Obama's Anger - Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions

Synikul · **Obama's Anger -** 03-21-08

Quote:

Obama's Anger
By Ed Kaitz

"The anger is real. It is powerful, and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races."
- Barack Obama

Back in the late 1980s I was on a plane flying out of New Orleans and sitting next to me was a rather interesting and, according to Barack Obama, unusual black man. Friendly, gregarious, and wise beyond his years, we immediately hit it off. I had been working on Vietnamese commercial fishing boats for a few years based in southern Louisiana. The boats were owned by the recent wave of Vietnamese refugees who flooded into the familiar tropical environment after the war. Floating in calm seas out in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico, I would hear tearful songs and tales from ex-paratroopers about losing brothers, sisters, parents, children, lovers, and beautiful Vietnam itself to the communists.

In Bayou country I lived on boats and in doublewide trailers, and like the rest of the Vietnamese refugees, I shopped at Wal-Mart and ate a lot of rice. When they arrived in Louisiana the refugees had no money (the money that they had was used to bribe their way out of Vietnam and into refugee camps in Thailand), few friends, and a mostly unfriendly and suspicious local population.

They did however have strong families, a strong work ethic, and the "Audacity of Hope." Within a generation, with little or no knowledge of English, the Vietnamese had achieved dominance in the fishing industry there and their children were already achieving the top SAT scores in the state.

While I had been fishing my new black friend had been working as a prison psychologist in Missouri, and he was pursuing a higher degree in psychology. He was interested in my story, and after about an hour getting to know each other I asked him point blank why these Vietnamese refugees, with no money, friends, or knowledge of the language could be, within a generation, so successful. I also asked him why it was so difficult to convince young black men to abandon the streets and take advantage of the same kinds of opportunities that the Vietnamese had recently embraced.

His answer, only a few words, not only floored me but became sort of a razor that has allowed me ever since to slice through all of the rhetoric regarding race relations that Democrats shovel our way during election season:

"We're owed and they aren't."

In short, he concluded, "they're hungry and we think we're owed. It's crushing us, and as long as we think we're owed we're going nowhere."

A good test case for this theory is Katrina. Obama, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and assorted white apologists continue to express anger and outrage over the federal response to the Katrina disaster. But where were the Vietnamese "leaders" expressing their "anger?" The Vietnamese comprise a substantial part of the New Orleans population, and yet are absent was any report claiming that the Vietnamese were "owed" anything. This is not to say that the federal response was an adequate one, but we need to take this as a sign that maybe the problem has very little to do with racism and a lot to with a mindset.

The mindset that one is "owed" something in life has not only affected black mobility in business but black mobility in education as well. Remember Ward Churchill? About fifteen years ago he was my boss. After leaving the fishing boats, I attended graduate school at the University of Colorado at Boulder. I managed to get a job on campus teaching expository writing to minority students who had been accepted provisionally into the university on an affirmative action program. And although I never met him, Ward Churchill, in addition to teaching in the ethnic studies department, helped to develop and organize the minority writing program.

The job paid most of my bills, but what I witnessed there was absolutely horrifying. The students were encouraged to write essays attacking the white establishment from every conceivable angle and in addition to defend affirmative action and other government programs. Of the hundreds of papers that I read, there was not one original contribution to the problem of black mobility that strayed from the party line.

The irony of it all however is that the "white establishment" managed to get them into the college and pay their entire tuition. Instead of being encouraged to study international affairs, classical or modern languages, philosophy or art, most of these students became ethnic studies or sociology majors because it allowed them to remain in disciplines whose orientation justified their existence at the university. In short, it became a vicious cycle.

There was a student there I'll never forget. He was plucked out of the projects in Denver and given a free ride to the university. One day in my office he told me that his mother had said the following to him: "M.J., they owe you this. White people at that university owe you this." M.J.'s experience at the university was a glorious fulfillment of his mother's angst.

There were black student organizations and other clubs that "facilitated" the minority student's experience on the majority white and "racist" campus, in addition to a plethora of faculty members, both white and black, who encouraged the same animus toward the white establishment. While adding to their own bona fides as part of the trendy Left, these "facilitators" supplied M.J. with everything he needed to quench his and his mother's anger, but nothing in the way of advice about how to succeed in college. No one, in short, had told M.J. that he needed to study. But since he was "owed" everything, why put out any effort on his own?

In a fit of despair after failing most of his classes, M.J. wandered into my office one Friday afternoon in the middle of the semester and asked if I could help him out. I asked M.J. about his plans that evening, and he told me that he usually attended parties on Friday and Saturday nights. I told him that if he agreed to meet me in front of the university library at 6

0pm I would buy him dinner. At 6pm M.J. showed up, and for the next twenty minutes we wandered silently through the stacks, lounges, and study areas of the library. When we arrived back at the entrance I asked M.J. if he noticed anything interesting. As we headed up the hill to a popular burger joint, M.J. turned to me and said:

"They were all Asian. Everyone in there was Asian, and it was Friday night."

