For the Progeny

Uptownsteve asks:

What will you black conservatives tell your grandchildren?

It’s a question which I take to imply that, somehow, our grandchildren will presume to vilify us for voting against the man who will become the first black president of the United States. It’s a very easy question to answer, actually: we believe that political, social, moral and spiritual principles take precedence over ethnic tribalism and we followed through on that assertion. But I’m guessing that Steve needs things spelled out a bit more, so I’ll do it for him and for my great nieces and nephews and—perhaps—any grandchildren I might have through being a step-mother. Here goes.

When a voter picks a candidate to serve in an office, that voter is essentially saying “Of all the choices available, I think that this person will do a better job in that office that all of the other available candidates.” In this case we are, of course, talking about the office of President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces. We are talking about a person whose job it is to support and defend the U.S. Constitution, the American land and the American people.

In order to make that decision the American voters need information and during the campaign season we are presented with information designed to allow the voters to make an informed decision as to which of the candidates will be the most competent in fulfilling the objective particulars of that office. By November 4th, we are supposed to come to a conclusion about this matter and record that conclusion in the voting booth.

While we are evaluating all of the information which can indicate a candidate’s competency at supporting and defending the U.S. Constitution, the American land and the American people, we have to take the information we receive and decide whether that information is relevant to the particulars of the office in question. Additionally, we have to decide whether the positive information outweighs the negative. And on top of that, we have to decide which candidate’s positive-negative ratio is better than that all of the others.

I concluded that the things which I know about Barack Obama which are relevant to his possible abilities to adequately support and defend the U.S. Constitution, the American land and the American people —his political background, his expressed political/social ideas and his overall judgment were either of lower quality than John McCain’s or that those things would be overtly detrimental to the well-being of this nation. I also concluded that either man’s ethnicity/race/color was insignificant factor in making a judgment as who was able to better serve this nation and, therefore, was irrelevant to making that decision.

I made my decision by making judgments about the following:

• Barack Obama’s decisions about the Surge conducted in Iraq
• His words regarding the success of that Surge
• His words about the US Constitution in 2001
• His words to Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher.
• His voting record in the Illinois Senate
• His voting record in the US Senate
• His words about his association with domestic terrorist William Ayers
• His adherence to Black Liberation Theology as formulated by James Cone and as articulated by Jeremiah Wright, Emeritus pastor of Trinity United Church of “Christ”
• His claim to not know the nature of Wright’s theological stance and to not have heard the latter’s more incendiary sermons after sitting in the pews of Wright’s church for twenty years.
• His stance on abortion and on the “Born Alive” provision in Illinois law.
• His stated intention to conduct presidential-level negotiations with rogue heads of state
• His promise to accept public funding for his campaign

There are many more factors but I hope that I have formed a picture---I did not like Barack Obama's words and/or subsequent actions regarding the above topics. And I would state such to the younger members of my family without hesitation. And if my sisters and my brother-in-law are doing their jobs properly, their children will understand that if a presidential candidate goes against every dearly-held ideology and principle in which you believe but is your same color, it’s a no-brainer to make the decision to vote against him/her.

Because if a candidate’s political, social and moral values are an anathema to a given voter but that voter chooses that candidate anyway solely because the voter shares race/ethnicity with the candidate and/or because of historical precedent, that voter has exchanged principle for emotion and for carnality. The voter has exchanged political, moral and spiritual values for pride of tribe (blacks) or to assuage tribal guilt (whites).

And that, good sir, is the very illustration of a selling-out.

However, if one’s “principles” are for sale, I guess that’s not such a big deal. And if one has no principles, we all know what’s being exchanged, what’s being sold: one’s very person. One's soul.

I’ll tell the kids that I retained mine.

UPDATE: Unfortunately, uptownsteve is banned. Pearls, swine, you know.

UPDATE: Welcome, friends from Ace of Spades HQ!

Comments

[uptownsteve]

"The voter has exchanged political, moral and spiritual values for pride of tribe (blacks) or to assuage tribal guilt (whites)."

So a clear majority of Americans have chosen Obama's message of change and redirection from the corruption, incompetence, bellicosity and cronyism of the Bush Administration which has wrecked this countries economy, infrastructure, prestige and spirit because of black tribalism and white guilt?

I've now concluded that you are not merely misguided and confused but a bottom dwelling hustler.

A cyberspace HO.

