Why do the net root progressives hate President Obama?

[angee_is_mad]

Everyone I know (I'm politically active outside of my computer)support his presidency and are going to campaign for him hard in 2012.
I'm just confuse about who should be President in 2012 posts. Hell, maybe it's a black thing, cause I just don't get it.Thank God his base still support him.

[OHdem10]

1. They do not hate Obama. Some are dissappointed but I would

daresay they got themselves and voted.

Please do not put Progressive and hate in same sentence.
It is not true.

Progressives do not give up their right to dissent when
they disagree with the President on issue. Dissent cannot
be equated non support.

[CakeGrrl]

4. I've seen the word "despise" used here, so don't claim that

Progressives are not capable of hate.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

77. I would argue that it's not just progressives. I think there are segments of every

ideological group who 'hate' or 'dislike' the president. Over 80% of liberals or progressives still support Obama.

[impik]

5. Seriously?

"Please do not put Progressive and hate in same sentence.
It is not true."

You really don't see the hateful messages here? Really??

[bigwillq]

15. So people "hate" a president.

It's not the first time that's ever happened.
Yes, some here are hateful. Oh, well. That happens. I don't understand why you are so sensitive to the criticism. I could care less what others think of the politicians I like and support.
Just because they are Democrats doesn't mean we have to like them.
Posters like yourself have a difficult time accepting that some do not like this president or this administration. And some, including you, take DU way too seriously. I don't see the type of negativity towards Obama in real life that I see here. Word of advice: Stop taking DU so seriously. Learn to accept the fact that some, including some DEMS, do not like Obama. Your DU experience will be a much better one when you learn to do that.

[angee_is_mad]

16. at least you admit it

and I respect you for that. You DON'T like President Obama. Got it. Now if the ones with the hateful posts will be as upfront as you, I could respect that and I will post rebuttals to the dislike.
You call me sensitive for calling out negative posts? Well sir/ma'am (?) I will proudly wear that banner.

[bigwillq]

17. I don't like him on some issues

and I like him on others.

I happen to like Mr. Barack Obama. President Barack Obama, it's a mixed bag.
Mr. Barack Obama seems like a great guy. Great father. Great husband. Cool guy. Really not much you can't like about him as a person.


But, so far, Obama has met my expectations (some good, some bad).

[angee_is_mad]

18. boner, palin, cantor agree with you

they like Barack Obama, they just don't like President Barack Obama. I got your point and how you feel about the POTUS. Fortunately most democrats feel differently than you all. Unfortunately they aren't in the blogosphere and on pundits shows.

[bigwillq]

19. I don't understand why some, like you,

need everyone to approve of a politician just because you do.

[ampad]

35. Exactly

"I don't understand why some need everyone's approval of a politician just because they do." Like the ones that are so pissed off about their candidate losing that they are carrying the primary fight two years down the line.

[bigwillq]

36. Those who do that

have issues, too. People shouldn't take this stuff that seriously.

[Number23]

99. TELL. IT.

:applause:
And these same ones claiming that somebody "worships" Obama will be the same ones wanting to pour gasoline on your @ss and set you aflame if you say one bad word about Hillary, Dennis K or Howard Dean.

[WonderGrunion]

65. I don't need everyone to approve of President Obama

Just enough to keep the Repugs from winning any more congressional seats or the Presidency.

Is that truly too much to ask for?

[bigwillq]

87. No.

I voted for DEMS across the board this past mid-term.

[muffin1]

45. So...

if one likes President Obama - the man, but not his policies, he/she is the same as Boehner, Palin and Cantor? Right...:eyes:

Have you been drinking? Or are YOU merely blinded by hate at anyone who doesn't agree with your feelings about Obama?

[bigwillq]

47. Good post.

I almost posted that myself but could really care less about what a poster says on a message board.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

78. If they hate the president, my follow-up question would be a simple one...

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU STILL HERE ON DU???!?!?!

[bigwillq]

85. Obama isn't the only democrat in the country

You do know this, right? :shrug:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

93. Which leads me to another question, then...

If you know that Obama isn't the ONLY Democrat and you know that there are more Democrats, say in the Congress, then why not understand that Obama can't do it all by himself?

Understand that there are Democrats that are just as horrible for the Democratic agenda as the Republicans. And Obama can only do so much.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm very disappointed in Obama right now. And in fact, I'm incredibly angry with him, but at the same time, I do understand how politics works and that the president isn't responsible for passing laws. The Congress is.

I think there's a slew of Democrats who are personally out for themselves and their own agenda, not the party and definitely not the country.

[bigwillq]

94. I do understand.

And I do blame the DEMs in Congress. They're just as much to blame, if not more.

[ProSense]

2. You're assuming

that all the anti-Obama sentiment is coming from progressives. A lot of progressives, online and offline, still support the President.

[angee_is_mad]

8. Offline yes

but if one was to just go by the blogs, one would think that the democratic party has turned against. When its only an extremely small percentage and the real democratic base (who are unheard and unseen till election time) support him fully.

[Top Cat]

9. Agreed

[firedupdem]

86. +1

I agree. Then the msm picks up on these blogs and state that this is how the "base" feels. I hate that. The majority of the real base hasn't decided the president failed before he even got started!

