The Shopping Cart with the Shaky Wheel Theorem: Is It Just Me, or Does President Obama Seem to Be Veering a Bit to the Right?

Since President Obama assumed the presidency, he seems to be doing a credible job.  He got off to a shaky start, mind you, but since his early mis-steps and mis-calculations, he has come into his own.  I do believe, however, that his early mis-steps and mis-calculations may have given the GOP a foot in the door in the mid-term elections that they might not have otherwise.

But the president does have a certain predilection that I find curious, that I cannot quite figure out.  Let’s see if I can explain it with this analogy.

Have you ever gone to the supermarket and gotten that grocery cart with the shaky wheel?  You know the one.  No matter how hard you try to prevent it, the cart keeps veering in one direction.  Sometimes it’s simply a minor annoyance, but at other times, it bgecomess so utterly aggravating that you just leave the cart there in the aisle in the middle of the store and stamp back to the front to get another cart.

That’s how President Obama’s presidency appears at times.  It seems that despite the direction we would like him to go, he keeps seemingly veering right. 

Take for instance his nomination of Harvard legal scholar Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.  Admittedly, I know very little about Kagan, but that’s just it.  No one seems to know much about Kagan.  Since she has never been a sitting judge, she has no important rulings that we might have to examine. 

And despite her being a long time legal scholar, it appears she has produced very little in the way of scholarly writing that we might examine to determine her legal inclinations.  Besides that, her record of hiring minorities while serving as the dean of the Harvard’s law school leaves a lot to be desired. 

She’s basically an unknown quantity;  we have no idea what we are getting , so we cannot be positively sure it’s what we really want, if she’s really the change we voted for. 

And in addition to Kagan’s nomination, the evidence of President Obama’s tendency to veer right abounds.  When he assumed office, he kept many of his predecessor’s policies in place much to our chagrin.  And in putting together the HCR package, he seemed to stack concession to the demands of the right on top of concession even when it became apparent that the right just might not be negotiating in good faith.

When we throw in his reluctance to do away with DADT once and for all, his Bush-lite like policies toward the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, his plans to expand offshore drilling, and numerous other lingering glances to the right, you just have to stop and wonder.

Perhaps it is simply a case of political exigency.  Certainly, Kagan’s nomination might be considered to be a shrewd move;  the paucity of information to sift through gives the GOP little ammunition in attacking her which, of course, we know they’ll do anyway no matter who the nominee might have been.

And in the uber-contentious, partisan climate of today’s Washington, such forays rightward might be necessary in order to gain political traction.  And keep in mind that to win elections, to remain in favor, President Obama must appeal to moderates and Independents. 

It is the base from which you receive your support, your energy;  however, no national politician can win without the votes of moderates and Independents.  It’s always a precarious balancing act, placating your base while maintaining the support of moderates and Independents.

And if this is the case, I do understand.  After all, the game’s chess not checkers.  But again I believe President Obama to be doing a great job.  I’m not being critical just for the sake of being critical.  I just wish that every once in a while, he would give just a nod and a wink to those of us who are just a bit left of center.

Do you think that President Obama has a tendency to veer left?  If so, what do you think of this?  Is it simply a case of political necessity?

The Rise and Fall of Reason on the Right: How Charlie Crist Went from Presidential Contender to Party Pariah

My voter’s registration card identifies my party affiliation as “No Party Affiliation”;  however, I do lean Democratic.  However, in the 2006 Florida gubernatorial election, I supported Republican Charlie Crist over his Democratic opponent, Jim Davis.

All the President's Men: Is Reverend Al Sharpton the President's New BFF?

There is this postmodern theorem that states that whatever is considered revolutionary or subversive at the moment will invariably be subsumed into the prevailing power structure to be used toward its own ends. In other words, what is radical and revolutionary and subversive today will eventually yield its countercultural virtues and loyalties to that very thing it wishes so ardently to destroy.

More than a little amused, I have been quietly watching the Reverend Al Sharpton’s flirtations with the Barack Obama administration. Early on in President Obama’s historical campaign, both Sharpton and the Reverend Jesse Jackson tactfully and tactically indicated that they would hang back a bit to determine Obama’s posture toward the African American community.

However, many wondered if more than a little jealously was at play, and Reverend Jackson seemed to make it almost obvious with his remarks that he wanted to “cut [Obama’s] nuts out.” But then he made up for it with the image of tears of supposed joy streaming down his face on election night.

But Sharpton did eventually jump on board, and he campaigned hard for Obama. And when the president finally assumed the office, Sharpton was one of the first he received in the oval office.

And on a later date, as President Obama’s commitment to the African American community and a Black Agenda was being argued, Sharpton emerged from a meeting at the Whitehouse with the president and other black leaders who in their remarks seemed to suggest that President Obama didn’t need a Black Agenda. In facing and taking on the challenges of the nation, he is, in actuality, facing and taking on the challenges of all people to include African Americans.

