A Question that caused me Great Sadness in my Response

[FrenchieCat]

I went by to see my first cousin last night. She is the mother of a beautiful 3 year old little girl, a public school teacher, and the wife of a local judge. We don't get to see each other often due to our busy lives, but we do discuss politics when we do.

We talked about our state and local judicial elections, and I told her how I had picked the Judges that I voted for; by looking up a radical right wing website in where judges running were recommended, and that I had voted in the exact opposite way they advocated. LOL!

She asked me, after we had discussed just about everything under the sun, a poignant serious question: Will Barack Obama be able to win a 2nd term, considering the hatred and the negativity that is out there, much of it seen, felt and heard every single day and reported? She admitted to not wanting to turn on the news anymore, because it only upsets her, and makes her feel deep down inside depressed about this country's inability to see a man with a great vision for America's future, but which it seems will not be allowed to have much of it, if any, implemented.

We talked about his vision for this country, economically becoming the Research and Development economy of the world, which is why he was focusing so hard on Education; both primary and secondary. we agreed that in order to develop this kind of an economy as the primary one, we'd need the qualified young people to come out of our schools. She lamented how the schools were in really sad shape, that there had been 6 fights at her school in just that one Friday (she teaches at a public high school that is in what some would call, the poor part of town).

Her husband, the judge, came and sat with us, once he had put their child to bed. He was somber and skeptical too as to which direction this country was going in. He agreed in applauding Barack Obama for having great vision for our future, but he didn't feel confident that enough people appreciated not so much Obama's political approach, but rather, Obama's overarching vision for the future. He wondered what vision the Republicans themselves had? That if they had all parts of government in their control for the next 100 years, where would we be there at the end for us at such time? I answered that I didn't think that Republicans, and for that fact, most of the American people, ever thought that far ahead, although they claimed to.

As for a 2nd term for Barack Obama? I responded that it would depend mainly on our outlook of our economy as we approach voting day 2012, and it would depend on our media, who essentially are the ones that decide the narrative, and can choose to frame any issue to tip elections however they decide, as witnessed in just this last election.

I also told them that to me, Obama's initial election and his current presidency was starting to feel like the era of Reconstruction that occurred back in the 1870s, right after the Civil War; a time when the first Black Senator in our history had been elected by the legislature from Mississippi, as a feel good act juxtaposed against an era that had just seen an end to a bloody war; much of it centered around the issue of race as well in the economic future of the nation.

Although that 1870 election was an historical event in its time, it should also be noted that this Senator only lasted 1 year, and that he resigned a few months before his term was up. It had been argued by his opponents that he shouldn't have ever been elected, because he had not been a citizen long enough to qualify they said, as the passage of the 14th amendment had only passed two years before.


Senator Hiram Rhodes Revels -
Mississippi Senator from 1870 and 1871




FACTS: In American History, as of 2010, there has been a total of Six African Americans have served in the U.S. Senate, two in the Republican Party from Mississippi during the Reconstruction Era and four more recently: three Democrats from Illinois (including Barack Obama) and one Republican from Massachusetts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress
-----

The right of blacks to vote and to serve in the United States Congress was established after the Civil War by amendments to the Constitution. The Thirteenth Amendment (ratified December 6, 1865), abolished slavery. The Fourteenth Amendment (ratified July 9, 1868) made all people born or naturalized in the United States citizens. The Fifteenth Amendment (ratified February 3, 1870) forbade the denial or abridgment of the right to vote on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, and gave Congress the power to enforce the law by appropriate legislation.

In 1866, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act and the Reconstruction Act, which dissolved all governments in the former Confederate states with the exception of Tennessee.....

As a result of these measures, blacks acquired the right to vote across the Southern states. In several states (notably Mississippi and South Carolina), blacks were the majority of the population. By forming coalitions with pro-Union whites, Republicans took control of the state legislatures. At the time, state legislatures elected the members of the US Senate. During Reconstruction, only the state legislature of Mississippi elected a black senator. On February 25, 1870, Hiram Rhodes Revels was elected the first black member of the Senate, becoming also the first black member of the Congress.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress


Revels was born free in Fayetteville, North Carolina, of a free father of mixed white and black ancestry, and a white mother of Scottish heritage.

The election of Revels was met with opposition from Southern conservative Democrats who cited the Dred Scott Decision which was considered by many to have been a central cause of the American Civil War. They argued that no black man was a citizen before the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. Because election to the Senate required nine years' prior citizenship, opponents of Revels claimed he could not be seated, having been a citizen by law for only two years.

Supporters of Revels countered by stating that the Dred Scott decision applied only to those blacks who were of pure African blood. Revels was of mixed black and white ancestry, and therefore exempt, they said, and had been a citizen all his life. This argument prevailed, and on February 25, 1870, Revels, by a vote of 48 to 8, became the first black man to be seated in the United States Senate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Rhodes_Revels

----------

From 1868, southern elections were accompanied by increasing violence, especially in Louisiana, Mississippi and the Carolinas. In the mid-1870s, paramilitary groups such as the White League and Red Shirts worked openly to turn Republicans out of office and intimidate blacks from voting. This followed on the earlier years of secret vigilante action by the Ku Klux Klan against freedmen and allied whites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Rhodes_Revels
----------

IMO.....

Sometimes I think that what happened in the 1870s should have concluded in African-Americans retaining equal rights at that time in the way that would have been finalized...but that was not to be. In fact, it took nearly an additional 100 years, and many battles before it became even remotely close to true.

It is with that type of an historical backdrop that I experience sadness in my understanding that at any given time, we do not truly see the future, and therefore, what we at a time believe is a given, doesn't always pan out as we would have believed would have happened all along.

