Obama: A Liberal Dose of Confusion.

by Staff January 19, 2012 13 Comments News Opinion Politics Weekly Columns

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

(ThyBlackMan.com) As America celebrated Martin Luther King Jr. ‘s birthday this week and is getting ready to celebrate Black History Month in February, I have reflected on the state of liberalism and its impact on the Black community and have concluded that I am very confused!

What am I confused about? Before Obama’s election as president, no one thought we would ever see a Black person elected president because of racism.

Since Obama has been elected president, can one reasonably postulate that racism has become less of an issue? If the answer is no, then how do you explain Obama’s election? Remember, conventional wisdom was that America was too racist and would never elect a Black president (and remember, whites are still a majority of the electorate, so therefore, there were a lot of whites who voted for Obama).

If the answer is yes, then why do liberals constantly blame the plight of Blacks on racism? You can’t have it both ways.

So, whites are too racist to care about the plight of Blacks, but no longer too racist to vote for a Black candidate for president?

Is it white America’s fault that they helped elect a Black president that took almost two years before he met with the Congressional Black Caucus (despite meeting with gay and Hispanic groups sooner and more frequently); is it white America’s fault that they helped elect a Black president who told the CBC last September to “stop complaining” [about him not doing anything for the Black community]; is it white America’s fault that they helped elect a Black president who has fewer Blacks in his administration than George W. Bush?

Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver (from Kansas City, MO and Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus) famously said last year, “if Obama was white, we would be marching on the White House.” Cleaver was making reference to Obama not paying attention to the Black community.

Here you have the first Black president of the U.S. who is doing everything in his power to ignore the very community that gave him 96% of their vote. And people like Cleaver are giving Obama a pass simply because he Black?

Why was there no outcry from the NAACP, the Urban League, Al Sharpton, or Jesse Jackson about Cleaver’s racist comment? So, it’s racist when a white person in power ignores the Black community, but it’s ok if a Black person in power does the same thing?

King fought and died for the principles he believed in. King constantly criticized both Kennedy brothers over civil rights; he constantly criticized Johnson over Vietnam. I can’t imagine King giving Obama a pass simply because he was Black. His moral compass would not have allowed him to remain silent.

Cleaver, and those who think like him, does a great disservice to everything that King stood for.

There are more Black elected officials than ever before, but the pathologies in our community are getting worse (unemployment, crime, teenage pregnancy, etc.).

Who is to blame for this? White folks? Devall Patrick, the Black governor of Massachusetts, has not improved the plight of Blacks in his state. David Dinkins (New York), Tom Bradley (Los Angeles), Coleman Young (Detroit), all former mayors, never improved the plight of Blacks in their cities with their liberal policies. Was that because of racism also? The two exceptions to this were former mayor of Atlanta, Maynard Jackson and former mayor of Washington, DC, Marion Barry. Why were they so different than the other Black mayors?

They focused on increasing Black entrepreneurship by increasing more opportunities for private sector and government contracting. These two mayors created many Black millionaires, who created jobs, and hired people who paid taxes and helped to create stable communities.

So, on the one hand, Blacks said America would never elect a Black because of racism. Blacks then turn around and say Obama can’t do anything to specifically address the needs in the Black community because of racism (meaning white racist will accuse Obama of being partial to Blacks).

I am confused!

Staff Writer; Raynard Jackson

Mr. Jackson is also founder of a political and industrial consultant firm which is based in Washington, DC; Raynard Jackson & Associates.

13 Comments

hoodgirl says:

January 25, 2012 at 4:30 am

@James Davis, you are so off base with my party affiliation. I don’t care if one has a “D” or “R” behind their name and most Americans agree with the Tea Party principles of less government and lower taxes. However, I believe their is a role for government just not the Nanny State it has become. Individuals should be held accountable for the decisions they make, allowed to fail when risks taken do not manifest into success, and rewarded when their bets pay off.

I don’t know if you are aware of this but Social Security is bankrupt. There are too many parasites feeding off the system that have NEVER contributed a red cent to the fund. Nowadays, everyone’s receiving Social Security Disability, Supplemental Security Income, etc. while they simultaneously work underground and run viable businesses avoiding to pay medicare, social security, self employment and payroll taxes. This is called the TAX GAP which is estimated to cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars in lost revenue annually which in my opinion is underestimated.

