honesty is political suicide

[Athena]

One of the greatest observers of humanity and writer was Tocqueville. He was a French aristocrat who lost family members during the French revolution. He came to the US to study the still young democracy and wrote "Democracy in America" and much more.

His observation of the racial differences leads to a chilling truth of death or servitude. Neither are acceptable choices. These racial choices remind me of women's liberation. Do we have to be as men to succeed in a male dominate system? Are you sure? How can we be different and equal?

We are insane right now. No, Obama would not be so successful if he were not Black, and Hillary would not be as supported as she is, if she were not a female. Yet we can not be honest about these things.

Tocqueville's observation of cultural and therefore racial differences, gives us food for thought:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/race/frames.html

For Tocqueville and Beaumont, the issue of race becomes complicated in more ways than one. For example, Beaumont receives a lesson in miscegenation when he attends a theatre in Baltimore and is shocked to see a seemingly white woman sitting in the mulatto section of the theatre. When he expresses his shock, he learns that the woman has a few drops of black blood in her, marking her indelibly as black. Her "blackness" is a taint that is not easily removed with subsequent generations. American Indians, however, occupy a very narrow ledge in the 1830s. The only authentic Indians are those that have escaped or are resisting acculturation; those that are anglicized no longer can proudly claim their "Indianess."

So why this apparent paradox? Tocqueville certainly recognizes it and attempts to ease it out, but ultimately is doomed to fail. He asserts: "The Negro, who earnestly desires to mingle his race with that of the European, cannot do so; while the Indian, who might succeed to a certain extent, disdains to make the attempt. The servility of the one dooms him to slavery, the pride of the other to death" (335). Tocqueville reveals his naiveté here, for if American Indians did "make the attempt" to mingle with white "race," they would be in a similar position to that of the African American-allegedly cultureless, disdained because of their lack of place in the dominant society. Moreover, it is not African Americans' desire to mix their race with the Europeans' that ensures their servility, but the fact of their situation-they were brought into bondage, and outright rebellion would certainly ensure their swift death, the future that Tocqueville promises American Indians.

Servitude of death? Being accepted in the power circles of closed out? Or how about denial that being a Black man or a White woman does make a difference? From talking with people, I know White people are voting for Obama to make right the wrong of slavery and racism. Others are voting Hillary, simply because she is a woman, and they want to open power circles to women. Why is it political suicide to be honest about this?

[penmyst]

Most people don't have the courage to deal with the truth. Whether inside or outside themselves. To be honest with one's self requires intense and often unpleasant feelings. Of course, this is the only way to strengthen your character. But it is the path of most resistance, and therefore is avoided by man.

It's why we do idiotic and unreasonable things. When you are unwilling to genuinely deal with the truth, your ways are unpredictable, strange, and foolish.

To vote for a person to any elected office based simply on the color of their skin (or their sexual organs) rather than the content of their character is indeed foolish.

[Buck Laser]

Athena, I haven't had time to think about your post thoroughly, but the thought that went through my mind immediately is that Barack Obama proved yesterday that real honesty is such a powerful tool that it pretty much trumps everything else. Of course, it only works if you really have no skeletons in your closet. Obama's enemies will have to battle him solely on the issues, and he clearly has the clearest grasp of the issues of any candidate this year, or in my memory, for that matter.

[Osborn F. Enready]

The reason honesty is political suicide, is because a large portion of Americans believe THE LIES, so they see honesty as a lie, a slur, a degradation, an insult.

Ron Paul ran his campaign on telling the truth about the economy..... you see where that got him.

He ran his campaign on telling the truth about the piecemeal weakening of the Constitution and Bill of Rights by the bi-partisan majority...... you see where that got him.



When you have a large percentage of the population living in a world based on "hope and faith", truth is not necessarily a relevant necessity.

We see today, appeal to emotion often carries more weight than fact or simple truth.

[4Reaganomics]

Seriously,

You can now run for president without a resume.

[suedanim]

Servitude of death? Being accepted in the power circles of closed out? Or how about denial that being a Black man or a White woman does make a difference? From talking with people, I know White people are voting for Obama to make right the wrong of slavery and racism. Others are voting Hillary, simply because she is a woman, and they want to open power circles to women. Why is it political suicide to be honest about this?


Tocqueville may have had some valid povs, but your use of his material and statements are dead on awry. Its as if you aimed for the bullseye and hit its tail.

The bolded words are where you fail. You cannot have been talking to many people in the first place and in the second, you have generalized a whole demographic and assumed MUCH about their reasons for voting for Barrack Obama. You are Geraldine Ferraro and indeed...it is people like you and her who are playing the race card, not Barrack Obama.

hmmm...think about that a minute. Can white folks play the race card? Well! Many have and in this case, many are. This is exactly what you are doing with this post, however well intentioned.