That's how I am starting to feel in the current era; that the Barack Obama Presidency was simply a feel-good measure of many who voted for him, and that Barack Obama's Presidency, 100 years from now, will be reviewed as one of those "at the time" social experiment, that was not to happen again for a very long time. Like many of those he followed from long before during the reconstruction era, who were elected and counted as governmental officials in our history books, the closer reality was that they were only there to satisfy a moment in our history, but not one that lasted. History shows us that, clearly.

I'm starting to see Barack Obama as someone who was elected, but will not be given the chance to truly govern, because too many on all sides believe themselves to not only being smarter, but more politically savvy, more knowledgeable in what should be done, more judgemental of all of his decisions, and more critical of anything that he does than I have ever before witnessed before in my lifetime, certainly.

Perhaps my thoughts on this are overactive hyperbole, but perhaps they are not.
It is rather History in hindsight that will tell us better than anyone here now can.

[dionysus]

1. k&r frenchie

[CBR]

2. K&R nt

[ampad]

3. Brillant

Rec

[jwirr]

4. K& R for the deep down depression that the truth seems to give us.

[kentuck]

5. K & R

I have thought similar thoughts. How will history judge Barack Obama?

[flamingdem]

6. Thank-you for the post, I wonder if the Republicans will attempt to take credit

for elements of his vision by integrating aspects into their platform. I think staying ahead of them and sticking to carrying out that vision will bring us another win in 2012.

[JoePhilly]

7. I agree with much of your assessment, but don't think we should lay down ...

Here is a very simple example, compare this ...

Bill Clinton runs on reforming Health Care, and gets NOTHING. Obama runs on Heath Care, and for all of the flaws in the final bill, he GETS FAR MORE than Clinton did.

Now let's consider the Democratic reaction to each. Democrats were ANGRY that Clinton didn't COMPROMISE and MAKE PROGRESS on health care. And today, democrats are angry that Obama compromised TOO MUCH, and too frequently IGNORE the many, many positive elements included.

The reality as I see it is that Democrats are easily discouraged. If Clinton had compromised more in the 90s, Obama would have been building on a higher platform now. But where was Obama having to start, right where things were in the early 90s. Hillary care, became Obamacare.

By failing to compromise some back in the early 90s, we stopped the clock on HCR reform going forward.

In your analysis above, I think we see the same kind of problems. "Progressives" tend to be idealists, which makes QUESTIONING any compromise quite easy to do. Nothing is good enough. And so, everything is easy to pick apart.

The right wing does not suffer from this problem. If they did, they'd be throwing out the GOP for having not over-turned Roe V Wade, or for not ending Social Security yet. The GOP has those goals, but they recognize that these goals are hard to acheive, and so they do what they can to "chip away" ... and they CHEER ANY PROGRESS.

The left does not. No move forward can be acknowledged, unless its WEAKNESS can also be laid out at the same time.

You can see the Democratic strategists on TV make this mistake. The GOP talking heads say their lines, regardless of the question ... the Dems when discussing ANY progress, also feel the need to knee-cap themselves and complain about what did not get done.

Doing this over and over, weakens our candidates. They never WIN. They never DO ENOUGH to be cheered. And, they end up out of office too soon to create real change, because creating real change, that takes time.

And we don't have the patience.

[FrenchieCat]

8. I agree we shouldn't lay down.....

But I believe that the exchange that I recounted is happening with many, in particular African-Americans all over this nation. They see and feel the repeated put downs and abuse this President is enduring not from just one side, but from all sides....and reasonably, they wonder about his re-election chances because of the deep hate and lack of understanding (about anything really) that seems to be washing over this country. It is one of those feelings that makes one stomach a little bit queazy, way down deep. :(

[ampad]

11. I think it began with the Wilson "you lie" comment

At least for me that was when it started. Something I noticed from the left and the right. Anytime an AA voices concerns in regards to racism many times they are accused of using the race card. As if race does not matter. This is the first black president we are talking about here. A man in a position that many of us thought that we would never live to see. I know my family is fired up for 2012. We are determined to see this man re-elected. I believe that while the community may be questioning Obaman's re-election that at the same time the community will be there to the bitter end. I suspect that the AA turnout and organization in 2012 will be off the charts.

[CBR]

12. It is sad. A thread the other day was met with a rash of

"that's race-baiting" replies. Sad really and speaks to the unfortunate state of discussing racism on the left.

[FrenchieCat]

16. The trouble is that no one wants to be defined as a racist,

Those who discard race altogether as not being an element of anything
are simply looking to rationalize that their own discontent is quite normal.....
as they do not see the unreasonability of all that
they have decided they should unapologically expect from this one man,
much which they have not demanded from any other.

[JoePhilly]

13. Its not just with African-Americans .... but I see what you refer to ...

On the racial aspect ... African Americans I know have often described the different expectations they often face. Its not enough to do better than a counter-part, you have to do MUCH, MUCH better, AND .. even if you do, it still may not matter. And while their won't be any "overtly racist" actions, you can tell.

I also know women who have encountered the same situation (my wife for one).

But its broader. My wife and I have some very good friends who are generally moderate, used to lean GOP. They voted for Bush twice. Which makes that "lean" pretty strong I guess.

The wife is nearly despondent. After they realized what was really going on under Bush, they switched parties and voted for Obama. And neither is angry with him now, both would support him, and most dems in a second. But they are now seeing the insanity from other friends, and family.

They worry that eventhough Obama has accomplished so much, the narrative, from BOTH sides is too negative.

But we won't quit.

I also think that Hillary would have been in the same boat had she been the Dem candidate, and now President. The GOP would simply be framing her as an emotional woman having "hot-flashes", totally over her head ... blah, blah, blah.