[impik]

3. They were never his supporters. They were in love with whatever

But now they walk around telling everyone that "they put Obama on the WH and he should do what we want״. They never listen to him in the campaign and now they're so "surprised". And yes, it's the black thing too. Jon Stewart wouldn't dare to call Bill Clinton "dude" and no one would dare to say on their talk show that they wanted Obama to be a "gangsta".
The problem is that they control the airways and demoralize the base 24/7.

[Top Cat]

12. yeah.. and many take their messages as the gospel.

[JoePhilly]

27. I tend to agree with your assessment.

Bush was so terrible that a portion of the left was simply thrilled that we might unseat McCain, aka Bush #3.

As a result, they only heard those parts of Obama's policy statements that they liked, and they ignored any of his more bipartisan statements, when he was a CANDIDATE.

Now that he is PRESIDENT, they're hearing has FLIPPED OVER. They ONLY hear his bipartisan statements, and ignore anything he says that supports a more progressive view.

Obama never was Bernie Sanders.

[ampad]

41. I think I heard the gangsta comment on Ed Shultz

Totally uncalled for. Yes this is an aspect of race. I am so sick and tired of people telling black folks to stop being so sensitive. People can be racially insensitive and not even know it. There is a closed thread in GD to prove that. It does not necessarily make them bad people.

In regards to the gagnsta comment I have heard callers make that comment several times. When I first heard it I was totally taken aback but the show went on without a beat. Without the host ( I believe it was Shultz) calling them on it. As far as the dude thing I think Jon was just in his element. I raised an eyebrow but I would not consider it racist or racially insensitive. Just Jon in his element trying to be cool. I think it was just an age thing.

One other thing I notice is that people are quick to say that black people play the race card in regards to this president. The race card slogan comes from a place of racism. In the UK, during the 60's, when a conservative was trying to gain votes by using racism to gin up his base. I never understood why people in the United States thought it was appropriate to use that slogan, seeing where it came from.

[political_Dem]

55. Thank you for saying out loud what a lot of folks are thinking.

Everytime the issue of race is brought up with this subject matter, people will either bully you into silence or pretend it isn't happening.

It's getting to the point that you can't even share anything positive about Mr. Obama without being bullied for expressing your opinion.

The most sickening thing about this is the abnormally high expectations some have for Mr. Obama along with the assertion that he's "nothing but a servant" or an "employee". What is so derogatory about that is that those two descriptions are as racially coded as some of the other overtly insulting things I've heard and read said about Mr. Obama.

Yes, people do have criticisms about policy. I even have my thoughts about certain issues that pertain to my interest. But I think some of the criticism aims to be racially coded because it directly is aimed at taking away the humanity, power and dignity of a Black man who happens to be in one of the most powerful positions in the world.

Simply because white privilege is used as a particular lens to view the POTUS, Mr. Obama is simply not allowed to have his own policies, ways of conducting business or even his own thoughts. He can't even have a particar world view because to some white folks, that would be too much power for a man of color to have.

If Mr. Obama takes a small step to even assert himself, the blowback is a hundred times greater. He can't simply be autonomous or someone in the dominant culture gets mad.

So what do some in the dominant culture do when they feel subordinated by a person of color in a higher position? They get angry, frustrated and revolt.

Just to disagree on policy alone isn't enough. They have to continue their relentless task of cutting everything about Mr. Obama down until he isn't a threat to the supremacy of white privilege anymore.

To some, the "threat" to their societal privilege ends when Mr. Obama is primaried and loses. Hell. Any candidate will do (even some questionable choices) as long as that "Black man" isn't in office anymore. Then, America can get back to business as usual.

That's why I believe that this anger isn't simply against policy. Instead it is a struggle of supremacy, power and keeping things status quo racially in America.

Lastly, it amazes me that with the attention paid to bullying and its negative effects the last few months that some of its biggest anti-harrassment proponents turn around and not only roughly treat the POTUS; they also target those who support and give dignity to the national leader.

[AspenRose]

74. I appreciate your sharing those thoughts.

Seriously. Thank you.

[political_Dem]

81. You are very welcome.

:hug:

[quakerboy]

97. I have a question.

I see some of what you are saying in action, although I would say mainly and most strongly from the Right. But I have a question

What would you say to those who's gripe is that President Obama is NOT asserting himself, who believe that the President appears to be acting in fear of blow back, rather than as an autonomous leader of a country?

[political_Dem]

103. I'd say that some have a problem with cultural understanding.

Mr. Obama has a different way of doing things. Some folks have balked at this style, even saying he "didn't do anything". The problem here is that some of the comments are viewed with a cultural lens that dismisses behaviors foreign to the "status quo" of the dominant culture.

Although there is a strict protocol and tradition that goes along with the POTUS, the wider culture has to realize that Mr. Obama is going to lead in his own manner and not the way that white privilege views leadership roles.

And no, these hostile behaviors don't just come from the right; they come from the left with the same amount of vehemence too.

[quakerboy]

110. Does that apply to anyone

with a critique of or disagreement with the president?

