Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I could not disagree more.

Now do you concede thurgreed?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Now do you concede thurgreed?

Are you actually suggesting I fall into any of the three camps you originally described?

I am critical of Obama because he has failed to live up to his campaign rhetoric. In other words, he is to much of a pol, a hack, afraid to do the right thing for fear it will alienate voters. I didn't see that anywhere in your description of how White people think about a Black President.

In other words, Cracker, please.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Are you actually suggesting I fall into any of the three camps you originally described?

I am critical of Obama because he has failed to live up to his campaign rhetoric. In other words, he is to much of a pol, a hack, afraid to do the right thing for fear it will alienate voters. I didn't see that anywhere in your description of how White people think about a Black President.

In other words, Cracker, please.

I assume you were in the group that had no worries about him, but my last post was simply the joke that T would not want to find himself in agreement with you.

I wonder if I should start abridging these things?

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I assume you were in the group that had no worries about him, but my last post was simply the joke that T would not want to find himself in agreement with you.

I wonder if I should start abridging these things?

Ah, now I understand. You must forgive me for I am new to these parts and not yet familiar with your culture's folkways and charming way of building consensus.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I don't think he does have to do this and quite frankly I think it's a major failure of his Presidency that he has chosen to do so. It's symptomatic of many of his other poor decisions. When confronted with the choice of his stated principles or political expedience, Obama has proven to be a Chicago pol in the spirit of Richie Daley. Take care of the money first, and then consider whether or not you can do the right thing.

He should have given the authorities in Florida the choice of moving forward and seeking an indictment or having the U.S. Attorney do so under the civil rights provisions of the U.S. Code.

His choice of trying to soothe the crackers is a political act. Upholding the law and using the powers of the federal government to enforce law when the state refused to do so is what the oath of office he took is what he was supposed to do and failed to.

I'm not sure "political expediency" is the right concept. He's very careful about where he spends political capital.

What you suggest for the Martin case is rather strange given that the state did go forward with a prosecution.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

How am I supposed to trust someone who would choose asparagus over cake?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

The article sums up much of what has disappointed me about Obama. He's proven himself to be just another pol from the City of Big Shoulders.

Setting the article aside, are you saying that he's just another politician, or are you saying that he's someone a Chicago politician. When Republicans say the latter, I think they're saying that he's urban (read: black) and corrupt. I have some familiarity with Chicago politics, and I don't see Obama this way at all. He may be from Chicago but he's not of Chicago -- at least IMHO. You have even more familiarity with Chicago politics -- do you see it differently?

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Setting the article aside, are you saying that he's just another politician, or are you saying that he's someone a Chicago politician. When Republicans say the latter, I think they're saying that he's urban (read: black) and corrupt. I have some familiarity with Chicago politics, and I don't see Obama this way at all. He may be from Chicago but he's not of Chicago -- at least IMHO. You have even more familiarity with Chicago politics -- do you see it differently?

It doesn't mean black. It means corrupt and mafia-like.

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'm not sure "political expediency" is the right concept. He's very careful about where he spends political capital.

What you suggest for the Martin case is rather strange given that the state did go forward with a prosecution.

Florida did move forward. Weeks and weeks after the incident. Meanwhile, the best Obama could come up with is "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon." He didn't campaign with a promise to let the media and the public do his job.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I don't think he does have to do this and quite frankly I think it's a major failure of his Presidency that he has chosen to do so. It's symptomatic of many of his other poor decisions. When confronted with the choice of his stated principles or political expedience, Obama has proven to be a Chicago pol in the spirit of Richie Daley. Take care of the money first, and then consider whether or not you can do the right thing.

He should have given the authorities in Florida the choice of moving forward and seeking an indictment or having the U.S. Attorney do so under the civil rights provisions of the U.S. Code.

His choice of trying to soothe the crackers is a political act. Upholding the law and using the powers of the federal government to enforce law when the state refused to do so is what the oath of office he took is what he was supposed to do and failed to.