Its what they do.

[FrenchieCat]

18. I'm sure that it isn't only African-Americans that feel this way......

But considering that I am that, and that many that I speak to are as well,
although I do not claim to speak for all AAs, it is quite noticeable to me,
that many whom I have discussed politics with share a similar sense sadness and
also a lack of suprise that this President is so damned by so much of the public,
no matter what the issue.....and that any praise appears furtive and rare.

[JoePhilly]

25. I'm with you on that ... I'm a 40+ white guy who can easily pass as a ...

Tea Bagger, even when I don't try to ... Mid 40s, brown hair, a little over 6ft ... and, a little thicker in the middle than when I was younger ... :)

And I am amazed that because I look like them, they speak more freely in front of me. Its unreal.

The same folks, PRIOR to Obama winning, did not seem to hold such overt racist views. I would have had no clue.

But now, its like Obama winning ripped the scab off an old wound. And the racism they've held in for so long, is seeping out, like a nasty infection.

Part of my comparison with Clinton gets to this too ... Clinton failed on HCR, and got caught in an affair, and Democrats (me included) still LOVED HIM. I seriously doubt Obama would get such treatment for the same personal failing.

You post also caused me to think of Jackie Robinson. He endured regular vilification on racial grounds, and yet rarely did he respond in anger. He instead, from what I've read, remained apart from responding to direct attacks, while at times discussing the broader implications. In a sense, he seemed to DENY the racists the "angry black man" they sought.

I don't know if Obama is taking a similar path. That he is denying them a target so that, as Jackie did, more African Americans can "get in the game".

The GOP has been very good at repositioning their old Southern Strategy. They've been able to create a narrative that Obama is the racist (hates the white culture), Michelle is a racist, Colin Powell, Holder too ... Sotomayer, racists all.

This is all one of the reasons that the infighting on DU ticks me off so much ...

The GOP's level of cynical manipulation of the electorate is so obviously evil ... meanwhile, the "cats" on DU debate tactics.

It can be depressing. But we still won't give up!!

[FrenchieCat]

38. We are together.....and we will have to work together to ensure

that history doesn't in any way repeat itself!

[chervilant]

42. Totally appreciate

your post, JoePhilly. When I read your comments about Jackie Robinson, I was reminded of one of my favorite quotes from Booker T. Washington:

“I shall allow no man to belittle my soul by making me hate him.”

I suspect that Mr. Robinson, learned as he was, knew the writings of Mr. Washington.

BTW, there are things that Mr. Obama is doing with which I take exception (primarily his stance on public education). However, I recognize that his biggest obstacle to achieving his {progressive} goals is the same obstacle that has usurped our media and our politics: the Corporate Megalomaniacs.

When less than 400 people worldwide own and control more than 45% of this planet's resources, that miniscule fraction of humanity has far more power than any individual world leader can hope to bring to bear on their political endeavors. I have watched Mr. Obama struggle to effect change against a relentless tide of resentment, anger, bigotry, and naysaying. I cannot but admire his courage and his tenacity.

I have said herein before that no matter which Democrat had become POTUS in this last election, s/he would have been pilloried by the pathetic people who are carrying the water for the Corporate Megalomaniacs. The teabaggers, the Becks, the Hannitys, the O'Reillys, the Republicans of this ilk may crucify Obama--in all but the literal sense--but theirs will be a Phyrric victory, and our nation will long suffer the consequences of their bitter fears.

[ampad]

21. Excellent points

I agree that Hillary would face sexism from the right. However, I do not think she would face the same level of sexism as Obama is receiving racism from the left and the right.

I think that one of the problems that some on the left face is one dimensional thinking. Meaning that many see racism and sexism as something that can be clearly identified. Probably because they have been watching the right with their blatant racism thus that is how they identify racism. For instance, stating that Hillary is a hot head. Or calling Obama a boy. When in reality sexism and racism can be very subtle.

Being racially insensitive is just another form of racism however, some on the left do not understand this. Stating that Obama should be challenged when the man has only been in office for 2yrs. Then going as far as to say he should be challenged by politicians that could not even win their own race. As an AA I view this comments as racially insensitive. For one those who make those comment rarely if ever comment on the racial implications of a challenge. As if AA are going to stand by and watch the first AA president challenged when history proves that a primary challenge is rare. Second of all why should Obama be challenged when there was no cry to challenge Clinton after his big loss? Third of all why should Obama be challenged by those who could not even win their own race? As you and many others have stated AA must over perform or else. Sorry for the rant. At any rate you made excellent points, all in which I agree with.

[FrenchieCat]

23. It is true that folks don't want to question their own selves.......

Like why would some folks speculate based on some story that they have barely read
(these days many simply read headlines, not necessarily the text) put out by a corporate media
that they claim they do not trust, and then via their own opining in a their own free wheeling
speculation, choose to announce in the same post that they are now "through" with him (Obama)....
not for anything he's even done,
but simply due to what they think he might or might not do according to
some corporate media initial speculation.

I find this quite amazing, and somehow as intellectualy dishonest as one can get,
no matter how "Normal" it may currently appear.

[treestar]

52. +1 million

We need to get out of our own way!

[dkf]

9. I do think you are right in that Obama has a vision for the future.

But what he didn't realize earlier, and I think he mentioned this himself, is that he forgot people are dependent on what is happening now. They can't afford to be excited about a better future when the fear about the present is too consuming.

It's like planning to purchase state of the art fire engines when the house next door is on fire. Yes the engine went out earlier and the initial flames were put out but after we left it started flaming again and we figured...eh it will go out on it's own.

