Re: [A-List] Obama enabling White Supremacists

[Leighm <the.buffalo.in.the.midst@xxxxxxxxx>]

Charles Brown wrote:
> I'm sorry to pop your bubble, but Barack Obama IS NOT likely to be the
> 'uppity N..." leading some hypothetical masses to liberation.
>
> ^^^^
> CB:  Well, can't really say you are in a position to pop my bubble on
> this one , are you ? Think about it.  Running for President is real
> uppity, which you should know if you have much Black consciousness.  In
> fact, I was just about to formulate some radio talk show comments on
> Karl Rove's latest about O being arrogant.  Arrogant, Elitist...uh no I
> think the word they want is Uppity Negro.
>
> ^^^^
>   

You and I differ... I don't believe running for president of the US 
under any currently known circumstances is "uppity"... you don't get 
there from here by being uppity, you get 'vetted' and removed from the 
possibility of EVER being even the government's dogcatcher..

If you still believe (like all those 40s/50s CPUSA folks did) that 
'burrowing from within' is a viable strategy for change, we differ there 
too.

> He's what I've always called a 'corporate hack', and 'hack' crosses
> race/gender/income lines as if they don't exist... You COULD replace
> that word with opportunist or somesuch and have part of the meaning of
> 'hack'.
>
> ^^^^
> CB: You can call him a corporate hack , but that don't make it so, 
> since he went from President of Harvard law review to community
> organizer. Bill Goodman , venerable National Lawyers Guild veteran ,
> just said to me how he was impressed by O doing that when he could have
> made a "trillion".  
>
> ^^^^
>   

OK, so he won't have a trillion in his bank account, but he'll NEVER 
have to carry cash in his wallet again anyway. Harvard? You state that 
like it means something other than 'bourgeois'.

I don't know Bill Goodman or his background, but I wonder what John 
Mage, former NLG director and direct action activist (retired director, 
but not retired activist I believe) would think of Obama.


> I found this today, and it is a summation of my visualization of the
> problem with American political figures regardless of race, color, creed
> or national origin.
>
> ^^^^^
> CB; But you are white, right ? So, what makes you think we Black people
> grant you that right to look at things in a color-blind way ?  Ever
> heard of the White Man's Burden ?
>
> i'm sure Obama would cut you a break on this though.  He's more
> tolerant than some of the rest of us.
>   

Look, just because a black person can rise to the top of the white man's 
shit heap doesn't negate the fact that it's still perhaps permanently a 
shit heap and your fingernails still need cleaning from scrambling to 
the slimy top.

I dunno about the "White Man's Burden" stuff... . Is that like 'blood 
quantum' or something?

"So, what makes you think we..."

Is that the editorial we?

From what I'm reading, you seem to indicate you don't believe there are 
intense class and cultural divisions running deep within the black US 
population, a non-homogenous population just like all other ethnic 
groups, and some people within any of those groups can only be called 
opportunistic.

They rise to the top, like scum.

Much like John Kerry slimed his way to the top of the VVAW, Obama's 
community involvement may or may have not had any positive effect, but 
he made good friends with a Chicago slumlord, most likely due to those 
connections, who hooked him up with a reallly really nice deal on a 
house. Too bad no one else in the 'hood' is getting a good deal on a 
house, unless you consider options like the FORCIBLE RELOCATION of the 
Cabrini Green community a "good deal".

The whole race issue, when it comes to who will do what for/to whom if 
political power in the US is attained annoys me as a bogus issue that 
diverts attention from the fact that people in power do whatever is 
necessary to maintain that power, no matter what their skin complexion 
is (Mine's pink...) like it annoyed this author at the Black Commentator:

"Moreover, since Barack Obama has no qualms about “unilaterally” 
militarily attacking other nations, there is absolutely no reason to 
believe that he would be self-constrained from ordering that Black, 
Brown, and Red peoples right here inside of the US be viciously attacked 
via “police actions;” and quite frankly, lots of white Americans 
themselves might not be that far behind from being sacrificed, 
especially if they dare to try and get in the way of Mr. Corporate - 
“unilaterally” attack them - Barack Obama."

http://www.blackcommentator.com/262/262_keeping_it_real_obama_bamboozling.html


Leigh
> >From The Nation:
> George Carlin: American Radical
>
>
> posted by John Nichols on 06/23/2008
>
> I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is
> drawn and cross it deliberately. -- George Carlin,
>
> The last vote that George Carlin said he cast in a presidential race
> was for George McGovern in 1972.
>
> [...]
> "But I'll tell you what they don't want," Carlin continued. "They don't
> want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't
> want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking.
> They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against
> their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit
> around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked
> by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. You know
> what they want? Obedient workers - people who are just smart enough to
> run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively
> accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the
> longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing
> pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now,
> they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking
> retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their
> criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it.
> They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking
> place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the
> big club."
>
>
> Carlin did not want Americans to get involved with the system.
>
>
> He wanted citizens to get angry enough to remake the system.
> [...]
>
>
> In Full: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/331953 
>
>
> Barack Obama is not "...angry enough to remake the system."
>
>
> He IS PART of that ShitStem, urban 'activist' creds aside.
>
>
> " It's a big club, and you (and I) ain't in it.", Charles.
>
> Just like John Kerry, with his VVAW creds (humorous hint: he was really
> there because 'the hippie chicks put out') pinned to his sleeve is part
> of the shitstem.
>
> ..and anyway, I'm not sure "...seek(ing) anything that *"rightfully
> belongs"* to white people..." is a worthwhile goal for anyone anywhere.
>
> ...or for that matter, women or the gay community seeking the same
> ill-gotten gains that can be derived from patriarchal domination.
>
>
> Leigh
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com
>
>
>