All very easy for you to say. But I think he'd like to get re-elected. And whether you believe so or not (or whether you think once he's President he's free to express outrage over racial issues), if he wants to retain his effectiveness as the President and wants a shot at re-election, he most assuredly can't appear to be taking the side of black people in this country. That's just the way it is.

It's not the outright racists that are the basis for concern. It's the nervous suburbanites he has to make feel comfortable. It's the voter in the swing states who is not entirely sure that Obama won't turn on white people somehow.

I'm sorry you look at Obama as some huge disappointment. I believe he would have done much better if he didn't have to overcome a completely obstructionist Congress. I also don't understand how you're so bitter about him trying to stay in a position to compete within a system that is built to make sure you have to compile a billion dollars to even run an effective campaign. To be sure, he has flaws, but he's a fucking politician. And the politician you're looking for either no longer exists in today's reality, or never actually did.

TM

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Setting the article aside, are you saying that he's just another politician, or are you saying that he's someone a Chicago politician. When Republicans say the latter, I think they're saying that he's urban (read: black) and corrupt. I have some familiarity with Chicago politics, and I don't see Obama this way at all. He may be from Chicago but he's not of Chicago -- at least IMHO. You have even more familiarity with Chicago politics -- do you see it differently?

Yes, I do see it differently. Obama is very hesitant to take a position that will upset the Democratic Old Guard here in town. It's a big part of the reason he's afraid to be "too black." He remembers what happened to Harold Washington. Washington got elected primarily because even the Machine was pissed off at Jane Byrne and Michael Bilandic. He didn't get re-elected because he placed more faith (and support) in Eugene Pincham and Bobby Rush than he did in the two Eddies (Burke and Vrdolyak) and the precinct captains.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

It doesn't mean black. It means corrupt and mafia-like.

I don't believe this. Outside Chicago, it means urban and corrupt. And "urban" is shorthand for black.

TM

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

All very easy for you to say. But I think he'd like to get re-elected. And whether you believe so or not (or whether you think once he's President he's free to express outrage over racial issues), if he wants to retain his effectiveness as the President and wants a shot at re-election, he most assuredly can't appear to be taking the side of black people in this country. That's just the way it is.

It's not the outright racists that are the basis for concern. It's the nervous suburbanites he has to make feel comfortable. It's the voter in the swing states who is not entirely sure that Obama won't turn on white people somehow.

I'm sorry you look at Obama as some huge disappointment. I believe he would have done much better if he didn't have to overcome a completely obstructionist Congress. I also don't understand how you're so bitter about him trying to stay in a position to compete within a system that is built to make sure you have to compile a billion dollars to even run an effective campaign. To be sure, he has flaws, but he's a fucking politician. And the politician you're looking for either no longer exists in today's reality, or never actually did.

TM

I'm sure that is cold comfort to the men and boys in Gitmo. He promised to shut it down. He hasn't, because the prisoners there now hate the US and have been turned into potential enemies. He campaigned as critical of the PATRIOT Act, calling it the blot on our nation that it is. He has since fought to keep its abuses in place.

I counted on Obama to be the greatest President since Lincoln. I believed he wanted to serve as not just the leader, but also the conscience of the American People. I am bitter and disenchanted. I'll vote for him, if the race is close. If it isn't, I'll use my franchise to vote "none of the above" by writing in my own name.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Yes, I do see it differently. Obama is very hesitant to take a position that will upset the Democratic Old Guard here in town. It's a big part of the reason he's afraid to be "too black."

Uh, what the fuck did you just say?

This is not a phenomenon particular to black politicians from Chicago. This is something all black people live with every day.

Jesus. I need to get outta here.

TM

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I don't believe this. Outside Chicago, it means urban and corrupt. And "urban" is shorthand for black.

TM

That may be what some people who don't know anything about Chicago think. Anyone who lives here knows that Chicago voters who aren't Black are more afraid of putting a Black in local office than they would be voting in a communist. Chicago is quieter about its racism these days, but all you have to do is take a drive down Ashland Avenue from North to South to see that the divide between North and South mimics the antebellum South.