[FrenchieCat]

22. I believe that Barack Obama realizes more than you give him credit for.....

I think he realizes that he could not do one thing as opposed to the other, and therefore has had to integrate both doing policy work to help now and doing policy work to help later. The fact that folks don't understand this approach doesn't make them right, it makes them less thoughtful than was should be expected from those who would like to consider themselves informed.

You analogy isn't the best, as I would say it is like planning to purchase state of the art fire engines, while still going next door and putting out that fire. One isn't exclusive of the other....and I find it sad that anyone would try to think so.....

But your analogy brings up my own.....in where Obama is putting out the fire, while those in the neighborhood are standing around yelling through a megaphone that he isn't doing fast enough, well enough, and thoroughly enough,.......meanwhile, they have left a cigarette buring on their very own bed, and will blame him for that too, when he has to race to their houses, only repeating the same thing over again, all of the time continuing to have to hear the jeering and instructions yelled at him....from none other than the smokers who set up the every burning house scenario to begin with.....while others who should be clapping at Obama's efforts have joined in with the others at only seeing that there are fires, and not understanding that he is but one fireman, and that part of the solution, would be if they would simply also pick up the additional hoses laying there unused.

[handmade34]

26. I have provided this link a number of times today

"Businesses holding America Hostage"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/15/884730/-Blame-Businesses-For-Not-Hiring

your analogy is good and I thought of this article... while business may not be sabotaging President Obama because he is black, enough people are and encourage this behavior

[FrenchieCat]

27. Yes.......the saboteurs with pointed fingers......

at just one guy.

[Karenina]

54. Indeed.

[jaxx]

10. And so 140 years later we still aren't there.

That was an incredibly sad and beautiful post Frenchie. One day soon America will be brown and maybe a man of vision will be judged by his humanity instead of his color. That is my Hope.

K&R

[FrenchieCat]

15. During that conversation with my cousins, we also discussed the

apparent devaluing of a higher education...how knowing nothing appears to be more better touted,
than being educated and measured, and having a fair and thoughful approach. That message being sent out to this country's youth at this time, is also a very disheartening trend.

[jaxx]

19. It has to be confusing for the students.

Either have knee-jerk reactions or thoughtful actions. Knee-jerk stays in one place, thoughtful moves on. I always wonder why people think knee-jerk is cool. It's destroying them.

[FrenchieCat]

31. We will lose a few that could have been encouraged instead......

and that is a great diservice. :(

[SunsetDreams]

14. ohhh Frenchie, Powerful doesn't even begin to describe what you expressed

:hug:

In alot of ways, it's amazing just how far this country has came with respect to equality, but there is so much more to do.
I too have never seen anything like this, it's like he is damned if he does, and damned if he don't.
I have no issue with criticism, but some of this is way way over the top. It used to be when there was nothing but constant criticism against a Democrat, it was coming from the right.

I really think that the history books will be kind to Obama, and most will look back on his Presidency, as being one of the greatest ones in history. Already, with less than 2 years in, Obama is ranked #15 out of 44. That is pretty good, if you ask me. I think he will continue to rise up the ranks.

Scholars Rank Obama the 15th Best President

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20009531-503544.html

[firedupdem]

17. K&R

That's how I am starting to feel in the current era; that the Barack Obama Presidency was simply a feel-good measure of many who voted for him, and that Barack Obama's Presidency, 100 years from now, will be reviewed as one of those "at the time" social experiment, that was not to happen again for a very long time. Like many of those he followed from long before during the reconstruction era, who were elected and counted as governmental officials in our history books, the closer reality was that they were only there to satisfy a moment in our history, but not one that lasted. History shows us that, clearly.

I'm starting to see Barack Obama as someone who was elected, but will not be given the chance to truly govern, because too many on all sides believe themselves to not only being smarter, but more politically savvy, more knowledgeable in what should be done, more judgemental of all of his decisions, and more critical of anything that he does than I have ever before witnessed before in my lifetime, certainly.

Sadly, I feel the same way.

[mahina]

20. It depends how smart and how hard we fight for him.

Beautiful, sad, wise Frenchie. Imua.

[handmade34]

24. excellent essay/commentary

Voting for Barack Obama was not merely a feel good measure for me and I am not African American but I feel what you feel. President Obama from day one has not been given the opportunity to 'truly govern' and despite that he has continued to act with grace and maturity. I adore and have utmost respect for President Obama and his long term vision and, though I am terribly saddened by this, I don't believe the vast majority of people in this country have the maturity and wisdom to understand what a great man we have as President..

You are correct, if the economy is doing well and people have jobs in 2012, Barack Obama has a chance, but corporations and backwards thinking Republicans will be fighting against progress every step of the way until the next election.

[DesertFlower]

28. K&R. nt

[haifa lootin]

29. It seems to me that most of the electorate falls into one of 4 groups:

Those who are angry that he has done much of what they feared he would,

Those who are angry he hasn't done enough of what they hoped for,

Those who are certain he can do nothing right (to a degree based on race), and

Those who are certain he can do nothing wrong (to a degree based on race.)

Obviously there are overlaps in these categories but not sure how to quantify or even qualify them, I'm just
talking about how I've been influenced by people I've observed.

Conclusion is that unfortunately he will have a very tough time getting a second term barring some significant
change in the national mood. I hope to be proven wrong.

[FrenchieCat]

30. Problem is they are all wrong...these groups......

and cynically unreasonable, when the facts are examined.

[joshcryer]

32. Love ya FrenchieCat, this is a sobering post. But I think he will be reelected.

I feel for you though because this is a really sad post coming from you! Don't be disheartened. We lost this cycle because we didn't GOTV. The youth vote was non-existent. We need to teach more civics classes in our schools.

[FrenchieCat]

35. I find that the nastyness on boards such as these, and just every where that I turn

is uncommonly hateful......