Nothing I could do, say, or show him, however, could match the fire power of his support system favoring anger. I was sad to hear of M.J. dropping out of school the following semester.

During my time teaching in the writing program, I watched Asians get transformed via leftist doublespeak from "minorities" to "model minorities" to "they're not minorities" in precise rhythm to their fortunes in business and education. Asians were "minorities" when they were struggling in this country, but they became "model minorities" when they achieved success. Keep in mind "model minority" did not mean what most of us think it means, i.e., something to emulate. "Model minority" meant that Asians had certain cultural advantages, such as a strong family tradition and a culture of scholarship that the black community lacked.

To suggest that intact families and a philosophy of self-reliance could be the ticket to success would have undermined the entire angst establishment. Because of this it was improper to use Asian success as a model. The contortions the left exercised in order to defend this ridiculous thesis helped to pave the way for the elimination of Asians altogether from the status of "minority."

This whole process took only a few years.

Eric Hoffer said:
"...you do not win the weak by sharing your wealth with them; it will but infect them with greed and resentment. You can win the weak only by sharing your pride, hope or hatred with them."

We now know that Barack Obama really has no interest in the "audacity of hope." With his race speech, Obama became a peddler of angst, resentment and despair. Too bad he doesn't direct that angst at the liberal establishment that has sold black people a bill of goods since the 1960s. What Obama seems angry about is America itself and what it stands for; the same America that has provided fabulous opportunities for what my black friend called "hungry" minorities. Strong families, self-reliance, and a spirit of entrepreneurship should be held up as ideals for all races to emulate.

In the end, we should be very suspicious about Obama's anger and the recent frothings of his close friend Reverend Wright. Says Eric Hoffer:
"The fact seems to be that we are least open to precise knowledge concerning the things we are most vehement about. Vehemence is the expression of a blind effort to support and uphold something that can never stand on its own."

American Thinker: Obama's Anger

Awesome article. Credit to Rush Limbaugh for brining it to my attention. He's pushing the PC envelope these days.

This is why niggers are the only race I hate.

VOTE FOR HOPE AND CHANGE!

VOTE BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!

I am, and I'm not joking. White America needs to be pushed to the point of intolerance for this kind of bullshit before it will ever change.

Dyshade · 03-22-08

No way will I ever vote for him.

I think he would screw everything over pretty badly and irregardless of whatever lesson it would teach anyone that would suck.

I cannot stand anyone who plays the race card in order to promote themselves irregardless of race.

thefinalw0rd · 03-22-08

Well, when we're throwing the word "nigger" around, it says more about the tone of the conversation and the backwards ideals of the speaker than I care to comment on. Though the article mentions Obama once with the hurricane example (not even specifically, just in a generic list) and again in the last two paragraphs. It uses the story of the M.J. kid juxtaposed with Obama's "Anger" to illicit a response. Clever writing for sure on the part of the author. Interesting how he misrepresents Obama's speech at the end as well. Very little of this article has anything to do with Barack Obama and it entertains me how it is painted to be otherwise.

Though I'm curious who the Vietnamese voice is in the media, the voice for these people who chose NOT to speak about their hardships. I can't think of one, can you? I don't even see how the comparison can be drawn with Katrina when you consider that around 2.0% of the population in New Orleans are catagorized as "Asian" (let alone Vietnamese!) whereas 36.7% are identified as "Black."

In any case, Obama hasn't pulled the race card to do his thing (until his hand was forced) any more than Hillary has pulled the gender card. Others have been pulling it for them. It should ALWAYS be about the issues. This speech never would have occured if it wasn't for Obama's reverand and it was even put up on Fox news as an incredible move that stifled most of the negative conversation. It is the media who has controlled the conversation about race. As he said in his speech, various outlets pegged him as "too black" or "not black enough" to win.

Also, "Irregardless" is not a word and is, indeed, a redundancy.

On the other hand, if you'd like to put on the rose-colored glasses and pretend that we have no racial issues lingering, then you have no further to look than the use of the word "nigger" one post above yours Dy. Hillary is interested in nothing but polarizing things. McCain is less so but does it nonetheless. At least in a race between Obama

Its no wonder to ME that Limbaugh and other conservatives lambast Obama and put up Hillary. Aside from Limbaugh's drug problems, They know that McCain stands a MUCH better chance against Hillary because of the amount of Democrats who would turn and vote for McCain in a race between those two.

Lets look at some particularly "divisive" comments regarding race and Rev. Wright from his recent speech:

"But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."

