“You’ve got to be taught to hate and fear. It has to be drummed in your dear, little ear. You’ve got to be c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-y taught.” From a 1950′s musical called South Pacific, if my memory serves.

Personally, I see Obama as neither Right, Left, or Middle. I see him as the chameleon King, a law unto Himself. If elected, he’s going to do what he wants to do, and because of the precedents set by Bush, those Executive Privileges will be even more dangerous in his hands. Keywords for Obama’s further distortion of Executive Privilege: Nuclear, Finance, World, Ambiguity

Personally, I saw Clinton as a moderate. Still part of the bureaucracy for sure, but less willing to go to extremes. The motives of a Clinton were/are obvious, and less threatening to the world.

As for alternate candidates like Nader, if he manages to increase his chances to win between now and election day, I could vote for him. You may say that without support from people like me, non-affiliated with any party, that Nader doesn’t have any chance at all… I say it’s the media… he needs them to cover his campaign to win support at a national level.

I don’t know how I’ll vote in November, but it won’t be Mr. O.

Obama is an evil genius. His flip-flopping (always flipping to the right) shows that he is in this for himself. He wants power, and the only ones that can deliver political power are the conservatives, the MSM, and the big money corporations.

How can any self respecting “leftist” believe that Obama is interested in “advancing” any “liberal” agenda?

Obama is the king of manipulations, a real hypnotist.

If, and this is a big “if”, Obama becomes POTUS, he will fill his cabinets with all his Wall Street friends. We saw his flip-flopping on Israel.

When black separatists, the Nation Of Islam, and the crusty old radical left wake up to the dream that is Obama, guess what?

Black separatists will rise in anger. They have said it already:

“Obama is benefiting from a landslide of black
support, built on social credit being extended on campaign promises. The Black Community is like the loving,
committed spouse, willing to ignore immediate needs so heir partner can conquer the world. But at the end of the
day, something must be delivered.”
ttp://brothers. yourblackworld.com/2008/02/tavis-smileys-
haterology-on-barack.html.

But nothing is going to be delivered, not to black separatist.

How can they expect that the MSM and Wall Street – which has refuse to hire black stockbrokers to this date -
will share power with the NOI or the radical left which, supposedly, wants to put limits on big corporation’s profits and redistribute wealth?

Obama as POTUS means: civil unrest, polarization based on race, gender and class. There’s no way African Americans will sit passively and take the betrayal that Obama is cooking for them. Obama has never identified his candidacy as “AA”. He’s here for himself and white millionaires, the only ones that can take him to the WH. Can the left take him there? Can the radical left outside the “democratic party” demand Obama to pay his IOU ?

What is happening here? This is mass delusion going on here, right and left, literally.

Deadbeat, you’re responding to something I wrote that did not refer to you: “Barack’s ‘Black’ support is not what it was in my area. Either you’re appalled that he sat through Wright for all those years or you’re appalled that he turned his back on Wright (and quit the church). Speaking only for the area I live in. ”

“My area,” then I explain the split in my area, and then closing with “Speaking only for the area I live in.” You’re responding to something as an attack on you and that had nothing to do with you. My point was sharing what I saw in my area and you don’t live in my area. It didn’t apply to you.

I ignored your comments re: Howard Dean because they were less important to me but since you’ve brought it up again. My opinion (all that follows), The Black Commentator cheerleads way too much. Always has. Black Agenda Report is composed of the hardest hitting writers who left TBC. TBC fawns over Democrats far too often.

Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon have publicly — in many articles now — noted they regret giving Barack a pass when he was running for the US Senate. They’ve written at length how he was DLC. Written that at BAR. At TBC, they gave the pass. I see it as the difference between TBC (where they were not in control) and BAR.

So my opinion based on what I have seen at TBC and BAR for many years now, TBC is more of a cheerleader. I don’t think they would take the same approach (Ford and Dixon) to stories they wrote for TBC as the do at BAR. (I think Margaret Kimberley just lets it all out, regardless and that’s why I love her writing.)

Why? Obama is a thoroughly vetted DLC and you’re “appalled”? Your use of the word “appalled” assumes the person you’re referring to has somehow rejected a deeply held belief. Such is not the case. “Appalled” would be the proper reaction had the object of you “appal” stood four square on principles when he/she had nothing to gain. Again, such is not the case.

Maybe AIPAC made him thr0w “his” pastor under the bus.

Of course BAR isn’t after Hillary. She’s an honest imperialist war hawk who isn’t trying to pretend to be something else. Who needs to call her on what she clearly is and makes no bones about it. No, H. Clinton isn’t even pretending to be the “anti-war” candidate. The purpose of alternative press is to go after the dishonest ones.

Thank goodness there is a Black Agenda Report.

That is true that BAR is not BC but when Ford and Dixon wrote for BC they had nothing but praise for the 2004 DEMOCRATIC candidate Howard Dean. They also supported Kucinich this year (however not in 2004) and neither did Ford or Dixon offered their support to Ralph Nader in 2004 who was the only viable anti-war candidate running then. Clearly both Ford & Dixon reveal a level of hypocrisy in their critique of Obama and especially the Black community as a whole with their inconsistencies.

Also, YOU ASSUME incorrectly my remarks. I am “appalled” that Obama didn’t stand firm WITH Wright during the media smears.

