ike kay August 31st, 2008 3:18 pm writes, "Wake up children!"

-the assumption is that not settling for Republican-lite is immature and arrogant. The assumption is that Democrats should get a free pass on selling us out and we MUST vote for them or we are childish. Democrats can support war, we MUST vote for them or we are silly. Democrats don't uphold the Constitution but we MUST vote for them or we are babies. Democrats can protect lawbreaking Republicans, that's okay we MUST vote for them or we need to grow up. Democrats can behave like Republicans, that's okay as long as they aren't registered Republicans it's we MUST vote for them or we are immature.

The reason we MUST settle for the lesser-evil instead of good progressive candidates is because Democrats don't want them. Democrats could have chosen Kucinich which is far superior to Obama but they didn't. They settled on the corporate, status-quo, big business platitude-speaking, opportunist Obama, because he talked to them about what they wanted to hear. He painted himself as an anti-war candidate and promised to filibuster against the FISA capitulation, talked of "change" and "hope".

Obama lied and the Dems like Ike Kay gave him a pass. Obama probably knew that and took them for granted. The smallest crumb off the table should do for them. And it does.

Now who is the adult and who is the child insisting on buying an inferior product because the marketers told him it was good for them and it was better than some other inferior product. When presented with inferior and unreliable products I don't buy them. I don't throw my money away.

If enough people acted like grownups and stopped buying inferior products the companies that make them would go out of business and only companies producing good products would survive. My guess is that Democrats buy inferior products because they like them or why else would they buy them?

Very difficult to read these American political opinions for the most part! All this griping here as usual with your flights into the never-land of Peter Pan politics and all here who would like to be children consumers in this liberal so-called progressive blog.

So many hoping for the choices that are not supported by the political machine. Yes look in the mirror people, except for a few who see the historic human choice in this bigoted land!

Mr. ex-prisoner of war, showed us his desire to pick someone extremely intelligent if he dies, we see his choices clearly. I hear the dream-merchants here in the face of the this rising debacle, who want nothing but purity of thought and an end to the political meanderings of this so-called democracy that is so immature.

The reality of this world pits the American dream now become the the western worlds dream and the world's nightmare, represented by both political parties and supported by your 401ks. Lets stop the nonsense people out there. There is only one choice in this election, to take a chance on a little change represented by a black man who will try within his limited power to change the way business is done and someone who will continue business as usual! Obama can only do so much he is part of the machine and the machine chose him, Nader or anyone else can do nothing!

This a a one party system if you want more choice try changing it to a parliamentary system. Good luck! That will happen after we are under thirty feet of water. In this system, the way it is; this is reality not a Disney Land show, never mind, perhaps it is? You have a single possibility of a little change rather than no change at all!

Wake up children! There is only one choice, like it or not the other option is no change at all in this warming hell of climate change your choice is to try to stop the oncoming end of the human race or allow it to continue like the snowball that is gone! You political purists out there are supercilious silly.

We are a nation of frogs. We have sat complacently in warming waters until now, we're cooked.

I watched a grand total of about 10 minutes of the marketing campaign called the DNC. I heard that every time Obama mentioned Afghanistan the crowds grew quiet. It's no secret most Americans want an end to war. But war is what the major parties will give us, like it or not.

We get war because war and domination of energy rich regions like the ME are in the best interests of the rich and powerful that stand to profit. This is all done under the facade of "Liberty and Democracy" for all. Damn the people.

We frogs get no choice when it comes to war. We can have a choice of skin color or gender but not much of a choice in policies, especially when it comes to war.

It's a sad day when Democrats have been so cooked that they support a candidate that promises to give them what they don't want. There is no choice on war.

In order for an antiwar person to vote for a prowar candidate a portion of the brain must be shut off. That is the portion that is cooked.

Mcain wants war in Iraq, Obama wants war in Afghanistan. Coke or Pepsi?

Sir Thomas Moore,
The fact that you asked me if I was sure about, among others: 6. Obama wants to intensify the war in Afghanistan, tells me you haven't been following closely and the Obama campaign is all smoke and mirrors.

During the primaries Obama hammered Hillary for her vote to go to war. What you may not know is that when asked how he would have voted he said he didn't know.

Obama has repeatedly said the central front in the GWOT is Afghanistan. He recently called for withdrawing two brigades from Iraq and sending them to Afghanistan. He promises to be a more efficient if not ruthless Commander in Chief than the Republicans.

You did say something VERY IMPORTANT: "Some of those things you mention with the services and personnel will have to be done no matter who is elected. Thats reality."