It’s time for everyone to carry their own weight “no exemptions”. We need to balance the budget, live within our means NOT off credit, and plan entrepreneurship by way of “SWEAT EQUITY” where all it takes is a willingness to get on the HUSTLE and GRIND in a legitimate matter that allows anyone to enjoy the fruits of their labor regardless if the economy is experiencing an expansion, contraction or recession!

Reply
James Davis says:

January 24, 2012 at 10:18 am

Hoodgirl:

Thanks for going to the web site and reading the proposal. However if you would have read it more carefully, the plan limits the percentage you may request from your Social Security Pension Fund in a lumpsum payment to $40,000.00, leaving you with about 80% of your pension which you will receive in monthly annuity payments. Therefore, no one is left destitute as a result of this plan. Nevertheless, I thought you Republicans were for less intrusion in people’s lives. If the plan had called for and it doesnot, taking down all your money, aren’t you guys suppose to on the side of government letting everyone do what they want to do without government interference, when it comes to money. Therefore why do you care? Are you saying, you are a compassionate Republican? The Tea party will kick you to the curb girl and take away your membership card if they saw what you are saying here. ( Just having fun!!) http://www.sslumpsum.com

Reply
hoodgirl says:

January 24, 2012 at 3:24 am

Throwing money at a problem only prolongs the inevitable. If we adopted James Davis’ plan most would receive their retirement funds, be broke by years end and have their hands out for another stimulus, especially since we are programmed to have big bro. govt. provide that safety net to soften the blow when we fail instead of dusting ourselves off and trying again.

Just stop the out of control spending, balance the budget, provide haircuts to everyone “no exemptions” for the betterment of America as a whole!

Reply
Victor says:

January 23, 2012 at 12:22 pm

@Hoodgirl,
POTUS may be as bad at predictions as he has been at preventing the unemployment rate from exceeding 8%. I contend that if it is to be, then it is up to you and me! As James Davis points out at sslumpsum.com, to get the unemployment rate truly low required much more stimulus than POTUS proposed, never mind what Congress passed, which was below that. You and I must provide the jobs by starting and managing businesses, if we can and will.

Reply
hoodgirl says:

January 23, 2012 at 7:03 am

@Victor, candidate Obama suggested that he be a one term President if he didn’t turn the economy around in his first term in office. Also, President Obama suggested that unemployment would not go above 8 percent if Congress approved HIS stimulus package.

I don’t know who in their right mind thought that Obama would be a good steward of this economy when his record as a Community Organizer/State Representative in Chicago suggests that his management skils at best is substandard.

Reply
Victor says:

January 23, 2012 at 4:03 am

@James Davis,
In Virginia, some early retirees from the state retirement system, have a similar partial lump sum withdrawl option to that which you advocate. Your idea would be an excellent source of funds for some to use to launch or save businesses, which would create private sector jobs.

However, I have one precautionary critique to make: it is not Obama who “occupies the most powerful position from which help can come in this country.” My friend and brother, it is you who occupies that position, not POTUS. Good ideas come from the bottom not the top. It always has and I suspect it always will. Fight the good fight!

Reply
Victor says:

January 23, 2012 at 3:45 am

@Davis,
Thank you for your recent post. I visited sslumpsum.com, and I stand corrected with respect to my prior post that suggested that you might be either “confused” or deliberately “confusing”. Unlike what I deduced from visiting Mr. Jackson’s site, I learned that your site evidenced a passionate compassion for the unemployed and that your proffered solution makes a prima facie case for a good solution to unemployment. The main problem I see is getting a Congress of the U.S. government to pass it. I immediately went to my Congressman’s site to advocate for the plan. I anticipate his response to be to blame his colleagues. As for the president’s leadership on this idea, I would love to see it. However, I do not anticipate his haters would follow. If their pass responses are any indication, they would demonize it and get AARP support to boot. Political leadership is complex as I am sure you are finding, but I commend you! Your proposal has my wholehearted support.

Reply
James Davis says:

January 22, 2012 at 11:47 pm

Victor, With all due respect to your point of view.

Induging in deception or being anti-Obama is a waste. No I do neither, and it is my sincere desire that no one think that, because nothing could be further from the truth. Pro Obama folk usually take that position because they have difficulty with handling the facts of the President’s inaction in the area of unemployment not just in the Black community but in the nation as a whole. However, historically high Black unemployment is real and these historically high numbers have occurred on his watch. Who should we look to for resolution? We ask not because we are the least of his supporters, but because we are his greatest supporters. We ask not because we are suffering the least, but because we are suffering the most. Finally, we ask not because he is in the least position to help us but because he occuppies the most powerful position from which help can come in this country. This is why we ask not out of deceit or dislike, but out of a sincere need, as our communities are changing right before eyes and not for the better. http://www.sslumpsum.com

Reply
Victor says:

January 22, 2012 at 5:46 pm

@Jackson, Ncholas, James Davis, and Hoodgirl
Ambitious or compaasionate? Pragmatic or unrealistic? Confused or deliberately trying to confuse? These are the questions. I ask my fellow citizens to both soulfully and rationally consider three core question:

Is President Obama primarily “ambitious” (in terms of self aggrandisement) or more “compassionate” (toward the middle class and lower income people in America)?

If the unemployment rate for the past 30 years for African American has been 5% to 8% higher than the national unemployment figures repored by the US Department of Labor (the differenctial was even worse during all of the other periods of recession and economic downturns) and now the differential still exists but is not as large as in the past what is pragmatic and what is what is realistic? Is not the narrowing of the differential to be pragamatically preferred to the utter unrealistic expectation of perfection in three years? Who could or did realistically expect that a President Obmam would eradicate such a historical differential in the unemployment rates as we have in American in 3 yeras?

Reason leads me to an obvious conclusion. Either one is naive (hence truly confused) or one disliked Obama from the start and is therefore setting forth, deliberately, unreasonable goals, which were never achievable expectations to begin with, perhaps not even hopes, but just something to say to cause more confusion. That is otherwise known as lying, covering up!

Reply
hoodgirl says:

January 22, 2012 at 4:37 pm

@James Davis, I really like your analogy and I concur with Raynard Jackson!

Reply
Nicholas says:

January 20, 2012 at 12:07 am

Mr. Jackson’s Ignoring the black community statement, is not only unreasonable, but based on his assumption that 6 per cent of black voters voted for John McCain or did not vote. This curious statement and opinion, coming from a black political consultant, caused me to visit his web-site hopeing to find clarity to his motivation. My visit to Raynard Jackson & Associates web-site helped me to put his statements into context. Some say, a man is judged by the company he keeps.

Reply
James Davis says:

January 19, 2012 at 5:17 pm

Ambition Has No Color And Is A Private Sport!

If nothing else, we should have learned from Dr. King and our own Biblical upbringing that, we not judge any man or woman for that matter, by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. Many Blacks mistakenly hold the belief, that given a 2nd term in office, this President will explode with legislation which will enhance the well being of Blacks, simply because he is Black or African American, and freed of the burden of running for re-election. That is why many misguided Black brothers and sisters will vote for him. Again, we make the classical mistake of relating color to performance. Ambition has no color and is a private sport. If we pragmatically look at this man and his election to office, we see we have done nothing more than his White brothers and sisters have done. (Yes, they claim him too – remember he has White lineage). Yes, we turned out in large numbers and voted for him, however, in raw numbers, more Whites voted for him than we did. Continuing in our pragmatism, if we dare, our reward for doing that is a future, grim at best, as we look back at 3 years of double-digit unemployment among female and male heads of households, and at least another year of future Black unemployment of males, possibly being above 15.0% and Black females being above 13.0%. Why do we find our selves in such dire circumstances? We put color before performance! In Biblical verbiage, we have stumbled, as a race. Can we now blame this man for his neck ambition, having taken advantage and to this very day, continues to take advantage of our racism? Remember, ambition has no color and is not a team sport! And if nothing else, this man is ambitious. http://www.sslumpsum.com

Reply
Victor says:

January 19, 2012 at 2:09 pm

Brother Jackson,
“Confused?” Yes. But it has nothing to do with Obama and perhaps little to do with liberalism, properly understood, especially if by liberalism you mean progressivism. The confusion you expressed in the article is imbedded in the false premises with which you infected your argument. The following is one example:
“The first Black president of the U.S. who is doing everything in his power to ignore the very community that gave him 96% of their vote” is presented as a factual premise from which you conclude that you are confused. Once you separate facts from obviously unreasonable opinions, you would be surprised how soon the confusion could dissipate.

Reply