Jump to content

Tavis Smiley is no good for Black folks!


Troy

Recommended Posts

On Tuesday I made a post on my blog entitled “Tavis Smiley is no good for Black folks!” The provocative title was used to encourage people to read the post so that I could talk about one of the good things Tavis has done and that is start SmileyBooks.

I began by describing why I did not always like Tavis. My dislike for Tavis really began when I saw Tavis’ reaction to Barack’s declining to participate in Tavis’ State of Black America forum. However in hindsight my impression of Tavis has changed to one that is very favorable.

I discovered pretty quickly that many people – at least those that commented on my Blog and on Facebook page DESPISE Tavis! I was actually quite surprised by the reaction. The strongest critics of Tavis have no problem overlooking everything Tavis has accomplished simply because he continues to critique President Obama.

It seems no one can really criticize the president without being vilified.

I know some of y’all don’t agree with everything the President has said or done. Are you too dogged by your friends or family for this reason? Whenever I question ANYTHING Obama has done folks always say stuff like “we’ll he is better than George Bush” or make some other accommodation to explain his actions.

Y’all know I predicted Barack would win before he even announced he was running. Y’all also know I supported him primarily because he was a Brother.

What I find it pathetic is that many Black folks will continue to praise Barack without reservation on every activity while we continue to catch the most hell and seemingly, have our votes and support taken for granted.

I guess I was guilty of the same thing supporting Barack simply because he was Black—in hindsight, that was a mistake too. I too was willing to overlook lack Barack’s lack of experience, for example, by saying, “he can’t be worse than George Bush”. Anyone who opposed Barack was simply a self-hating negro.

This unconditional, worship of Barack Obama (or any man) will do us no good, no good at all.

It is not just Black folks. Barack was given the Noble Peace Prize while continuing to escalate forces in Afghanistan and reneging on the promise to close Gitmo. I not even saying I disagree with those actions; but a Noble Peace prize – come on?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Cynique I've seen the errors of my ways. I recall you and a few others here were willing to look at Obama without the rose colored glasses. Oh well you live and learn.

Merry Christmas!

(I'm up working, this Christmas morning, while my entire family is still in bed. When the kids were youger they would have been up since 5AM dragging us out of bed by 6AM)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find it pathetic is that many Black folks will continue to praise Barack without reservation on every activity while we continue to catch the most hell and seemingly, have our votes and support taken for granted.

(What do you expect? Negroes are still worshipping Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton although they hated them and held them in contempt.

The Black community often acts like the classical abused spouse. Gets kicked in the arse and crawls back for more.

Pathetic.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the cure for battered wife syndrome? Perhaps that is the cure for Black America.

I know battered wifes (people) lash out at those that try to help help; and the battered seek solace from the people abusing them. The parallels to Black America are numerous.

Even more fascinating is Cynqiue, Troy an Chris agree on a topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that black folks are actually masochistic. They are just tenacious in their resolve to adhere to the mantra of Jesse Jackson which directs them to "keep hope alive".

Empathy is at the root of their attachment to Obama. They just want his critics to give him a chance to prove himself. IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Gosh, I drop by and you guys are still cheering for Mr Charlie. However, I am yet to here any of you say who YOU WOULD chose as Obama's replacement?

Really, regardless of how y'all try to frame it, much of the happy nappy negro's " critique" is nothing more than a tool of the white man.

"The strongest critics of Tavis have no problem overlooking everything Tavis has accomplished simply because he continues to critique President Obama"

Gag me with a spoon. Travis has accomplished? And tell me, what does that have to do with the tea in China?

If not Obama, THAN WHO?! Until yawl can answer that question, all of your alledged "criticism" is nothing but a vote for a faceless Republican. And, who might that be? Really, think about it. Do you really believe your critique of Obama is serving any purpoose? If so, how so? Y'all aint nothing but puppets of the 10 Oclock news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does an alternative to Obama have to be a "faceless Republican", carey? Why not a Democrat who acts like a Democrat instead of one in bed wih big business and war mongering generals. Those who voted for Obama have a right to criticize him for replacing the agenda that got him elected with one that Republicans have corrupted.

And who are you to quell dissent? Since when have presidents been immune from criticism? You would do well to listen to the 10 o'clock news instead of tuning out anything that requires you to be something other than an obedient member of the herd, plodding along, staring at the ass of the critter in front of you. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest esmerelda

On Tuesday I made a post on my blog entitled “Tavis Smiley is no good for Black folks!” The provocative title was used to encourage people to read the post so that I could talk about one of the good things Tavis has done and that is start SmileyBooks.