That seemed like a sharp departure from all of Sharpton’s previous rhetoric. But my eyebrow really went up when Harvard professor and lawyer Charles Ogletree, the president’s former mentor and friend, announced Al Sharpton’s new role as administration ally, President Obama’s voice in the street, “a conduit between the disadvantaged and powerful leaders.” Pretty high-falutin language, huh?

This is problematic because Sharpton’s greatest worth to the African American community is in the role of agitator working from a position outside the power structure to keep it reasonably honest and fair in its dealings with that community.

Never mind the perm and the jogging suits and the big gold medallions of the good old days. No one can whip up an indignant protest like the Reverend Al Sharpton, however self-serving and self-aggrandizing he might seem.

No racist or corrupt politician or government official or police chief or CEO wants to look out their window to see a permed out Al Sharpton marching down the street, bullhorn in hand, leading a crowd of protestors whipped into a frenzy by his rhetoric.

Furthermore, the media loves Reverend Al, and he returns the love every chance he gets.  It seems that he never met a microphone or a television camera he didn’t like. But whatever you might say about him, he does use the media to his greatest advantage in taking on those issues and cases no politician would touch; he has, in many aspects, became the voice of the voiceless.

However, now he gives that all up. At one time he fought against the man; now he is the man’s right hand man in the streets. If you think about it, though, it was a masterful move on the part of President Obama. By courting Reverend Al, he kills two birds with one stone.

On the one hand, by bringing Reverend Al on board, he negates a powerful and potential voice of protest from within the African American community and reduces that community’s ability to hold the administration accountable.

Of course, Tavis Smiley is another voice of powerful and potential protest, but a number of African Americans, if not most, are cynical of Smiley’s motives, and should Smiley get too loud, Obama has Al Sharpton to attempt to keep him in check.

What do you think that whole other Black Agenda Summit hosted by Sharpton was about this weekend? It was to counter the Smiley hosted We Count!: The Black Agenda Is the American Agenda Summit. Reverend Sharpton is already on the job.

You know, I cannot figure out if our Uncle Al has sold out or bought in; I am actively trying to figure that out now. But it appears that for the time being, the revolutionary, subversive Al Sharpton has been thoroughly and completely subsumed.

What do you think of the Reverend Al Sharpton’s new role in the Obama administration? Do you think he is selling out or buying in?


Also see:  It's official, Al Sharpton finally becomes the HNIC: Sharpton touted as Obama's man in the streets!

President Obama, you have our attention; now just give us something to believe in

For the first time in a long time, President Obama had an exceptional week last week. His State of the Union Address seemed to signal a reemergence of the candidate who we campaigned so ardently for and subsequently voted for and expected so much from.

And his verbal beat down of the GOP at the House Republican Retreat in Baltimore on Friday was perhaps enough to reassure those on the left that he is indeed in charge and out front and recapture the support of those skeptical and/or cynical independents and moderates who were beginning to doubt his intestinal fortitude. He met the GOP on their own ground and then masterfully met each of their weak, disingenuous thrusts with a parry until he had seized from them whatever advantage they thought they might have.

Now I am waiting anxiously, if not impatiently, for the second act. President Obama has made this drama interesting again. He has almost reprised his campaign performance that captured the hearts and imaginations of so many. The cast is reassembling backstage, awaiting their stage directions; however, we need to see just a little more. We need something to make us believe.

It is understandable that when a charismatic president with amazingly high approval rating and backed by a solid sixty seat senate majority is not able to push through anything resembling the comprehensive Health Care Reform package as promised, that people will began to get a bit disillusioned and cease to believe.

And when one integral part of the governing body decides against governing, but instead chooses to even go so far as to impede the progress of those attempting to govern, then I am not surprised that some should begin to shake their heads in disbelief, that some should wonder in just what direction the country is going, that some should question just who is in charge. However, if we are to believe, the president and his party must find a way to break this impasse, and they must do so sooner as opposed to later.

But let’s not leave out the mainstream media because they have played a huge role in fostering this growing sentiment of incredulity and distrust. When the media ceases to be a source of credible information and instead becomes just another entertainment outlet, who do we then turn to in order to inform ourselves? Perhaps like most, I have grown tired of having my reality interpreted for me and being told what to believe.

Do you remember back in school when we were assured that the separation of the three branches of government—the Executive Branch, the Judicial Branch, and the Legislative Branch—worked to insure that no one branch became too powerful, thus helping protect our freedoms? Or that of the three, the Judicial Branch was the most apolitical?

Well, that bubble has been burst. With the Supreme Court’s ruling that corporations are individuals with all the rights there of, it became all but plain that at least two of these branches seem to be in collusion. Or, at the very least, are politically driven. If that is not enough to make one skeptical, to make one cynical, to cause a state of disbelief and outright fear, I certainly cannot figure out what is.

