A few days a go someone sent me a link to Nazret blog post regarding an Ethiopian that worked as a field organizer on John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign. Addisu Demissie, after a political science degree from Yale University was a Research Director for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Impressive resume, and I am proud, so what was the reason for Nazret to highlight this seemly intelligent young man, well he recently accepted a paid position in Hillary Clintons 2008 presidential campaign.
Nice and dandy, not just him but also all the Ethiopian and African Americans that have injected themselves in the American political system. Gives me hope that one day that America and Americans can see a person for who he/she is rather than what the color of their skin is.
By far the biggest difference in 2007 was the emergence of Barrack Obama and his paramount campaign to the seat in the Oval office.
I am and will always be proud of Obama; over the last month I have been following the news closely hoping that he would win or actually get a fair shot as the democratic candidate.
My hope has been and is being proven wrong by the injection of race in the sociopolitical platform even though Obama throughout his career has tried to take it out of his various campaigns.
I am immesly disappointed by all the black people that currently support, and work for the Clinton Machine, because they are not only standing by but also helping the Machine destroy our hope by marginalizing our candidate as a black candidate rather than a candidate that happens to be blacks.
All black people that continue to support the Clinton Machine are sell outs!
Published by January 25th, 2008 in African and Current Issues.Send this post to a friend
Well said! I completely agree with you.
So, does that mean all white people who support Obama are sell outs too?
This is my jolly Friday mood…
Note to self: never read Nolawi. This is just so wrong on many levels.
[quote comment="120033"]So, does that mean all white people who support Obama are sell outs too?
This is my jolly Friday mood…[/quote]
nope, i didn’t say that did I.. all i am doing is accusing the clintons of marginalizing obama on the race card
that is all nothing else…. dont put words in my mouth…
[quote comment="120040"]Note to self: never read Nolawi. This is just so wrong on many levels.[/quote]
why don’t you explain some of the levels….
I see it a little differently Nolawi. The fact that some black people do not support Obama shows they are not just looking at him just as a black man. They might have looked at Obama and his platform and felt Clinton would do a better job than him,instead of support him and vote their race. Just because one supports Hillary doesn’t make one a traitor to you race. If it did, would voting for Obama make me a traitor to my gender? I for one do not have a problem with Hillary I think she will make a fine President. Just as it would be historic to have a Black man as president of the United States so would having a Woman as president. I think having a woman as the leader of the world might be a great thing. The men have been doing it and it is time to see how a woman might do it differently. Besides, there is really very little difference between Hillary and Obama except race, gender and style.
You are right the guy has an impressive resume and I respect him for following his convictions. I support Barack Obama but not because he is a presidential candidate who happens to be black but because I believe he will do a better job of bringing the country together. My next option for the presidency if Obama doesn’t become the nominee is McCain for the exact same reasons that I thought Obama would be a better president and if McCain doesn’t become the nominee of the repubs for me it is going to be Bloomberg or sitting it out.
And from what you have been saying thus far, you seem to be an Obama supporter and I do not think what you are doing, limiting him to the black presidential candidate rather than to the presidential candidate who happens to be black is helpful for him. I totally agree with Dinich in asking “So, does that mean all white people who support Obama are sell outs too? “. Obama gets strong support from white males democrat and independent who by the way helped him win Iowa and helped him have a very strong second finish in New Hampshire. And if we try to limit the guy by race he will lose this strong voting block which is exactly why the Clintons injected race in the first place.
You guys are all wrong what I said was that clinton is marginalizing Obama as a black candidate rather than a candidate who happens to be black
i could care less if you support obama or clinton regardless of gender or race but the fact remains that the clintons are marginalizing obama as a black candidate intentionally to promote billary to the presidency… that I can’t just stand along and see are a fair thing to do.
and thus when i see the magic johnsons, the Bob Johnsons stand by the side of the clinton machine and help marginalize obama I see them as sell out.
maybe the concept of marginalization of candidates as a person of a certain race or gender is hard to grasp for some of you enji the fact remains.
Nolawi I agree with you that the Clintons have used the race card to marginalise and smear him, I am so far away from it but even here it is on our media everyday being discussed on every tv and newspaper and on that issue I am a bit shocked that it isnt seen as a dirty trick by the black people on the Clinton’s campaign as it is seen here by both black and white people.
At least one or two in the Clinton camp in my opinion should have left in disgust and on principle. But if there were not dirty tricks would you still feel that they are sell outs for supporting Clinton rather than Obama?. Also dont forget they are all politicians and probably backing who they think is the winning candidate. I hate to be cynical but that might be it…
This is politics, it is a dirty, bloody sport. All of them will do, say and use whatever it takes to win. The Obama campaign didn’t have to do much mudslinging because the media, especially Faux new, has been doing a great hatchet job on Hillary. And yes the Bob Johnsons of the world will do say anything for their own benefit. What do you expect he was the founder of BET.
no it is not hard for me to grasp the concept, I just think it is part of the sport.
Great post Nolawi! I don’t know enough to say the Clintons are purposely marginalizing Obama. But if so….it looks like it’s working. Name the last election where two opponents that didn’t have tricks up their sleeve. I’m sure Clinton supporters have many things to say about her opponents.
When it comes to Mr. Addisu Demissie, I say good for him. It’s his decision (whatever he bases it on) to support Clinton.
May the best person win. Playing fair is not the name of the game
First of all, all those who vote one party or candidate because of some sense of loyalty to their race are , well, stupid. Saying someone is a sellout because he or she happens to support a party that is different than yours is no better.
As for chastising the Clintons for using negative tactics; Do you think the republicans will want to hold hands and sing kumbaya during the general elections? He decided to step into the kitchen, take the heat. This is nothing compared to what will come if he is the nominee for the democratic party. He is a goner if he can’t find a way to get his message out starting at the minute someone points to him and states the obvious fact that his skin is dark.
As an aside, as foreigners and Ethiopians our affinity should be with the republicans anyway as the democrats are isolationists that will “sell us out”.
[quote comment="120106"]First of all, all those who vote one party or candidate because of some sense of loyalty to their race are , well, stupid. Saying someone is a sellout because he or she happens to support a party that is different than yours is no better.