I began by describing why I did not always like Tavis. My dislike for Tavis really began when I saw Tavis’ reaction to Barack’s declining to participate in Tavis’ State of Black America forum. However in hindsight my impression of Tavis has changed to one that is very favorable.

I discovered pretty quickly that many people – at least those that commented on my Blog and on Facebook page DESPISE Tavis! I was actually quite surprised by the reaction. The strongest critics of Tavis have no problem overlooking everything Tavis has accomplished simply because he continues to critique President Obama.

It seems no one can really criticize the president without being vilified.

I know some of y’all don’t agree with everything the President has said or done. Are you too dogged by your friends or family for this reason? Whenever I question ANYTHING Obama has done folks always say stuff like “we’ll he is better than George Bush” or make some other accommodation to explain his actions.

Y’all know I predicted Barack would win before he even announced he was running. Y’all also know I supported him primarily because he was a Brother.

What I find it pathetic is that many Black folks will continue to praise Barack without reservation on every activity while we continue to catch the most hell and seemingly, have our votes and support taken for granted.

I guess I was guilty of the same thing supporting Barack simply because he was Black—in hindsight, that was a mistake too. I too was willing to overlook lack Barack’s lack of experience, for example, by saying, “he can’t be worse than George Bush”. Anyone who opposed Barack was simply a self-hating negro.

This unconditional, worship of Barack Obama (or any man) will do us no good, no good at all.

It is not just Black folks. Barack was given the Noble Peace Prize while continuing to escalate forces in Afghanistan and reneging on the promise to close Gitmo. I not even saying I disagree with those actions; but a Noble Peace prize – come on?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

It is not just Black folks. Barack was given the Noble Peace Prize while continuing to escalate forces in Afghanistan and reneging on the promise to close Gitmo. I not even saying I disagree with those actions; but a Noble Peace prize – come..

Huh? What does receiving a Noble Peace Prize have to do with Gitmo and Afghanistan? Like you, I also do not agree with the continuance of Gitmo or our presence in Afghanistan. But the Norwegian Nobel Committee decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee saw the importance to Obama's work for a world without nuclear weapons. Whether you like it or not, Obama has generated a new climate in international politics and cooperation. Something Bush 43 was disaterous at doing. Thanks to Obama's initiatives, the US is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. What other major world leader is attmeping to do this? These are the reasons they decided to give him the NPP. And for the record, I'm not suggesting nor attempting to make the argument that Obama (or any other major leadership figure) should be free of criticism. But I'm sorry bro Troy, your criticism of him for recieving a NPP does not stand up to the facts.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Xeon, Obama was in office for like 5 minutes and had not actually DONE anything but give anything to deserve that king of recognition.

Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Mother Teresa, Ghandi, MLK, Ralph Bunche,... OBAMA -- I don't think so. At least not yet. I don't even think Obama himself would disagree.

If you can't draw a connection between gitmo and and escalting war in afghanistan, and a "Peace Prize; then we can't really even begin to have a conversation.

"...new climate in international politics and cooperation." Please. Come back to me when you have some tangible results that can be directly attributed to Obama's actions.

Better yet get back to me which the lower and middle class Negroes in THIS country have something to cheer about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on Troy, on one hand you've said Obama is responsible for anything that happens under his administration, yet, now your implying there's no "...new climate in international politics and cooperation". It now appears you are paraphrasing in a lazy attempt to make a point.

And what is this... "Better yet get back to me which the lower and middle class Negroes in THIS country have something to cheer about"?

What?! Are you speaking for yourself? If that wasn't the most ambiguous question/statement you've said thIS year! Define "cheer about".

I can cheer and I am sure other can as well. Look Troy, a person gets what they are looking for and it's obvious you're looking in the wrong places, simply to make a shallow point.

"If you can't draw a connection between gitmo and and escalting war in afghanistan and a "Peace Prize; then we can't really even begin to have a conversation"

No Troy, nice try but you can't flip the script. The question is - to you- what is the connection? And how does any of that have to do with - your opinion - that it disqualifies Obama?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Carey what going on man? Good to red you again.

I thought I make a pretty clear comparsion with people who actually had a life time of significant accomplisments versus Obama who has been on the job for a millisec. Now Obama is not the first President to get the Prize, but seriously what had he actually accomplished? It is all well a good to create a "new climate", but that has not proven to really benefit anyone.

Maybe I'm tired of hearing talk, when it is hitting the fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The somewhat left-leaning Nobel Peace Prize committee is more than a little politicized and the awarding of this honor is often used to make a statement. Many contend that presenting it to Obama was more for his popularity and meant to be a slap in the face for Bush who was unpopular with Scandanavian countries because of the invasion of Iraq. This was also cited as the reason they gave it to Jimmy Carter and Al Gore a few years earlier. Having just ordered more troops to be sent to fight in Afghanstan, to his credit, Obama himself seemed a little embarassed to receive a peace prize.

The ad hominem resentment that people like carey display toward any black person who doesn't blindly support Obama, does nothing to legitimize their arguments. The arbitrary stance of his worshippers says more about them than it does about Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God knows I'm an "Obama Lover." I campaigned hard for him

and I can honestly say that he's my favorite person on earth

right now, no matter what he does politically.

BUT....

I thought it was grossly premature to give him the Nobel Prize.

It smacked of White People's desperate wish for someone to come

along and ZING (make the stigma of racism disappear)...it was the

ultimate Magical Negro moment. Barely in office. They rushed the

award in his hands because at that moment IT APPEARED to the world

that electing a "black" man had changed the universe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Kola and Troy, it's nice to "see" y'all again.

No Cynique, again you've managed to grossly misrepresent the facts. Fact is, I deplore those who bemoan Obama's alledged errors, using unsubstantiated shallow opinions to voice their discontent. I hold a deep disdain for those who obviously have a hatred for Obama, yet hide behind the trite phrases "it's just my opinion" and "we are making him responsible" and "it's our right to critizise". Those kind of words are nothing more than shallow shields for those that love to lanquish in negativity, and for those that are simply a died and fried cynic that never views the world as anything but ugly. That infantile, overly-simplified reactionary approach does not make them appear more business minded. Nope, for many, it exposes their inner frustrations and lack of happiness in their own lives.

Look at Kola's comment. Her comment had balance. She didn't attack the man, she voiced her opinion based on the issue at hand. And she came through the door with praise in her hand. On the other hand, there are quasi-wannabe intellectuals that do nothing more than regurgatated the 10 O'clock news, in an attempt to appear as if they are all knowing. Those are the negro that I can't stand.

And, I am still waiting for someone to define "Hero worshippers".

Look, I've said this many times, I am all for contructive feedback, but if the feedback is nothing but gripes and moans, sticks and stones, porous opinions and bitches with switches , I don't view that as constructive feedback. That's more akin to the wayward negro's real messages of "replace Obama". And I, for one, can spot that bullsh*t 100 miles away. And I don't like it one bit.

Cynique, define it as you please.... 10 toes up and 10 toes down, 2 naked booties going round and round, skin touching skin, going in and out, if that ain't fkin' you're really a cynical brown-out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...new climate in international politics and cooperation." Please. Come back to me when you have some tangible results that can be directly attributed to Obama's actions.

I just did. You chose to ignore it. I can understand your disagreement with believing his receiving the NPP was premature. I have no issues with such an opinion. But let’s look at the documented facts. I stated before, what other current “major world leader” has been more aggressive in traveling, meeting, attempting negotiations and addressing global issues than the POTUS? Putin? Hu Jintao? Angela Merkel? Naoto Kan? WHO??? You gave no response. You may disagree with Obama for personal reasons but his aggressive efforts to address Middle East peace , Global climatic changes, nuclear weapons reduction and economic cooperation is documented.

Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 days into office. Perhaps this is what unnerves you. But what did he do within those two weeks that caught their attention? Well, let’s list them:

• January 21: Obama met with the ambassador to Iraq, commander in Iraq, and regional commander to receive a complete briefing on the war and what is the best strategy to bring it to a conclusion.

• January 22: Obama ordered the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

• January 22: Obama signed an executive order explicitly prohibiting the use of torture and ordering all U.S. forces to obey the Army Field Manual. He also ordered a review of the case of Ali Saleh al-Marri, a detainee held on a Naval brig in South Carolina.

• January 22: Obama met with numerous retired generals on security matters.