But we move forward now. I think we all get it now. I think we all realize that the actions of the president alone do not ensure success; we must be willing to do our part, to play our roles as assigned to us. We again take our places on stage, and look to the wings for our cue to begin. All we need now is a reason to believe.

President Obama's willingness to get out front and lead will determine how this all ends

Let me say up front, I wouldn’t want to be president. I couldn’t be president. As I watched the coverage leading up to and following the president’s State of the Union Address, it again occurred to me the incredible amount of scrutiny that encapsulates him. Every move he makes, every word he utters is instantly weighed and dissected according to the purposes of whomever is speaking; objectivism in journalism has long ceased to exist if it even ever has.

Nonetheless, the president made a strong showing last night. However, it was not the triumphant speech that I and others like me had hoped to hear. Among other things, he could not inform the American public of the numbers of people finding jobs and returning to work. He could inform the American public that the economy appeared to be righting itself and even of the many successes of the policies he has implemented since in office, but he could not promise or pinpoint an end to the morass.

And most of all, perhaps most importantly of all, he could not inform the public of the implementation of a newly reformed and revamped health care system, insuring everyone had access to adequate medical care, that we had all so hopefully and urgently anticipated.

That being said, I think what President Obama accomplished in the main on last night was to get us almost back to the point where we were at last January when he first took office. It seemed then that coming off the campaign trail, he had an august tailwind behind him, propelling him forward. And with a solid filibuster proof senate, we just knew that perhaps finally things would get better for the country.

But then something curious happened. It seemed he took a step back and delegated his authority to others. We looked for him to be out front, but we could only see those faces who, especially for those who don’t follow politics closely (which is perhaps the majority of Americans), we didn’t know from Adam; most people didn’t even know who Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid was before the push for health care reform began.

Most people only knew that they had invested a tremendous amount of energy and faith in Barack Obama, and he seemed to be letting them down. It was at this point that progressives and others on the left began to get discouraged; it is at this point that his base felt that he was wasting too much energy and political capital in pandering to the right, chasing some elusive ideal of bipartisanship; it is at this point that the country began to appear as if it were spiraling out of control and people became frightened. And we all know that frightened people do not always make the most rational decisions.

Personally I believe that perhaps the bar was set too high for Barack Obama or any other politician for that matter. Personally I believe things got so bad under the last administration that people searched vigorously and expectantly for a miracle, a savior who would come along at just the right time and fix it all with one fell swoop, a wave of the hand and a reassuring wink. After all, in our most popular and enduring theatrical genre, the western, doesn’t some tall, swarthy stranger ride into town at the very last minute and save the day?

But we, along with President Obama, have gotten a hard dose of reality over the past year. We realized the he was not our savior and that change would not come overnight. And he realized that perhaps the complete overhaul of a completely corrupt system and bipartisanship were only chimeras; playing fair and by the rules only works when both sides are in agreement just as to what those rules entail.

So, the speech has been made, and it was a good one, a real hum-dinger, a barn burner. But we already knew the brother could deliver a good speech. We already knew the brother was a master of rhetoric. The proof is in the follow through. Has he gained the ability to distinguish ideal and reality, and has he gained the intestinal fortitude requisite to get out front and lead? That we will find out in the days ahead.

Heavy Lays the Head that Wears the Crown (or Assumes the Presidency): Pragmatics, Peace, and the Nobel Prize

This morning President Barack H. Obama received the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. Across the blogosphere, the reactions ranged from those on the right who seemed utterly disgusted that he should be given an award so prestigious as the Nobel Peace Prize, to those on the left who actively questioned whether not he should even accept the award especially after having committed 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan only nine days previous, thereby escalating the conflict.

The reaction of those on the right does not surprise me. I have a feeling that President Obama could go on a cross country tour, healing the sick, making the lame walk, and the blind eye to see, and the right would still find reason to criticize him.

And I am even less surprised by those on the left; perhaps nothing is as disillusioning and disheartening to one committed to peace as much as war and the rumors of war. And I am one committed to peace. Even as I write this, there hangs on the wall above my desk a quote from the Book of Isaiah which reads,

“The shall beat their swords into plough shears, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.”

However, even as I decry the rank turpitude inherent in war, I am pragmatic enough to recognize its inevitability. Men will have disputes; men will go to war. So it has been since the beginning of man. This knowledge, this indisputable truth, perhaps factored into the president’s decision.

But allow me to ask you a question. What do you think would happen if the president did as the left would have him do and pull all the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan? What would happen if this very second the president would have a change of heart and order each and every soldier deployed to theaters of combat home?

Would some deep and abiding peace suddenly settle over the region? Would the men, women, and children, the denizens of those countries, take to the streets dancing and singing and carrying olive branches and go home at the end of the day to enjoy a new found harmony?

Or would all hell break loose as the presence of American troops is replaced by an unparalleled struggle for power and control and the countries descend into completely chaotic conflagrations?

