Obama: Behind the Hope, Part One: The Good
November 10, 2008 · By Adam Dyck
Over the next few days I intend to do a short series of blogs on the new President-elect of the United States of America, Mr. Barack Obama, to try and dig past the “Hope and Change” buzzwords, the “Messiah” talk coming from the left, and the “Evil Muslim Commie” talk coming from the right. This series will come in three parts: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
First off, allow me to dispense with the obvious. The fact that America has elected a black man as their President and that coming generations will never remember a world where a black President of the United States was any stranger than a white one is a good thing.
More substantially, however, I would argue that there are upsides to his policy as well. He favours focusing efforts on Afghanistan and removing the forces from Iraq sooner rather than later. I think at this point we can all agree that Afghanistan is the “right” war, and this can only be seen as a step in the right direction. He’s promised to cut billions of dollars from the budget (of course, we can only wait and see if this will happen). He’ll most likely give the world a more favourable view of America, and while he may not have had as large of an impact as many thought, he’s clearly energized the youth of the country.
To ignore his positives is to close your mind completely to outside thought, and does both yourself, and conservatism at large, a disservice.
I’m not saying this will make him a “good” President, or that it won’t. I am saying these are his positives, and they aren’t negligible.
He is not the first black President, he is bi-racial.
If he says he’s a duck, is called a duck, and doesn’t mind being a duck, then…he’s a duck.
LOL
Positives? What positives?
Those who voted for him come from two categories: the loony left who have been fed a line on this man by the media and those who voted for him because he was “black” without knowing a thing about him. It would no different from me, a woman, voting for Hillary simply because she was a woman. What a brainless way to vote.
Perhaps the only “positive” to come out of this disaster of a President-elect is that maybe they’ll put an end to this endless stream of white-guilt we’re all supposed to feel for something we didn’t do.
And I am correct, he is bi-racial, not black.
At what point, precisely, does someone with both black and white heritage become purely ‘black’ or ‘white’? Are Barack’s children ‘black’?
Ethnicity is more than being racially ‘pure’. It is about the culture and people with which one genuinely associates themselves. If Barack considers himself black, and he looks black, and other people think of him as black, then I submit that, as far as anyone actually cares, he is black.
His multicultural background is a strength in today’s world, not a weakness.
I really don’t give a rat’s behind what colour he is, I truly don’t. When can we start celebrating what we have in common instead of this empty “celebrate diversity” silliness? When can we dispense with the politically correct “tolerance” mantra and deal with issues head-on and in a realistic manner?
Voting for someone solely for their colour, or yes, their gender, is simple-minded and foolish.
I completely agree with your last statement. Voting for, or against, someone purely for the colour of their skin is foolish. Why do you think this is just about ‘celebrating diversity’?
A person’s background and experiences, however – those are good reasons. If a person wants to vote for someone who understands racism, they aren’t going to vote for some old white guy. He hasn’t likely experienced it.
Why is his “multicultural background” a strength? Are you a racist? It should NOT be important in the least. Don’t you get it?
A “white guy” doesn’t “get” racism? See? You are a racist. If anyone is discriminated against these days it is white guys! Tell me Mr. Abattoir, why did 95% of the black vote in the U.S. vote for Obama? Huh? Can’t answer that can you? They voted for him because he is black (or at least in their minds he is, he isn’t: he is bi-racial). That is racist!
Enough with the white guilt already.
Glacialgal: Are you kidding me? There is no way that being a black in America is a better deal than being white. I’m not saying that things like affirmative action are right, or should be contnued, but I am saying that they’ll never balance out the negatives of being black.
Glacialgal, you are aware that blacks as a group tend to always vote overwhelmingly Democratic, right?
I never said anyone should vote for him being black. I said it was good to see a black President. Learn the difference.
No, you YOU learn the difference Adam. Are YOU kidding ME?
Please! Tell me how being black in America is a negative? Come on, spell it out. Give me specifics. You have got to be kidding.
Your statement that “it’s good to see a black president” is RACIST. You are a RACIST.
I’m a racist because I believe that “the fact that America has elected a black man as their President and that coming generations will never remember a world where a black President of the United States was any stranger than a white one is a good thing”?
As for specifics, http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=462.
Adam – Glacialgal is not persuaded by facts or logic. However, she never puts either of these elements into her posts, so at least her expectations of others are not higher than what she expects of herself.
You said “America” Adam, and then you quote a UK source? Come on. Get a grip.
Ryan, when I see a single “fact” out of you, it’ll be your very first.