Are there none with, for instance, a legitimate general unhappiness with the whole political landscape, who might justifiably believe that the President (The current, the prior, or the one before that) represents that system, and therefore be unhappy with him regardless of race? I would tend to believe that a decent portion of the "non dominant" culture might be in exactly that situation. Thus the most recent election where so many didn't bother to show up and vote, or even voted against what common sense would tend to indicate as a course of wisdom.

Or for instance, where I would place myself. I feel that President Obama Presented himself as one thing during the campaign, but has acted in ways contrary to that after taking office. I strongly believe that I would feel this way regardless of the presidents race. I have the same complaints of President Obama as I do looking back on President Clinton. And barring some sort of real drastic changes in the status quo of the dominant culture, as you phrased it, I expect I will likely have the same issues with the next Democratic president as well.

While it is clear to me that race has played a huge part in the opposition to and hatred of President Obama, I do not feel that it is fair to assert that every one with any disagreement with the President is basing it on a cultural difference, with the inference being that these disagreements are therefore invalid.

[political_Dem]

116. There are several things to consider when answering your question.

1) Everybody, regardless of their societal position views persons and the environment around them through a particular cultural and racial lens. Race and culture is part of one's identity. The problem with white privilege is that the ways of white people have been adopted as the defacto cultural norm. Therefore, it is rendered "invisible" because the dominant influence in society has always been white cultural norms and behaviors. As such, persons who don't identify with white cultural (and racial) norms are thought to be "on the margins" of society by those who adopt "mainstream culture".

(If you can, please read "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" by Dr. Peggy McIntosh. A white professor from Wellesley, she discusses how cultural identity, race and power intersect when one views the world. )

There are situations (via empathy and understanding that crosses cultural lines) where one can defy those earlier influences, but that depends on how the person chooses to use his awareness of the world around him or her. In some cases, this transcendence has to do with social justice.

2) Being that one uses all their influences (racial, cultural and otherwise) to make decisions and develop one's point of view, the choices that a person makes corresponds with the social development they had. Therefore, you can't just say that one makes a choice "regardless of race, culture or influence". Although you say you don't, you truly are because it is part of your identity.

3)Thus, how people view Mr. Obama falls under these lines. You, like myself and everyone else, views the POTUS in a particular way. A person employs their political, cultural, racial, environmental and social influences to determine what they think of the man, his performance as Leader of the Free World and his importance to this country. So, all of these influences help shape a complex picture of the man depending on one's point of view.

With that being said, here's my take on your question:

Is it possible to make political decisions about a politician regardless of race? Could a person simply not use race in their perceptions about a politician? Anything is possible in an ideal world. But for that to happen, a person would have to be in solitary confinement without any human connection whatsoever.

[quakerboy]

117. I appreciate you continuing to discuss this with me.

I have not read that particular book. I will add it to my "to acquire" list, but realistically, given that that list is filling a whole page, in 7 point font at this time, and the 2 shelves of "acquired, now read it", its going to be a while. However, I have read several that I would guess contain similar themes, which have had a lot of influence on my thinking.

I take your point that we are with our influences, not able to be separated from them. At the same time, I think that the level of awareness of those influences effects how much power they exert over our choices and our beliefs. And I strongly believe that there are some objective things that render cultural context largely irrelevant. Ie starving people need food, regardless of caste, class, or financial history.

I also tend to believe that to some extent, things have to be viewed from within the "dominant" structure. From a practical aspect, purely because it is the dominant structure. Otherwise, one cannot hope to practically achieve a good end result within that structure. And unless one has found a way to overthrow that structure, we are all to some extent stuck within it, no?

But setting that aside for a moment to get back to the core of what I was originally asking

Is it possible for people to have a valid criticism of a president who may be coming from a cultural identity other than their own?

Or alternately, is it not possible for someone askew from that "dominant white norm" to have a valid criticism of another person who they perceive to have assimilated into the dominant structure too fully to do the work of challenging it, without gaining the benefit of changing it from within?

[political_Dem]

118. You are quite welcome. This is a fascinating discussion. :)

I'm sorry that a reply was a long time coming. However, your questions were quite fascinating.

To talk about the experiences that go beyond one's identity, they do exist. That would be the idea of the "collective experience" we have as human beings existing within a society (Jung). However, collective experiences can only go so far--especially when it has to do with one's influences and identity within a given societal system.


Without further ado, here goes in giving my reply to the issues you raised....

1)You posed a question concerning a person existing within the dominant culture, having to learn about its ways and whether it was possible for them to subvert the system.

Yes. There are a plethora of theorists from Angela Davis to Edward Said who discuss this very phenomenon. In fact, for a person in the margins to gain autonomy within a dominant system, some theorize that one must dismantle the power system "using the master's tools". In this manner, a person could run for office. Or, they could lobby for a bill that protects people on the margins. They could even form a group that lobbies on a specific issue. These are a few of many ways to do it.

Other ways of breaking down the system is exposing the corrupt influences of the power system and its social relations with its subjects. (Michel Foucault). That would concern the issue of activism and protest. The main issue is using truth as a form of power.

