FeedSat 23 Aug 2008
Prepare for disappointment
Posted by Big Fat Hairy Dave at 12:40 pm under Politics
Years ago, I volunteered for a political campaign. It was the first and only time I’d ever been so inspired by the honesty and integrity of a politician that I decided to get off my ass and volunteer for him. I did the phone bank thing, calling people and asking them to support him. And despite being a long shot, he was elected. I went to the victory party for his volunteers and shook his hand and congratulated him - and really meant it.
Then, of course, the disappointment slowly set in. He was constrained by the limited powers of his position and by the necessity of compromise and by the fact that, even though he had political experience, being at the top is almost never an opportunity for meaningful change. Now? He’s all right. He’s not inspiring any more. He’s just another sell-out politician.
Same story with Obama, whom I predict is going to be the biggest disappointment imaginable. The only thing that might prevent people from being disappointed on January 20 is the fact that he hasn’t bothered to wait for the election to be over to turn into a sell-out. Yeah, he’ll probably stop torturing prisoners in Guantanamo, but given who he’ll be replacing how could he not be better? The very first articulate, bright, clean black presidential candidate is just more of the same. He’s not meaningfully different from any other right wing politician, at least if you define right wing sensibly and not by the standards of the Republican party. Prepare for disappointment.
well, having lived through the bush regime, i have to say that anything will be better than what we’ve had to go through for the last eight years!
By Phuckslut1, August 23rd, 2008 at 17:32“Articulate”
No one called McCain or any of the Dem primary candidates “articulate”, though they all are. I take it that “articulate” is some kind of euphemism for “acceptable” or “educated” or, worse, “non-ghetto” black person. I’ve heard it from several people, all of whom were white and not once used it for any other truly articulate candidates. What’s more, people also call Condoleeza Rice “articulate”. I’m not surprised.
It’s kind of like when a female leader or politician simply does a great job or holds here own and gets called “aggressive”, no?
Or when a guy who’s gay is called “normal”, “manly”, etc.
By Prometheus, August 23rd, 2008 at 17:46Dude!!! “…the first articulate [...] clean ….[] black candidate for president…”
WTF? In so many ways, this is just wrong.
#1 and most important: “articulate” as an adjective describing a black person is promulgating an old stereotype of black people being inarticulate.
#2: Your blog is one of my faves BECAUSE you like to slap down those who make such prejudicial ejaculations.
#3: Shirley Chisholm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Chisholm) was a black candidate for US president in the 1960s. She was not even the first black candidate, merely the first black candidate of a major party.
Looking forward to more pictures of hot guys from you (and/or of you…).
By dveej, August 23rd, 2008 at 17:46The very first articulate, bright, clean black presidential candidate
David,
I don’t mean to pile on, but this statement implies that African-Americans are not “articulate, bright, [and] clean.” I am sure that is not what you meant.
As somebody who works in a US urban secondary school where the majority (63%) of the student body is African-American, I can vouch that the overwhelming majority students of all races are articulate, bright, and clean.
Bear hugs for now. I look forward to seeing you again the next time I’m in Toronto.
CircleCityBear4u
By Circlecitybear4u, August 23rd, 2008 at 19:02Leaving aside what Biden said, don’t you all think that Obama is a far more eloquent and articulate speaker than the other candidates?
By deadSkip, August 23rd, 2008 at 20:54Well, maybe he’s not as amazing as he appears to be, but you have the choice between Obama and McCain. How could the Americans want to elect ANOTHER Republican after what that party has become? I’m not saying the Dems are saints, but they’re 1000x better than the stupid, backwards-thinking, oli-corrupted, indifferent Republicains.
By shadownight, August 23rd, 2008 at 21:48It’s either that or a Republican.
It’s one of the disgusting consequences of a two-party, winner-take-all electoral system, but I don’t know how to change that except through massive constitutional reform, which is far more difficult than you might think, or massive social change and bloody revolution, which is even more difficult.
In the United States, there’s no “new government”, no NDP, no by-elections or votes of no confidence, no “living constitution”, no regional parties independent of the Democrats or the Republicans that are in any way meaningful. This is the choice we have.
By Daniel M. Laenker, August 24th, 2008 at 2:37It doesn’t have anything to do with Canada versus the US, and yeah, Obama is better than McCain, if only because McCain is obviously senile. But Obama’s part of the same old system, and he won’t change anything meaningful. If he does, I’ll eat my hat.
By Big Fat Hairy Dave, August 24th, 2008 at 9:12You know I have pretty shallow knowledge of political matters. But as early as a year ago I was telling people how Obama bothered me because everything that came out of his mouth seemed to be a slogan. In other words, yes, just another politician.
But I can’t help but hold out hope that as a black guy - as a minority - he’ll do something to subvert the system from within.
By Claude, September 16th, 2008 at 16:55