However that issue was not the subject of my post. That is something you interjected to make a point. My point is has to do more with how Ford and Dixon has chosen to direct their critique upon the Black community AS A WHOLE without any analysis regarding the effect Clinton had on assisting with that shift to Obama.

As an example both Ford & Dixon rarely mention that Clinton early on had greater support from the AfAm community than Obama. That support shifted during the South Carolina primary. Now why would Black be supportive of Hillary Clinton? Why should they be supportive of Howard Dean for that matter. In facts Dean’s position in 2004 were less progressive than than Obama’s in 2008.

I have also pointed out critiques of Obama POSITIONS that deserves being called out — especially his having to kiss AIPAC’s behind.

However Obama is NO different than ALL mainstreams politician in this regard. What I have found ironic is that those on the “left” who missed the opportunity to engage on the question of Zionism in 2003-2004 now HAS TO ENGAGE the issue as a CRITIQUE of Omaba. Now that is an irony of history.

Therefore seeing that Obama’s Achilles’ heel is his fealty to Israel, this may be the spark that agitates the “left” to really confront Zionism.

I don’t know who they [BAR] “lost their credibility” with. Frankly I think BAR has it right on Obama and I’m not interested in the context of previous candidates. But I get you’re point. Why are they so hard on Obama when they were willing to let Dean go by without so much as a critique? (Again, I didn’t follow BAR back then, but will give you this point.)

Here’s my shot at answering your well placed point:
Status quo white male left of center progressives leave a lot more room to make a point about just how un-progressive they are. The “baggage” is less encumbering.

Obama, who is very much the male version of Hillary Clinton, has proven that he can take race and turn it on its head. He is the ultimate answer to an economically based racist empire (not to be confused with red-neck or Northern suburban based “racism” which is really not racism – imo). So, what commentators like Glen Ford see when they look at Obama is the duplicity of empire not only outside of Amerika, but within. It is the neoliberalization as well as gentrification of our cities.

Obama layers the problem by offering a continued no-win to poor and people of color. He highlights what faux Dem progressive candidates have always been about – talk left, act right; but as I said he punctuates it through his black appearance – one that seems not to reflect the black experience in Amerika.

I think BAR sees this at a very visceral level. Obama offers a very different paradigm from white Dems. He is a poke in the eye candidate.

In sum, DV is becoming more and more instant-history, exactly the sort of problem created by the mass media.

I’ve asked Obama zealots to do a simple thought experiment: imagine that Obama is running on the Green ticket, and, say, Edwards as a Dem candidate. Would you vote for Obama then? So far I get, “I don’t know?” “It’s a hard choice given the calculation of the Greens getting no votes.” and frequently, a brush off with no response as if I just called their mother a name.

Many Obama “fans” are simply calculators. Who do they want is reduced to who will the system give them to chose from.

But there are young voters (historically, they are all sizzle and no beef come voting time) who just think it’s about time to have an African American who is so articulate to be our President that they don’t give a f?uck what he’s saying. They’re more than glad to excuse the imperialism and fill in the blanks.

The Dem progressives will not hold Obama accountable. He could set the planet on fire (where were they with Bill Clinton?) and they’d either be silent or cheer him on in the name of humanitarianism. He will triangulate and let his “fans” use the race card. Meanwhile we’ll get a sup’ed up Patrick Duval (even the Dems of Mass. have had it with this once transcendent wonderkund!).

The Obama thing has taken on a trajectory all its own. As resounding speeches become tiring and discrepent with actions, or as he genuflects to the oil, pharma and AIPAC string holders, there will be growing discontent on the left. But the right will be calling him all kinds of stupid things which pull some of the left energy back. The right will actually be Obama’s firewall from the left.

Yes, the corporate elite have chosen extremely well.

Then, if you still want to disturb the sane, try putting up your post and Being Patient. It’ll post just fine (once).

I encourage you to check out blackagendareport.com for the unvarnished truth about the Great Biracial Hope. The journalists at BAR have followed Obama since his early days in politics and provide information you won’t see in the mainstream press.

BAR lost and is losing a lot of credibility with the manner of their critique of Obama because they arrogantly directed their ire towards Obama’s supporters in the African American community and ignored Clinton’s racial antagonisms. Also BAR has contradicted themselves with their criticism of Obama yet they embraced Howard Dean in 2004 and all of the other white Democrats. BAR (formerly Black Commentator) did not endorse Ralph Nader in 2004. BAR comes off with a very high and mighty “I told you so” veneer.

African Americans vote for the Democrats because they have no other choice. Clearly BAR recognized this in 2004 with their endorsement of Howard Dean however in 2008 it’s another story.

The “left” hasn’t really reached out to African Americans (Nader really hasn’t). If the “left” truly wanted to cripple the Democrats they certainly would attempt to attract the most loyal group. However the Green Party self-destructed in 2004 and McKinney notwithstanding is not as popular as Nader and Nader already made his choice of running mate.

Another reason why the “left” is reluctant to engage African American is that the Black community has been empathic to the Palestinian struggle however Blacks are staying quite about Obama’s position because they believe that in order to get elected he has to “accommodate the Zionists”.

In other words Blacks are fully aware of the grip that Zionism has on the political economy of the United States and this is a taboo topic on the “left”. So much so that the “left” demobilized the anti-war movement.