And if this is the case, who would be the biggest losers? Who would stand most in harm’s way? Would it be the most powerful and those most thirsty for power or would it be the weakest, the infirmed, the men, women, and children least able to flee the carnage that is bound to ensue?

Would we simply exchange one war for another or even others?

Alfred Nobel’s will dictated that the Nobel Prize for Peace be given to “a champion of peace.” And I apologize for my ignorance, but I am not fully aware of Mr. Nobel’s background. However, I am sure that in his wisdom and vision, he was pragmatic enough to realize that the pathway to peace must sometimes necessarily cut through a battlefield; however, recognance must be given to those burdened with the onus of facilitating such a perilous journey.

I have seen it written or heard it said many times that no one abhors war as does a soldier. And as a former soldier, I can verify the veracity of this statement.

There is nothing romantic about war. There is nothing noble about war. Every soldier knows this. Can you find the romance, the sense of nobility in being so frightened that the only thing you can taste in your mouth is the acrid, metallic taste of fear and your own bile, that your balls draw up into the pit of your stomach, or when success is defined by the untenable option of taking someone else’s life in order to spare your own?

I’m sure that the president must feel like this daily. I am sure that for the president this anxiety, this fear, is multiplied one time for every one soldier on the front line and in harm’s way. The power to send others off to war and possibly their death is a dreadful onus indeed. But heavy lays the head that wears the crown or that assumes the presidency.

May war soon be over and peace reign in its stead; I am sure only then will President Obama be able to fully appreciate this award.

Congratulations to President Obama, and my condolences to the right

I know this comes a day late, but yesterday I awoke to learn, as did perhaps the rest of the country, that President Obama had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. And like the rest of the country and maybe the world, this really took me by surprise; I didn’t see this one coming. Nevertheless, I do extend to President Obama my hardiest congratulations. And to the right, I extend my sincerest condolences.

At one time, the actions of the right following the election and inauguration of the president surprised me. But little by little, episode by episode, they one-upped themselves on absurdity.

I think my incredulity began right after they announced Sarah Palin as a candidate for vice-president. Even as it became clearer that she lacked even the most basic qualifications for the office, the right solidified in their support of her. And almost as if they were sensing an imminent defeat, as the campaign wore on, the tone became nastier and nastier.

I believe at that time they too could sense the beginning of the end. They too realized just how preposterous her candidacy was, but they obstinately refused to admit such and held on to the very end.

And then following the inauguration, I thought the worst had finally passed. I thought that this country would move forward politically. I thought republicans would gracefully conceded defeat. And for a minute it seemed that they would do so, but then the foolishness began anew with even greater virulence and even greater antipathy.

Instead of getting out front leading, the republicans decided to follow the most obstinate, contentious, and seemingly racist and off kilter elements of the right. And with each new obstructionist tactic, they seemed to sink lower and lower until nothing they did surprised me anymore.

But then not too long ago, a conservative writer wrote a piece suggesting that President Obama’s administration should be deposed via a military coup. The article was subsequently pulled but not before someone was able to take screen shots of it and circulate it around the net. Just the very appearance of such an article suggests how desperate the right is and how far they are willing to go.

Also, implicit in this notion is the fear of what would happen if the President does succeed in his agenda. Such a success could change the paradigm of power in this country. Such a success could mean the diminished power of the upper classes and a resurgence of the middle class which all but perished under the Bush administration.

Thus the celebration when President Obama failed in his attempt to bring the Olympics to Chicago. And thus the reaction from the right when President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.

The recent gathering momentum of the Healthcare Reform effort and President Obama’s securing of the Nobel Peace Prize seem to signal just such impending success. And if Healthcare Reform goes smoothly, it opens the doorway to the success of the rest of his agenda.

But it gets even uglier from here because with every success, the opposition will simply get that much more obstinate and outlandish in its resistance. And in their obstinacy and outlandishness lies the seeds of their undoing. And for that they have my sincerest condolences.

As time moves forward, their position gets that much more untenable. And should Healthcare Reform succeed, should the economy right itself, should Americans go back to work, their attempt to portray President Obama as an incompetent outsider intent on destroying the country from within becomes an even harder sell.

Love/Hate: Desire, President Obama, and the Right

Allow me to begin by setting up this analogy.

For the past three years, I have had a colleague who has openly expressed her absolute and ongoing disdain for me. At first this hurt me; I had no idea what I had done to incur or to incite this level of hatred in someone who I barely knew and who barely knew me, but soon I came to recognize her reaction as simple and pure jealousy. And soon thereafter, I began to recognize it as so much more.

Other colleagues began to question me as to what I had done to her. Evidently I, or her loathing of me, was her main topic of conversation. Colleagues reported to me that it had gotten so bad that they had to insist that she quit speaking of me altogether.

Then, several times I noticed her standing in my doorway, desperately straining to see what I was writing, what was on my computer screen. And several times as I stood in front of my class, out of the corner of my eye I could see a figure standing just within the shadows peering in. I have been told that it was her.