Bush had to steal an election, allow 9/11 to happen, take us into wars not paid for,
and bring us a great depression, and he still got and gets more respect all along
than Obama has in his first 20 months. I find that amazingly odd surreal!

[Top Cat]

33. K&R...I'm afraid you maybe right Frenchie.

[FrenchieCat]

34. I don't want to be right.......

and in fact, I want to prove that history never truly repeats itself.
That's what I want to do.

[DebJ]

36. Another fact about the election of black Senators:

Copied this from a powerpoint I used to student teach US Government and Politics. The students were amazed. My Big Idea was that you can't just look at history as to what was accomplished, you also had to look at how hard people fought most every change after it was enacted into law, by every devious method that they could. (Example: poll taxes, literacy tests, etc.) Nowadays, the tricks are in the media.


After the first two Senators in the late Reconstruction Era, it was 84 more years before another black Senator was elected.

Hiram Rhodes Revels (R-Miss) 1870-1871
Blanche Bruce (R-Miss) (male) 1875-1881

84 Years Later…….

Edward Brooke (R-Mass) 1967-1979
Carol Moseley Braun (D-Illinois) 1993-1999
Barack Obama (D-Illinois) 2005-present


On edit: I was teaching this during the election in Fall 2008.

[FrenchieCat]

37. Talk about patience!

I think Black folks are probably the most patient than anyone else in the world.
But even when they wait, and wait, they still don't get what they should be due;
benefit of the doubt and respect.

[BumRushDaShow]

59. K&R to the OP and sadly, Harvey Gantt got this close >< in NC in 1996

to upending the devil Helms. IMHO, the only consolation was that NC threw their electoral votes to our Prez.

[political_Dem]

39. K and R. Great treatise.

Even though there are those who bitterly fight to deny that this is so, racism pretty much clouds the belief in the POTUS' potential. Frankly, our leader is between a rock and a hard place. If Mr. Obama gets angry and "acts out", the dominant culture will think he is not intellectual enough to be POTUS. He'd be just as angry as "other Black folks" and dehumanized for such emotion.

If he holds his feelings close to the vest, is soft spoken and approachable, the dominant culture emasculates Mr. Obama and transforms him into the "safe black"--someone who doesn't threaten white people. Therefore, he has to act restrained at all times. Even his wife and children have to keep this up so that they are protected from such negative perceptions.

What white people don't understand is that Black folks have to deal with these perceptions of race on a daily basis--especially in formal culture. It is a walk on a tightrope in which a white person can speak or act any way they want, but a person of color has to continue supressing his or her feelings until such a social encounter is done.

I don't envy Mr. Obama his position because he has to deal with this crap every day. He can't act out. He can't say what he feels. He can't even get angry. It he does anything, the dominant culture will react negatively and prosecute his behavior. And if he is "prosecuted" other Black folks feel the brunt of this "finger-wagging" by the dominant culture.

That's why it is almost ironic to read the howls of despair from the voices of the dominant culture as they describe how he should act towards the Republicans.

So, yes it is a social experiment in a way because it has to do with a shift of power. White people have to deal with being subordinate to a person of color. How they react is reflected in the way they treat the POTUS. It is also seen in how the national discussion is set.

The real tragedy is that because the dominant culture is caught up with their privilege and prejudices, they miss the gift that Mr. Obama bestows upon this nation because privilege makes a person blind except to his or her own superiority.

[FrenchieCat]

40. Yes. You've got it!

Your post is profoundly accurate.

[SwampG8r]

41. i dont think he will have a serious primary challenge frenchy

he will be renominated and re elected
people are whiny they always have been
i have some questions about some policies and some appointments but none that would remove my support
and the gop wont have a candidate in 2 years they have no credible faces
thats the reality here

but
i am amazed at the number of "good"people i know personally who became conservatives the day he was elected
there is definitely race involved
it will be interesting to see if the Gop will be easier to work with than the dems were

[craigmatic]

43. You're not the first person I heard this argument from. I hope you're wrong.

[FrenchieCat]

44. I need to be wrong.....

[nofurylike]

45. K&R thank you for this, FrenchieCat. heartbreaking. please

spread word everywhere you hear people hurting so, that we will not give up. we will keep pulling the heavy weight until we break through the arrogance and the ignorance.

i know this is true, too, because look how far we've come.
miraculous, if seen from a century ago.

President Obama was willing to stand the heat - and he does it more magnificently, with greater dignity, than i can ever have imagined anyone doing! - and deserves us all to stand it, as best we each can, too.

thank you for this intimate glimpse into hearts and dreams.

:loveya:


peace and solidarity, always

[FrenchieCat]

46. You are very welcome.....

with peace and solidarity with you always as well. :hi:

[Number23]

47. Frenchie, Frenchie, Frenchie

I don't know what I expected when I clicked this thread but a beautiful, POIGNANT history lesson was the last thing.

You and I both know that it will be wasted here. Too many have no knowledge of history and they have no INTEREST in it either. I have seen on DU more times than I can count that Obama only won because "McCain was such a bad candidate" and that the Dems could have put "Donald Duck" on the ballot and he would have won. This minimization of this man, his intellect and his abilities has been NON-STOP since he was declared the winner of the Democratic nomination. And yet, I'm supposed to nod my head and believe these same folks when they say that their criticisms of Obama all stem from "policy." They must think that the rest of us are as stupid as they are.

I do believe that Obama will run in 2012 and I would not be surprised if he won. Bloodied and bruised, but still triumphant. But one thing I do know is that whatever happens, as with all great men and women, he will be known, he will be honored, and he will be REMEMBERED in every history book as a ground breaker, a tremendous American, and quite possibly a tremendous president while his never ending critics fade into oblivion.