Well, other than the mentioning of radical Islam being possibly racial, I don't see any problems here...

"...problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all."

Ouch, problems we face that are colorblind? That face America as a WHOLE? What a divisive figure that Obama is!

Oh, I get it. It must be the picture that he paints of America when segregation was present and Blacks were not allowed to amass wealth - except that his whole point in saying it was that "This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up." It was giving Wright's comments a context.

"That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change."

Sounds to me like he's CONDEMNING anger here. Interesting. What else does he say?

"But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union."

Move BEYOND RACIAL WOUNDS? Working TOGETHER? A MORE PERFECT UNION? Oh, the HATE!

"For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words."

Or, he says, we can talk about the things that are important for all Americans - uniting to fight injustices that we all face. What a divider. What an angry man.

But to Ed Kaitz, the writer of that article, I have to say, its very easy to take one snippit of a 40 minute speech COMPLETELY out of context and put it somewhere in order to paint a person in a specific way, as you did with Obama. To the writer of the article and to anyone who thinks that it holds a grain of salt, I say this: READ THE FREAKING SPEECH! Obama NEVER expresses his own anger. I call this sort of inability to comprehend "selective illiteracy." This is a perfect demonstration of that.

Dyshade · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

Also, "Irregardless" is not a word and is, indeed, a redundancy.

.

It is actually seen as an actual word within the American English language even though it is seen as a non-standard word. It has been in widespread use since the beginning of the 20th century. Yes it has two negatives which do make it redundant and yet it is still used for emphasis by even very educated speakers to enunciate a point or meaning.

Irregardless of why he played the race card he did so. Clinton playing the gender card is just as bad but we were not speaking of her. You should never play the race card.

Dyshade · 03-22-08

It is hard to unite to fight the injustices when you are part of those very injustices. He may speak of hope but he is running for an office that panders to Corporations.

thefinalw0rd · 03-22-08

So he shouldn't have commented at all and let it sink him? That a black man is unable to avoid the conversation of race in this country tells us that we still have issues. As far as corporations, note his position on campaign finance reform. How he avoids lobbyists.

If being an old white man wasn't the norm in politics, then McCain would have THAT conversation thrust upon him. How the hell do you avoid that? Lie? Is Obama supposed to say that he ISN'T black, despite visual evidence to the contrary?

If you have such criteria, than I suppose we will never have a president that isn't a white male lawyer.

Billy the Kidd · 03-22-08

Oh Obama is not a racist at all, I mean he only hung out with a guy who thinks HIV was invented by whites to murder blacks for 20 years, was married by him and baptized his children by him and gave his church 1000s of dollars... Face it Obama is just Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in prettier packaging.

Obama is a race obsessed self hater. he's tried so hard his entire life to be black for personal gain that its fucking absurd. Read up anything in his 1st book BEFORE he thought about being a president.

Its rife with angry racist bullshit. He practically disowned his Half Brother (same father) because his half brother isn't interested in Race or any of that. The guy wanted to become a Christian for political purposes and instead of picking a highly popular black christian church in Chicago of which there are MANY he picks the 1 openly black nationalist Church. I mean... no one can see this? I feel like I am taking crazy pills!

He gets a pass CONSTANTLY because he is black, if he was a white man he would have been laughed off the stage already. Its sickening to see how many retarded white liberals will pretend that by voting for him they are less racist than conservatives, when all along its the fucking white liberals who are RACE OBSESSED to begin with!

Billy the Kidd · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

So he shouldn't have commented at all and let it sink him? That a black man is unable to avoid the conversation of race in this country tells us that we still have issues. As far as corporations, note his position on campaign finance reform. How he avoids lobbyists.

If being an old white man wasn't the norm in politics, then McCain would have THAT conversation thrust upon him. How the hell do you avoid that? Lie? Is Obama supposed to say that he ISN'T black, despite visual evidence to the contrary?

If you have such criteria, than I suppose we will never have a president that isn't a white male lawyer.

He wouldn't have to have the "race" conversation thrust into his face if he wasn't such a racist nutcase. The guy has spent 20 years surrounding himself with black afrocentrist lunatics like his wife and his pastor and now he wants people to pretend it doesn't exist? He is a liar, he's been saying all along that he wants his campaign not to be about race issues etc, and yet thats exactly what he brings to the table. He couldn't even disown or quit the church he's going to that specializes in black racism. Instead he justified it by claiming his grandmother once said racist things to him. Its fucking absurd, you want to vote for a guy who will toss his grandmother under a bus (the woman who RAISED HIM when his mother and father weren't around) so he can defend his fellow racist asshole pastor? NO FUCKING WAY!

thefinalw0rd · 03-22-08

I'm not even going to bother trying with that one. I see that there is even more illogic here than when I used to visit. Some opinions are not even worth attempting to turn.