2)You asked whether it was possible for a person from one cultural identity to give a valid criticism of a President who is from another:

Of course. People do it everyday. However, it depends on who receives the message. Also it deals with whether the receivers either belongs or is knowledgeable about the cultures of the President or the speaker to interpret the message as valid or not. This is where all the societal influences on a person's identity come into play. How well the speaker and the receiver of the message knows about other cultures (including that of the POTUS) depends on how such a message will be interpreted. Therefore, the exchange of information in such a setting can grow quite complicated. Exchanging information is just like the kid's game of "Telephone" in which a simple utterance can be changed based on how the listener receives the message via the sum of their experiences.

3)Lastly, you asked that if a person who doesn't totally follow the "white dominant norms" to give a valid criticism about a person who has fully assimilated into that system:

Again, yes. Lots of people do it everyday. However, that would depend how the speaker does not subscribe to the "white dominant norms" in a given society. It would also depend on the person's point of view regarding assimilated society. On one hand, you could be talking about Emo/Goth culture. On the other hand, you could be discussing the Untouchables in India.

It has to do with a person's identity, experiences, influences, politics and environment. Thus, how the the message was transmitted and received plays into its interpretation. There are many factors that determine the validity, idea and weight of the answer. That's why one person could find such a message offensive while another could treat it as gospel.

Consequently, there aren't easy answers to this pertinent issue. That's why many philosophers, academics and theorists have studied and produced a body of work about communication, power relations and societal influences. However, I can tell that you have strong principles in trying to work at finding what truth, justice and power means to you. It's all about the communication of ideas and how one uses them in their daily life to get towards a deeper understanding of the world. That's why learning and empathizing with other cultures is rather important in that determination. It creates a sense of greater awareness than just being isolated under the influences of a particular set of information and behaviors.

As for the books that you have yet to read? Join the club. ;). Since I love exploring different theoretical ideas, there an many texts that are waiting for me when I find the time to read them. So don't feel bad.

I appreciate your questions and observances. I believe that the exchange of ideas in this manner is an effective way to develop understanding. :)

[Number23]

100. I see that sentiment every damn day on this web site.

Posters saying that Obama is "their EMPLOYEE." That he "works for them" as if he's Rufus the damn trash man. No awareness whatsoever of how they sound when they say something so stupid.

The president does not work for us, he REPRESENTS us as Americans. He goes before corporations, foreign governments, etc. and gets things done on our behalf. All 300+ damn million of us. Liberal, progressive, conservative, independent, moderate. Super-informed, super-uninformed and every damn thing in between.

They have to continue their relentless task of cutting everything about Mr. Obama down until he isn't a threat to the supremacy of white privilege anymore.

Many will deny until they are blue in the face but what you've said is the truth.

[political_Dem]

102. The constant reference to Mr. Obama as an "experiment" and "employee" frustrated me to no end.

I thought the same way you did except I felt that they treated Mr. Obama as if he were beneath them. They give every other President (even W.) the dignity of the office. However, the current POTUS is treated no better than a slave. And then, there was always someone who would defend this terminology knowing damn well it was offensive and racially coded.

That's why I appreciate everything that you said. Your perspective and many others who are aghast and perturbed by this behavior help solidify the proof against those who would like to treat this abhorrent behavior as a figment of everyone's imagination.

The sad and almost serio-comical aspect of those who defiantly fight against being called out is that they truly do fingerwag and lecture you as if you're a bad dog who must receive a swat on the behind and is told to sit in a corner.

After all, their indignance ahd hostility only provides even more truth that their slander against the POTUS is not benign nor innocent. Anyone who defends Mr. Obama is seen in the same light as they treat the POTUS: an individual the taunters must "put in their place" because they too are "beneath them" for supporting a person of color in a powerful position.

After all, between some white folks and their entitlement is a Black man who is the Leader of the Free World and his supporters. Shut them all up and the support doesn't get heard. Continue to spread negativities about Obama to the point that everyone despises him? White privilege stays in tact. America is saved.

It was some of the disturbing threads and comments I read that caused me to write the piece above. Some of the things said about Mr. Obama really caused some to show their true colors. That some persons said these disturbing things and acted indifferently to the feelings and observances of myself and other folks of color, says a lot about the mindset of the attacks on Mr. Obama's character.

That is why I am sick and tired of the divisiveness. It serves no purpose. :(

[Number23]

104. Beautiful post. There are many who would accuse you of using the dreaded "race card"

because of what you're saying. (Coincidentally, these are also the same folks who endlessly "observe" that the only reason black people voted for Obama was because he was black, so there you go.)

Even in this thread, you can see the DETERMINATION to negate the OP's feelings and those of every single person who supports/agrees with her. The OP is black as are most of the people agreeing with her, but that doesn't mean anything to the people tearing her down even though these many of these same folks love to pretend that they care so much about our community. Apparently, that "caring concern" only extends as long as we do what they want us to and believe what they want us to believe. The good news is that these people are so transparent that everyone but the truly blind amongst us can see right through them now.

The irony is that many of the same folks basically telling a black person "you're too stupid to know what's going on in this country" are also the same ones who can't scream loud enough about how they admire MLK, worship at the altar of Malcolm, and they just ADORE Jesse Jackson. It's like "see, I'm not really a racist. There are some black people I like! Yeah, two of them are dead and the other has no chance of ever, EVER being an elected official outside of a very small area, but I still like them!" These brothers are all gods to these people because they were marginalized. Because Obama has become a part of and has in many ways BESTED the system that they despise (probably because they were never able to become a part of it themselves), he is somehow WORSE than the 4 billion white people who made the system, power the system, control the system, and benefit the most from it. It's bullshit.