You, like Shay Riley, are just trying to draw attention to yourself by being the anti black black woman.

God bless you sweetie.

Cuz the white people you perform for don't give two craps about you.

Once they're off this board they laugh at you.

Hopefully one day you'll figure that out.

[james in bklyn]

uptownsteve = OWNED

[Karen of Scottsdale]

Well said!

[uptownsteve]

Oh, so you're gonna ban me now?

You black righties are such pathetic frauds.

baldilocks sez: Did you get a ban message? Did you forget that my comments are moderated? Or perhaps you just magically lost your ability to read, assuming that you ever possessed that ability?

You have used up your insult chits, whiny little boy.

[Dick Stanley]

What is it about liberals that they're never satisfied with just debating an opponent but must stoop to name-calling and villification? Down to and including sexual swipes. Charming people. Enjoy your hangover when Barry's "hope" evaporates and his "change" turns out to be more radical than even you Bush haters can stomach.

[RightGirl]

Wait, so these color-obsessed freaks are getting all Oreo on your ass now Baldi? That's ridiculous!

Barak Obama was elected for the color of his skin. He was not elected for his policy. And if Baldi voted McCain, it was because she is more interested in policy than color. And a helluva lot more interested in America.

To berate a black woman because she didn't vote for the black man is pretty low - as low as the Black panthers standing outside the Philly polling station. Why would Baldi want to be part of your ugly, thuggish little gang?

RG

[notropis]

"if a candidate’s political, social and moral values are an anathema to a given voter but that voter chooses that candidate anyway"

I don't think you could make it any clearer.

A lot of people voted for Obama because they agree with his political, social or moral values.

A lot of others voted for him without really knowing much at all about him, except that they were sick of Bush, and they saw McCain as more of the same.

But if someone looked at his whole resume', said, "there's not a thing there I like or agree with, besides the fact that he's a black man, and I'm going to vote for him anyway;" well, then, that's pretty much the definition of black tribalism or white guilt.

Therefore, for me to have voted for him, or for Juliette to have voted for him, given that we are opposed to his foreign policies, disagree with his social policies, and see him as the much riskier and less experienced of the two major candidates, would have been an act of black tribalism or white guilt.

I don't see where that implies that the clear majority of Americans voted for Obama for those reasons, unless you are conceding that, by any rational standards, McCain would have been the better choice.

Even I'm not so in the tank for McCain as to go along with that.

[uptownsteve]

"Barak Obama was elected for the color of his skin."

Yeah, being black sure is an advantage in US Presidential elections.

The previous 43 were..............?

Do you people smoke crack?

[uptownsteve]

Baldilocks,

If you or any of your buddies can make an intelligent argument for the continuance of the conservative policies that this country has been subjected to for the last 8 years, which have brought this nation to the sorry state that it currently is in, which a prepeponderance of the electorate, WHITE BLACK BROWN AND YELLOW have REJECTED, then I'll leave your board permanently.

GO.

And don't try to tell me that Bush was a liberal.

[baldilocks]

Sorry, but you're leaving now.

I see from your first comment to your last one, Steve, that I was casting my pearls before swine. And I see that you can't stop hurling the basest of insults.

Tell you what, since you refuse to communicate in good-faith and you assume bad-faith from me, I am going to ban you. You can go Hope, Change and whine about it elsewhere.

A little advice, Steve: when you win, you're supposed to act like a winner. You're not doing that. Perhaps you don't know how.

It's interesting that you would suppose that "they" are laughing at me. And it's interesting that you would suppose that I would care; that my stance is based on what people think--in this case a set of white ones.

That's what your problem is, isn't it? You care too much about what people--black and white--think about you. The fact that other people have other bases for making decisions and are brave enough to stand on those bases shames you, doesn't it? It illuminates your cowardice.

You refuse to understand that people are different for you even if the are the same color or you don't have the tools to understand it. So you have to *try* to make us suffer for not being what you want. You're a raving narcissist.

You're also working out your little childhood traumas on this board; I saw you doing that at Booker Rising. Well, I'm sorry that you got hurt by somebody or somebodies back in the day because you weren't like them in some way, but I'm not going to let you work out your problems here. I suspect Shay got tired of your psycho outbursts as well.

Take care and, for your own sake, seek help.

[baldilocks]

Oh BTW, thanks for the blog fodder. I guess that this is an example of unintended consequences. Go forth and help out other black conservatives, Steve. :-)

[c. smith]

I would tell anyone that DNA-based voting (ethnic, gender, whatever) is utterly false, and the people who'd say that
"dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
followed by
"you're racist if you don't subscribe to Mr. Obama's policies"
are beyond deluded.

[james in bklyn]

gotta add on which planet does a 3m popular vote win in a country of 200m count as a landslide victory?

looks about as close to 50% of america as it can be

and...oh wait, nevermind...you've already been banned. good riddance

[baldilocks]

By the EVC (the part that counts) it is a landslide.

[Laura(southernxyl)]

If a future grandchild ever tried to call me to account for how I vote, I would tell him or her that it was my turn and I voted how I wanted; and when it's their turn they can vote how they want.

Re: idea that white folks are laughing at anybody "performing" for them - as a white person I suggest that Steve get some medication for those aural hallucinations he's got. I'm not laughing and I don't hear anybody else laughing either.

[Dymphna]

It's a shame that the election was race-based, but it was. Only 3% of black voters here did not vote for Obama...but how could it have been otherwise?

...it's schizophrenic in a way, because in general, blacks (in my neighborhood, anyway) tend to vote conservative on social issues like, say, abortion on demand [as in what was once said to me -- "that child is going to abort my grandbaby over my dead body"]. Yet Obama was surely the most brutal of pro-aborters to come down the pike in a long, long time. But that didn't matter.

You see, the racial tensions in a small, backwater rural area that knew slavery longer than it has known true freedom are bound to affect people's voting decisions at a visceral level that cannot be overwritten by rational commands.

When I say our slave heritage here is longer than our history of freedom, I am calculating from the time the area was settled and began to be cultivated thru the Civil War and the Emancipation till now.

Back in the early 17th century the English pushed the colonists in Virginia to use African slaves because that's what England was selling at the moment: African slaves (as it was also to hook the Chinese on opium when Britannia found that to be good economic policy and had opium to push).

England wanted tobacco for the global market and Virginia was the place to grow it. And besides, the colony of Virginia didn't have enough white indentured slaves (debtors or criminals serving time) to do the labor intensive work needed for tobacco so even those who fought the importation of slaves had to bow before King Tobacco and accept the inevitable.

OTOH, that's why many left in disgust and moved inland toward the mountainous regions where tobacco didn't grow. Slaves wouldn't be forced there as England saw no value in it (to this day, mountainous southwestern VA is sparsely settled with black people compared to the Tidewater area).

So slavery lasted about 260 years all told. Liberty -- of a sort -- was wrested finally from the dead hands of fallen tobacco and cotton planters.

But we all know that true freedom didn't begin then. Freedom is based on a citizenship that doesn't have first and second class tiers, and the possibility for real equality didn't begin until the middle of the 20th century -- it's a long, long march from the 1610's to the 1960's.

Around here, we just had a commemoration this year of the march of black students on the town hall back in the 1950's to demand better educational facilities. Before marches were the "cool" thing to do these brave kids took it on just to get "separate but equal".

A few years later, with the advent of integration, the public schools would close down rather than allow black children in.*

So in reality we've gone from the early 17th century thru the mid 20th century with black people carrying a large burden of social stigma.

We probably have at least another hundred years to go before the road even begins to level out in terms of time in servitude vs time in freedom. Guess which kind of time seems to pass more slowly??

So sure, great gains have been made, but...

... if we could just get the Democrats to quit selling aggrieved resentment disguised as entitlements (have they NO integrity at all??), we could move along a whole lot faster.
__________

*Little did those bigots who closed the public schools know that they would be the seed of a future movement of home-schooling as both black and white parents realized that government schools don't do a very good job. To this day, Virginia has loosely held the reins of rule for home-schoolers.
___________

As for my personal opinion on this election, I didn't vote for Obama. With his Axelrods and Emmanuels and Ayers', O is going to bring some kind of European putsch scenario into the higher echelons of American politics we haven't seen before. I think it will scar us. It scares the bejeezus out of me.

I don't consider him an African American and his election is sad because we still, after all these years, have not elected a black man to the Presidency. He's a fake.

My consolation? We definitely *do* have an African American First Lady. And she's gonna make Hillary look charming in comparison. He's a fake, but she's for real.

What you see with Michelle is what you get. You might not like it, but at least it's familiar and you know who you're dealing with.

[baldilocks]

I like what you wrote, Dymphna, especially the observation that black Americans have only having been free de facto since the 1960s. Too many Americans forget this.

One thing: since my biological father is Kenyan and my mother is a black American, does that mean I'm half "African-American?" I find that concept a silly one.

This is why I don't use the term "African-American." Unless we're talking about an immigrant from the continent, the term should be discarded.

[notropis]

"One thing: since my biological father is Kenyan and my mother is a black American, does that mean I'm half "African-American?" I find that concept a silly one."

Yeah, I've mentioned this before, but whenever I've been compelled to disclose my children's race (in a forced-choice situation), I've called them African-American. I mean, their mother is African (now first generation US citizen) and their father is American.

On the other hand, now that the kids are old enough to represent themselves, they militantly avoid any labels, beyond "American."

(Both are in the USMC JROTC program, and I've never felt more a piker or pretender than when I try to talk patriotism with my girls....)

[thebronze]

BL, you rock!

Love 'ya girl!

[ErislDysnomia]

Found this thread via Ace.

Wow. Baldilocks, thanks for making my wee hours enjoyable.

Pearls before swine was too generous a metaphor. I like to call posters like "uptownsteve" what they really are.

Pearls before retards is more like it.

[newton]

That nasty commenter goes to show you that one thing that's worse than a sore loser is a proud and naughty sore winner.

Good job, woman! Keep it up!

[Tom W.]

The blacks who voted based on everything BUT skin color will someday (soon) be recognized as the true heroes in this fiasco.

White libs gave us our first affirmative-action president. The standards were abolished for Obama. He wasn't required to unseal his records, explain his relationships with unsavory characters, account for missing years of his life, or answer any difficult questions. Career-killing gaffes were discreetly ignored, the way you overlook the involuntary outbursts of a Tourette's sufferer.

White libs decided that since Obama's black, he's not capable of being held to the standards to which they held Sarah Palin. Electing a black president made them feel all warm and toasty. They were kind to an inferior, and it made them like themselves better.

Plenty of demented conservatives, on the other hand, promised Sarah Palin that they'd vote for her, so she went through utter hell and campaigned her heart out, and then they either stayed home or voted for Obama to "teach the Republicans a lesson." They stabbed her in back without a qualm.

About 20 percent of conservatives are no different than Code Pink. Political power before all, including their own country, their own children, and a terrific governor who only had their best interests at heart. Sorry, Governor. Nothing personal!

Don't get me started on the cocktail-party conservatives, either. Suffice to say I'm done reading their twaddle or watching them break wind through their mouths on TV.

The clearest-thinking people in this disaster are black Americans who voted with their heads and not their skin or their raging obsessions with abortion and homosexuality.

Luckily Obama is already cratering. The Dems in Congress are telling him he's overreaching, and he's put up this insane Web site full of Stalinist plans that make you laugh hysterically and then go out and buy more guns.

Obama will be our worst president ever, and he'll set race relations back decades. Blacks who voted against him will become folk heroes, these eerily prescient Yodas that nobody listened to.

It'll be just as condescending as the urge that gave us our first affirmative-action president, but what are you going to do?

I thought we had this race-thing figured out, but we're going backwards.

Makes me sick.

[James]

What an amazing exchange Baldilocks!

I just got sent over from Ace, and you've been added to my feeds. Keep up the good work, can't wait to read more of your work.

[Anon]

I'm white, and I'm not laughing at anyone.

It's not funny that a demographic group in America still votes based on race. (uptownsteve, people who do that are racist.)

[Lee]

Baldilocks, you are a true American and one hell of a writer.

[fireweednectar]

Interesting, Steve, I wasn't laughing at Juliette's words. It's been a very long day, I am coming to realise how upset I really am, and I have a lot of thoughts running through my mind. And yet her words gave me enough ease to go to sleep, my mind less troubled.

You on the other hand, you do not sound as if you care about this country or its citizens. Your words betray a small person of bitter mind, filled with hatred so that when you lose you lash out (it's so much easier than self assessment), when you win you lash out. You seem like the type of person who is so angry at something (perhaps done to you, at Juliette mused) that you can feel better only by attempting to reduce others.