As for chastising the Clintons for using negative tactics; Do you think the republicans will want to hold hands and sing kumbaya during the general elections? He decided to step into the kitchen, take the heat. This is nothing compared to what will come if he is the nominee for the democratic party. He is a goner if he can’t find a way to get his message out starting at the minute someone points to him and states the obvious fact that his skin is dark.
As an aside, as foreigners and Ethiopians our affinity should be with the republicans anyway as the democrats are isolationists that will “sell us out”.[/quote]
are you confused… ?
no one said support obama because he is black…
I said clintons are using rase to marginalize obama for race… to which the republicans will do the same?
so what I didn’t bring the republicans up.. i don’t expect any less of them… i am talking about the beloved billary…
I agree with Nolawi to some extent… I have no problem when black individuals support Clinton. However, I have an issue when the so called civil rights activist criticize him for being young and inexperienced. If Clinton had more experience I would have understand the argument.
Some blacks support Clinton out of loyalty and self interest. Some former civil right activist now full time Clinton supporters and lobbyists will never have any place in the white house if Obama wins the election. hence, they do not have any incentive to support him. Politics is a dirty game.
This election is not about race or gender, i am black man and i am going to vote for Clinton i hope she wins, she knows what we black people need, I mean her husband is the first black presidnet. The best thing about it she will help our women achieve a lot of success, because she understands where black women are coming from because she’s a women. Most importantly pay attention to the policy that she advocates. Nolawi this marginalization you are talking about its a figment of your imagination, the clintons have done so much for black people. I mean look at the BET owner he supports her, he is not a sell out he’s just a buisness man. My gosh Vote clinton 08.
Chala, Bob Johnson doesn’t own BET anymore, he sold it to CBS a long time ago. 2005 to be exact. He’s now the owner of the Charlotte Bobcats (NBA basketball team).
All,
I agree with Nolawi, smearing tactics and all the mess against Obama for his race is their target, it’s been exhibited ’cause he’s the biggest obstacle for Hilary, bar none. The republicans don’t have a fighting chance against Obama, ’cause all his beans have been spilled. He wrote of all his wrong doings in his book and nothing more, nothing less.
Hilary has big issues to deal with, her husband’s days in the office, the Watergate scandal, her Walmart corporate issues, her campaign finances…all of that will be put to test and she will definitely fail….watch and learn.
Obama is not just a black candidate, he’s the best candidate. A man who’s working to change the prospect of the nation. A man who’s determined to put the USA back on the map with his diverse background. A man who’s willing to change prespectives in the world today; about black people and minorities as a whole.
Bill Clinton was a great president, made positive strides for the nation, no arguments there. But is he going to be making the decisions this time again…I would beg to differ. If Hilary is as strong of a candidate as she claims to be with her so called 35 years of experience; Obama has the same type of experience, if you put them side by side. Be clear, Hilary gets lobbyists money all the time, insurance/medical/pharmacudical/campaign funds all the time. She voted for the war against Iraq, with no basis to do so. She cried to win an election (no arguments there). Obama is getting more white support than ever exhibited in America’s history.
All these Black supporters, NAACP, Congressional Black Caucus, Bob Johnson, etc are voting for Clinton ’cause during her husband’s tenure they all succeeded; so support is back in his corner. In realistic terms, she hasn’t really been on that corner for a long time.
Mind you, John F Kennedy had very little experience before he ran for the presidency and won. It was unfortunate that he was assasinated (hope the same doesn’t happen to Obama). Yes yes yes, everyone is going to bring up his family history and all that, but looking above that frey, he was the best candidate the county has seen.
Obama is on a different level, above all means and the color of his skin. He’s for making changes, he’s for liberating the nation. Look at how many Republicans and independents are voting for him, not barring race. I don’t hate Hilary, she just doesn’t fit the bill.
My 2 Cents.
Mr. Nolawi, i would like to start by saying great post. I love the passion you have for your candidate, Obama.
However, i must say i would disagree with your view-point around the end of your post, where you held no punches back in attacking blacks who happen to work for the Clinton campaign. I think that’s an utter non-sense. What’s next? Whites should blame the white people that work for Obama.
Very bad my friend. I think you should shun from such a narrow criticism. Listen, why would you want to have Obama elected in the first place? Let me answer that for you, because he is black, first and foremost. And secondly, you obviously think he is capable of doing the job as good as anyone running. Right?
Well, do you also think Hillary is capable of doing this very job as good as Obama?
Listen, i have been following your posts for a while now and i think this is the first time i disagreed with you and i disagree with you with a passion.
What Obama needs to do stop playing soft all and start attacking back. He doesn’t have to be nasty but yet he can still attack.
This is politics and it will only get worse. So in retrospect, when Obama is complaining about any attack, i can’t help it but think to the days when Hillary Clinton used to say, “I am the best candidate that can stand up against the Republican attack machine”.
Come to think of it, she might be just right. Unless Obama proves me wrong. And i hope he does.
But regardless of a win or a loss, he is a ‘trail blazer’ that made so many around the world believe that ANYTHING is possible. And never forget that there is always a second round if he ever loses this.
And boy i can’t think of anyone that would ever beat him other than the sophisticated Clinton’s if he loses this and decides to come back.
What say you?
P.S. If blacks can not come out and vote for Obama in South Carolina in overwhelming numbers, then again we have ourselves to blame. Don’t we? That’s the chance for blacks to put one of their own back on the map.
http://www.abesha.wordpress.com
Chala…
You dangle that stupid comment from Toni Morrison… A comment by now rotting as a putrid cliche… its stench is hard to ignore the way you mindlessly invoke it to make a misleading point.
Even accepting that silly comment about Bill Clinton being “the first black president”… Whatever that woman meant when she said that was in the way that his socio-economic background was a close to a black man in modern America as any president before him. (and therefore making him so close to being like a first Black president that we can actually call him the first black president…) lol… He came from a broken home grew up poor so he can be called black? So the major identifying trait of being black, besides the obvious of the skin color is only that families are typically broken and there’s little money around? Stupid comment by a talented writer. No more.