But most recently, a manuscript I placed in another colleague’s box mysteriously disappeared then, just as mysteriously, suddenly re-appeared a couple of days later. We both shrugged it off, but later as we sat listening to the lady in question give an address, we both recognized the argument she was making. It was my argument as contained in the purloined manuscript.

I was told that I should be angry, and perhaps I should or will be later, but instead I was amused a great deal and even a little bit flattered. What I had perceived as jealousy, what I had perceived as hatred, revealed itself in that instance as a certain admiration, a certain longing, a certain yearning. It is a need to possess me, to control me, to have me need her. It is, in a word, desire.

And in contemplating this moment, I somehow drew a parallel in my mind between this situation and the right’s treatment of President Obama. Perhaps I may be mistaken, but I don’t remember seeing such a virulent outpouring of hatred toward any sitting president in my lifetime. Perhaps I am mistaken, but I don’t ever recall there being this many thinly veiled open threats against a sitting president ever.

The right is beside itself with anger, and this anger has enabled the oft fractured and factioned right, even in the absence of a rational, coherent platform or message, to finally coalesce, come together, around something—their supposed abhorrence of all things Obama.

But you know what? I don’t believe we are witnessing the expressions of a long pent up hatred at all; what we are witnessing is a long pent up desire.

Perhaps I could better express my point in this manner: Love and hate are flip sides of the same coin; each supposes an infatuation with or a tenaciously vigorous inclination toward another, an “other.” This infatuation with, this inclination toward, expresses a certain desire, a certain emptiness that can only be filled by possessing the “other,” by controlling the “other,” by being needed by the “other.” It is only through the “other” that we define ourselves, and that we achieve subjecthood.

And this is, in essence, the basis of the right’s relationship with the president. Theoretically, this is, in essence, the root of racism.

So when you see the throngs of people, their face twisted in rage as they scrutinize and protest every action of the president, when you see and hear them enunciate vague but open threats against the president, when you find that they have twisted the truth into half-truths and outright lies, don’t think of it as hatred. Think of it, instead, as a myriad of expressions of passion.

Think of it as them attempting to fill a sordid emptiness. Think of it as a certain admiration, a certain longing, a certain yearning. Think of it as a need to possess him, to control him, to have him need them. Think of it as desire.

A Soliloquy for Fools: Thoughts on the President's Address & the Fool Who Yelled Out from the Audience

Let me preface everything I have to say today by stating that I believe neither the democrats nor the republicans have posited a tenable argument in the so called health care debate that has captured our attention as of late. Neither side has turned in a laudable performance.

However, at this point, I believe the advantage must go to the democrats simply because the fact of their seeming timidity, disunity, and lack of a coherent message has been largely obfuscated by the shamefully loathsome behavior of the republicans.

In all their pointed malfeasance, I don’t think the Republican Party has been able to win anyone over; they have only managed to stir up the hornets nest of crazies that are convinced of the divinity of their mission. All they have managed to do is to introduce a new level of confusion and anxiety.

However, I believe President Obama’s speech to have been successful in rearranging the playing field. Given a primetime television and cable audience, he was able to outline his plan, albeit not without a few gaps, and debunk some of the lies of the right. Not only that, he was able set a certain tone. He left the door open for bipartisanship, but also apprised those standing in the way that he would move forward without them.

But I believe the most telling moment of the night came when South Carolina Republican Joe Wilson brazenly and all so rudely and disrespectfully yelled out in response to the president’s promise that healthcare coverage would not be extended to illegal aliens, “YOU LIE!”

Oh, but haven’t they gotten beside themselves? Keep in mind that for eight full years, President Bush lied in almost every instance he stood before a microphone. But in all that time, no one yelled out “YOU LIE!”, even when it became plain that his verity was to be questioned.

But this is the sticky part. When Congressman Joe Wilson yelled out “YOU LIE!”, he had to have known it was indeed he who was lying. He had to have known that the various healthcare bill proposals forbade that coverage be extended to illegal aliens. At this point, perhaps, he realized that the nation might be ready to believe the president’s message, and in a last ditch effort, he attempted to insert a bit more misinformation and confusion.

However, his greatest effort may have been his greatest undoing. In his insolent audacity, he revealed his party’s dependence on emotion rather than reason. In violating all established rules of decorum, he revealed the Republican Party’s only message to be a soliloquy for fools in which they are characters on the stage of their own exaggerated efficacy, shouting lines filled with bigotry, with cynicism, with lies and misdirection, and reveling in the applause without realizing only they are clapping.

The Curse of Ham: Why the Right Fears Obama So

Around noon today the president of the United States, the first person of color to ever hold that position, will deliver a televised address to school children around the country. I can only marvel at the educational possibilities this speech presents. In a letter to principals throughout the nation, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan writes,

“This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s schoolchildren about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use the historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong.”

