don't mean to interrupt, I will go now and leave you in peace. :grouphug:

[Brewman_Jax]

18. You aren't all

Your post slipped in there and I didn't catch it earlier. That was not a broad brush. If you aren't one of those "open-minded" white voters, you aren't included, so there's no need to take offense. Also, to extrapolate from your professors, be careful when you answer for everyone. :think:

Consider the history of race relations in the USA, which is rarely taught, and usually not very well when it is. The Jim Crow era didn't happen because black people thought it was a great idea. Up to and including the Civil Rights era, the vast majority of white people wondered why black people were so angry and why they were marching. :shrug:

Stick around, you might learn something. :hi:

[treestar]

7. right on

would the Republicans be quite so "blocky" if one of the white Democrats were President? I'm thinking not. They won't support anything the President supports, even if it was something they could vote for. They just want to make things as difficult as possible.

[Karenina]

8. "Enunciation not denunciation."

2009:Best Year in the Worst Decade?

Maya nails it starting around 19:02

http://lauraflanders.firedoglake.com/category/episodes/

[noiretextatique]

9. he's magical, doncha know, like the dude on the green mile

:shrug:

[Tarheel_Dem]

10. Are we finding out that "white liberals" are as fake & elitist as the Repukes...

always told us they were? I've been positively blown over by the selfish & meanspirited behavior of DU & the liberal blogosphere. I have to question now whether this was ever about healthcare reform, or was it just about taking out the insurance industry.

Mind you, I wouldn't care if the insurance industry dried up tomorrow, but what I do care about is that 30 million currently uninsured people, many of whom are my friends & relatives, will now have access to healthcare. Isn't that what it was supposed to be about, afterall?:shrug:

[firedupdem]

11. +1

I don't think it's even about taking out the insurance industry in some cases. They just hate Obama. Plain and simple. He will never do anything to please the most outspoken ones. Funny seeing them agree with trolls just as they are banned from the site. Most of these folks have zero credibility...they were pissed off before the inauguration.

[FrenchieCat]

12. Certainly there is plenty to be pissed about.......

I'm just questioning the aim of their ire,
and the motives for the level of vitriol.

The assault upon this President from the Left,
(and I'm talking about the name calling, generalizing,
finger pointing, character denigrating),
will only help the Right get stronger,
and a Friend of my enemy is not a friend of mine.

[Karenina]

13. "aren't people just sick of the lies?"

"The Lady and the Snake." Take your pick and there's such an undertone of violence in their blame... "That half-breed is a lying snake in the grass PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE for all the crap we've willingly swallowed for DECADES! Turn the hounds loose!" :eyes:

[Tarheel_Dem]

14. "In some cases". I agree. Some bloggers are settling old primary scores.

At this point, it's a pile-on. Never let the sharks smell blood in the water. However, I don't know that they "just hate Obama". Some think that the Democratic Party should be completely destroyed, and rebuilt by the Ralph Naders & the Dennis Kuciniches.

If you remember back to 2000, we were told by the purists that there was no difference between Gore & Bush, and you see where that got us. We're now being told by the same set of people that there's no distinguishable difference between Pres. Obama & Bush. It's crazy, but the ideologues on both sides are trying to purify the parties so that a viable third party can take hold. Personally, I'd rather the party never won another election, than to be headed up by an ideologue who places purity over actually getting things done for the American people.

I'll finish by saying that the party had better get it's priorities straight. Can you imagine alienating the most loyal block of the party? We stuck by Clinton through his trials, and we always support the Dem candidate, in 90 percentile. If we feel the party has mistreated the first black president, I don't see the party ever recovering from that.

[rebel with a cause]

15. Hallelujah and Amen.

You said it right and I'll not add any more to it.

[HopeOverFear]

16. "He's just a man, albeit a latte colored one"

that little gem is still in GDP as I type, and has NOT been locked.

Wonderful :eyes:

[Brewman_Jax]

19. Did that have something to do with the upset in Massachusetts?

it's enough to make one wonder. :freak: