Thursday, November 6, 2008

Addition to Previous Post

I have the habit of allowing generalities to oftentimes sound like full sweeps over a topic, and I want to clear up that and say the criticisms of the groups I mentioned earlier are not an indication that I feel that way in regards to all members of all of those groups. Obviously I am as idealistic as anyone, and I suppose what I spent a long time trying to say is that it would be great if all voters were as informed as those of us here.

I also recalled that Freddie had echoed the point that my friend at work made yesterday, about not having considered the blind alligence black votes. I've far more faith in Freddie than the friend, and, so, there must be some real validity there. I suppose we all perceive different aspects of a thing, and our vote is the summation of those observations. If the young who exist today were all as smart and informed as Freddie I would not only not question certain aspects of the result but call my entire opinion into complete question.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

After reading your original post and then this follow up, I think I am unclear as to what you mean by "blind allegiance." Could you briefly clarify what you mean?

If you mean that black people voted for Obama simply because of the color of his skin, then I realized full well that many black people did that and would do that. I knew, long ago, that many black people would vote for Obama because he is black. But if you mean something else by "blind alliegance," could you help me understand what you mean?

Mike Denison said...

Simply what you understood it to mean. It is true that blacks usually go Democratic, but obviously the black vote was a major factor in this election. And, obviously, many, many people who vote--of all color--are ignorant of a candidate's stance on issues and are aware of what and what not the candidate has promised. There has been a lot more "gimme" mentality among the black people I have heard speak about the election as opposed to the "earn it, once the opportunity is there" mentality of great men like MLK.

My problems with Obama's policies aside, it just seems very sad that our first black president was elected largely because he is black. MLK did not want this; he said so in his speeches. So why such a celebration when the significance is hollow, or contrived? Oprah did not get weepy over Clinton, Gore, or Kerry (all of whom I voted for, by the way).

I myself never doubted America was ready to elect a black president. But the echos of a free ride, or one of special privilege, that I hear daily from the mouths of real people, is both deeply saddening and hair-pulling infuriating. It seems that race relations are becomming worse as the result of this election. Whites who are not racist at all--myself included--are becomming wary of the overabundance of "black power" statements. Equally tiring are those pertaining to new entitlements and twisting lack of desire to work into being downtrodden and being under the white's thumb.

Obama is proof any black person can get the best education and rise to the highest level. But that message doesn't seem to be catching on. Maybe he will preach it to blacks who think they should not have to work hard as he did, and as any of us do.

But, yes, the blind alligence comments meant what you got them to mean. Does it bother you that Obama's skin color was the deciding factor among many? My question is not a challenge--again, I love my friends, of any party, and save my acidic rhetoric for parties and mindsets in general--but honest wonder. How can we applaud this achievement without asking very obvious and serious questions?

Anonymous said...

Абсурд утверждать что у женщин нет логики
!!!