Now to come to why you support that witch. You think these people have done so much for the black people and act like a “TigeGNa” and fail to detach yourself from your irrational and insulting stance of implying that the black people OWE these Clintons their vote!!! Well, man, there isn’t much left by way of degrees of departure in which you can remove yourself from the truth… so unless you lock yourself in a dark room and think this out, I don’t see how you can find your way back through debates with others.
Nonetheless: You must understand why it is that all this ‘civil-rights’ leaders are clustering around the Clintons. And why they are desperately, almost in a panic, trying to ‘proselytize’ the desirablity of a Clinton in White House, the need for Black America to vote for Clinton. They will stop at nothing to convince us of this… “We owe the Clintons!”… “They been good to us… Real good…”… Does anyone feel the bile rushing up? Yuck… “Yes Sah! Mastah, They been reeeal good to us!”
It is because the Clintons made sure that they did many favors for these same clowns calling themselves ‘the civil-rights leaders’… Imagine how the relevance of the Jesse Jacksons or Sharptons of America will be shattered in the presence of a Black president that is able to DIRECTLY address all the issues in Black America without having to self-edit due to the idiotic liberal-fanned cloud of PC thinking holding the nation gagged and bound and letting dangerous emotions stirr beneath the surface. A black president will NOT need any “civil-rights” estabilishment to communicate with the Black America. And that scares a lot of people….
Now you may have your “competence” delusions about Clinton that tips the scale for you when you imagine her head-to-head with Obama. But your reasoning does not indicate that such a pros and cons thought went to your decision. For the purpose of helping put my comments into proper context, let me explicitly reveal my political leanings…
To put it very midly I am extremely against any election of Clinton to the presidency.
And I don’t think Obama is the right choice for the moment.
No Democract is. The issue of Iraq and the need for the US to continue maintaining troops in that country is one that should decide it for most people. WE need a republican in the white house who has the correct ideas about how to turn the corner in Iraq. And when you add the issue of the economy. In a nation of plenty, where the president basically hires a committee and have his economic policy speech/decisions forwarded to him, so there is little merit to arguing about “experience in dealing with economic matters”…etc… But in the minimum, the president should be an excellent team-player good at inspiring his team to do their best and run the White House with great enthusiasm. Successful business executives/governors/mayors and the like can have this quality.
If 60 years have gone by with America maintaining troops in their tens of thousands in places like Japan and Germany to a great success, why would people fall into the trap of insisting that America pulls out of Irq at the moment when staying makes the most sense? Here’s a country with a populace torn apart with beast-like cruelty exhibited by ‘insurgents’ (No one even dares to call them ‘freedom fighters’…these blood crazed thugs beasts controlled by a few who wield the hypnotizing power of religion+money they need to kill anything and anyone to keep the fear running…) This is also a country with insane, almost mythical amounts of oil that can literally turn the world upside down if the supply is manipulated in any way that can affect world markets.
To talk about pulling out troops from Iraq at such a moment when success is within sight… This takes the ‘audacity’ of a true-believer like Obama who is simply being stubborn and not seeing the changes on the ground… or the poll-driven I’ll-be-whatever-will-get-me-where-I want-to-go deviousness of a Clinton who inherited her poll-checking instincts she and her hubby used for everything from choosing vacations spots to “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!” … lol…
The Clintons are insatiable, blood-thirsty political beasts, who have so much anger and rancor buried deep that they salivate at the thought of actually wielding ultimate power in Washington… I can already imagine the memos being prepared to find ways to get back at “the vast right-wing conspiracy” once they hold the White House. You think Bush is divisive? That nation will learn a bitter lesson about division if the Clintons are back in the Washington.
And to say that they did not cast Obama as “the black candidate” is to be myopic and incapable of brushing away the obfuscations and seeing the plain cold hard facts. Why do you think when so near to MLK memorial day, dear Mrs. Clinton chose to put that contrast between Lyndon Johnson and MLK?… People took the wrong bait and started arguing how she portrayed MLK as a simple enabler for Johnson to act as the 2nd Lincoln in liberating Black America… Well, Johnson did make the final swing that did the job. HOWEVER, you have to ask yourself WHY she said these things?… Why did she compare herself to Johnson (implying she’s the doer) and Obama to MLK (implying a dreamer with only hope in his heart)?….IT SEEMS OUTRIGHT SILLY and even INSULTING… Times have changed now, right? That’s what Black America is told. Obama is runnning for president… He’s not tied down by society as MLK was… He is running for president so he can do things. So he can be the ‘doer’ right? hmmm… So what does this bitch mean when she made the implicit comparison with Johnson-MLK as Hillary-Obama?? This my friends was only one of several carefully planned comments made by her or surrogates to cast hooks into the river of the Political scene with some racial bait at the tip…
Supporters of Obama fell for the trick… race was injected into the dialogue. The moment this was done White America was immediately taken aback. The media fans it continually. Obama getting 85pc. of black support in Nevada… (that’s spun as fact that blacks are blindly supporting this black guy… so maybe whites ought to do the same for their kind) The victory of Obama in Iowa was what put The Clinton machinery to think of this Machiavellian strategy of finishing Obama. They knew there was no way they could compete with this guy if he was winning by such large margins in 98 pc. White states!!! They needed to remind whites of their fear of Black America… They needed to slap people into letting go of any ’silly’ notions of hope, progress, change and unity of America that Obama might have told them about…and see things as the Clintons have always seen them: There’s black America… There’s white America… And then there’re the Clintons and they’ll be damned if they’re gonna let some “kid” (as your beloved rotten shame of a man called Bill Clinton referred to Obama) come and ’steal’ the nomination by appealing to both blacks and whites!!!! UNTHINKABLE! This is Clinton territory. They’ll pay well in money and favor to the whores that we call our ‘civil-rights’ leaders… and they will play well with the Democractic leadership that is still bound and gagged by Clintonian (Think Machiavellian, as bad as Rovian) techniques of snaring supporters…or a gen. democratic support base too blind to see through these people.
