Posted on 10/06/2010 8:14:53 AM PDT by Jerome Hudson
It’s time for a frank discussion about the folly of monolithic voting among black Americans.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
In fact, black approval of President Obama is virtually unchanged at 91 percent since his inauguration.
Now, unless we believe that 91 percent of blacks are truly as radical as Obama (and every indication is that blacks are far more conservative than he is), then what explains how Obama could have 91% approval, when even among Democrats as a whole, that number is lower at just 79 percent?
Worse, black poverty is higher now than under President Bush.
In fact, during the Bush years, black unemployment was actually lower than during Clinton’s terms (you know, "the first black president"), at an average of 9 percent and certainly lower than the 16.3 percent it stands at today.
Indeed, under Obama, black unemployment rose from 12.6 in January 2010 to 16.3 percent as of August 1 2010. An almost 30 percent increase.
So far, President Bush has a better track record on black upward mobility than Clinton or Obama.
Regardless, Bush only enjoyed an average of about 32 percent approval amongst black voters two years into his first term. And we haven't even mentioned Bush’s historic cabinet level appointments of blacks or his unprecedented AIDS funding in Africa. Much to Kanye West’s chagrin, it turns out President Bush did, indeed, care about black people.
Still, some argue that black support of Obama is merely a function of "black solidarity”; that birds of a feather flock together. But that in itself is racist. After all, can you imagine white voters lining up 9 out of 10 to stand in "racial solidarity" with an elected official who was the equivalent of a wrecking ball slamming through their lives?
After nearly two years of Obama’s reckless spending spree, (John Keynes would be proud), 43.6 million Americans - one in seven people - now live in poverty, a 51-year high.
Looking deeper, these figures show that blacks, who account for only 13 percent of the population, make up 22.6 percent of the now 40.5 million Americans receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Food Stamps).
And after a year-long debate and an endless barrage of promises from the Obama White House that there would be no federal funding of abortions in the healthcare bill, we now know that tax dollars for abortions are being provided through high-risk insurance programs and have already been stopped in Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Maryland.
When political parties know that they no longer have to work for your vote, and that support from any voting bloc is automatic regardless of performance, those voters have relegated themselves to playing the role of perpetual dupe. Put simply, they are begging to be taken for granted.
Is it any wonder, then, that 50 years of black voters conceding 90 percent of their support to a party with a racist past has culminated in an anti-empowerment agenda that has sapped black Americans from achieving our maximum potential by creating a culture of dependency?
When Uncle Sam is your “baby daddy,” is it any wonder that so many inner city children chose gang life over graduation? Or that in just four days, more black children die at the hands of the abortion clinic then the KKK killed in its entire history?
Progressives and Democratic elites have long argued that black stagnation is the result of racism. But is a 70 percent illegitimacy rate among blacks (90 percent in some inner cities) the fault of “racism,” or a lack of accountability and personal responsibility?
The painful truth is that blacks kill more blacks (whether by gun or by a trip to the abortion clinic) at a higher rate than the Ku Klux Klan could have ever dreamed of.
So-called “civil rights leaders,” pseudo intellectuals, and progressive lawmakers are fully aware of these facts, yet they insist on pretending that “systemic” forces (racism) are more responsible than blacks themselves for sluggish black advancement.
It’s time for a frank discussion about the folly of monolithic voting among black Americans. When 91 percent of any racial group votes one way, it’s either out of racism or blind groupthink. Neither of these is good for America.
________________________________________ Jerome Hudson is a 24-year-old student of history, majoring in broadcast journalism, in Tallahassee, Fla. He blogs at http://jeromehudsonspeaks.weebly.com/
Racist as racism is defined?
No
Racially motivated?
Of course
Of course black support for Obama is largely racist. Racism is a basic tenet in the black community. It’s the awful secret whose name the mainstream media dare not mention.
I used to do a TV show in Baltimore with negroes, and their comments doing commercial breaks were repugnantly racist. And that includes the comments of the “conservative” negroes on the panel.
Identity politics is nothing new.
Let’s not make something out of nothing.
T.D. Jakes and Bishop Long of Atlanta, Evangelical Conservative Mega Pastors backed Obama. I wondered then, and wonder now, how they could support an advocate for abortion on demand, and his stand on partial birth survivors...being left to die.
Oh...one caveat here:
Unless we are talking support from Nation of Islam. Which IS a racist organization.
It’s only called “racism” when Whites prefer their own. For everyone else, it’s called “solidarity” and considered a virtue.
Actually, I don’t think it is racist. It is likely at least partially racially-motivated, though it may be as much partisan as racial (white Democrats get similar landslides from African Americans).
Honestly, I think Americans are generally oversensitive about race. Conservatives are usually less-so, but many seem to be jumping on board now that it is politically expedient to cry “racism”.
People should be able to support a political candidate for whatever reason they want ... it is inherently a judgment call.
SnakeDoc
Well said Jerome.
Its not racist, its just supporting a brother because of his skin color!!!
Keep up the great work, young man! :-)
Your pic is worth a mark.
A Republican form of Democracy is a higher level abstraction than can be understood by a tribal mentality. Some people cannot manage themselves much beyond mere survival. Too bad if that offends anybody.
Yes, of course. If someone votes for a person because of the color of their skin, that is by definition racist.
You already made the point about solidarity, didn’t you? It is writing like yours that will help cause people to band together based on shared principles, rather than on skin color.
Absoultely... it is driven by a racial component.
I’m all for it at this point in history. Old Hillary will run a challenge against Obama, win, and 20% of the Democratic vote will be so lividly angry about racism and Obama being beaten they will sit on their hands in the general. Hillary will say “but look at Palin” you have to hate her enough to vote for me . . . and it won’t work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.