Billy the Kidd · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

I'm not even going to bother trying with that one. I see that there is even more illogic here than when I used to visit. Some opinions are not even worth attempting to turn.

how convenient. I too wonder how any one with any logic can even begin to TRY and pretend that Obama isn't a racist. The entire life for the guy is race obsessed nonsense. Not because he is black, but because he MAKES it an issue.

Dyshade · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

So he shouldn't have commented at all and let it sink him? That a black man is unable to avoid the conversation of race in this country tells us that we still have issues. As far as corporations, note his position on campaign finance reform. How he avoids lobbyists.
r.

I would be shot down if I started a conversation about the white race. Right? If I started in on a piece about how the white man has been demonized I could be assured negative results. Just because I was putting white instead of black at the core of my argument.
Lets put it this way. There should never be a reason to insert RACE into politics IF you want race not to matter within politics. If you want it to matter than please be assured that what is good for the goose is good for the gander and white rhetoric should also be allowed. "Irregardless" ( now you have me using it again and again

) of white or black race should not be an issue when it comes to American Politics.
But it is. We all know it. He should have had a bit more integrity and just ignored the racial banter and not have made it part of his politics. It shows a lot of his character that he felt he had to answer. Silence would have been a sure winner.

Dyshade · 03-22-08

Jesse Jackson is the black version of Tom Metzger

Dyshade · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

I'm not even going to bother trying with that one. I see that there is even more illogic here than when I used to visit. Some opinions are not even worth attempting to turn.

tfw you have to remember Billy

Billy has been here forever. He was prime and parcel within some of those threads you remember.

thefinalw0rd · 03-22-08

Oh I do indeed. Its no big deal. Certain discussions are useless, though, because no one will change their mind when it is that vehement.

Dy, there's a fundamental problem with what you're saying.

Race is NEVER going to come in to play if you are a white man. No one will bring up the gender or ethnicity of John McCain, Bill Clinton, George Bush, or any of the other presidents. Race, as anyone other than the 'norm' for our society, will be an issue that you can't avoid. Should a black man or hispanic woman never run for anything because their race might get brought in to it? White people don't have that problem because we're used to seeing a white politician. Men don't have the problem of gender because we're used to seeing male politicians.

The whole point that I was making above, though, is that the premise of the article, ESPECIALLY where it is supposidely based on Obama's 'anger' from his speech (in which the author conveniently forgot that Obama was saying that anger is counterproductive) is completely ludicrous. It has little to do with Obama and painting him as a divider, especially based on his speech, is being dishonest.

When the article cites that the Vietnamese didn't complain about Katrina when ASIANS (not even Vietnamese; Asians as a whole) make up 2% of the population of the New Orleans area as opposed to 36% blacks, that is being dishonest.

When the article takes a section about anger from Obama's speech COMPLETELY out of context and uses it as the premise for an article that...oops...has little to do with Obama anyway, that's being dishonest.

Billy the Kidd · 03-22-08

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefinalw0rd

Oh I do indeed. Its no big deal. Certain discussions are useless, though, because no one will change their mind when it is that vehement.

Dy, there's a fundamental problem with what you're saying.

Race is NEVER going to come in to play if you are a white man. No one will bring up the gender or ethnicity of John McCain, Bill Clinton, George Bush, or any of the other presidents. Race, as anyone other than the 'norm' for our society, will be an issue that you can't avoid. Should a black man or hispanic woman never run for anything because their race might get brought in to it? White people don't have that problem because we're used to seeing a white politician. Men don't have the problem of gender because we're used to seeing male politicians.

The whole point that I was making above, though, is that the premise of the article, ESPECIALLY where it is supposidely based on Obama's 'anger' from his speech (in which the author conveniently forgot that Obama was saying that anger is counterproductive) is completely ludicrous. It has little to do with Obama and painting him as a divider, especially based on his speech, is being dishonest.

When the article cites that the Vietnamese didn't complain about Katrina when ASIANS (not even Vietnamese; Asians as a whole) make up 2% of the population of the New Orleans area as opposed to 36% blacks, that is being dishonest.

When the article takes a section about anger from Obama's speech COMPLETELY out of context and uses it as the premise for an article that...oops...has little to do with Obama anyway, that's being dishonest.

Noone brought up Race for Obama except:

A. his supporters
B. Liberal democrats
C. Himself

thefinalw0rd · 03-22-08

What the fuck ELSE was he supposed to do when Wright spat out his nonsense? And that still doesn't take away from everything else that I'm saying. There's a lot more to this than the segment of what I'm saying that's getting pigeonholed right now.