Subscribe
Notify of
13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“He never preaches division.”

My God what a load of crap. Matthews is psychotic.

Does anyone really pay attention to Chris anymore?

From the transcript:

challenging those who erect new barriers to the vote

Straw man.
WHO????

black unemployment has remained almost twice as high as white unemployment, Latino unemployment close behind. The gap in wealth between races has not lessened, it’s grown.

Yes, under Obama’s own policies!

those elected officials who found it useful to practice the old politics of division

Point one finger at imaginary others and Obama has FOUR other fingers pointing back at himself on this one.

Racial politics could cut both ways, as the transformative message of unity and brotherhood was drowned out by the language of recrimination. And what had once been a call for equality of opportunity, the chance for all Americans to work hard and get ahead was too often framed as a mere desire for government support — as if we had no agency in our own liberation, as if poverty was an excuse for not raising your child, and the bigotry of others was reason to give up on yourself.

Whether Obama ”framed it” or not, he has done just that with his own racial politics.

It’s obvious the man’s elevator doesn’t quite make it to the top floor. Perhaps we should put him and Pat Buchanan in the same room with loaded guns and not open it until the shooting is over and then finish off who’s left if either of them are.

King supported unions, Obama has done little for them. Tell me, how is this not your narrative?

@Old Guy: “Does anyone really pay attention to Chris anymore?” Who?

Reading the above, how is President Obama himself not responsible for the divisiveness?

People truly only hear what they want to hear. How can we label a speech that gives hard truths to both sides “divisive”? Sure, people on the Right might not like the paragraphs cherry picked above, but what about the paragraph that directly follows? If President Obama wanted to score easy points with his base, why – in a speech of this magnitude, on this anniversary – why in the world would he include the following?

And then, if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that during the course of 50 years, there were times when some of us claiming to push for change lost our way. The anguish of assassinations set off self-defeating riots. Legitimate grievances against police brutality tipped into excuse-making for criminal behavior. Racial politics could cut both ways, as the transformative message of unity and brotherhood was drowned out by the language of recrimination. And what had once been a call for equality of opportunity, the chance for all Americans to work hard and get ahead was too often framed as a mere desire for government support — as if we had no agency in our own liberation, as if poverty was an excuse for not raising your child, and the bigotry of others was reason to give up on yourself.

Does this not resonate with anyone here? I’ve read variations of these themes (albeit, not expressed as sensitively or eloquently) a million times on this blog. What was riskier for Obama, the paragraph quoted in this post – easy fodder for the Right to take umbrage with while completely ignoring the message – or asking his own constituency to answer some hard questions?

And what would have been the safest, easiest approach of all? I know: don’t include either admonition, to the Right or Left, in the speech. Just do a vanilla, safe, speech and be done with it. A post like this makes me shake my head. There is truly nothing President Obama can possibly say that the Right will not jump on to take offense.

@another vet: Hey, if it’s a one story building…..he’s golden. Much like the dribble down his leg.

From all the educated erudite people the president has at his disposal, if we are to assume these Ivy League degrees are still valid proof of intellectual accomplishment and not what appears to be a record of jumping through the hoops of political indoctrination, the president still allows the crass loudmouth Mathews to carry his water and throw rose petals in front of his motorcade.

No one can fault Mathews for his passion and partisan belligerence, no he excels in these fields, but to the public he has become the boring drunk at the party, an embarrassment to everyone.

Our president surrounds himself with buffoons and dolts, his opponents no longer hide their disgust and among his supporters, only the most rabid fawners believe or follow these coarse and obvious hacks like Mathews. He is losing America, he is losing the presidency, he has lost the confidence of the American people and he still insists on using drunken cheerleaders to deliver his political message. Like the water in the bowl after the flush handle has been pushed, it gains momentum until everything disappears and is replaced with fresh water. It is time for Obama to be replaced, his vanity strike in Syria will be the perfect excuse for America to get rid of its embarrassment and begin to rebuild this country.

Obama can’t stop preaching his propaganda or giving excuses even under the most inauspicious of times. Just like when Hilary Clinton made a jab about the US healthcare system after her husband underwent bypass surgey, Obama can’t avoid trying to manipulate the American mind when he gets up to speak.

Hard to add anything after Skook’s take, but there are two points I’d like to add.

First, this business about people opposing Obama from the get-go because he’s black. No, it’s always been because he’s red.

Second, rejecting someone with little experience who always voted “present” when the chips were down turns out to have been frustratingly prescient.

How racist can a country be that not only elects a black president, but re-elects a black president who (please pardon my language) s—s?

When you reach back into history, grabbing moments that suit your self-serving sermons stoking the fires of resentment, and hatred, the source of the fantisized intolerance you rail against will eventually respond.

90% of the whites being condemned will begin to wonder, “who the hell are these race baters talking about? I’m not racist, and I’m not seeing the racism that these preachers of hate are claiming. WTF?” And then, the hate mongers will feel vindicated, because they will have the reaction that they engendered.

Whites will eventually become resentful of the unrestrained verbal accusations, further enabled by a debilitated and unthinking MSM. Hispanics will also become resentful. Think of the tens of millions who arrived in the U.S. over the last 30 years from Europe or Asia or South America, for example, who look at these hate mongers and wonder who the hell they’re talking about.

Racism exists in some form all over the world, but in America, the reality is that it is marginal. The race baters are hell-bent on creating racism where none exists.