[political_Dem]

109. Thank you. Your post is just as spectacularly and very intelligently stated.

Furthermore, Number 23, you hit the nail on the head in lifting the sheet on the hypocrisy that occurs.

Even though you, myself and other Black folks have constantly related our experiences and our views when it comes to how we see politics and the POTUS, it is like talking to a brick wall. The more one points out the truth of the situation the more some of the respondents get all flabbergasted and furious as they protest that "they and so many others aren't racist."

And yes, the first thing flung during such a "debate" (and I say it loosely) is the accusation of the race card. It is meant to trivialize and demean the experiences of Black folks and other folks on the margins of society. It is even thought that throwing out the race card accusation is the final arbiter that bring about a final trump card and that the accuser has "won the debate".

Sadly, some white folks pointing the finger and accusing you of the race card isn't going to make the issues of race and racism go away. Mentioning Dr. King, Malcolm X, Jesse Jackson or any other Black dignitary they know is not going to smooth things over. These actions by some white folks only demonstrate cognitive dissonance in terms of the cultural and racial experiences of people of color. Most of it comes with the feeling of superiority in the insistence that only they are right.

Furthermore, the acts above also convey an inability to listen and learn as well. It's as if some folks from the dominant culture put their fingers in their ears while shouting, "La-la-la-la, I can't hear you!!!!!!!l". And then, in a final act of pent up fury, they shout, "Not all of us are racist!!!!!!!". Then, the lecture comes which almost always tell you how offended they are that you aren't assimilating to their point of view.

What the inability to listen and the drive to negate the experiences of our community demonstrates is a lack of comfort of being in a societal position other than one of white privilege and supremacy. Because of white privilege and power, the speaker feels so entitled that they don't have to listen to the experiences of persons they intentionally marginalize. Yet, they feel they know all about the experiences of people of color.

By extension, I feel that these same persons are uncomfortable and are even angry that Mr. Obama because he holds so much power that he is in a position to decide the fate of this country. And because he is in the position (and not a white man) to decide the fate of not only people of color, but white people too, it produces feelings of explosive anger that is often projected toward not only Black people, but others who support the POTUS.

The tragedy here is that because some white folks are so busy finger wagging and lecturing people of color for speaking out, they miss the bigger picture of why our country is in this dismal mess. Race, power and social relations is part of it, amongst other pressing things dragging down our nation. Another irony is that when we--as a nation--have a chance to change things for the better, the lure of keeping a societal position of entitlement is so strong that they are not only willing to screw themselves but the rest of us too.

I'd like to thank you for having this enlightening conversation with me. This is a time to exchange ideas and yours are certainly awesome. This is the type of discussion I crave. :hug:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

82. I'm a black woman and I've caught myself exclaiming that Nancy Pelosi is "gangsta."

I didn't think of it as a racially insensitive or disrespectful thing, only because I believe that intent is important. However, I see what you're saying. It's probably not cool to tell the president to "man up," or "get gangsta," and definitely not refer to him as "dude." As someone else said, people just feel that they can be disrespectful to him and not even know or realize that they're being disrespectful.

[Jennicut]

63. He was a compromise candidate for many of them, simply put.

Nothing wrong with that but it is what it is.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

80. The disrespect is amazing! I've never seen anything like it.

Bill Clinton is always playing the victim, crying that the Republicans treated him just as bad. It's a lie! The Republicans never treated him as bad as they do this president. And in fact, because they hate Obama so much, I'm hearing them now lavish praise on Bill Clinton, suggesting that Obama be more like Bill--a DLCer. They love Hillary Clinton, primarily because they are trying to divide the Democratic Party.

[spin]

6. We seem to have an excess of hate in our country ..

probably why we find ourselves unable to solve our problems.

[Top Cat]

7. I'm also confused it feels like freeperville sometimes on DU lately.

[angee_is_mad]

10. can't blame it all on the freepers

some of it are progressives behind keyboards.

[Exilednight]

11. Progressives and liberals do not hate Obama. We just believe that he ..............

is not living up to his campaign promises and needs to be reminded that he can, and should, do better. A better word would be disappointed.

Now, with that being said, the disappointment in Obama seems to be a regional thing. I currently live on Long Island, NY, and I often travel back home to Chicago. I also travel to PA and NJ on a regular basis.

In Chicago, I've noticed that many liberals and progressives still overwhelming support Obama. Here on the Island, not so much, same with PA. Oddly enough, in NJ, many liberals and progressives still support him.

Another explanation could be summed up as "the company we keep". People often seek out other people with similar points of view. During Obama's election, I was part of five different political groups. After about a year into Obama's presidency I decided to leave two of the groups due to ideological differences and lack of criticism of the administrations policy.

[CJCRANE]

13. Bloggers and messageboard posters are self-appointed

and self-opinionated.

For better or worse, they don't reflect the proportion of views in the real world.

[MrsCorleone]

14. No complaints from me!

Obama's policies have helped my family, friends, neighbors, and fellow small biz owners immensely.