Sure, there are some who are voting for Obama because he is black, actually biracial and others voting for Clinton because she is a woman OR which I believe is happening, they are voting for her because she is married to Bill Clinton and the warm fuzzies of a great economy and no war compell them to bring them back.

But, it is intellectually dishonest to claim that the white people of Iowa and other predominantly white states or even those whites of more mixed demographics states are voting for Obama for any reasons other than he is the candidate who most agrees with the idealogies they want to see sitting in the Oval Office.

So... as we discuss honesty, lets also be honest about our own motives, our own baggage regarding race and lets NOT generalize or stereotype white people OR black people for their reasons for voting for Obama.

Geraldine Ferraro was wrong and acting as a Clinton surrogate, a hitman. She put her garbage out there, quit, Clinton came down on it, pretends to distance herself from Ferraro .. and in typical Karl Rove fashion, the smear was done. But, some of you, mostly from the right... bought it, and now jump on the idea that Obama is the affirmative action candidate, in the running and winning, simply because he is black and whites in massive, overwhelming numbers have voted for him out of guilt alone.

Obama is the winning candidate out of merit and hard work alone. Because he is a gifted, thoughtful with integrity and a freshness untainted by the old school inside the beltline, DC corruption that McCain and Clinton come out of, he WILL go on to be the next CIC. I will applaud that day.

[Osborn F. Enready]

You want honesty.....motives, agenda, baggage?

The honest truth is all three of the two major parties candidates are lying to your face, and all are working hard at removing your individual rights, to placate and pander to select groups that provide their financial backing.

Major parties have been corrupting the system for the last 157 years straight, and the real LIE is that people think voting for either one of the puppets put forth by either party COULD be a positive change......

Talk about wearing the blinders.....

People have been voting for change for the bulk of the last 157 years, and still today we ACCEPT the ULTIMATUM put forth by both parties as a CHOICE, and believe the lie that either party has the capacity or intrest in change.....

All the while, both work together to shore up their political domination through gerrymandering, vote rigging, creating new and more numerous obstacles to any third parties ballot access......


What a disgrace.

[4Reaganomics]

It is, but I believe that we can't really exercise our right to overthrow government at this point in time.

They gave us the 2nd Amendment to defend ourselves against enemies and most of all gov't, yet I won't be the one to start some violent rebellion,

[Truth_and_Power]

Most people don't have the courage to deal with the truth. Whether inside or outside themselves. To be honest with one's self requires intense and often unpleasant feelings. Of course, this is the only way to strengthen your character. But it is the path of most resistance, and therefore is avoided by man.

It's why we do idiotic and unreasonable things. When you are unwilling to genuinely deal with the truth, your ways are unpredictable, strange, and foolish.

To vote for a person to any elected office based simply on the color of their skin (or their sexual organs) rather than the content of their character is indeed foolish.


So you will vote for a elderly white male, the same as you always have?

[Truth_and_Power]

Seriously,

You can now run for president without a resume.


Bush established that.

[Osborn F. Enready]

4Reganomics said:
It is, but I believe that we can't really exercise our right to overthrow government at this point in time.

Let me guess the excuse.... you have too much to lose right?!?
That will be an excuse until both parties suck up what you have to lose as they have been..... then what? Wait until you have nothing to lose? Since when has starting out with nothing been a plus, when compared to starting with something?

4Reganomics said:
They gave us the 2nd Amendment to defend ourselves against enemies and most of all gov't, yet I won't be the one to start some violent rebellion,

One person can't start a rebellion, 10% of a nation can though, and Ron Paul carried about that much in each state he ran in.

Something tells me if either one of the major parties puppets get in office, you won't have long to wait to join an ongoing rebellion.

[penmyst]

So you will vote for a elderly white male, the same as you always have?


Actually, I vote for the candidate that is closest to my personal political views. You know, the whole "content of character" thing and not the "color of his skin (or her sex organs)".

Obviously, I'll be voting for John McCain in this next election. Though he is a moderate Republican that is no Ronald Reagan, he is closer to that ideal than anything the Democrat party could ever put up.

[Athena]

Servitude of death? Being accepted in the power circles of closed out? Or how about denial that being a Black man or a White woman does make a difference? From talking with people, I know White people are voting for Obama to make right the wrong of slavery and racism. Others are voting Hillary, simply because she is a woman, and they want to open power circles to women. Why is it political suicide to be honest about this?


Tocqueville may have had some valid povs, but your use of his material and statements are dead on awry. Its as if you aimed for the bullseye and hit its tail.