The GOP doesn’t offer as much as it should have in this election cycle. It has some very flawed candidates.. Each of them has some very un-conservative like outlooks and outright bizarre characteristics. But still, I believe a couple running on a ticket can emerge from the current GOP players…a ticket that combines 2 candidates who can compliment eachother and help balance out and make up for the less-than-ideal positions each one has…
Do not make the mistake of going for the democrats this season friends. Sad thing is, if Obama is nominated (which the odds are highly against at the moment) and loses the gen. election, then the Clinton machine will drill it into the psyche of the American people until we all go crazy… that Obama, the great Black hope, lost the race… they’ll churn this into a juice and force it down our collective throats until Democrats will never again defy the Clintons and support a black candidate leaving the Clintons knocking at the door. hehe
Oh the bind you Democrats find yourself in. :-)… The party “that is good for blacks” eh?… lol… NO no my black Democrat friends, “you have to know your places and wait your goddamn turn”. This is what you’re being told by the “first black president”, which zombies like Chala are cheerleading for.
Missteps in a liberal minefield, as one pundit wrote recently… It is a delight to see. And I hope the likes of Chala will stop acting like sheep in a herd AND WAKE UP TO SEE THAT BLACK AMERICA NEEDS TO BROADEN ITS POLITICAL HORIZONS AND NOT BE TRICKED INTO LOYALTY LIKE SOME DOG. THIS IS A CARRY-ON FROM SLAVE DAYS WHEN THE ‘HOUSE NEGRO’ FELT SO SPECIAL AND LOVED BY THE MASTER because he was given little treats here and there…
Bill Clinton, our beloved fearless leader who never inhaled, Who has deeply wondered “what the meaning of is is”… Long departed, along with much of the nation, from thoughts of semen on blue dresses and lies told in a deadpan staring at the cameras… Well, his integrity is as solid as it has ever been of course. No question about that! lol… What is sad is to see fellow habeshas buying this crap… when this asshole is just juggling his way into making the final, ultimate payment in alimony - the presidency for his wife. I guess they made a deal that she’d forgive him for all the times his penis and tongue conspired to lead him on the wrong path, unbeknownst to him!… As to her, Well, she…she wants her…precious… precious…. she wants it very very badly… oh precious…
Oval Office!
FRIENDS, THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN!!
Slay Gollum at the general elections*!!!
~
* A reasoned assumption is made that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination.
And lest we forget… a democratic ticket of Hillary-Obama? Many people say that is looking more unlikely by the day… But I think the democratic leadership will TWIST some arms to make sure this happens.
“If you want change, We got change: Female president + Black v.p. vs. 2 White Guys from GOP”
This is how the Democrats would like to run if Clinton wins the nomination.
Since I don’t think the democrats are the right choice this time around, I don’t want to see a Clinton - Obama ticket. It would be too in line with people’s flawed pitch-perfect visions of a total change that many would robotically vote for Democrats and Clinton (the real beneficiary) thinking the presence of Obama makes up for all the ‘negatives’ of Hillary and her attack-dog/husband/co-president Bill Clinton. In such a scenario, GOP candidates will be almost unable to put their cases forward to any effect.
Like mentioned above, the biggest impact of such a ticket would be in giving Hillary a safe passage, spared of all scrutiny of her underhanded ways in the nomination contest, or undesirablilty as a president. She can shroud herself in the Obama banner and hide her reptilian scales and forked tongue. As for Obama, it wouldn’t do him any more good (other some pointless ego massage) than if he waits in the Senate and tallies up a voting and bill record to summon during one of the next 2 presidential elections.
The only ones to really benefit from a democratic ticket of Clinton-Obama will be Hillary Clinton, the Democratic leadership, and the white liberal masses who are in anxiety at the moment because their P.C. sensibilities are being rattled by the naked truth of hipocrisy that lies at the core of liberal beliefs.
We’ll no doubt hear cries for Obama to accept a position as a VP on a Clinton train - “for the sake of the Democratic Party!!” LOL
Obama would gain very little from all this, but I don’t think he’ll be able withstand the pressure.
we’ll see…
P.S. - For those who are still holding out hope that Obama will win the nomination… good luck… I doubt this will come to pass. And if it does, it is very hard to see how the democrats will proceed to the general election… Obama-Edwards? Quite appealing for enough that the Democratic leadership might accept. Obama-Clinton? I don’t know…
if i read carefully you article, i am compelled to conclude that Addisu Demissie is a sell-out. –>
Addisu Demissie is black
Addis Demissie works for Hilary Clinton
all blacks working for the Clintons are sell outs.
thus (as we used to say in maths classes)—>………….(fill the blank).
Obama, is extremely articulated, sharp, sophisticated and above all ambitious. He has a very trustworthy face, a voice that commands reverence with benign too assertive. This kind of excellence is not found in many politicians and it is indeed his only positive features which “might” just help him to be victors.
However what matters in America politics, isn’t personal qualities or merits that one might possess. Rather, it is who you are and what’s in your blood- I don’t mean the question of colour, there are other factors e.g the invisible hand. It pointless for us to argues, if the election is all about the race to the white House or is it just a “race” to be the first black president. I am sure there is more to it then just what we are seeing.
I must admit, my knowledge of US politics, is virtually zero, compare to you. However judging, from his speeches and his background in general, I can’t help but to ask why is he running for president? It dose not add up! Why would a very intelligent person such as him, with a great potential to be come a top political figure in the world, would want to run for president? A position that is nothing more then ceremonial. This is a crazy suicide. He know every well, to be president is nothing more then being the main actor in very well rehearsed drama. Could it be just pure greed or is it a question of ego. We well see!
I know it is very hard for a lot black Americans, not to support him, since many see him as a hope to end their wretchedness of existence. However the fact remains that black Americans deed to ask themselves as to what they want out of this election. They need to participate otherwise the middle and upper classes blacks will eat them alive again. Even our brother Addisu , who has noting to do with the country is taking advantage of the ballot box.
This discussion is a name calling bonanza– First Nolawi’s stereotypical ‘sell-out’ label that’s not far from being called house-nigger. Then WereQet’s full of misogynistic statements. Do we really want to get into who is a house-nigger, field-nigger? More so with WereQet, whatever sound statement you may have made is erased in my book because I have no need for an irrationally angry and sexist neo-con philosophy. Garbage in garbage out… We can all be stereotyped if that is the route you choose to take.
Xana,
“They need to participate otherwise the middle and upper classes blacks will eat them alive again”. What?! Please, comment responsibly.
Holy Molly WereQet you say dont vote for Clinton she is a witch, dont vote for Obama he is not ready while criticising Clinton whom you say implied Obama is a dreamer to Hilary’s doer…
You say the same thing the Clintons and Democrat says about Right wing people and the point is what beyond political trash talking and accusing each other of all sorts in order to confuse the voting public to beleive their respective version of who is best to rule over them for four years and who is a living beast who should not…what is the point of this this everyone hears the same insults fromt he opposing party you get savy to it after a while , as for decisive Oh my God. No one has divided Americans like this current administration and moreover managed to make Americans hated all over the word including other Western countries by their own western indigenous population and others…how can Clinton or Obama make it any worse?
Bill Clinton many sins are on a personal nature, but did that cost anyone their life? it only stained his political record but by God he has much more integrity than the current president whose party you are rooting for who is responsible for many American deaths in a fake war. Have a sense of proportion. It is the Republicans who had control in he last 8 years and ruined America’e reputation nationally and abroad.
Success is not within sight in Iraq, everytime one American report tells us so another American tells us none of it was true and that it is infact getting worse. The latest one cant have been two months ago I will look for it. I dont know what is needed to be done in Iraq but what is being done isnt working now the same way it hasnt worked in the last 4 years, it is not getting better it is getting worse how is that success?
Confused…
Well well..there must be an apt saying out there about appropriate nicknames… but let me not go there.
You cherry pick your way and miscontrue my words and/or create new situations to which the original arguments were not meant to apply. And you run away with it all.
But no matter…why should we make a big deal out of such intellectual ‘megefater’ when it is among friends? :-)… So let me try to realign what you’ve just communicated to me is your perception of my message with what the real content of my message was. Then we can get closer to seeing eye to eye - by which I mean on properly diametrically opposing views (We’re not even there yet, for you’ve assigned me positions I never took)… and after that we can maybe try to work on being able to cast our eyes in the same direction thereby approaching aggreement.
You utterly misunderstand what I said + assign to me statements I never made.
My reasons for not wanting Hillary as a president are ones with which I could go on and on and on… And as you can see, I have a problem with unexpectedly expanding messages that reach ridiculous levels in a short time (I’ve always chosen to err on the side of verbosity) I suggest you get Christopher Hitchen’s book on the topic (BTW, this’s a guy I find to be obnoxious so this is not an all-encompassing endorsement. But he’s right on the point - dead on when it comes to this).
As to my statemens on Obama. I never said “he is not ready”. That’s just a voice in your head. Let’s get that out of the way.
I had hoped you’d first see my conflict in this discussion. With on hand, my hope to see a black candidate, no matter his views, putting up a worthy fight and making a positive mark on the political landscape. And on the other hand, my conviction that he’s ill-suited — owing to some of his positions on issues — to address some of the serious problems of the country at this moment. I would like to see him have a fair fight during the Democratic nomination. But I do not believe he is the right choice for president. It is quite an unfortunate conflict.
This, I hope you can tell by now, has nothing to do with the “not ready” comment that is so condescendingly thrown his way by… The “civil-rights” leaders (whores, as I lovingly refer to them), the foot-soldiers of the Clinton political beast, and by some whose liberal PC tendency jams their internal racist convulsions to the thought of a black president and causes them to automatically spit out the “not ready” comment, which is their mind’s way of covering up their racist core positions. ( Oh how many are the liberal minefields…) Of course, there might also be others - rational beings following their deductions - who decide that Obama is truly not ready….
As to Hillary’s Johnson-MLK comments…She DID make a readily detectable implication where she compared herself to Johnson and Obama to MLK in a strange statement that seems to be bereft of any straightforward meaning in contemporary America where Obama is running for president. I have written what I think is a thorough exposition of this statement’s true purpose. Please go back and read it again. It is very important that we are clear on this point. I think time and more collective reflection will expose this statement she made to be part of a major attempt of the Clintons’ campaign to trade off the black vote they originally hoped to split with Obama, instead aiming for a backlash from the white potential supporters of Obama whom they estimated will fall on to their laps on the rebound. This seems to be just what is happening at the moment. Of course this is possibly coupled with various comments, anonymous emails, robocalls and other negative propaganda that have been bedeviling Obama’s campaign.
Confused, you do not seem to be much into picking on implications… Most of these pols never tell you what they mean, you have to search for systematic obfuscations and behaviour to judge their positions. Much like our beloved PM Meles Zenawi (I still have to take the chill pills when I get worked up over just how that guy’s gotten away with dancing on the very souls of so many people…) their true nature is cleared up when one takes the time to juxtapose their different displayed personas and decisions till a common trait emerges.
As to your comments about divisive leaders. I never said that the current administration is not divisive. That’s another voice in your head.
The divisions caused by the inarguable administrative incompetences of the current White house will ofcourse remain and soon be part of history. A past presidency. A Clinton election, however, will cause millions of like-minded Anti-Clinton Americans to have to re-live the dark days of the late ’90s when the Clintons left a very bad taste in the mouths of millions. We are now in a position for a possible 8 year extension of these same Clintons in that same White House. That will create a different level of division among Americans when a happily forgotten phase in presidential history is re-instated with little redress, only more anger, more vindictiveness and more dogged determination to blast everyone out of the way. A potential for 16 total years with these people at the helm is more that what many are willing to accept.
You then speak of Bill Clinton and act like those liberals who discovered his adventures (starting from his days as governor) and keep desperately trying to act all ‘grown-up’ about it by bringing out that dusty “that’s in his personal life” argument. Jesus Christ. Haaaack. Tuuuuf.! Sorry, I had to get the phlegm suffocating my throat… I always get this way when I hear this argument.
So what? They say… he probably raped a woman in Arkansas, had numerous extra-marital relations, put government resources to bear in his quests to manage his little ‘bimbo eruption’ problem, and afterwards he did NOT have any sexual activities in the oval office and he swore to this in a court of law…all up until he realized that there was hard evidence against him. This is a perjurer whose law license was subsequently revoked. No biggie really. This is just in that clearly defined area of Bill Clinton labelled “personal”. Never had a thing to do with his “public service”.
And then you’re off on a new path: “Compared to BUSH…” that gives your entire argument new life. You now compare Clinton with an outgoing President whom (and whose party) you accuse of “causing American deaths in a fake war”… What an absurd and irrelevant argument to our premise! And you lecture me about “proportion”….
That’s yet another voice in your head telling you that my post compared Bill Clinton’s failings with those of Bush.
Whatever your thoughts on Iraq and we could argue about this for a long time, I do not submit to the allegation that this is a ‘fake war’ as you mean it (started with deliberately false pretenses). Premises maybe have been inaccurate, some major decisions flawed, some implementations botched, and some possible fixes missed. But what is relevant to the present is that this war is a war that is VITAL for the interests of not only America but many many allies across the world. And above all, the people of Iraq, whose only clear hope lies in the success of this mission.
And about the success I said is in sight, you seem to be intent on disbelieving… I think you are putting yourself in the same boat as those soon-to-be-proven-wrong Democrats who find themselves unable to accept the possibility of success. They keep highlighting the lack of political progress when faced with military success. Fair enough. But now they’re getting worried about putting all their eggs in that one basket…. What, they fear, will happen to their argument if the Iraqis come to an agreement to share oil revenue, and governmental control? Recall how Hillary wanted to spin the recent improvements on the ground as a result of the election of Democrats to Congress… !
Let me define the success I am talking about, just incase you are one of those “TSegur SenTaqys”. I am talking about success in terms of victory over the violence in civilian areas. Success in the deployment, distribution and maintenance of basic services, and political progress in terms of rock-hard deals overcoming sectarian inequalities, etc. are reasonably thought to follow the assurances that arise once there is a collective conviction that the violence is over.
But even about the overall success of American soldiers in Iraq, well the future will only disappoint you, I’m afraid. There are the signs of subsiding violence and these will be translated to wide-ranging success. There will be refugee Iraqis returning back to their lives in Iraq. There will be less killers on the streets and eventually full control of the whole country. There will be a stronger Iraqi Army. There will be less Iranian agents dealing weapons and spreading their control. There will be more revenue from oil. There will be more inter-sectarian co-operation based on the principles of co-existence. There will be schools built and power plants constructed and school children able to study in peace. This is the future which, after a long and difficult trek, Iraqis will be able to grasp soon if they continue to do their part as they are doing now. With The Help Of American Soldiers.
So…umm… prepare yourself to be disappointed.
As to the opposing reports you’ve been reading, well read closely and you’ll see the die-hard liberals and certain Organizations are trying to battle against the numbers and create an argument that would sustain the Democrat candidates’ promises of pulling out troops within a couple of months. They are dividing up success and saying military success is irrelevant at this point because there is no political stride commensurate with security progress…etc…. I’ve touched on this above - the assurances of and delighful pleasures of peace after the long violence will be the key to political progress. This is a resonable theory.
As to your indignations about America’s standing in the world… Again, please don’t neglect the implications and undertones. There are more governments that you think in the middle-east that would LOVE to see the Americans stay in Iraq for many more years. Same thing with the Europeans. The feelings of distrust caused in the public at large by the tactless and alarmingly asserive steps the current administration took, are unfortunate but not unfixable. The important thing right now is to communicate both in efforts to reach out to citizens of relevant nations and even more importantly to the American people to explain the realities and distinct likelihoods of success on the ground. This is the way to blunt the liberal agenda (=withdrawal right now) of promoting what amounts to defeatism in effect which will most assuredly lead to actual defeat on the ground. This should not be allowed to happen. And it won’t if Americans make the right choice in these elections and vote for success in Iraq*
* - This is not meant to negate the importance of local everyday issues like health care solutions, educational policies and steps to address problems with the economy… Eventual candidates’ positions on these issues will surely have to be well scrutinized.
Just a housekeeping note. Common netiquette requires comments to be shorter than the original blog post. If you cannot make your point in a concise thought-out manner and insist on long drawn out rants/comments, may I suggest that you start your own blog and post it there where no one will read it (or have to scroll past it)?
Thank you.
[quote comment="120463"]Just a housekeeping note. Common netiquette requires comments to be shorter than the original blog post. If you cannot make your point in a concise thought-out manner and insist on long drawn out rants/comments, may I suggest that you start your own blog and post it there where no one will read it (or have to scroll past it)?
Thank you.[/quote]
Co-signing Betty.
Yeah for Obama….. another win!
betty, moral enforcer/aspiring thought police
Listen…I’ve spent many many hours battling yeirgo zimb/troll/creatures like yourself on message boards. Please just go away. You’ve shared your immense wisdom on housekeeping in a “concise thought-out manner”. Thank you. It is mighty complicated but I’ll keep trying till I master it okay? I have you to look up to.
P.S. - You’ve got the ‘baluka’ act down pat… LOL… yet yihon degmo indih menager yelemedshiw…
wereqet
It is you who needs the dark room no I. Your point only makes sense to those who are bind deaf and dumb. I don’t think you will find that here. You bring up Iraq. I bet you also believe colonization was much needed in Africa. No democrat should take office? You give sold out a new meaning.
WereQet,
I enjoyed reading your comments here, regardless of the above complains. At least your position in the issue and what you really believed in is “concise”. Thanks for taking your time and prsenting to us the very unpopular view among us. The issue like this really requires a well thought explanations and it’s upto us to agree or disagree. We’ve a choice “to read or not to read” right?
WereQet I was hoping that in your reply you will cut the personal commentary on people you dont know, seeing that hasnt happened I will refrain myself from replying in kind seeing it all it does really is deviates from what we are discussing doesnt it?….
And I will get to each and everyone point you made, and the ones you are refuting when time permits which is scarce for the next few days, but I will have a consultation with all the little voices in my head, both benign and malign to make their contribution, you too, seeing as you know so much about voices in heads, you might wanna tell yours to make their point and leave the pyschoanalysis to the experts who get to at least see, know, and diagnose people corretcly when voices are heard, they might do a better job, like. Miscontrued what you said?..ah, but I say I havent and I you say I did and I will show it in time as I said. For now thank you I think….
I will be back for the rest….
Nolawi . . .
WHOA!
Well, Well, Well - - - look what happened when i come back 24 hours after i have replied to this post.