Exactly! US Militarism will continue and not abate regardless of whether we get a White Republican or a Black one. The lines between Democrats and Republicans are blurred, but the policies aren't, more war.
-tailcap

Person of Color is as Person of Color does.

Anyone who has followed the news knows that Obama lied his way to the top. He makes good slogans and bald faced lies. There are many alternatives to voting for a liar. If the voter does not have principles in casting his/her vote, why should the politician have any principles about lying to the voters? Vote for a liar and you will have made your sacred vote meaningless, and at the same time make yourself a slave of a liar.

So many users on here criticize Obama's centrist stances - he is doing what he can do get elected. The election is not the same as being in power! Ultimately the people decide who wants to be president. For better or worse - if Obama moves to the center to appeal to the majority of people - he's giving the people what they want. It's been said tirelessly that people get the government they deserve. In 80% of the country I would disagree with this statement. Iraqi children do not deserve death and misery, nor do Kenyans or the Sudanese for example.

But in America - we have just enough freedoms - we have just enough to make it work. We have just enough to be idealistic - to dream big and make things happen.

So in America there are no excuses. And if you think Obama is less of a person for simply being good at being a "politician" remember, then you are like criticizing a pig at being good at making a mess when he eats. Blame the people of the nation - blame yourself for not getting the message out - before you would blame a politician.

Activism needs a serious overhaul. 80% of Americans are currently umbilical-ly tied to their TV sets. Protesting - for all its intensity - is so easily censored. Gone are the days of the Vietnam style journalism. Has anyone done a study to compare the coverage of Vietnam to the coverage of Iraq? Has anyone made a point to ask why so little is reported from Iraq?

So if Americans are holed up in their homes - and public protest only impresses those in the immediate area - usually in metropolitan areas which are largely progressive anyway - how can Activists reach the rural centers? The minds of those Americans largely indoors?

How? These are questions Activists need to ask themselves. American ingenuity hasn't failed the likes of Ford and Fox News - for better and for WORSE - why shouldn't it fail Activists?

Tony Norman is a kind, proud, and bedazzled African American. Allow me to suggest that his excitement might be better spent on the likes of Barbara Lee, Cynthia McKinney, or John Lewis who are African American office holders or nominees who didn't sell out their people or the rest of America to get where they were.

Poet

Man I've been really disappointed in Tony Norman lately. Talk about being loveblind.

Yes it's nice that we're seeing a non-WASP guy gunning for the title. We NEED more non-WASPS running things.

Obama? Hell, he's a great speaker, seems like a decent guy, he tries to be inclusive, despite the fact that he seems to relate more to wealthy white folk than anyone. But when ya peel the layers off of the onion, I'm seeing a guy who wants to make deals with the corrupt and powerful, a guy who waves the bad finger at Iran and anyone who looks at Israel funny, a guy who apparently wants to enable war profiteers, a guy who from the looks of it wants to ease the "burdens" hedge-fund managers face moreso than the real ones workers and the poor face.

I'm an Obama skeptic, not hater. He would be better than McCain, and I would think he'd be at least slightly more malleable in regards to the will of the people. In other words, if the people raise hell and get on Obama's ass, he might very well bring about a positive change that is far deeper than what he proposes.

Right now, I'm torn between Nader and McKinney, the angry dissheveled old man and the loose cannon. They've got the right ideas though, and even if they don't get elected, they can possibly influence Obama in the right way.

I still don't regret writing in Dennis Kucinich.

Hey, the racism is there. I see it in those who attack Obama and deal with them daily. It pains me more than anyone here will ever know. My heart sinks, and my throat gets tight when I hear racial epithets thrown Obama's way. I am all for breaking the stone of white supremacy, but will things really be all that better and different if we leave Imperialism, Classism, and the Military-Industrial Complex intact?

Who's better?

The white male who is bent towards a perpetual world war that is costly to the rank and file and profitable to the elites he serves?

Or...

The black or biracial (whatever) man who says he cares about and is willing to make small concessions to the rank and file yet makes overtures to the same elites the Old Soldier is unrepentantly in league with?

Give me the old white crankypants and the black lady hothead anyday. At least they each have their respective brainpowers trained precisely on peace, justice, and the healing of our sick planet. The Old Soldier's in a nihilistic trance, and The Audaciously Hopeful One has deliberately poor aim.