The bolded words are where you fail. You cannot have been talking to many people in the first place and in the second, you have generalized a whole demographic and assumed MUCH about their reasons for voting for Barrack Obama. You are Geraldine Ferraro and indeed...it is people like you and her who are playing the race card, not Barrack Obama.

hmmm...think about that a minute. Can white folks play the race card? Well! Many have and in this case, many are. This is exactly what you are doing with this post, however well intentioned.

Sure, there are some who are voting for Obama because he is black, actually biracial and others voting for Clinton because she is a woman OR which I believe is happening, they are voting for her because she is married to Bill Clinton and the warm fuzzies of a great economy and no war compell them to bring them back.

But, it is intellectually dishonest to claim that the white people of Iowa and other predominantly white states or even those whites of more mixed demographics states are voting for Obama for any reasons other than he is the candidate who most agrees with the idealogies they want to see sitting in the Oval Office.

So... as we discuss honesty, lets also be honest about our own motives, our own baggage regarding race and lets NOT generalize or stereotype white people OR black people for their reasons for voting for Obama.

Geraldine Ferraro was wrong and acting as a Clinton surrogate, a hitman. She put her garbage out there, quit, Clinton came down on it, pretends to distance herself from Ferraro .. and in typical Karl Rove fashion, the smear was done. But, some of you, mostly from the right... bought it, and now jump on the idea that Obama is the affirmative action candidate, in the running and winning, simply because he is black and whites in massive, overwhelming numbers have voted for him out of guilt alone.

Obama is the winning candidate out of merit and hard work alone. Because he is a gifted, thoughtful with integrity and a freshness untainted by the old school inside the beltline, DC corruption that McCain and Clinton come out of, he WILL go on to be the next CIC. I will applaud that day.


:lmao: I wonder who think is my favorite candidate.

Buck Laser I agree. Obama has handled the racest issues brilliantly, and this is surely winning him points. Frankly, I am pleasantly surprised. More political commentators responded favorably to how he has managed than negatively. It is not just what he said, but his whole demeanor.

I think his demeamor says, I am a White man in a Black man's body and see both sides of this, and if we are going to get anywhere, we have to get past this White guy- Black guy thing. He says it with such confidence that we can do that, it is believable we can.

Osborn, I can really appreciate your frustration, but Ron Paul is such an extremist. Ross Purro (sp?) , Ralph Nader and Kincinch have also told us we need to fix things. If these guys have what it takes to run a nation, they should get together and give us a platform we will support, standing alone, makes them look like kooks. We have not heard enough from Obama. I intend to get a copy of his book and see if I can learn more about his economic position. If he understands the energy/economic problem, I will be impressed, but here, remember Carter told us we had to conserve, and when Reagan lied to us and said that wasn't necessary, he became far more popular than Carter. Clinton will say anything she thinks we want to hear, and I do not trust her.

penmyst, I very much appreciate what you said. I think we must change how we live in drastic ways, and no candidate can directly address that reality. Carter was right when he said we have to conserve, and Reagan took us in the wrong direction. This is like an ambulance being driven by a couple of drunks in the wrong direction, reassuring the man having a heart attack that it is just indigestion.

[Buck Laser]

Athena, thanks for your thoughtful responses to several posts. As an enthusiastic Obama supporter, I do encourage you to get and read The Audacity of Hope. I read it a year ago, just before Obama came to Austin in one of his first campaign stops after announcing his candidacy. His goals and views are clearly and logically laid out there. Unlike most political books written to prop up a candidacy by a ghost writer, Obama wrote the book himself.

Despite the constant drumbeat from the radical right, Obama isn't short either on ideas or experience. I'm not going to detail them simply because the record is out there for anyone who wants to see it.

As several observers have noted, there's no such thing as "experience" that qualifies one to be President. It's a uniquely demanding job, and the most we can hope for from any candidate is strong character, intelligence and good judgment. We've learned at great cost what happens when we get a president with NONE of those qualities.

To be in the political arena, one has to learn the art of compromise. Some people view compromise as dishonesty, but that strikes me as a hopelessly idealistic and unrealistic view. That's one of the reasons I have so little trust of libertarians who, in their insistence in standing on principle, close the door on any accomplishment. On the other hand, people who are totally in the political establishment seem to care more for preserving the structure than for fixing what's wrong.

I'm not absolutely SURE that Obama can do much to fix what's wrong, but I believe he's least likely to do great harm. I will have no problem supporting Clinton if she gets the nomination, but I strongly prefer Obama.

Besides the partisan problem with McCain, I worry about his age. At 72, with 8 years in a harsh prison camp behind him, I'm not willing to take the chance that he'll survive to govern.