Juliette, I have been trying to perform a sort of balancing act these last 24 hours or so. I'm angry and upset but I don't want to define myself by that. I have no trust in Obama and I refuse to surrender the ability to direct my own life. But I want my country to succeed and stay strong, and my boy to have a prosperous future.

You gave me a wonderful reminder just now when I read your words of praying for Obama. I'm not sure when we will see the fruits of these prayers, but it did give me a way to calm my spirit tonight.

Grace and dignity. That in fact, Steve, is the impression of Juliette I take away when I am done here.

[douglas]

Beautiful post, Baldilocks.

I was struggling with people saying today that even those who voted McCain should be proud that today we have our first black President. Struck me odd, and I wondered why I wasn't particularly moved by the fact. I realized that it was because I didn't see why Obama deserved any credit for the feat. His candidacy bears no resemblance to the entrance of Jackie Robinson into baseball, for instance. Recall how difficult it was for Robinson, and what him being there meant to the country, and to the black people, who at that time were truly oppressed. In the case of Barack Obama, it is completely different. So much so that in his case, being black was an advantage. An advantage! Doesn't that more indicate that the perceived sense of victim of the black community was an illusion? Hasn't that been the case for at least a decade, maybe two? Isn't it that the problem of race has been an internal problem to the black community, and external to the white community for years now? I'd argue that JFK getting elected as a Catholic was far more notable than that Barack Obama has been elected as the first black President.

That's how I was thinking. After reading Dymphna's comment, I think I understand the emotion of the black community better, but only so much. After all, mistreatment was the norm for most immigrants here. When my parents married in 1960, there were states where they would have been denied a marriage license as an Asian/white couple. But they never clued me in that I should resent this country and most of it's people.

The good news is, my six year old, and his friends really have no clue about race as a divider. Last year at MLK day, they didn't get the stuff they did in class about King and the civil rights movement. I had to explain it as a man standing bravely up to bullies for it to make sense to him. It was a beautiful thing.

[epobirs]

What an unfortunately all-too-typical jackass, this guy Steve.

It is a sad thing that sometimes something really dumb must be done before a person can move on with their life. (Jasper Fforde has a hilarious take on this in his Thursday Next series, where the UK is on the verge of entering a disastrous war because it been accumulating unexpressed stupidity for so long it threaten to burst forth all at once.) A writer of my acquaintance once published an embarrassingly bad novel that still attracted a large readership based on his past greatness. When asked, he said he just couldn't get anything else done until he'd gotten that wretched book out of his system.

It appears we've done this on a national scale. Almost since birth, my generation of tail-end boomers has been fed racial guilt by the shovel-load, regardless of whether we showed the slightest inclination to behave badly towards others on the basis of where their ancestors were shaped by local conditions in pre-technological times. We been trained to feel terrible about things to which we were never a party nor any of our ancestors. (The Civil War was decades past when my all of my grandparents or great-grandparents came to America and it's difficult to imagine them acting in any way worse than what they received as Jews.) As a consequence, the first time a melanin-advantaged man who isn't as blatantly obnoxious as an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson runs for the Presidency, he is given pretty much a free ride without consideration for his minuscule experience, obscure past, dubious associates, and stunningly bad policies.

Can anyone say with a straight face that somebody who couldn't exploit that indoctrinated racial guilt would have gotten past the early primaries with Obama's massive list of negatives?

We've had explosions of stupidity in the past. Far too many people thought there was no end to the dot.com madness and claimed there was a 'New Economy' but were eventually forced to admit that a business model with little or no net revenues was a loser. We've had an administration that adopted some of its oppositions worst traits and were surprised when this angered the base. We've had a policy of lending large sums of money to persons utterly unable to make good on the transaction, often making those people the hardest hit when the bad loans inevitably lead to economic collapse. This was done in the belief it was helping people who'd been wrongly denied and making us all better as a result. In real life, making more poor people doesn't make the already poor better off.

Steve wants to know how those of us will explain not voting for Obama to our grandchildren. Any grandchild of mine who still asks that question when it reaches voting age is out of the will. Rather than feel compelled to defend my choice, I'll ask how the people who brought the likes of Stalin, Mao, Castro, Khomeini, and someday Hugo Chavez to power explained it to their grandchildren.

[epobirs]

What an unfortunately all-too-typical jackass, this guy Steve.