[BlueCaliDem]

20. Everyone I know loves Obama, too. We're a small 40-person progressive group

that understands what he's up against {mostly because I'm the one finding articles and pieces for the rest when they begin to doubt}, and damn, it's only been LESS than two years!

But I think you're right about his skin color. When poll after poll show, that the ONLY White demographic group that voted for Obama were young people {18-28} it does support the skin color theory.

Everyone I know here in my community, my group, in the upper echelons of Progressive society in SoCal, support President Obama, including this Progressive.

[Pirate Smile]

21. I'm not discounting race as an issue but it is important to note that Dems never win the white vote.

A lot of the reason for the numbers is just being a Democrat.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

38. that is actually untrue

He also got a majority of the white gay vote. Fat lot of good it did us too.

[jonnyblitz]

22. a big UNREC for implying YET AGAIN that DU critics are racist.

of course it has NOTHING to do with his center-right positions on all the issues :sarcasm:

[WorseBeforeBetter]

30. Or that anyone critical of Obama is racist.

His mother is white and I'm critical of his policies, does that make me half-racist?

[bigwillq]

34. Yes, you half-racist MOFO!

:rofl:

[Dr Fate]

24. You are right- the rest of the voting public whole heartedly supports our centrist polices.

The electorate is still far-center, thank goodness.

Dont worry about Liberals who complain about Obama. Liberals are just a small portion of the party.

You are right- the rest of the voting public whole heartedly supports our centrist polices. It's only the netroots that are complaining.

[OnyxCollie]

95. At first I thought you forgot the sarcasm tag

but then I saw your DLC avatar and realized you were serious.

"You are right- the rest of the voting public whole heartedly supports our centrist polices. It's only the netroots that are complaining."

Yes, the rest of the voting public loves centrist policies. Ignore the netroots. They are small and insignificant.

BTW, how did that midterm election work out for ya?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Milo_Bloom]

26. A black thing?

So the fact that we got two years of weak, nearly useless legislation has nothing to do with it?

It's "a black thing".

Get real.

[sally cat]

70. Agreed. Progressives are racists? And he's half white.

[Milo_Bloom]

72. I think it is the white half I don't like.

;)

[sally cat]

73. Funny.

[CTLawGuy]

28. 86% of liberal democrats support him

nt

[Azathoth]

29. Because they, like most right-wingers, believed he was a crypto-socialist

Most liberals and moderates who supported him still do.

[Exilednight]

31. So which is it ...........

As a liberal I've been told that I believe that Obama is right-wing shill, now I'm being told that I believe he's a crypto-socialists.

[Pamelita]

32. I say you exaggerate

I know many in the net roots that do not hate President Obama. Why does it have to be "hate"?

[Luminous Animal]

33. Haters. If memory serves, tossing out the accusation "haters" was a tactic of the right

when characterizing Bush critics on the left. The accusation is a ploy to destroy substantive discussion about policy and issues.

[bigwillq]

37. Hello.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[muffin1]

46. Absolutely. It isn't *hate*.

More like profound disappointment.

Welcome to DU! :)

[Skittles]

58. CORRECT

I'd be happy as all get out if Obama turned around and started behaving like a true progressive. I was very impressed with his Supreme Court picks but alas, that was the last time I was impressed.

[Exilednight]

62. It's interesting that you bring up his SCOTUS picks ...........

On Friday night, C-Span was broadcasting the audio of the recent Arizona school voucher program. Alito and Scalia asked the questions that I expected from right leaning judges. On the other hand, I was surprised by the tone of voice and questions that Kagan and Sotomayor were asking.

I found it quiet surprising, to say the least.

[Skittles]

66. tell me more, please

what was the gist of the question / tone of the gals?

[Exilednight]

89. Off the top of my head ........

Sotomayor was questioning the validity of the lawsuit and under what grounds the suit was actually filed. Kagan questioned how it was a use of tax payer money to take deductions for private religious schools. Both women sounded quite aggressive towards the plaintiff, both women's tone sounded eerily similar to Alito's.

Ginsburg sounded quite sympathetic towards the plaintiff. Her questions were centered around whether or not the groups that offered the scholarships took religious affiliation into account when picking applicants.

[Skittles]

90. er..........WTF

will research :mad:

[Exilednight]

92. I went to c-span to look for the audio, but ..........

I couldn't find it. I am probably not using the right search terms. I have to be honest, I was geeking out listening to the arguments. I was unaware that they allowed post-audio transmission of oral arguments. I hope c-span does this more often.

[VMI Dem]

39. Unrec.

[demmiblue]

40. Unrec...n/t

[pinto]

42. Hi angee. What's the take in African-American communities on Obama at this point, generally?

I don't mean a 2012 primary challenge or any of that - that's down the road. But opinions you hear at this point in his first term. I'm assuming, from your post, that the overwhelming support he garnered from African-Americans, across the economic spectrum, in 2008 remains for the most part. Plus some mid-term assessments. Is that what you hear in your community political activity? Thanks.

[Steely_Dan]

43. I Could Not Be A Bigger Critic...

of the President. In fact, I have refrained from posting on the subject because I feel that there is enough criticism flying around.