In a perfect world, this would be a moment which brings the nation together. This would be a moment for individuals on the left and the right to say to the world, “This is the fulfillment of the promise of equality inherent in the notion of Democracy. This is the proof that in this country, in our great nation, anyone can be anything if they simply focus and apply themselves.” This could be the proverbial teachable moment.

But instead, the possibility of this moment has been all but rendered impotent by a cynical cabal of self-aggrandizing individuals who claim to speak with the best interests of this country at heart; however, their methods reveal the nefariousness of their motives.

It is out of their own fear that they stoke the flames of fear in others. These are but two things that they fear most:

The Awesome Symbolism Inherent in the Moment

The office of the president does carry an enormous amount of power; however, the greatest virtue of that office perhaps can be found in its symbolism. The office of the president represents the highest achievement in the land.

And though the vast majority of U.S. presidents, with the exception of President Lincoln and President Obama and one or two others I cannot recall, have come from the upper classes, it is a symbol, a tacit promise, that anyone can rise to the very acme of power regardless of class, regardless of religion, and now, regardless of race and gender.

In the past, we recognized that though it might not have been articulated, race and class were real obstacles. But in the last election, those obstacles seem to have been removed. And could you imagine what ideas young African American children or young Hispanic children or young women might get in their heads if they see another minority, an educated, well-spoken person of color, stand before the nation’s school children and address them as their president?

They might be so audacious, so unctuous, as to believe that they too can achieve. And a nation of empowered, focused minority children is a threat to the current power structure.

The Curse of Ham

When President gave his historic race speech in Philadelphia during last year’s election, many thought that by revealing his grandmother’s unconscious racism, he did her a great disservice. However, I interpreted the revelation a bit differently.

I interpreted the revelation as a veiled reminder and message to those virulent racists still clinging so tenaciously but precariously to power that he was raised in their house as one of them. I saw it as a veiled reminder and message that he had seen them at their best, but in the same instance, he had witnessed them at their very worst. It was a veiled reminder and message that he had lived among them just enough time to learn the layout of the house, to learn enough family secrets to be sufficiently dangerous before being finally cast out as an adult bearing the curse of Ham.

Remember, revolution always begins from within. Wasn’t it Moses who proved to be the downfall of the House of Pharaoh after living there as a son all those years?

In closing, I have read the transcript of the speech, and I will be watching with a group of inner-city middle students this afternoon. If I can find the time, I will return this evening with my observations and their reactions.

Do you agree/disagree with my assessment? What do you think is behind the right’s fear? Or is it not fear but downright vindictiveness?

Barack Obama Parody: Something New from Jib Jab.

What do you think? Hate-r-ation or just good fun?

[Hat tip to Track-a-'Crat; Read the commentary at this conservative blog and see if your answer remains the same.]

Lord of the Flies Greatest Hits

Our Brother President Obama was all over the news this week for swatting a fly. Evidently someone found that newsworthy. Last night, Rachel Maddow made light of the ridiculousness of it all. Enjoy.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

And the science behind it all (I hope my tax dollars didn’t pay for this.):

There Are No Whores in Rome: My Somewhat Convoluted Pro LGBT Argument

Oh, boy! Looks like Brother President Obama has torn his britches with our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. They are getting a bit peeved with him, and I don’t blame them one bit.

Now, I completely understand, or at least I can empathize, with what Brother President is up against. A number of disparate groups representing a number of interests bought into his message of change and threw their support behind him. And now these groups want some payback.

I understand that Brother President can’t engage in a wholesale program of change; on a number of issues, he has to ease into it. As he is successful in many of his initiatives, he will gain political capital which will then allow him to address some of the more controversial issues. But if he moves too quickly, some of his more right leaning supporters will run for the hills.

However, on some issues I believe Brother President should drop his guard and act just because it’s the right thing to do. And LGBT issues rank right up there at the very top of the list.
Let’s look at the gays in the military issue for instance. Brother President passed this issue to the courts thinking they would make the decision for him, but they lateraled it right back to him, forcing him to make a stand. But he won’t, and it doesn’t make any sense.

Let me drop this little tidbit off as I cruise on through. While the decision to allow gays in the military is being contemplated, they are already there. Our society and culture has always made the mistake in believing those bodies we deem deviant are necessarily excluded from certain spaces and polities by the very nature of the institutions. Let me relate this little tale as demonstrative of this assertion.

A few years back I attended a conference in Italy, so while I was there, I decided to stay over in Rome a couple of days to do some sightseeing.

Well, the first day I was there, I was standing on the grounds of one of the many historical sites in the city. A group of young American males were there being generally obnoxious; I could not ascertain if they were students or members of the military. But they were good and drunk.

As I looked on at their antics half annoyed, half amused, one of them asked the question, or rather yelled the question, “Where are the whores?”. The others took up the question as if it were a mantra: “Yeah, where are the whores? Bring on the whores!”

And then what could only be labeled a postmodern moment, it was definitely post something, a black man appeared from nowhere.