It is a sad thing that sometimes something really dumb must be done before a person can move on with their life. (Jasper Fforde has a hilarious take on this in his Thursday Next series, where the UK is on the verge of entering a disastrous war because it been accumulating unexpressed stupidity for so long it threaten to burst forth all at once.) A writer of my acquaintance once published an embarrassingly bad novel that still attracted a large readership based on his past greatness. When asked, he said he just couldn't get anything else done until he'd gotten that wretched book out of his system.

It appears we've done this on a national scale. Almost since birth, my generation of tail-end boomers has been fed racial guilt by the shovel-load, regardless of whether we showed the slightest inclination to behave badly towards others on the basis of where their ancestors were shaped by local conditions in pre-technological times. We been trained to feel terrible about things to which we were never a party nor any of our ancestors. (The Civil War was decades past when my all of my grandparents or great-grandparents came to America and it's difficult to imagine them acting in any way worse than what they received as Jews.) As a consequence, the first time a melanin-advantaged man who isn't as blatantly obnoxious as an Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson runs for the Presidency, he is given pretty much a free ride without consideration for his minuscule experience, obscure past, dubious associates, and stunningly bad policies.

Can anyone say with a straight face that somebody who couldn't exploit that indoctrinated racial guilt would have gotten past the early primaries with Obama's massive list of negatives?

We've had explosions of stupidity in the past. Far too many people thought there was no end to the dot.com madness and claimed there was a 'New Economy' but were eventually forced to admit that a business model with little or no net revenues was a loser. We've had an administration that adopted some of its oppositions worst traits and were surprised when this angered the base. We've had a policy of lending large sums of money to persons utterly unable to make good on the transaction, often making those people the hardest hit when the bad loans inevitably lead to economic collapse. This was done in the belief it was helping people who'd been wrongly denied and making us all better as a result. In real life, making more poor people doesn't make the already poor better off.

Steve wants to know how those of us will explain not voting for Obama to our grandchildren. Any grandchild of mine who still asks that question when it reaches voting age is out of the will. Rather than feel compelled to defend my choice, I'll ask how the people who brought the likes of Stalin, Mao, Castro, Khomeini, and someday Hugo Chavez to power explained it to their grandchildren.

[kal]

"This is why I don't use the term "African-American." Unless we're talking about an immigrant from the continent, the term should be discarded."

Interesting. I believe the Pew organization did a study recently that found that the majority, vast majority, of African-Americans in the US considered themselves to be Africans first and Americans second.

This perspective exists in spite of the centuries that many family lines have spent on this continent.

My hope is that the Obama presidency will instill some sense of ownership in society for those people who think that way.

I read stuff like this --

http://tinyurl.com/5rfko8

...and I weep for the ignorance of our young people and future generations.

[mlk]

One day, 98% of black people will be able to vote for a candidate based on the content of their character, and not on the color of their skin.

I'm pretty sure that's the dream, anyway.

As to Richard, who said: "... and his "change" turns out to be more radical than even you Bush haters can stomach" I would offer this observation:

Obama won't be bringing much change at all; firstly because he's now in charge of the long-term strategic interests of the United States of America and he's sworn to uphold and protect our Constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic.

Secondly, what gets you elected isn't what keeps you elected. At any moment, Obama can be removed from power by the American people, and he knows it. Obama and the Democrats are now AGAINST Change; because Change would force them out of power.

[Stephen Kruiser]

There were conservative policies governing this country for the last eight years, Steve?

I've been a conservative my whole voting life so I'm pretty sure I would have recognized any such policies.

But we'll be back.

Great stuff.

[Wind Rider]

Baldi -

I found that the most effective response to folks with steve's point of view is to just point out to them that my vote was cast following Martin's dream - that we should all be judged by the content of our character rather than the color of our skin.

Then I point out that the man's words remind me of Jimmy Carter on steroids. That usually resonates pretty well with people over 30-35.

And usually ends the discussion, without any recriminations - so far.

[Allen]

Baldilocks, your post here has given me some comfort in an otherwise sad time for me.

I'm a white man engaged to a black Haitian women. She's been a republican leaning, Bush supporter for the whole six years I've known her. Several years ago at a Christmas party she tore to shreds a guy spouting off the usual "Bush lied, people died" crap. And yet, she voted for Obama.

At first she tried to justify it based on the last couple of years, but she knew what I told her was true - she was voting for Obama because he was a black man. When this was finally out in the open I got the following as her true reason for voting for Obama - I'm going to put it in quotes even though I'm just paraphrasing:

"White men rule the world. They're the most powerful people on the planet and have been for a long time. There's a sense that they can do anything and that everyone else is lesser by comparison. And it's not just black people that feel this. Now there's a chance for a black man to become the most powerful man in the world and it's spiritually healing. No matter how bad you think he'll be, he isn't going to ruin the United States, but the mere fact that he gets elected is going to make a lot of people feel better about themselves."

I understood - still didn't like her reason - but I understood. I truly wish I could have explained to her how wrong I felt that was, the same way you did in your last few paragraphs.

Anyway, I think I've read you before from Instapundit, but I came here from Ace's site tonight and now you're getting bookmarked.

[Karen]

I'm just starting a new blog under the URL listed above---I posted my reaction to the elections on my husband's blog at http://www.thebrewdogblog.com under "Mrs. Brew." (There are 2 posts relative to the election under my name.)

Your eloquence and courage are breathtaking. Thank you. I hope you'll read what I have written, and that you'll join me in building a new, true grass roots effort to redefine and revive Conservative America. I have been reaching out to like-minded people in the DC area, including a few of the more forward-thinking politicians, to try to get this thing going. My vision is laid out in my post.

Liberals have actually disagreed with my assertion that our elected representatives should represent us, and that we have to be educated on the issues and vocal about our opinions. We've made the Big Brother jokes, but it's only 2 days after the election, and I'm being told that it's "not cool" to say that? That is utterly appalling to me.

Obviously, this is intended as a way to reach out to you as opposed to a comment I would expect you to post. I would love to exchange ideas with you outside our blogs.

I promise that I'm not a crazy, and I'm generally more articulate but I'm on 4 hours sleep with a raging headache!

I hope to hear from you soon. I had never heard of you until I picked up a link on Ace a little while ago, so I don't know much about you, but I know that I would like to.

Thanks for your consideration,

Karen Mason

[thomas Poole]

I'm old, white ugly and a 23 year veteran. Came across you site by accident, think your comments wonderful and I hope more reflective of Black Americans than what I've seen and heard at Obama rallies. Unforftunately, the Democratic party wont let good Black leadership, such as Barbra Jorden in her day, get ahead. Instead it brings us the hacks like Waters of Ca. and the crooks like Jefferson of La. But it serves the purpose of maintaining a "dependant" voting block.

[Harry]

I wandered over here from somewhere else. You have an interesting site. Dymphna has an insightful comment. Thanks.

The election of Obama is worrisome to me on many levels. I look at many things that happened during this election and there is no way that I can say that the election of Obama was a good thing for America. All it proves is that racism can take many forms. If we want to move beyond racism, we must learn to look at people as individuals.

[downtownchris]

I wish people like uptownsteve would explain to me how in the world the last 8 years were failed conservative policies. Other than maybe, kinda defense there wasn't a blessed conservative thing going on in the White House.

Running from a center-left to radical left gov. makes a whole lot of sense!

baldi, you kicked his ass!

[brinster]

Baldilocks,
first time poster here. Let me say that this old white guy would NEVER be laughing at you. For one thing, I'm afraid you'd track me down and whip my butt. For another, if you hadn't said anything humorous, there'd be no reason to laugh, anyway. And then, it would be at what you said, not you that I'd be laughing at.
Interesting that Dymphna mentioned SW VA (where I live). One would think that overt or covert racism would be a bit more prevalent here than elsewhere. As far as I can see, it isn't. About twelve years ago, here in the small town where I live, we elected a Black sheriff. The man will have the job as long as he wants it, because we'll keep electing him. Why? Racial guilt? Nope. The fact that he's a good man, and is good at what he does is why he's there, and why he'll stay there.

[J.J. Sefton]

Baldi:

Wow. What a breath of fresh air. The left are perpetually angry and never satisfied, even in victory. I find that the one thing I cannot stand above all is their utter hypocrisy.

Liberals are supposed to be the movement of inclusion and diversity; freedom of expression and differing viewpoints - EXCEPT if you are a conservative. Then your views are hate speech.

The party and campaign that was post racial. No comment needed.

Speaking of voting along tribal lines, as a Jew it amazes me that my co-religionists vote solid Democrat and have blindly done so for over 60 years. Ironic since Jews are lumped together as Neo cons, controlling the media and the government strings and the world economy and so on and so forth.

Ugh. I am disgusted and dreading what's to come. But more than ever, I want to know what we can do to return from the wilderness and save this nation from itself.

Hey, if you are in NYC, some of the folks who blog on Ace may be getting together this evening for meet up somewhere in town. Not sure if I can come, because of work, but will try and make it.

Will now link to your inspirational "pearls"

[Retread]

Bravo, Baldilocks! I enjoyed that.

I took MLK's speech seriously all those years ago and decided against Obama for the same reasons you did, I don't agree with his policies and positions as evidenced by his voting record, and I think he's tied himself in knots over Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.

That he is the son of a black father and white mother is the luck of the draw and was not a factor in my decision, no more than Hillary's gender would have been if she'd been the nominee.

Thank you, and your commenters, for one of the most articulate threads I've read on the policy v pigment argument.

[Natalie]

I applaud your answer to uptownsteve but I can condense it even further for you:

"My vote was determined precisely by the methodology suggested by Martin Luther King, Jr."

100% true and irrefutable.

[Patrick]

And uptownsteve, because I'm sure you're reading this (your tone indicates you WANTED to get banned so, congratulations, that's two successful operations you've been a part of this week), I'll take your challenge.

Bush is a strictly centrist Republican, or maybe right of center who adopted liberal tendencies because of political advice. Or maybe he's truly less partisan than anyone else in memory.

For whatever reason, he chose to reach across the aisle on a regular basis, and each time it cost him. No Child Left Behind, with Teddy Kennedy - no credit from liberals and unpopular with the Conservative base. Ditto immigration reform. Each time he reached across the aisle and endorsed big-government programs, he got no credit from you and lost credit from Conservatives.

I'm not thinking Rove to be the genius that everyone thinks.

[Val Prieto]

Uptownsteve's been sipping the Kool-Aid through swirly straws. His cmment are not only disingenuous and myopic, but irresponsible. To blame President Bush for everything that ails this country while we've had the absolute worst congress ever, led by Democrats, for the past two years is absurd at best.

Great post, Julliette.

[Marty]

Just a great post! I am so happy to read that I am not the only person not consumed with the race of the candidate. New fan here, I hope to return often.

[Eric]

Nice dismantling of a typical ill-informed Obamaton. It's disturbing that so many people acknowledged Obama's obvious shortcomings in experience, character judgment and political philosophy, and just didn't care.

It also shows that Obama was incredibly successful with his message of "change" and the corollary (but very false) message that McCain was just a continuation of Bush.

[The Opinionator]

Steve was making the error of conflating your decision with that of the electorate as a whole. Other people may take the same information and come to a different conclusion. What you explained quite well was why YOU came to a decision and how you could stand by that decision. Whether or not the majority of voters agreed was irrelevant.

His ranting about the last eight years was unrelated.

[LogicalUS]

What I am unable to comprehend is this slovenly devotion by these people that Obama is going to truly solve all life problems?

Obama is going to "change" America and "heal our souls" now, but his past has shown that the only thing Obama has ever used his supposed superior "intelligence" and "skills" to do is promote Barack Obama?? His district in Chicago has not improved an inch economically, educationally and financially during the six years he represented them in the state senate and certainly not in the three years in Congress. Obama has had extraordinary opportunities such as when he was appointed to lead the Annanberg Challenge without any experience and he failed miserably.

Given an incredible opportunity to help improve the education of Chicago's children by directing the use of 155 million dollars of other people's money, instead of utilizing this stash of money to develop programs in math, science and technology which would have helped our children compete in the world to improve their lives, Obama held meeting, paid for studies and ultimately funneled the money to numerous radical far-left groups who wanted to use education to increase their power. The groups own auditors deemed Obama leadership as a complete failure and a huge amount of the money's use was not accounted for.

I suspect that this will be representative of Obama's presidency. He will fund tons of studies\meetings\networks which will increase the political structure of the leftist but will not provide real value to our country.

[uptownsteve]

I'm a typical stupid leftist who doesn't learn from experience and who refuses to listen. I would rather throw a temper tantrum like a child when another person refuses to allow my spewings on that person's property. I am the cyber equivalent of a burglar.

I will also forget that, the next time I try to post, the hostess will alter my comments--just like she has this time--and then publish them.

[smihut]

Whammy! You've been bookmarked.