Hogwash - written by a brain-washed American. What difference does skin color make if Obama continues the Bush's policy? Yes we Can? Sure we can
- shred our constitution
- continue funding an illegal war
- send more troops to Afghanistan
- spy on Americans
- suport Israel's racist, imperial, colonial and genocidal policy

Yes, a black man can do!!

Arrrrghhhhh !! I don't care if the next President is black/white/female/alien or a slug for that matter !! I just want someone who realizes that killing other people's children to steal their resources is bad !!!!!! WTF is going on with this country !!!! I was yelling at the TV last night when Obama called the Iran war "ill-conceived" and gently suggested the Republicans need to take "responsibility" (or whatever mealy mouthed politically correct words he used). I will not vote for someone who is not yelling that these crimes are atrocious, and they must end !!
I sat and watched him beaming over his beautiful children (and they are precious) but all I could think about was the hundreds of thousand of beautiful children maimed, or dead in our tragic foreign wars. Man, I'm pissed, when will we all get this angry ?!? I'm lost for words....

Since Barack was in Indonesia being raised by an Indonesian Muslim step-father and white mother and had not at this time even met his Kenyan father, I doubt he even thought of himself as an American, let alone African American. At 10 he went to Hawaii to be raised by his white grandparents. Whites in Hawaii were as likely to be discriminated against as blacks in those days, and there were very few blacks in Hawaii.

Most of what Barack learned of the black culture on the mainland and their experiences came from books, magazines, TV and his black communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis (referred to only as Frank in his book Dreams From My Father).

The War on Drugs was perhaps the most devasting thing to happen to African Americans, and yet Obama has as his VP running mate the man who was the leader of this phony war, and has built up a resume of 35 years experience fleecing Americans of all colors. Go figure.

Sir Thomas Moore, writes, "I certainly wouldn't describe him as a militarist though."

-What would you describe him as? An antiwar radical peacenik?

Obama: “And so my job as the next commander in chief is going to be to make a decision what is the right war to fight, and, and how do we fight it?”

Obama: “We’re going to have to provide them with logistical support, intelligence support,” Obama continued. “We’re going to have to have a very capable counterterrorism strike force. We’re going to have to continue to train their Army and police to make them more effective.”

Obama:”Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.”

Obama: “We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator in the Afghan border region…etc.

“Barack Obama is ultimately articulating a position of sustained troop levels in Iraq based on the conditions on the ground and the security of the country,” said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds. “That is the very same position that John McCain has long held.”

1. A vote for Obama will not end the occupation.
2. Obama wants to increase military spending.
3. Obama's advisers want to keep Bush's Defense Secretary Roberts Gates.
4. Obama has wants more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones.
5. Obama wants to add an additional 90,000 troops.
6. Obama wants to intensify the war in Afghanistan.
7. Obama wants to keep over 50,000 troops in Iraq to guard "our" oil.

Obama wants to intensify the war in Afghanistan and picked a strong advocate of the Iraq war in Biden as his V.P. Obama has not denounced military aggression but embraced it. What part of his militarist plans are not clear?

Obama has saber rattled Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and even Russia.

What is not militarist about Obama? He has embraced the concept of the Global War on Terror (GWOT) which is a blueprint for world domination under the guise that any opposition to US domination is a justified reason to exterminate it.

As far as I know the Taliban didn't attack the World Trade Center nor did Iraq. What evidence has Obama provided that we NEED to go fight in Afghanistan? None.

I spent some time in the USA in 1969 and the racist tension at that time was very worrying. So nearly 40 years on we get to this week's big event. I have not used the 'b' word because I do not understand why Obama is described as 'black'. Perhaps someone can explain that for me.

If I were a US voter I would find myself in a predicament. I would love to take the opportunity to vote for Obama and for a major change in US politics. However, Obama's acceptance speech was a great disappointment.

On environment - "I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology, and find ways to safely harness nuclear power".
"I'll help our auto companies re-tool, ....... I'll make it easier for the American people to afford these new cars".
That's just the sort of change that suffering planet earth needs!

On foreign policy - " I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan".
"I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts".
And in the process ensure that the Military Industrial Complex which controls the USA will accept me as its figurehead.

There may have been some positive words on education, health care and taxes but it looks like the 2 big issues will produce more of the same as the Bush years.

Thank you, Tony Norman, for this thoughtful piece!
It was a pleasure to read.

Why vote for a "black" man when I can vote for a black woman? Seriously, why? I only wish it were Barbara Lee. The bravest member of Congress bar none.