His features were decidedly of African origin—very African origin. He had the widest, flattest nose and the biggest set of soup coolers I have ever seen. And he was so absolutely black that as the Mediterranean sun shone on his skin, he actually appeared purple.

He wore a three piece black suit, white shirt, black tie, a black bowler hat, white gloves, and held an umbrella in the crook of his arm. He looked like a negroid Mr. French. Keep in mind now, this is the middle of July in the Mediterranean region, and it is hot—hell hot. I’m standing there in flip-flops, shorts, and a tank top, and I’m sweating like a slave.

The obnoxious party boys were finally quiet and looking at him like he was a chimera of some kind. Then he spoke. In an impeccable British accent with a openly contemptuous tone, he spoke.

“My dear sirs, there are no whores in Rome. The Catholic Church and the presence of His Holy Pontiff prevents such. The local and the federal government entities and the Vatican saw to it that Rome was rid of this scourge a quite a while whence.”

Now I was scratching my head. No whores in Rome? I’ve visited cities all over the world, and whatever the government system, whatever the economic system, there were some hoes somewhere. After all, it’s the oldest profession in the world, and to think there could be no whores in Rome is absolutely ludicrous.

And to confirm my suspicions, as soon as the Anglo-African gentleman disappeared as quickly and quietly as he appeared, a half-moon circle of the most stereotypical, Guido the Killer Pimp looking characters—shiny silk suits, greasy hair, a neck full of medallions, the whole nine—step out of the shadows offering up for purchase what else but whores.

Instantly, this image of a slimy underbelly of Rome crawling with prostitutes and comically stereotypical pimps entered my mind.

But the upshot of this little cautionary tale is this. To think that those bodies we deem deviant can be legislated out of existence is absolutely insane. To think they will go away by simply denying their presence is equally insane. These bodies exist and will continue to exist, inhabiting all spaces and polities regardless of their supposed sanctity and orientation.

So Brother President, do yourself a favor and do what is right. When you were campaigning, you spoke explicitly of equal treatment for everyone. You promised that the humanity of all would be recognized and all would be represented. Everyone and all did include our LGBT brothers and sisters, didn't it.

And keep in mind, you are going to need all the support you can get to get your other initiatives, especially this healthcare thing, pushed through. Besides, it’s just the right thing to do.

And if anyone out there is going to Rome and wants to know where to find whores, shoot me a line.

What do you think? Is Brother President Obama unjustly dragging his feet on LGBT issues?

Where Angels Fear to Tread: What I Learned from Our President this Past Sunday

During the last few months of the last election campaign, an incident occurred which I think characterizes the ambition as well as the mettle of our president. It also serves as a lesson for those seeking to become successful.

President Obama had taken his campaign into North Carolina. At the time no one thought that he could win North Carolina; the television pundits were even questioning why he was there. Before a rally, he stopped the campaign bus at a diner filled with whites, and it was assumed, whites who would not vote for him if their very lives depended on it. In the news coverage, it was also noted that a diner frequented by African Americans stood just a short distance away.

The moment President Obama entered the diner, the place became deadly silent. Perhaps, this was the last person the white diners thought they would see on this Sunday afternoon. Some lady even began to taunt him with “Socialist!,” yelled repeatedly at the top of her lungs.

But President Obama kept a smile on his face as he went around the diner greeting the customers and shaking hands. He even stopped at the obnoxious diner’s table and offered his hand to her, but she refused to take it. Undaunted, and with a smile on his face, he then attempted to engage her in dialogue.

Let’s take a look at this past Sunday’s speech at Notre Dame. The president knew what he was heading into even before he arrived in South Bend. The hullabaloo erupted soon after his selection as the commencement speaker was announced weeks ago. And the angry debate has only crescendoed since then, but he went anyway. And in doing so, he managed to drown out the enraged shouts and chants of the protesters outside with a message calling for thoughtful dialogue and compromise.

Both in North Carolina and at Notre Dame, Obama deliberately inserted himself where he was not necessarily wanted or, at the very least, expected. I can almost bet you that he did not win any votes among those patrons in that North Carolina diner. Likewise, he did not change the parameters of the abortion debate at Notre Dame. However, he did exhibit a willingness to face critique and dissent; he did exhibit a certain courage in his willingness to assume and play out his role as outsider.

Too often we never step outside the familiar as we push toward our goals and objectives. Too often we reserve our message for those most apt to say amen, rather than those who might disagree but might otherwise need to hear the message. Too often we disregard the road less traveled for a more amiable route, the familiar beaten path, only to be surprised at the crowd gathered once we reach our destination.

I do not agree with every action or position the president has taken since he assumed office; in some instances I disagree even if I understand the rational and in other instances I am still scratching my head. But in seeking out those places, those public spheres, where he is unwelcome, in seeking out those voices of dissent and incredulity, and offering the hand of friendship thereby opening the door to dialogue and effective discourse, he has earned my respect and admiration, and in the interim, left a clear trail to follow in achieving success.