• January 23: Obama rescinded the Mexico City policy, which had prevented nongovernmental organizations from receiving government funding if they supplied family planning assistance or abortions abroad.

• January 23: Obama calls Prime Minister Harper of Canada, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain, and Ban Ki-moon, secretary general of the United Nations.

• January 26: Obama announced his appointing of Todd Stern to the new position of special envoy for climate change -- recognizing the environment as a pressing foreign-policy concern.

• January 27: More phone calls. This time Obama speaks with Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, South African President Kgalema Motlanthe, and Prime Minister Taro Aso of Japan.

What other president in American history has been that pro-active on an international scale within the first two weeks???? You may not be impressed by his calling, negotiating and attempting to communicate with international leaders but it is a very significant effort to shore up the extensive damage done to Americas image by a previous war mongering administration. Sorry bro Troy, I can understand your belief that it (NPP) was premature, but what he did in those "first two weeks" was extraordinary and none of your acerbic railing can undo or erase it from the record………

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, I've said this many times, I am all for contructive feedback, but if the feedback is nothing but gripes and moans, sticks and stones, porous opinions and bitches with switches , I don't view that as constructive feedback. That's more akin to the wayward negro's real messages of "replace Obama". And I, for one, can spot that bullsh*t 100 miles away. And I don't like it one

Damn Carey! I guess that means you have zero tolerance for Obama haters? Ha! Ha! Ha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn Carey! I guess that means you have zero tolerance for Obama haters? Ha! Ha! Ha!

Yep, ZERO! :-)

In fact, I don't particularly like haters of any kind. Ya can't trust them to tell the truth. They smell their own stankin' upper lip while saying the world is funky. And you know what, the harshest criticism always seems to come from those that truly have no idea what you’re doing, and truly has no gift of their own. And are just plain pissed off that you’re happy and happily plying your craft. That is of course, if you’re making the world a little more ugly, then, of course, that type of personality will gladly hold your hand and dance through the stinking muck filled sewer, proclaiming that you, just like they, see only how awful it all is, but take pleasure in the celebration of it. But somewhere along my journey, I came to understand that any D- minus person can see how terrible things are. That does not take any skills.

If a person wishes to be a full time cynic, that’s their very unfortunate choice.

To hate someone or something is a mean thang. It grinds the hater to the ground while the "hated" whistles while they work; going on their merry way.

Btw, I knew you'd come back. We have to make Troy accountable for his words *wink*. As long as we sit back - while the other one swings off his nut sack - nothing will ever come to fruition if we don't say it loud.... HATERS GO HOME!

go%2Bnow.jpg">

Link to comment
Share on other sites

carey is a classic example of somebody who is blatantly guilty of everything he accuses everbody else of. He is a big mouth who couches his arguments in the subtefuge of name-calling character assassination and once you strip away all of his vapid verbiage all he is saying is that if you don't agree with me, then you are automaticaly wrong; if you don't jock who I jock, you are a "hater". carey is the poster boy for the old adage about there being "nothing worst than a fool who knows not that he is a fool". :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carey I know Satan is wearing an overcoat right now 'cause I agree with Cynique and Kola -- both of their observation are FAR more plausible explainations for giving Obama a Noble Prize than what you and Xeon have put forth.

I'm not sure I understand why you are bringing "Hate" into the conversation. No one hates Obama we all want him to succeed. I've supported Obama since before day one and continue to do so.

You Carey, like many people you confuse criticism with hate. In fact people who critique the president are probably better supporters because they are interested in him doing better -- as opposed blind or apathetic support.

Xeon, your research is great. However your interpretation is lacking. Or rather, it still fails to address my main point. After 12 days in Office Obama had not ACCOMPLISHED anything -- certainly not enough to warrant a Noble Peace Prize.

I do not consider making phone calls, having a few meetings, and ordering shit that never happened, accomplishing anything.

It is like awarding Carey a Nobel Prize for literature because he talked about writing a great novel. Do you see the distinction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You Carey, like many people you confuse criticism with hate. In fact people who critique the president are probably better supporters because they are interested in him doing better -- as opposed blind or apathetic support."

Please Troy, that silly retort has never held any weight. You're basically saying, those of us that do not voice unsubstantiated shallow opinions, and vent gripes and moans, sticks and stones, porous opinions and bitches and switches - at President Obama - are blind followers? Surely you see how ridiculous that is?

And, I am still waiting for someone to define "Hero worshippers".

I don't believe there is a truly "thinking" man or woman who could legitimately claim or believe the request to "watch the motive of others" regarding the public flogging of a President can compare to what some would call "hero worship", and/or compare the request to the blind devotion some folks have demonstrated in regards to Kwame Kilpatrick and Marion Berry.

Troy, now lets talk about something that's real. Do you really think you are making him accountable by mimicking the words of his arch rivals?! I mean, really? Do you think you're making him accountable by sitting in a remote site, with a bunch of negros that acquired their political science degrees on-line - or off the 10 o'clock news? I mean, what's accomplished by listening to rants, half-baked solutions, haters and naysayers - huh? Surely that's not making him accountable. That's nothing more than a game of spades or dominoes. Any negro can sit around a table and talk trash. I mean, helping him and supporting him??? Tell me, tell me exactly how you're doing that? I mean, considering the un-focused willy-nilly rhetoric that's the final product of most "side-walk" discussions, I find it hard to believe - you believe - it's the best way to "support" him. accountable. Really! Would your words move people toward Obama or move them away from him?

Really, I believe you and YOUR ilk have "criticism" confused. Not those of us that do not think it's wise to vent and spit on the president, with no defined reason to do so. I mean, really, what's your purpose?

"Carey, it's just our opinion"

Oh, is that what it is? If it’s “JUST” yo opinion; implying that you don’t have to support it, or it’s not to be taken seriously, then why say it at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carey I read what you wrote twice. I don’t really understand how any of this supports an argument to justify Obama winning a Noble Peace Prize.

Since this would not be the first conversation that has run completely off the rails I'll follow your lead. I agree that many people blindly followed Kilpatrick and Barry -- perhaps for the same reasons people blindly support Obama: they see a Black man, one of their own, in a position of power and they are living their dream through him. It really does not matter what an “Obama” does their faith will never be shaken.

There are examples of this throughout all of recorded history. It is nothing new, it is human nature.

Realizing this, I completely understand the reaction that you and others will have to anything I have to negative to say about Obama. It is like challenging someone's believes in Jesus Christ is God -- that is a more than pointless exercise in futility.

Since Obama is not God (though some might disagree), and just the president, I think it is worth pointing out problems.

When I "blindly" supported Obama for president. I called those who disagreed "self-hating Negros". Though some were, of course many, if not most, were not. However, I really wanted Obama to win, a playing the race card seemed appropriate -- especially since I could not point to anything remarkable that Barack had actually DONE prior to taking the oath of office.

Of course I appreciate Obama, due to no "fault" of his own, has virtually nothing in common with the experience of most Black people in this country. I thought it would be a great thing for the country to have a Black family in the white house running (sort of) things.

At this point, now that Barack is in office, I want a president that is actually going to do something positive for this country. Talking to other world leaders is expected of all presidents – particularly the one in charge of the most powerful nation; but surely does not warrant a Noble Peace Prize.

If we don’t hold Obama’s feet to the fire, like we would any other president; I guarantee you the country and especially, Black folks, will be FAR worse off after Obama’s term is complete than we are now. I for one do not want to see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"There are examples of this throughout all of recorded history. It is nothing new, it is human nature.

Realizing this, I completely understand the reaction that you and others will have to anything I have to negative to say about Obama. It is like challenging someone's believes in Jesus Christ is God -- that is a more than pointless exercise in futility"

Well Troy, since we've been doing this for over a decade, I know you will still kiss me in the morning, even though I have to tell you to miss me with that BS. That premise - that setup - is woefully faulty. That analogy does not speak to the nature of the "challenge", "criticism" nor "blame". I have never said one should not challenge authority. Nor have I ever said a person should not criticize their superiors. Check the books, I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT. My contention has always been that a wise man has a purpose and a plan when they decide to speak negatively of someone. Think about it. Lets say your wife or children did something that was not to your liking. Now, although I know the president is not your wife, would you think it's wise to vent your frustrations - of your family - to anyone "in range" of your words? More importantly, whomever you did decide to share your troubles with - concerning your family - wouldn't you think it wise to know who you are talking to, and then give them the absolute truth, and not some ambiguous bs? I mean, we are - you are - trying to support and help your family - right? Should the dynamic change for your president, who you claim to be supporting. If you look deep, I think the answer is right in front of you. I know you are trying to hold onto your opinion, but Troy, I know you undestand my position.