If a Democrat had done to the United States over the last eight years what George Wanker Bush has done, the current Democratic nominee would be behind 66 to 33, or 2 to 1 . . . and would richly deserve it. But because a reactionary, even fascist Republican regime did it, they are basically even with the Democrat, or, according to some polls, are even ahead. Doesn't this tell us all something profound? This overwhelmingly right wing, hopelessly fearful and uninformed citizenry will drag their collective knuckles to the voting precincts in November and make yet another jerk-off, know nothing, blood-in-the-eye Republican the next president. And then, as Jack Cafferty of CNN said, the United States will get everything it deserves.

Yes, let us all be proud that racism against black Americans who are rich, elegant and articulate has diminished somewhat. Let us all use a nice mental filter that lets us see and speak only of the good, not the bad. We have succesfully forgotten all our crimes so why stop now. Lets have three cheers for the acceptance of Uncle Tom by the establishment. Institutionalized robbery is now also open to rich black men. Let's call it progress and pat ourselves on the back. Lets also have another beer and eat and eat until we are even fatter. Hurray for good egg uncle Tom......We have finally arrived!!-------lizard

RIC ABRIEU & LITTLE BROTHER & WSW.ORG: Excellent points. There is the glimmer of hope that having lived a bicultural/biracial experience, the politics of ambition & convenience may at times be overrun by something akin to a conscience, a soul. That is something we see NO evidence of in the present administration. This is not to say I would vote for Obama. At the time he won the nomination from Hillary I had higher hopes, but having seen the decline into sell-out after sell-out, his actions have only rendered Nader into something of a prophet in relating that there were no viable differences between the 2 parties due to the influence of big money/lobbies/corporations on the US elections.

Lobbies have increased exponentially, curiously in parallel with the wealth aggregating upwards, as taxes are cut to favor the rich, and CEOS continue to claim more and more profits regardless of the status of the companies they are employed to run.

The pyramid shape has endured the tests of time. What happens when all the money seeks to remain on top? The structure will collapse... as someone said on another thread yesterday (Co MARC, I believe), the fact that the orchestration of a massive surveillance state is underway, that millions are blown on these elaborate election pageants, and that a lot more $ is used to manufacture consent (and marginalize alternative political perspectives) suggests that the elites recognize there are a lot of us, we are dissatisfied, we have justice on our side, and as assets become scarcer, and people hungrier, the potentials for a massive uprising increase. Perhaps they are readying the way with their private Blackwater style forces, and loose laws that blur the line between terrorist and conscientious objector of policies that are heinous and an insult to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We are living in interesting times, all right...

Thomas More August 29th, 2008 3:07 pm writes, "This is exactly what this writer said it was. A very historic moment in our history. Ity may not mean as much to people that weren't allowed to ride in the back of the bus because they weren't black or were made to because they were black."

-Why am I supposed to be proud that a "Black" man became a presidential candidate when on the things that matter most to me, like war, Obama sounds every bit as hawkish as McCain?

I'll remind you that MLK said a person should not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. By this measure I believe MLK would have rejected Obama for being an imperialist militarist server of the interests of the powers that be.

Common Dreams is drinking the Kool-Aid.

No one will ever have to pay attention to our wars, police state, or the policies of our leaders, if in four years we elect the first Chinese-American President, then the first Jewish-American President, then the first Mexican-American President, the first woman president, the first gay president, etc...

We have brazenly stolen two countries and this is what you want to focus on.

KDelphi This type of infatuation always wears off. Yes, it is historic, and good for Obama. But the way he got there takes a little of the sheen away. He "voter caged" in Chicago to defeat a black female; he had the Clintons (I'm NOT sticking up for them, but criticizing them vehemently in the DNC is a good way to lose!)campaign to get him in the Senatr and then dissed them completely; his campaign (or people suporting him that he did not know about)has played ALOT of sexist games, and rappers did some of the worst of it--it had some Af. An. young women running for cover and the "Bros Not Hoes" t shirt was just TOO much!); he "hinted at" (I dont know how else to put it) some very progressive opinions and then ditched them in one of the fastest runs to the right in the history of the US!; his campaign (I say that, because I never heard HIM say anything like that)made a very calculated decison --disagrese if you like--to pit Af. Ams. (and rich people/suburban housewives--who only know any black people on their kids iPOD and voted early to maek it to the "stop low income housing in my babies' lily white school district" meeting) against "working class" (poor) whites.(Dont get me started on faith based initiatives) This workd in the nomination process.I wrote a letter about it in January to a local paper and GAWD!! I live in an integrated, working clsss (on a good day)_ neighborhood wher alot of people like the Clintons (I wanted Kucinich), and Obama "suppporters" descended like I had called for a Klan rally!I got letters, emails, calls...it was ridiculous. I was CALLING for Af, Am,s and white working class to NOT LET THEM DO THIS! But, people who called me "white trash stupid bitch" somehow saw it differently.He and Hillary were friends before this, adn if she had been his VP--we might be more certain--well, she beats biden, doesnt she? I know Obama cannot contro lall these people--but he put him self out there--by that I mean, he appealed to al these young people on the net--and then expects their actions to not have an impact of peoples' impressions of him. I also think that it is cowardly to go after poor whites, whenm they are not the enemy, especially in the Rust Belt. Its alot harder to go after the Big Boys in DC--AT&T, FISA/CIA, Pepsi--all the monied interets in the DNC/DLC, and I just dont see a prompensity in him to do that.There were also several instances of Af Am. males showing up at rallies to ask about the Black community and , at one, the "ghetto"--there were suburban white kids screaming them down with "Yes we can!" which sounds alot, to me, like Dubya's "USA!". Class is just not a popular topic. But, with Af Ams income disaparities so high, to not discuss it more than he has, is upsetting to say the least.