I am thrilled to rec this. Thank you for posting.

[lamp_shade]

48. This is a very thought-provoking post, Frenchie, as evidenced by the wonderful responses.

Rare are intelligent, thoughtful, snarkless discussions around here.
Big kick and rec.

[FrenchieCat]

49. Thanks for the encouragement! It is appreciated!

[denimgirly]

50. Great Read! I just wish Obama would Just FIGHT for His Ideals

When he doesnt it just leaves him open to attacks from his own base...and rightfully so. He then goes on to appease the right and get nothing in return.
To me Obama is a very weak individual who is always afraid of a fight even though somewhere in him he has ideals of a Left...i guess.

If he is going to have a 2nd term he has to act like he cares about us...right now i see no reason to vote for him in '12. I want a real progressive challenger

[treestar]

53. He has pressed for what he could get

And got what he can out of the Congress he had.

This smear is so over the top it is ridiculous. Any Democratic President with that Congress would have the same thing. It is a political process, not a prize fight.

The fight metaphor does not fit and is tired, too. A President is a political figure, along with the Senators and representatives. They do not "fight." They need to come to a consensus.

[BlueMTexpat]

51. I firmly believe that history will be much kinder to Barack Obama

than we ourselves have been - at least so long as that history is fact-based.

Obama was not my first choice for President in 2008. Neither of the two individuals that I would have supported with all my heart and brain even entered the primary. I believed then that Obama needed more political "seasoning" at the national level before making a run for President and he was always more centrist than my own personal political preferences are. He was, however, the choice of Democratic primary voters. So I supported his candidacy as fervently thereafter as any one of those who were Obama believers from Day One.

I voted for him because he was the Democratic candidate. Period. Even without that major plus, there is absolutely no question whatsoever in my mind that he was the only choice for progress that we had. That he is also a person of vision, intelligence and compassion was a wonderful bonus. It is not to say that I did not then and do not now appreciate the wonderful political symbolism he represents as a blended-race candidate - and one that he will always represent to the world outside the US. If nothing else, Frenchie, the world still admires him tremendously - and you had better believe it. He is a man who is truly underappreciated in his own country. But that all too often happens to persons of vision, I'm afraid. And it will continue to happen to him so long as Democrats let the RW dominate the agenda - which it will - so long as Dems (including Jon Stewart, whom I still love dearly) will not call out Republican lies, smears and distortions for exactly what they are.

Lies, smears and distortions are not civil discourse and one cannot have civil discourse with those who use them.

[rasputin1952]

55. Very well thought out posting...

To be sure, all advances come in steps, generally very small one's, but it is still advancement not regression.

Radical Republicans of the era were no less than what we would call neo-cons today. There would be many calls for the complete extermination of the South, fortuantely saner minds prevailed. The party of progression back then was the Republican party, (in the early 20th Century they literally did a 180 degree shift), and by the time Eisenhower left office, the last of the truly Moderate Republicans were pretty much gone. In order to stay viable, (even Nixon would have been called a Commie by now), the GOP had to make a radical shift to the extreme right, but it didn't really get rolling until Reagan moved into the WH. Reagan lived a life of fantasy throughout his entire career, if it wasn't Hollywood or making Signal Corps films about the horrors of syphilis, it was still all glitz and glamor cranked out by the Dream Factory. He was utterly clueless when it came to anything that could be seen as substantial, those who empower the GOP used him like a\he was used in Hollywood, easy stuff, give him a script and off he goes.

The Radical Republicans used the Lincoln assassination as a springboard for Southern suppression, which brought about even worse treatment to the recently emancipated slaves. Every violent act begins the motion of a retaliatory violent act. When Booth shot Lincoln, and the South was tossed into the firepit, Andrew Johnson could do nothing to stop the rage. The Northern part of the nation was enraged, the Southern part terrified. The balance was thrown so out of whack, Reconstruction would not actually end until just before the end of WWII. The animosity was so deep by that time, that black soldiers were still segregated and often buried in an entirely different cemetery that caucasian soldiers. Not until Truman did we have anything nearly coming close to integration, North or South, East of West...it makes no difference, it was taking small steps by some remarkably brave and intelligent leaders to make any progress.

The same holds true for women's rights and GLBT rights; hispanics are latest "enemy", just before and overlapping is the Muslim community. We seem to be stuck in cycles of "enemies", many of our own creation.

Leadership takes courage, when challenged, FDR would publicly take on those who demanded his head on a platter, and more often than not, come out on top. We need to see that kind of courage again, not just from President Obama, but everyone down to the common citizen. We have not had our Rights taken away, we have given them away, and we need to find the courage and fortitude to take them back and break the cabal that thrives on hatred and profits from division and destruction. PO can pull this out, but he needs to counter the negativity by digging in his heels and taking on those that will be more than happy to turn us into a nation that stumble down into history as a grand experiment that went awry.

[Paper Roses]

56. Excellent post. Well researched and well written.

Like others, I appreciate your post and like you, I hope you are wrong.

Thank you for your insight.

[hulka38]

57. The left's discontent with Obama is based on racism?

[laughingliberal]

67. Sure. It couldn't be his policies or anything.

:sarcasm:

[txlibdem]

58. Did Sen. Hiram bail out banks and big business while letting working class people drown

I don't know how much of a parallel you want to draw between the two.

Did Hiram surround himself with advisers from the previous congressman's staff and Goldman-Sachs?

Did Hiram allow(or was it encourage?) his underlings to bad mouth his most important constituency at will, calling them f*king retards, need to get a clue, need to get a life, need to grow up, need to STFU and vote for Hiram?