That exact mindset, in my opinion, should be used when voicing our "opinions" of our president. Until someone SHOWS me differently (nobody on this board ever has), I am thoroughly convince that the wanton banter and unsubstantiated opinions of president Obama, does more harm than good. NO ONE - I repeat - NOBODY on this board can bring me one iota of fruit from their labor of venting on Obama - or what they call criticism - other than an inflated ego. I am still waiting.

And Troy, I realize this is an open board,and thus, it's difficult to know your audience, but please spare "me" next time, before you decide to use the analogy of a dogma - such as a religion (someone's believes in Jesus Christ is God) - and the respect one should give to their president, or any human. Your analogy was nothing more than feel good fodder for the uninformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carey, I guess I just have to accept that you view one's critique of some else as hatin' on that person or being very negative. I believe critique is a positive action.

As far as having an impact on Obama polices by discussing him here; come on! What does that have to do with anything? Of course there is no direct impact.

Why do you think people who criticize Obama are trying to inflate their own egos? That is a tremendous leap. Do you ever criticize anything or anyone? When you do, is your goal to inflate your own ego?

Carey we are just talking here and exchanging ideas. I participate to have fun and to have my ideas challenged. If I'm am presented with new information or a different way to view things, it forces me reconsider my own position. Sometimes my views are bolstered, sometimes they are changed. In any event it forces me to think.

For example, I was harsh on folks who did support Obama out the gate. In hindsight, that was short sighted. I now believe ANY man running for an important role such as president should be vetted and not selected because he can give powerful speeches, has Brown skin or for any other reason that has nothing to do with the position.

Palin was on the republican ticket for the similiarly shallow reasons. This is what our country is all about. We percieve it as crazy, but clearly other thiught it was agreat idea -- have you ever considered why?

Of course the real power does not sit with the figure head in the oval office. I just mention this because at the end of the day unless something revolutionary changes in the whole structure of this country I don't really see it mattering too much who is in the white house.

The powers mandates that Wall Street is bailed out. If Bush did it it would be wealthy interests protecting their own. If Obama does it is it making a tough call, to save a nation and cleaning up after Bush’s mess.

Obama escalates in Afghanistan and fails to close Guantanamo Bay we hear crickets from Black folks. It Bush did it he’d be a war monger who hates poor and brown people.

So you keep sucking on the blue pill Carey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Carey, I guess I just have to accept that you view one's critique of some else as hatin' on that person or being very negative. I believe critique is a positive action."

And Again Troy, there you go again! You have consistantly tried to misrepresent my concerns and views. I am sure you read my previous posts, consequently where did I say I veiw all "critiques" as negative or hatin'. Granted, that is the core of my complaint - haters & and those that are overly negative - but again, if those types of individuals and opinions are removed from the equation, then yes, "critique could be a good thang. But unfortunately, that's not the way the cookie has been crumbling, and you know it. And regardless of how you try to minimize it - and although it's a colloquialism - we all know the definition of a hater. There's no balance in their "criticism" and nothing the other person could ever do will please them. A hater is a cronic cynic - to those they dislike - that bares qualities similar to a racist and/or someone who seldom admits guilt or wrong. At the very least, they will be hard pressed to justify their hatred of the other individual or thing. They will surely give "excuses" for their behavior, but those excuses will not justify their hateful ways or their dislike of the other person. The other person is generally damn if they do and damn if they don't. Then, there's the herd mentality; those individuals that follow the biggest ass, no matter where it might be heading.

So Troy, rather or not you care to admit it, "critique" "criticism" and "discussion" does not equate to "positive". Until you admit to that be the simple truth, I am left to wonder who's really swallowing the blue pill.

"Carey we are just talking here and exchanging ideas. I participate to have fun and to have my ideas challenged. If I'm am presented with new information or a different way to view things, it forces me reconsider my own position. Sometimes my views are bolstered, sometimes they are changed. In any event it forces me to think"

Yep, I agree. If not - if we ain't having fun - you owe me a lot of money, cuz you and your partner in crime have been working me :-)

And hopefully, it forces others to think. Yet, I am of the opinion that humans seldom change. Really, it does not happen on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...cuz you and your partner in crime have been working me :-)

Stay strong Brother! <_<

Yet, I am of the opinion that humans seldom change. Really, it does not happen on a regular basis.

Yeah I agree with you on this one.