Let's make a big deal about color. If it's progress that a presidential candidate is 1/2 "black" it certainly isn't progress that a minority candidate doesn't mention anything about militarism, corporate crime, racism or anything that could be seen as a challenge to the powers that be.

Obama's kids playing with Biden's kids! Wow! Great progress! What has really happened is that Obama has so embraced ALL the policies and positions of the status quo that he has been deemed acceptable to the establishment.

As long as this "African" American basically stands for everything the White Republican stands for he can be president. This allows some people to feel good about themselves and America and view it as progress. I veiw it as marketing. Why not put a minority's face on the same old tired militarism, it'll be an easier sell that way.

If he presented any challenge to the status quo even being White wouldn't help him. If Obama were a threat he would have met the same fate as Kucinch, Gravel and even Ron Paul. It's not the color that matters, it's the embrace of militarism and imperialism that's important nowadays. Having that will get you a pass on color.

Being a woman or a minority is an asset as long as you represent and not challenge the same things that Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice and Colin Powell represent, the establishment.

A half white man is not the first black anything !

Ah, here we are: we CommonDreams' posters (a.k.a., we, the people) ... hidden.

Out of sight, out of mind, CD ownership? For shame, for shame!

Interestingly enough, CommonDreams posters are, for the most part, TO THE LEFT of the people who actually *own* CommonDreams. For example, no doubt those at the top of the Common Dreams' corporate structure will endorse Barack Obama -- but, lo and behold, notice how many CD posters, in fact, DON'T support Barack Obama but, instead, support Nader or McKinney or some other genuinely progressive candidate.

You know, the voice of the people can be *such* a bother sometimes, can't it? Especially to those at the top.

In any event, Donna Volatile wrote a very interesting article that recently appeared at counterpunch.org entitled "The Obama Construct."

After pointing out that Barack Obama is a.) willing to keep a "residual force" in Iraq for an indefinite period of time; b.) wants to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and
c.) is willing to invade both Pakistan and Iran, Ms. Volatile writes:

"McCain is a war mongering bully who is in your face, Obama, on the other hand, is a smooth talker, whose own Foreign policy positions aren't too far removed from McCain's and one has to wonder which is worse, or indeed if there really is any difference at all. (The idea of voting for the lesser of two evils, McCain being the more evil, according to Obama supporters, seems ludicrous given that both of these candidates will ultimately do the bidding of their masters and the master plan is the same for both parties. This should be quite apparent by now and if it isn't, well, by all means vote for Obama and reap your just rewards...Do you really think 'Obomba's' idea of war will be kinder and gentler than McCain's?...)

"Obama supporters will tell you 'but he's honest and so sincere', and 'he's run a clean campaign' or 'he's one of us' (that one always gets me) but they remain blinded to what is obvious to many on the radical left and many on the traditional conservative/libertarian right: Obama is a player and he is playing the game of the global elitists.

"Since he has all but secured his party's nomination, he's becoming more militaristic by the minute, in both tone and by his stance on several key Foreign policy issues.

"Obama and his VP Choice, Senator Biden, however, are not the crux of the problem but rather the mainstream voters are the problem as they continue to enable the corrupt two party system by consistently supporting the candidates being foisted upon them by controllers who select them in the first place and who are reinforced by the mainstream media machine in the second. These are not choices, these are lack of choices and if voters continue to participate in this sham, then they truly get what they deserve!