Let’s see how “tolerant” Obama is when it involves anyone else’s opinion but his own. Let’s see how he reaches across the aisle in an effort to unite the U.S.
Don’t hold your breath. This Marxist will destroy the U.S. while he and ‘chelle enjoy their fave’s: taxpayer funded lobster dinners replete with Iranian caviar.
Seriously, you didn’t think that ‘chelle’s butt got as big as it is on Dorito’s alone did you?
glacialgal,
Being aware that different cultures are, in fact, not the same as each other is not the same as being a racist. Being from a multicultural background, and therefore understanding the values and differences that already exist between cultures, is a good thing in today’s world.
A white person does not experience racism the same way as a black, aboriginal, or Asian person. If you think otherwise, then I’m afraid you are simply ignorant, intentionally or otherwise.
If you don’t understand that blacks suffer actual racism and disadvantages in America today, then I’m afraid you are the racist here.
glacialgal also seems to be suffering from a misunderstanding of Marxism, so here’s a little reading material:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist
Please let me know when Obama plans to hold the worker’s revolution. I’ll try to stay home that day to avoid the crowds.
“Ryan, when I see a single “fact” out of you, it’ll be your very first.”
Hmmm, well add that statement to the list of things that you know nothing about.
The only possible good to come out of this win by Obama will be that blacks can no longer bitch and whine about how ‘da man is keeping them down. ‘Da man is now one of them. I disagree that being black is a disadvantage. That is just more white guilt tripe that doesn’t apply to the real world. 95% of blacks who voted, voted for O. THAT is racist. If you surveyed most of those who voted for him (regardless of colour or gender), they would have little or no idea what policies O has, or should I say has seeing as he has scrubbed his site clean of all his election promises since the election!
Not that the dummies who voted for him read it in the first place anyway.
Here ya’ go:
http://hotair.com/archives/200.....t-elected/
It is truly scary when you witness how clued out Obama supporters are.
As opposed to how clued out McCain supporters were? Or how about all those people who were convinced Obama was a secret Muslim, and Muslim = terrorist, dontcha know?
Here ya’ go Mr. Abattoir. Defend this:
12,263 terrorists attacks since 9/11 perpetrated in the name of Islam.
Ah, so you are one of those Muslim = terrorist people. Now who’s the racist? Hint: it’s you.
12,263 terrorist attacks, you say? All in the name of Islam, and in only 7 years? That’s more than 4.5 per day. Care to back that up with a credible source? Surely someone must have interviewed all those thousands of suicide bombers to understand their motivation. Somehow, I question your numbers, or your definition of terrorism.
It’s childish to simplify all of one’s enemies as ‘religious terrorists’, and it’s impossible to carry on an adult conversation with someone who does.
My definition? Fatalities for a start. That number represents the number of fatalities by islamic terrorists since 9/11. Yeah Mr. Abattoir, you really should interview those committing the beheadings against infidels like you. BTW, I didn’t say “religious terrorists”, that is YOUR term not mine.
I suppose you want sharia law to come to Canada too. How does your wife, sister, daughter feel about having their private parts excised by being held down and having them cut off?
Again, got a credible source for that number? And have you ever thought that maybe some (most) might actually have been due to geopolitical reasons, and NOT in the name of Islam? Of course not, because you see the entire situation in a single dimension: good vs. evil, us vs. them, the West vs. Islam.
‘I suppose you want sharia law to come to Canada too. How does your wife, sister, daughter feel about having their private parts excised by being held down and having them cut off?’
This is what I mean – it’s impossible to hold a rational conversation with someone who argues like a child. First, I don’t believe Sharia has any place in Canada, and I don’t understand why you should assume that I do. Simply because I don’t subscribe to your childish Muslim=terrorist viewpoint? Second, you are conflating Sharia with female genital mutilation, which only further demonstrates your ignorance. You are a racist, plain and simple.
[...] Last time I outlined the positives for Obama, but this time I’m aiming for the bad, and the ugly. I’ll begin by looking at his stances and promises, in his own words. That’s right, GlacialGal, they’re still on his site! [...]
I did not say muslim = terrorist: you did Mr. Abattoir.
Yet when someone merely suggests that not all Muslims are terrorists, you seem to be compelled to provide unsubstantiated and fantastic numbers of attacks carried out ‘in the name of Islam’, and cries of Sharia law and female genital mutilation. No, I’m sure you’re a big fan of Islam.
Mr. Abattoir, what do you suppose sharia law entails then? Oh, I know! It merely means a pretty head covering on a lady doesn’t it? How innocent! How quaint! Nothing to worry about folks. Carry on.