But if it means anything to you my opinions have been impactsed numerous based upon stuff I've read here including my view on Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Xeon, your research is great. However your interpretation is lacking. Or rather, it still fails to address my main point. After 12 days in Office Obama had not ACCOMPLISHED anything -- certainly not enough to warrant a Noble Peace Prize. I do not consider making phone calls, having a few meetings, and ordering shit that never happened, accomplishing anything.

Well, that’s because you have dug your heels in by ignoring the facts and the criteria that the people who awarded him the prize decided upon. You seem to be caught up in the Tavis Smiley hate thing that is simple minded and ridiculous (I’ll specifically address that later). First, it may have been trivial and meaningless to you, but after 8 years of saber rattling and driving the prestige and credibility the US once had into the ground under Bush, this was a startling change of events in America foreign policy. You may disagree with it and dismiss it, but it was seen as a major gesture to turn the American foreign war mongering image around. You say he accomplished nothing by doing so. This is false. It garnered the attention of our allies and others about affecting new foreign policy and peace efforts. Once again, no other major world leader has done what he did! Something you have failed to comment on or recognize. Now, I’m not suggesting Obama is free of missteps but your personal vitriol is not enough to technically diminish what he did in that short period. Bottom line is this bro Troy, we can spin wheels about this for days and I don’t see the need to do so. But to be fair, I can understand you reticence and belief in prematurity. I have no problems with that. But totally ignoring the facts and waving them off as nothing or meaningless is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Xeon, I feel you. When I wanted Obama to be president I did not want to hear anything bad about him. Black people who did not tow that line were self hating negroes, plain 'ole haters or both.

You can't bolster your agrument with hyperbole. You say, "...no other major world leader has done what he did!" It is astonishing you write something like this. You can look at the activities of US presidents like Jimmy Carter's involvement in the Arab Israeli conflict, Nixon in China or even Lincoln at home. Three very different men who atually did more than give good speeches (though one could argue Obama has nothing on lincoln).

You describe my comments as "personal vitriol", those are very strong words in the content of my comments -- I guess you wanna take folks like me out back and execute us huh?

As far as Tavis goes, I assume you, like I, don't know him very well and therefore can not devine his true motivations regarding Obama.

My question to you is how can YOU be so sure that what is in Tavis' heart is what is a "...hate thing that is simple minded and ridiculous", then just as easily turn around and paint me with the same filthy brush?

Here is my own reasoning:

First I KNOW I don't hate Obama. I voted for him the first time and will vote for him a 2nd time (not that it will matter very much). As an adult, my record demonstrates my love of Black people in Africa and across the Diaspora. Any critque I have for Obama, or any Black man, is not born of hate -- trust me on that.

I freely admit that I have no clue what the "...criteria that the people who awarded him the prize" was. I was basing my comments upon the comparions to the other Noble Peace Prize winners that I knew of including Dr. King, Sadat/Begen, et al.

I would not put Obama in the same category with Dr. King; at least not yet. Would you? Please, at least, answer that question Xeon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Why does an alternative to Obama have to be a "faceless Republican", carey? Why not a Democrat who acts like a Democrat instead of one in bed wih big business and war mongering generals.

...

I had not read this thread, so I'm late contributing.

I'd like to know of any politician past or present who "acts like a Democrat" (per a traceable record), or comes close to meeting that bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is YOUR definition of acting like a Democrat? Anybody who identifies himself as a Democrat and does not follow the policies of Republicans can qualify as a Democrat. Over the years the lines have been blurred in regard to this abstract classification, but certainly Obama ran on what could be considered a Democratic platform in the tradition of FDR. After becoming elected, he often aligned himself more with the philosophy of Republican Ronald Reagan.

What words would you use to describe people who "are willing to trust the president during dilemmas"? Blind faith?

"Empathy" has nothing to do with "trust" in my application of it. I meant that it's about putting yourself in the president's shoes and commiserating with what it's like to be in deep shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is YOUR definition of acting like a Democrat? ...

That is exactly the point - "acting" like a democrat depends first on a definition. Even with a definition, "acting" is subject to interpretation and misunderstanding. In the context of this discussion, acting would not be a term I would use. However, because it was introduced into the discussion, I would be delighted to learn who acts like a democrat. A well known public figure. Contemporary model preferred.

...

What words would you use to describe people who "are willing to trust the president during dilemmas"?