"With Obama supporters, the phrase 'blinded by the light' takes on a whole new meaning. What part don't you get?! (This is the party threatening to place demonstrators at the DNC in recently erected detention camps and the party whose House majority leader, Nancy Pelosi, ridicules the anti-war movement and the homeless: 'If they were poor and they were sleeping on my sidewalk, they'd be arrested for loitering but because they have 'Impeach Bush' across their chest, it's the First Amendment.' Funny how both parties get upset over that whole free speech thing...)

"What is most stunning about delusional Obama supporters is, when confronted by the aforementioned facts about Obama, they counter with this inane idea that Obama is only 'saying' these things, he doesn't really mean them, it's only to get elected and once he gets elected the true altruistic essence of the man will save us all from tyranny! (Can we say reality check?!)

"Their indefensible support of this double talker is beyond comprehension. ...

If you want to help put a stop to the rigged election game, if you really want to make a difference and you want your voice of disapproval to be heard, then do VOTE! Vote for ANYBODY but the two buffoons, who have been pre-selected for you by the global elitist machine. Send a message, loud and clear: We refuse your choices.

"Vote Nader, vote McKinney, vote Ron Paul, vote Bob Barr, write in a vote, do whatever but don't support the corrupt system. Commit to a protest vote. Vote your conscience, do not vote under the 'lesser of two-evils' threat because then YOU are part of the problem, not part of the possible solution. (We've been on this trip too many times before ... From 'hope and help is on the way' Kerry to Obama's constant harping on 'Change We Can Believe In', you have been sold a bill of goods from first to last. For all of Obama's talk of change, his words and actions show quite clearly, he means more of the same...)

"For those die hard Obama supporters who refuse to see the hand writing on the wall... YOU are the problem... For those die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters, promising to vote for McCain because your war-monger wasn't the chosen one, seek psychiatric help immediately.

"And one more thing ... Evil is evil, bad is bad, wrong is wrong regardless of sex, race, creed or color.

"And another thing ... If you vote for Obama, you are neither liberal nor are you progressive, so let's get that straight. If you vote for Obama, you are a neoliberal, so get use to it.

"Stop making excuses, there are none and time is running out as an even larger war may be in the making.

"Get those blinders off!

"This is your wake up call!"

(Words in parenthesis Ms. Volatile's)

Click here for the entire article -- http://www.counterpunch.org/volatile08282008.html

The problem is, in my view, the paradox of the virtue of identity politics evaporating as soon as it begins to succeed.

When Old White Men ruled the Earth-- as they arguably still do, albeit driven into the shadows, or underground-- any thoughtful human with a modicum of empathy will root for the oppressed and disempowered who are kept that way because of race, ethnic origin, gender, sexual identity, etc.

But once the disempowered begin to make sporadic progress, and even a minimal number of out-group members break the color, ethnic, gender, etc. lines, the rooting interest becomes more problematic.

The Rogue's Gallery RichM lists is a good example.

And another example that haunts me is when Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House. At the time, I spent hours daily at a nominally "progressive" blog comments site. There were no end of ecstatic posts from women-- one in particular that sticks in my mind was written by a woman who wrote that she'd watched Pelosi's coronation (or whatever the ceremony was) with three, maybe more, generations of women from her family.

They wept with delight, experiencing the moment as a "Juneteenth" of sorts-- as I might weep with delight at Pelosi's funeral.

Although I drifted away from that site eventually, I'd guess that a lot of those women were also enthusiastic Hillary supporters.

The identity politics that breaks barriers of oppression and discrimination also makes possible the breeding of monsters from the emerging oppressed.

This is exactly what this writer said it was. A very historic moment in our history. Ity may not mean as much to people that wren't allowed to ride in the back of the bus because they weren't black or were made to because they were black. Or never had to use a fountain with a color on it. Or never saw a black in your school till jr. high and have them say to you the thing they liked best was it was so clean and quiet.

Politics are in the back seat, those brave folks that took beatings, abuse and hate (both black and white) to put us in the position we reached last night just won.

Lets just enjoy one of the great benchmarks of our lifetimes. We just became a better America no matter who wins.

On the one hand, it's progress, of a sort.

On the other hand, Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell...

Being black I hate the fact that I have to agree with you Samson. It's just to bad we can't vote for someone who can do the right thing to put the country on the right track. There is more than enough money and man power. But it's all diverted to the few at the expense of the many.

As long as they sell-out to corporate America, there's no reason a black man can't be President.

----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"

www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com