As disappointed as I am, I do NOT HATE THE PRESIDENT.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheKentuckian]

48. Of course there are some race issues but seeing the people that ran from Hillary

like their hair was on fire are the most put out, you might think a little deeper on some fairly substantive policy differences.

I'm mad at President Obama for the same reason I've been mad for many years. I could give a shit about the face. I ain't racist against myself and am no Tom or Ruckus.

Most black folks are poor and working class and for such folks Obama's neoliberal policies are toxic. We need no more trickle down, fuck the environment, screw the workers, free trade, imperial, feed the rich by stealing from the poor, union busting, anti-civil liberties politicians playing pissboy for the corporations.

[ibegurpard]

52. yup...i was one of the "run from Hillary" voters

because what I expected from her was what I ended up getting from Obama.

[Warren Stupidity]

49. cough (bullshit) cough nt.

[PurityOfEssence]

50. Religion, Wars, Nuclear Power, Coal, Wall Street Complicity, Health Care Mess, Serial Conciliation

For starters

[zulchzulu]

51. If you are civics-challenged, you're bound not to really understand how politics works

Some people are just whiners. Some people are just lazy.

It's as though a president goes to Washington and he or she is supposed to have the powers of a dictatorial monarch with a willing media.

[jberryhill]

54. Yup

[ProudDad]

68. Most Progressives are not surprised...

just disappointed that like FDR he couldn't have been at least a tiny victim of unintended consequences...

You've GOT to work on that black and white thinking process and over the top rhetorical flourish... :shrug:

[ibegurpard]

53. The answers have been SCREAMED IN YOUR FACE for months now

you just choose to brush them off

[political_Dem]

56. K and R. Thank you, Angee for asking the question.

I appreciate you expressing yourself on this matter because it is talked about in many circles. The anger and hatred against Mr. Obama is rather appalling, to say the least. There needs to be a discussion on how race, privilege and power intersects in this debate about the POTUS.

People will try to laugh this issue off, but it is very serious business--especially in this caustic climate.

Civility has definitely been lost. :(

[PurityOfEssence]

64. So, the ONLY problems people have with this man stem from race, privilege and power?

That's offensive, and has been a tiresome refrain from some corners since he stepped onto the national stage.

Mercifully, this kind of finger-pointing and self-pity isn't the norm; the norm is bad enough: he's a deeply honorable, chess-playing, mega-genius whose magnificence just can't get through to some of us lunkheads. That's bad enough. The constant keening from apologists is that he really does have the commoners' interests at heart, and is just deftly maneuvering for position, whereupon he'll suddenly tack into the warm lefty wind of decency and fulfill our every wistful longing.

This is crap. The man is an ultramoderate corporatist who is naive enough to think that enabling the ongoing corporate stranglehold on our lives is either necessary, inescapable, or good. Couple this with an actor-like need to be loved by everyone and the extreme political amateurishness of not confronting those who would destroy him, and it's just a colossal mess.

The easy dismissal that those of us who have EXTREME problems with him are simply closet racists or the beneficiaries of privilege and power is ugly and vicious. For shame.

I had huge alarms go off in my head when he sucked up to Religion Incorporated in the fall of 2006, and the ugliness of playing the race and religion card with the "Forty Days of Faith and Family" Snake-Oil creepiness in South Carolina in October of '07 made me thoroughly disgusted. His distancing himself from the questionable messages in that latter display of wickedness showed him to be opportunistic and rather unprincipled, and it's just gotten worse since then. His repeated distancing himself from anything controversial while portraying himself and allowing himself to be portrayed as the stalwart champion-at-the-fore shows serious character issues, and the serial noncommittal nature of hiding behind Congress on such things as Health Care and Financial Reform are stupefying in their craven blockheadedness.

Go ahead, help others who blame his self-wrought setbacks on racism; that's just going to further alienate already disgusted leftists and accomplish nothing. Those who need to feed their self-pity for being downtrodden should at least think about the rest of humanity before skewing reality to justify their own bigotry.

Mercifully, most of those who blindly defend this man's every action don't fall back on such a primal excuse, but it's not a time for much pride in our ilk on this side of the aisle.

[political_Dem]

79. Yes. A lot of it does stem from race, privilege and power.

Just because you disagree with these concepts exploring why the hostility against the POTUS is occuring doesn't make them any less important.

These concepts still occur whether you and the other naysayers "don't see it".

I get it that you are blind and dismissive regarding the issues that affect a number of citizens in America.

But the silver lining here is that your impassioned inability to entertain other views regarding what had happened since Mr. Obama took office adds to the evidence that there is a severe disconnect and lack of empathy when it comes to entertaining the issues of marginalized groups and people of color.

Take heart. You aren't alone. The Teabaggers also don't like to engage the concept of race, power and privilege because the only thing they are concentrated on is "taking their country back.". Funny how this need to reclaim entitlement and supremacy is not just relegated to the RW. Some of the left wing fall into this camp as well. :(

[ProudDad]

69. Civility on this contenent was lost

in 1492...

[Metric System]

57. It's not a black thing. They hated Hillary. Then candidate Obama benefited from it at the time.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

76. That is how it happened. I was here too.

I also remember some of his current STRONG defenders having issues with Hillary being too centrist.