Obama and the White House Correspondence Dinner

The White House Correspondents' Dinner was held this weekend. According to published reports, President Obama was a hit. President Obama appears as though he has a healthy sense of humor. Is he writing his own stuff or does someone write it for him? Some quarters did take him to task because he did not wear a bowtie. You know they had to find something.

He got in a shot at Fox Network, though it was not as strong a shot as I would have hoped. It was funny though. I wish the camera had panned over so we could get a look at their faces. Also, he took a shot at Michael Steele who was in attendance, but I don’t know if Michael Steele had the sense to even know he was being clowned. He was probably just glad to get the attention. What a shame.

Most of the opprobrium, however, was aimed at Wanda Sykes. But I don't see what the uproar is. It was a little heavyhanded but it's Wanda Sykes; what do you expect? What did they think they would get? The right sure can sling shit, but they certainly get seriously offended when the shit is hurled back in their direction.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Did Condelezza Rice say what I think she just said? (See video below.) When confronted by Stanford students on the subjects of waterboarding and torture, Rice states:

"The president instructed us that nothing we would do would be outside of our obligations, legal obligations under the Convention Against Torture."

If I may offer a paraphrase here, she basically states that if the president says its legal, that makes it say. I’ll just forego the convenient references to Nixon and say simply, bullshit.




I’m almost beginning to feel sorry for those individuals who seemingly authorized torture. It seems as though they are on pins and needles just waiting to for the other shoe to drop. They must be sleeping very lightly these days. However, the person I feel the most empathy now is President Obama.

On the day the United States invaded Iraq, I was a TA in graduate school. I forget what was on the syllabus that day, but the class wanted to talk about the invasion, so I capitulated.

Some of them were frightened, but most of them were concerned. They were concerned that the country was headed into war for reasons other than those stated by our leadership. Before they left I attempted to assuage their concerns by assuring them that our government would not lead the country into war without good reason. I told them that in their naivety they failed to realize the seriousness of war, and that the leadership knew that if the nation were to go to war on false pretenses, there would be hell to pay in the end. It appears that I was the one who was naïve.

Since then the truth has come out; it turns out that they were lying to us all the time. And then on top of that, it seems that they turned to torture to coerce captives into corroborating their story. Ain’t that some shit? Torture. That’s where we are now.

We now know that our country’s leadership ordered the torture of individuals we held. Can you think of anything more egregious and against everything this country is supposed to stand for? Torture. Well, I’ll be damnd.

And now our current leadership is attempting to decide whether we should prosecute those involved.

I believe that those persons involved should, at the very least, go to jail. In fact, jail is too good for them. They should be severely punished for their actions. They should be tortured. Take away all their money, and force them to live hand to mouth. But I can understand the administrations hesitation to pursue those ends.

The country is already in crisis, and the republicans are not helping with their obstinate opposition even in the face of their obvious lack of viable alternatives. Every move President Obama makes is contested. So what do you think will happen if the Justice Department moves to prosecute Bush administration officials for their role in torture?

It would simply become fodder for an impotent republican fire. It would be absolute anarchy. Attention and energy needed to pass President Obama’s agenda would instead go into following every detail of the proceedings. It would be like the OJ Simpson trial on steroids. You know how we do things.

Furthermore, we would become a country divided; the left would be out crying for blood, while the right would certainly be decrying the politicization of it all.

In a word, it would quickly become one big clusterfuck.

So then, that’s what President Obama and his leadership team are facing at this moment. They are facing the less of two evils. Unless President Obama is able to perform some political magic, he is facing a lose-lose situation. Now is when he really begins earning his money.

Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth

Last night as I was preparing my one hundredth day of President Obama’s presidency post, I got the news. And by now I know you have heard. And on the ninety ninth day, during the administration of Obama, Arlen Specter left the house of the republicans and was welcomed into the house of the democrats.

On the surface this is good news; however, I’m going to put off the celebration for minute because my first inclination is that this is just some ol’ opportunistic bullshit.

Specter’s defection does mean that democrats are now sixty strong in the senate, the supposed magic number. Yet that just means that there are now sixty people claiming affiliation with the Democratic Party; Specter’s net worth will be proven when it’s time to vote. If I may quote my favorite uncle, I just don’t trust that motherfucker right dar. I hope that whatever deal was cut to get him to jump ship will work toward the president and the Democratic Party’s favor.

About President Obama’s first one hundred days, I think he has acquitted himself quite well. He has made some decisions I don’t fully understand or agree with, but in the same instance, I can see the political exigencies driving those decisions. His poll numbers continue to be quite high, but the first one hundred days are wholly inadequate in judging his success or failure; his success or failure rests on the ability of people to go back to work and be able to pay their bills

As we move forward, I do so with great anticipation and just a bit of skepticism. And I’ll have my eye on that Arlen Specter character.