These could be called citizens who trust their elected leader to do his or her best for the entire country. They could be prayerful people or atheist. They could be needy or independent people. Self confident people that are leaders in their own right. American citizens.

...

"Empathy" has nothing to do with "trust" in my application of it. I meant that it's about putting yourself in the president's shoes and commiserating with what it's like to be in deep shit.

Empathy has other similar applications. For example, I might be willing a certain level of trust toward someone with whom I believe I understand or can relate to. During good times, I might vicariously share in their happiness or success. During a dilemma, be it one of my own personally, theirs, or one involving the country as a whole, again, I might share in their disposition. Trust grows from the relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that anybody who I said represented a consummate Democrat would be challenged by you because I gave you a definition of a Democrat and you ignored it. If you want me to name examples I would say Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, every black lawman in the Black Caucus. Again I ask, what is your definion of a Democrat? After you answer this then name a person who fits the definition. Other wise just acknowledge that you don't believe Democrats and Republicans any longer exist.

Empathize is a variation of sympathize. Living vicarioiusly through someone is different because it implies that you envy that person . When you empathize with someone you feel sorry for them because you know what they're going through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that anybody who I said represented a consummate Democrat would be challenged by you because I gave you a definition of a Democrat and you ignored it. If you want me to name examples I would say Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, every black lawman in the Black Caucus.

Thanks for your list of model Democrats. This helps with understanding "what would [a] democrat do?".

... what is your definion of a Democrat? After you answer this then name a person who fits the definition. Other wise just acknowledge that you don't believe Democrats and Republicans any longer exist.

Any of the millions of people who self identify as a Democrat. Take your pick.

Empathize is a variation of sympathize. Living vicarioiusly through someone is different because it implies that you envy that person . When you empathize with someone you feel sorry for them because you know what they're going through.

This is a rather limited explanation of the usage of empathize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to select candidates from the choices WE ACTUALLY HAVE. The choice in 2008 was Obama-Biden or McCain-Palin. Is anyone prepared to say honestly say they would be okay with a Sarah Palin being a heart beat away from the presidency?

John Howard

http://www.facesinthemirror.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to select candidates from the choices WE ACTUALLY HAVE. The choice in 2008 was Obama-Biden or McCain-Palin. Is anyone prepared to say honestly say they would be okay with a Sarah Palin being a heart beat away from the presidency?

Are any prospective candidates preferrable over President Obama in 2012?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

John H, the choice (or lack thereof) was clear in 2008 Obama-Biden

Breathebooks, I'm unaware of any serious contenders ot Obama in 2012, though that guy (whats his name) with the white hair and the contract for America might give Obama a run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that anybody who I said represented a consummate Democrat would be challenged by you because I gave you a definition of a Democrat and you ignored it. If you want me to name examples I would say Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, every black lawman in the Black Caucus.

It would be very surprising if one of these consumate Democrats were to run for president one day in the future.

Breathebooks, I'm unaware of any serious contenders ot Obama in 2012, though that guy (whats his name) with the white hair and the contract for America might give Obama a run.

Newt Gingrich, Contract with America. He should run in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can observe what Clinton and Jimmy Carter did when they were in office. Whatever president is in office is acting like the party he represents when he opposes what the rivals party is for. As I said, the lines have become blurred and Democrats and Republicans have morphed into abstract terms. Just like democracy. Just like Osama bin Ladin became a symbol; the face of terrorism which inspired Americans to unite against a common foe. He was the boogie man who made America look like the good guys, while he languished in his retreat, doing nothing but giving pep talks via videos. We killed thousands of innocent Iraqis to avenge 911. As far as I'm concerned, it's all a big chess game, with world domination as the prize. And so it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can observe what Clinton and Jimmy Carter did when they were in office. Whatever president is in office is acting like the party he represents when he opposes what the rivals party is for. As I said, the lines have become blurred and Democrats and Republicans have morphed into abstract terms. Just like democracy. Just like Osama bin Ladin became a symbol; the face of terrorism which inspired Americans to unite against a common foe. He was the boogie man who made America look like the good guys, while he languished in his retreat, doing nothing but giving pep talks via videos. We killed thousands of innocent Iraqis to avenge 911. As far as I'm concerned, it's all a big chess game, with world domination as the prize. And so it goes.

Sobering indeed. A paradox. The "big chess game" ain't fun, especially for the losing player(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...