Now those same people get upset when Barack is criticized for being too centrist. They were all too happy to go along with that tag for Hillary.

Facts are facts.

:shrug:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

83. Obama and Hillary are BOTH centrists, but Hillary is slightly to the right of Obama.

The thing that pisses me off about my fellow liberals is that they somehow bought into the false meme that Obama was/is a liberal. He was not! Had they done their homework rather than fall for the okey-doke, they would have known this and not be so angry.

Neither Obama nor Hillary were top on my list, and in fact, it took me a long time to get on board with the Obama train, but the only reason I could never support HIllary is because she is too conservative for me. I don't hate her. I hate her policies. And I'm beginning to really hate Obama's policies as well.

[bigwillq]

91. Good post.

:thumbsup:

[zenprole]

59. Good showing here...

...for the forces of reason. Obama's a major disappointment and deserves all the progressive criticism he gets for policy cowardice on several fronts.

OP's like these trigger two pet peeves:
1) the idea that candidate Obama didn't stoke the overwhelmingly progressive desires of those that ended up voting for him (not me!).
2) that, in the wake of this gross manipulation, there is no valid criticism of his performance. We need olympic-sized swimming pools full of substantive change and instead get a few teaspoons worth.

Obama is underachieving on an epic scale, and I'm glad that pointing this out on DU provokes censorship. It must be the right nerve.

Continue the criticism, especially here; some call it democracy.

[polichick]

60. Bogus claim - people who use the word "hate" are lamely trying to deflect...

Net root progressives care about policies and will call out anyone who stands in the way of or fails to fight for progressive policies - period.

[Mass]

61. Dont know, but I dont understand either why you hate anybody who disagrees with Obama on anything.

(or may be your premise that people who disagree with you hate Obama is as faulty as mine). Anyway, UNREC.

[ProudDad]

67. Flame bait...

Very few Progressives (if any) "hate" Obama...

Most Progressives hate the fact that he completely sold out to the worst elements of the USAmerican capitalist elite...

(edited to remove snarkiness)

[sally cat]

71. You seem mad about something.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

75. The other day, Mike Papantonio suggested Hillary. I don't get it.

Hillary is to the RIGHT of Obama! There is NOTHING about Hillary Clinton--former self-avowed Goldwater Girl--that is liberal.

If liberals are upset that Obama isn't liberal, then that's the wrong solution to their issues.

[quakerboy]

98. That has been baffling me as well

Not just him, Ive seen it hinted at here as well.

The only thing that I can think is that perhaps some feel we are going to have to have a centrist to placate the money in the party, and believe that HRC would be a more effective and "powerful" centrist?

[LWolf]

84. They don't. They oppose his "post partisan" neoliberal policies.

That's not the same thing as hate.

Outside my computer, I know a broad range of people: those who support him, those who don't, and those who will vote for him while holding their nose.

[Jakes Progress]

88. You so funny.

The drama. The pouty outrage. The trite concept. The limited view of the world. The silly.

[LoZoccolo]

96. It took me a long time to realize this, but I think I know.

Either:

People aren't really that dissatisfied, but they think they can get more by making it look like a lot of people are, so they use the Internet to create that impression because it gives them the power to make a public spectacle.

Or:

They are dissatisfied and come to the Internet as some sort of shortcut to participating in democracy. Instead of going out and getting more people to support what they support, they think they can scare the elected officials into giving in to their demands by using the loud megaphone that the Internet offers.

[Number23]

101. Angee, you need to bookmark this thread

Welcome to the New DU. Even though there is very little "new" about the responses you are getting to your questions.

[niceypoo]

105. "Hell, maybe it's a black thing"

When you accuse Democrats of 'hating' Barack Obama because he is black, you deserve every rotten vegetable thrown back at you.

IMHO, of course.

[Number23]

106. Is your name "angee?" No? Then why are you responding to me?

And Angee, the person to whom I addressed my post, has nothing to be ashamed of with her OP. It's many of the responses within that should be ashamed.

[angee_is_mad]

108. Hey Numbers 23

thanks for the support.
I tend to ignore online attacks, cause they wouldn't have the balls to say it to my face. Silly people.

[ljm2002]

107. Have you stopped beating your wife yet? n/t

[krabigirl]

111. I don't hate Obama. I voted for him, but I didn't support him during the primaries.

I was a Kucinich supporter. However, he has disappointed me. Good to know that you are happy, though.

[Beacool]

112. What, the net roots are unhappy with Obama?

You mean those same people at Daily Kos, Huff, etc., who despised the Clintons and did everything in their power to thwart Hillary's candidacy in 2008 have now soured on Obama too? Let me start laughing right now.

:rofl:

Well, you know the saying: beware what you wish for, you might get it!!!

:shrug:

[seaglass]

113. I think there are very few who "hate" him though there are many who are disappointed

with his presidency.

Do you accept that there are those on the left who are extremely unhappy/disappointed with Obama's leadership and policies who are not racist?

[Vinca]

114. I don't think anyone "hates" the POTUS.

Some of us sure hate his watered down policies, though. I only hope I live to 2012 so I can vote for him again.

[NorthCarolina]

115. "Hate"? "it's a black thing"? Epic Fail and a big unrec. nt