People had started playing Rugby. You guys are really just bumping heads. Nolawi should have emphasized what he meant in a longer post. As to this post, it is short and hard to get your points across. I felt your analysis was wrong and it seems like most people agree with me.
I have read his responses and they made no sense. I don’t see any sale out here on behalf of the blacks you mention. I think that’s a very dangerous point to raise as it is very narrow minded and your support for a candidate overcomes your judgments in this post.
Anyway, we can agree on disagreeing.
P.S. Obama had won South Carolina as of this response. Nolawi Hi 5 !!!!
http://www.abesha.wordpress.com
Grand Ma,
This is what it means to be eaten alive…
see http://www.revivalarmy.com/outreach/
Xana,
Thanks for trying to give me clarity what you meant however, you’re mixing apple with orange. In a multicultral society,status within a particular race has no place at all.
The Clintons will not be getting my vote this year. I’d rather vote for a republican (Gag!!) before I vote for them. That is, of course, if they make it to the finals. I was listening to Clinton (Bill) speak last night after their loss and for the first time, I understood why some people really dislike him. He foofoo-ed the South Carolina results, as if it meant very little to him and of course he talked about himself A LOT! “South Carolinians, what do they know anyway?” was what I was hearing him say. Anyway, the main reason the Clintons are erking me right now is because they tried to reduce Obama to a color. Clinton compared Obama’s win to Jesse Jackson’s win in the 90s. What was that?!? Granted they are both black men, but so far, Obama has been successful in not letting his campaign be about color/race, but the Clintons made sure that didn’t last for long, did they? Dirty politics.
And another thing that truly ruffles my feathers is when a white person calls a black person “well-spoken, eloquent”. ‘Well-spoken” as opposed to what? Did you expect him to throw in some slang, some jive talkin’ or something. Aleguebagnem…Anyway, i digress
#14 Chala, last time I checked his skin color is WHITE (NECHE). Of course we should give him a lot of credit for what he did for black people in America. But if you think he is black tell me what he did for the Rwanda case when about a million people died. “Former President Bill Clinton is being the first black president” is the most dummies thing that I ever heard
“To whom much is given, much is expected” is a motto I live by day to day. Much is expected from Obama and he’s been delivering so far. Obama’s legacy, let’s say his run ends now, is already cemented in the plaques of the globe. He’s done more than most individuals around the world in contribuiting to change, new blood, and revolution. Barack Obama, even if he doesn’t win the prize (president), more doors will be open, more light will shine, more prosperity will be flourished. He’s single handedly transpired the spirit of people, not just minorities. He’s ready to be a president (I had doubts in the early stages), but he’s proved himself time and time again. Folks say he doesn’t have enough experience in Washington, last time I checked, John F Kennedy didn’t get fed like a pig by lobbyists in Washington neither. Times have changed and will continue to do so. Obama is a proud black man, didn’t want to battle the Clintons when it came to race; ’cause it would have brought more negative attention that’s not needed. He took the high road, right and proud. He won South Carolina and on a path to win the rest. I expect this race to go down to the wire, good luck to the DNC in backing one of the two.
About Nolawi’s point once again, being a sellout is too harsh (such a label could be poisonous) but having less trust in our own kind is weak and insensitive. I am not saying race is the only connection we have with others, but the reason we are (as blacks) now is a direct result of the civil rights movement. People, regardless of their race, will choose a direction that’s best fit to their agenda; agenda that’s hopefully not distorted. We need to stand together and support our own. Mind you, at the end of the day and in most cases, your people will stick by you faster than those who we befriended due to circumstances…..
My 2 cents
You know wht guys ? I have a question -why do some ppl write a book here ? In case you haven’t noticed yet ,this is a blog and try to sum up your views. The shorter the clearer and the better.
Clinton Black is the funniest thing I have heared of since the new year
[quote comment="120609"]The Clintons will not be getting my vote this year. I’d rather vote for a republican (Gag!!) before I vote for them. That is, of course, if they make it to the finals. I was listening to Clinton (Bill) speak last night after their loss and for the first time, I understood why some people really dislike him. He foofoo-ed the South Carolina results, as if it meant very little to him and of course he talked about himself A LOT! “South Carolinians, what do they know anyway?” was what I was hearing him say. Anyway, the main reason the Clintons are erking me right now is because they tried to reduce Obama to a color. Clinton compared Obama’s win to Jesse Jackson’s win in the 90s. What was that?!? Granted they are both black men, but so far, Obama has been successful in not letting his campaign be about color/race, but the Clintons made sure that didn’t last for long, did they? Dirty politics.
And another thing that truly ruffles my feathers is when a white person calls a black person “well-spoken, eloquent”. ‘Well-spoken” as opposed to what? Did you expect him to throw in some slang, some jive talkin’ or something. Aleguebagnem…Anyway, i digress[/quote]
You are a genius.
I love you I love you!
I have finally had it with this cry babies coming here with their handkerchiefs.
Dirty politics? What? Are you serious? I will tell you what the problem is with Barack Obama. The problem with Barack Obama would always come from black people or black leaders.
Not a single campaign would fold their chairs and leave the race without giving it all they got. Yes Obama might try to have it both ways, but it would never work. Was he not the same person that blacks were labeling as “not black enough”.
I guess your comments are judged based on your color skin. The harshest criticism of Obama has so far come from blacks.
My opinion about this whole thing is, if Obama is going to win this race - i would like him to take on the toughest critics. I don’t want anyone to cut him any slack because of his skin color.
That would be the ultimate insult to a black person - “we can’t make it unless we get some help along the way”.
Besides we all know how every political campaign as of late has been dirty. You guys know this is not about his color. John Kerry got swift-boated, but he didn’t cry about it. He understood that it was part of the game.
If Obama keeps crying afoul, i would have to pass on this limping lion. Obama should be criticized and dealt with by anyone who would like to do so. If they can use his color to steal some votes, they would do it. Winning matters. Why you lost wouldn’t matter to anyone.
If Obama makes it through the primary, do you know what expects him? Where do i begin? The KKK’s of the world would be buying ads in the airwaves that would make you go “how do they let this be said?”
Listen, you would look back to what Clinton said about Obama and you would go “that was a cake walk”.