[AnotherMother4Peace]

60. Excellent post - your cousin and husband

most likely fear for the future of their daughter, as so many of us do.

I have several close relatives who are irrational thinkers & blindly racist. They're horrible to listen to. They are, however, in their 80's & 90's. And although they're family and helped raise me, I secretly wish for the day they cannot vote anymore, for the sake of our country.

Frenchie, thank you for the well written post.

[LittleGirl]

61. Great post and great responses.

Thanks for your effort; all of you.
This is why I come to DU. I need history lessons like this based on those that have the patience and heart to present them. It's very very much appreciated.

[adnelson60087]

62. Frenchie, please ask your teacher cousin how

she feels about Obama's deconstruction and removal of support for public education through teacher bashing, and over-emphasis on testing. Ask her how these things undermine the motivations to learn by students and will have the opposite result from Obama's stated goal of improving our kids to "R&D" status. BTW, what happens with all the kids, the vast majority, who will never desire to pursue "R&D"?? What about them?? Those kids who are beset by poverty and hopelessness won't be served by Obama's recipe for education since poverty is just an "excuse" in his mindset. I'd love to know what your cousin thinks about all this.

[great white snark]

63. "Poverty is no excuse for bad grades." - Obama

"Finally holding teachers accountable is not bashing" - me

[adnelson60087]

64. Come do our job as an educator and then you can talk about "accountability".

Poverty matters a lot. It is THE major issue affecting educational outcomes. Parenting is a close second. Let's see Obama address these issues, and stop placing the responsibility on us. All we do is teach our children everyday. That's all we do. We are accountable in ways that don't show up on standardized exams. I don't expect those who support what Obama's doing, continuing the work of Bush, to change their minds, but they should know the truth.

[FrenchieCat]

74. Spoke to her......asked your questions, and so......

(her answer, as paraphrased by me, emailed to her and approved prior to posting)

Education is a very complex issue, that needs many solutions, and that the problems with public education didn't happen overnight, and therefore, there are no painless quick fixes.

She believes that Barack Obama understands those complexities, and is approaching the various
problems in a multi-prong fashion, but that doesn't mean that he has or will be right in every instant....but the fact that he's not stupid and appears to understand those complexities is reassuring.

She does not support the current standardized testing, and believe that has to go, and that merit pay
based solely on that is inappropriate.

She placed the responsibility of education on parents, poverty, and the educational system as a whole, which includes teachers.....and although she knows for sure there are many great teachers out there.....like with all professions, there are some teachers who should probably be doing other things, as she believes that teachers should be teaching because they love it, and that very little else can make a teacher great.

As for the issue of Charter schools, she believes that small schools are a better answer to giving students the attention they need, and that those parents in underserved communities who are interested in better education for their children deserve choice, just like the wealthier parents do.

She appreciates that Pres. Obama is also addressing the issue of pre-school education and its funding for the children of parents that wouldn't be able to afford it normally.
http://www.clasp.org/page?id=0025
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/summary/edlite-section1.html



She also recognizes that his additional funding of community college and training program does address the issue that not one type of higher education fits all children....but she does believe that R&D emphasis, although not for all children, is an option that is worthy and should be advanced and accelerated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/14/AR2009071400819.html

Without Pres. Obama at the helm, many teachers wouldn't be teaching any longer, and many still have their job due to his policies as in the additional funding specifically to provide states with funding via the stimulus, as wells as boosted spending in Education via his 2010 and his 2011 budgets to date.

IMO....: Fixing the extreme complex issues that make up the American Public Education system is not a Black & White situation with a one size fits easy answer, and The opinions of Teachers and the Teacher's Union, although to be seriously considered, cannot take priority over making sure that all kinds of innovations that could benefit the welfare of the children are tried and tested.

[adnelson60087]

77. Thanks for asking her the questions. I would take exception

to her statement that Obama understands the complexities of education, as evidenced by the fact that neither he nor his secretary of education have every taught in a public school and do NOT seek answers from those of us on the front lines of education. "Innovation" is a great thing, as long as there is actual research behind it. Unfortunately, as recent research has shown in Chicago where Duncan's plans were enacted, his plans do not work. I'd feel a whole lot better about many of these "innovations" if they seriously addressing the poverty and parental aspects of education. It's no coincidence that wealthier families with more involved parents have kids that perform better in schools, regardless of ethnicity or even teacher quality.

As for teachers' jobs due to funding, we are always grateful, but don't lose sight that ultimately, if we lose teachers, it is our society that suffers. He's not doing this out of the goodness of his heart, as much as the necessity of it. Even a stupid republican would likely have bowed to such pressures from his suburban constituents.

[FrenchieCat]

78. I don't think one has to be a teach to understand the complexities of education....

as I am a parent, and I understand them very well.

As for wiping out poverty as the answer to the problems with education,
that would be nice, but it is impossible.....so just to say it is not an answer
to anything.......

It is no coincidence that Wealthier school districts (paid via property taxes of area)
would include wealthier parents, who can afford to do what is required to end up with
kids that perform better in school...which end up being better funded. However,
that doesn't address the problem of those who do not live in wealthy areas,
so I'm not sure what your point is there.....

As for saving teachers' jobs? No, a stupid Republican would not have done it....
no matter the "pressures" that you have suddently come up with that have nothing
to do with reality.

Bush passed "No Child Left Behind" and then proceeded in not funding it.....
so Stupid Republicans are called that for a reason.

I think you just simply don't want to give any credit, where some might be due.
Typical of those who can only criticize, and never mention anything positive
that this President has done. Never fair, and never balanced. Never really
addressing the complexities and coming up with solutions.....and you didn't disappoint
on that with this post.