So, Nolawi - - - I guess you would need a lot of Advil come the general election. Be careful pal, this is the beginning. He is crossing into a crazy territory so you might be the only one that would be left to go crazy and with a bunch of headaches.
http://www.abesha.wordpress.com
guys watch dr.ethiopia .. has good points here……………..
Dr Ethiopia,
Good points, but Obama never cried about the racial attacks. He felt it wasn’t necessary and didn’t need to stoop to their level and discuss it; i.e. what would really come out of such a discussion? Dirty politics is dirty politics, pick on issues, his stance, his vote, his support, his actions but not his race.
Much to the dismay of everyone his opponents don’t really have much to talk about, he wrote about it on his books.
Your comment about the black people & leaders, what control does he really have? They will choose Hilary ’cause during her husband’s tenure, they excelled…more of following suit.
Another thing, does he really have to answer to stupid rhetorics who question whether he’s ‘black enough’, it isn’t worth wasting a breath.
Come up with a better argument.
Dr Ethiopia
There is another way to look at this. No one objects to the Clintonian machine to run a robust campaign as they have, but robust is not bullying or machavellian. A robust campaign is not to use race as a yardstick to beat your opponent to your advantage especially when you have a reputation for liberal views on race and especially when you are a woman politician vilified and shown hatred for just being a woman in some quarters. And it is the politics of the abslutetly filthy to try and awaken racial prejudices in order to gain votes. Unfair to her opponent, unfair to the voting public and it is not cry-babish to say so…
I feel people dont like to feel that they are manipulated, the only time we do is when we dont see it and we are dazzled by it and feel it is benign or at least not malevolent or opportunistic in nature, then we call it charisma and submit to it hoping it comes with more worthy qualities besides…When it is done by politicians in the manner of the Clinton’s it is seen for what it is..opportunism and lack of integrity and a ruthless streak to do whatever it takes to get votes and then people run the other way voting for their opposite whom they feel were hard done by unfairly and also because a good number of people like their would be leaders to have personal qualities that we admire and many of us dont admire ambition so fierce in a leader they are willing to manipulate subliminally or not so at times important issues like race to win an election….
That is why the crybabies as you call them complained, not because Obama or his supporters couldnt handle the heat or cant take political verbal punch ups from opponents, if he couldnt he wouldnt be where he is now. It is because Billary picked on a characteristic of his that he has no control over and put a diabolical political spin verging on the quasi-racist…
And to say the Neo Cons would say worse about Obama’s race if he is chosen as the candidate for the Democrats is not an argument, the right wing is supposed to do that because that is their beleif system, as far as we know it is not the beleif system of white liberal lefties Democrats like Billary yet they use it to become President what does that tell you about them?. Perhaps all people are seeing is their lack of integrity and making thei minds up about them accordingly….
Wait a minute Nolawi! You are missing the point here. I’ve my fingers crossed that Obama will be the democratic nominee. Having said that, I’m glad that Ethio-Americans are involved in the political process even if the guy above is supporting Hillary. We should be encouraging active political participation of citizens even if that means they may be supporting candidates that we don’t like or parties on the other side of aisle. I don’t believe we should impose unfair expectation on the guy above just because he’s black like Obama. I believe commitments to a political campaign should be based on more important issues that geographical location or skin color.
I think you are missing the point Haroun, I give him credit for his participation. But I take back the credit for the fact that he is standing quietly by while they are marginalizing obama as a black candidate…
SO I think you are the one missing the point!
I think you clarified a lot on your last post Nolawi. I didn’t know whom you were referring to when you said that “they are marginalizing him as a black candidate.” Yeah, the Clintons are in fact doing that. Bill compared Obama’s landslide victory in S.Carolina to Jesse Jackson’s win there both in ‘84 and ‘88(BTW the republicans were voting for reverend Jackson as well so that to the democrats will end up with a less-appealing figure as a nominee but that’s another story). What was Clinton’s intent behind such an ill-thought remark? They say Obama won in S.Carolina because half of the registered democrats are black. But, doesn’t that mean the otehr half are white? If we talk about numbers, 61% of the turnout in S.Carolina where females? Why didn’t they vote for Hillary? Female turnout so far has been 3:2 ratio in favor of females but nobody mentions that. I guess race still transcends everything in the US. Also, Hillary is using her gender as a means of garnering votes. But Obama can’t do that because any black politician has to downplay race and has to “make whites feel not guilty”. Obama has so far managed to avoid any trace of racial sensitive issues . The sad thing is that lately the Clintons are constantly reminding us of Obama’s race using subtle languages.
so haroun, you wrote a lot but you didn’t say if you agree if the clintons did marginalize him as a black candidate..
btw i wrote this before the jj comparison
Read the second line Nolawi. It’s rite there.
[quote comment="121583"]Read the second line Nolawi. It’s rite there.[/quote]
its not clear that is why…
then you agree and you were wrong when you said that I was mistaken.
[quote comment="121250"] marginalizing obama as a black candidate…[/quote]
are u referring to the bob johnson incident? ’slum landlord’ comment? inexperience claim?
[quote comment="120033"]So, does that mean all white people who support Obama are sell outs too?
This is my jolly Friday mood…[/quote]
that’s a great question by the way Dinich. That’s the first thing that came to my mind after reading this post. Something that I was asking myself about for the last few month now… when the average American citizen (black or white)asks “Is America ready for a black president? A woman president?”. It’s almost enavitable that come November voters think twice before putting another so called conservative candidate in the office. But that’s not what I want to talk about. I hate politics… or may be the way it was shaped and manipulated by people and especially the media. What’s interesting about this election season (primaries and caucuses) is the fact that we have a black and woman democratic candidate campaigning to become a front-runner for the upcoming presidential election. But what everybody seem to forget these days is the fact that race and / or sex isn’t…or shouldn’t be a factor to determine someone’s personality, or degree of intelligence or decision making abilities. And it seems like these early elections are fueled with sexism and recism and making people forget about the root of our current issues…a change in our healthcare systems, our foreign policies and the war in Iraq along with many other things putting this country in a mess and the person who we believe can make a promising change in these areas.
Congrats, Nol……looks like your man is on the right track….