[adnelson60087]

80. I'm sorry, but being a parent is NOT enough to make

anyone an expert on education. I've done this career/calling for nearly 2 decades now, and yeah, I'm an expert. I've taught in every type of school setting except rural and yes, poverty and parental involvement are indeed the major factors affecting outcomes. Spending on inner-city schools worked pretty well in the 70's and early 80's towards addressing systemic and long-term poverty among black americans in particular. That was what fueled the boom in the black middle class in the 80's and 90's. Now, with federal govt funding greatly reduced due to conservative ideology, those gains are long gone, and the general middle class is shrinking faster than we can easily imagine.

As for giving Barack his due, he was my senator before he was your president. He made certain promises and didn't fulfill them, like serving out his term. I voted for him because I believed him. Now, he attacks my profession in ways that would make Bush proud. I have to live with his lack of knowledge and vision, and watch as more kids get test-prepped and learn less every year. It breaks my heart. But maybe, if you WERE a teacher in our public schools, you'd know that.

As for positives he's done, I can think of a few, like paying heed to climate change and stem-cell research. I can also think of lots of areas he's a serious disappointment like reversing the Patriot Act, Gitmo, The Wars, and let's not forget my personal favorite, Separation of Church and State through the defunding of the Office of Faith-based Initiatives (another Bush hold-over).

[FrenchieCat]

81. I've had 2 children who have gone to private schools, including Bi-lingual school,

a parochial school, and public school, all the way through community college and upscale universities.....like Harvard and WASHU.

It is amazing how arrogant some folks are, in believing
that only they and those like them can know anything.

Guess your job is simply not to like the fact that teaching in a classroom
doesn't an entire education system make....and if it does, than perhaps
teachers are the problem after all, since you believe them to be the only
ones who know anything. I'm thinking Obama being a professor doesn't count either, right?
Only teachers in a primary classroom setting? Oh My! :rofl:

You really should vote Republican or 3rd party if you are that unhappy.
and you know so much while everyone else knows so little.

Bye!

[adnelson60087]

82. Sorry, but yes, you can't be an expert in something you've never done.

Try that logic with a surgeon, if you dare. My teaching includes classrooms, writing curriculum, mentoring young teachers, Masters degrees in both Science Education and Administration, and the current PhD program I'm currently enrolled in, not to mention working in 3 distinctly different environments: an inner city school, old rust-belt industrial district, and the very multicultural suburbs. Yep, Obama can't touch my credentials, and neither can his Sec of Education. I'm telling you, their "answers" don't work. Don't believe me though...go ask people who teach in Chicago (like I do, every week). They will be glad to let you know.

Why did you feel the need to insult me (vote Republican) because President Obama doesn't know anything about my profession. There is a WORLD of difference between being a university professor and a public school teacher. If you've been to college, you know the truth of this. If you're not hip to that, I begin to question your sincerity. He's never done it. Duncan's never done it. You've never done it. Being a parent simply is not enough. I've been to plenty of doctors in my time, but I'm not one and can't tell him how to do his career. That's just the truth. We are experts, but are not listened to by the powers-that-be. Why?? Because they don't want to hear our answers which are borne of fact, not simply opinion.

[lunatica]

65. President Obama is our living history right now

He is a brilliant man who keeps his eye on his vision. I feel a profound respect for him and I love his family intensely. I am proud to say he is My President. He will be re-elected.

[saracat]

66. Interesting how no one ever comes to the defense of Carol Mosley Braun.

Nor is she ever mentioned.There certainly wasn't much support for her for certain quarters and she was a very eloquent spokesperson and an impressive woman.I attended several of her events and liked her a lot.

[laughingliberal]

70. +1 nt

[opihimoimoi]

68. The MAN is PRICELESS...KnR 61..... :o)

[wndycty]

69. Kick

:kick:

[butterfly77]

71. Kicked&Recommended!

[laylah]

72. Bravo and thank you!

I have copied this and sent far and wide, giving you recognition, of course. Thank you SO much! What a terrific missive! :hug:

Jenn

[kentuck]

73. Frenchie, I have thought the same thing but....

I believe history will give Obama a fair shake. He came into the White House with a very big job. Will he do it efficiently or not, will be the question asked by historians?

The President has the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi. He is not a person that relishes controversy. I am hoping that when push comes to shove, he will fight back for the people who voted him into office.

I don't think the times will permit him to be used as an example that no black man can be elected President again because of the "terrible job" of Barack Obama. Barack Obama was a very special candidate for President. We want him to be a very special President.

[mstinamotorcity]

75. Hopefully all his achievements

won't be repealed or watered down to go un-noticed. Our President has struggled with the most silliest bullshit in History. To spend weeks fighting rumors. Do you know one of my friends who I thought I knew was talking that he wants to turn our country into Russia or some shit. I immediately told her I see she was a socialist girl. And why was she looking at Faux News for her information and had she fact checked anything she has heard or does she believe what she hears. She says she really doesn't believe everything that they say. I was mad from the point of Russia(Nothing against Russians). I just wouldn't talk to her for a few days. Then I text her and asked her to read this book so she could find out about her favorite Faux News personalities,and she hasn't responded to this day. That was Tuesday November 2,2010. We won't be speaking I don't think now that she has succumbed to the noise:cry: I will miss my friend.......Meanwhile,Fuck her ass!!!She thinks our President is a socialist. And I think she is an uneducated JACKASS. Ain't my friend anymore. Wouldn't want people to get the wrong idea me with a fucking BIRTHER. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[jesus_of_suburbia]

76. "I will miss my friend.......Meanwhile,Fuck her ass!!!"

:rofl:

You are quite a character (in a good way)!

[mstinamotorcity]

79. My friends

are socialist like me.:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: