It’s an understatement, but the President has the hardest job in the world. It’s a lose-lose job, even if he cures cancer, his critics will ask what took him so long.
But the added angst against Obama also has a lot to with the color of his skin and even he would agree with that.
In the small suburban town of Jefferson County in Steubenville, OH, race is still a factor when it comes to Presidential politics. In 2008, Obama barely won the county with 48.9 percent to John McCain’s 48.7 percent.
In fact, voters there say outright that it’s because he’s black that they won’t vote for him the second time around.
And here’s the odd thing, Jefferson County is predominantly made up of a small number of loyal Democrats who contend that Obama’s race is a deal breaker in 2012, which is sad.
If you’re not voting for Obama because he’s black, you’re a racist! Now even though a record number of voter turnouts in 2008 were black, did they really have a choice?
Many forget that if Obama wasn’t elected in 2008, we would be a heartbeat away from a former beauty queen being sworn in as President.
As Obama said in the latest issue of Rolling Stone:
“Look, race has been one of the fault lines in American culture and American politics from the start. I never bought into the notion that by electing me, somehow we were entering into a post-racial period….My view on race has always been that it’s complicated. It’s not just a matter of head – it’s a matter of heart. It’s about interactions. What happens in the workplace, in schools, on sports fields, and through music and culture shapes racial attitudes as much as any legislation that’s passed.”
The fact is, if you’re not voting for Obama because he is black, you’re only hurting the country. Vote (or don’t vote) for him because you believe in his message and ideas.
We’ve all been critical of the President, as Americans we have that right. Obama definitely needs to take a look at how we view our gun laws in this country, but my support for him will never fade.
Even those that support the President will still criticize and throw shots. For instance, famed Princeton University Professor Dr. Cornell West said recently:
“Mitt Romney is a catastrophic response to a catastrophe, whereas Obama is a disastrous response to a catastrophe. Is disaster better than catastrophe? Yes it is. I wish we had a third candidate who could actually do something, but we don’t at the moment.”
Really, “a disastrous response to a catastrophe”? Now, Dr. West has been an advocate for the fight against poverty, income inequality, the prison industrial complex and the military industrial complex since his inception into the media spotlight, but how can you expect Obama to fix a 40 year rise in poverty in only four to eight years? Not to mention his having to deal with the consistent Republican opposition as they keep their hands clinched to the paychecks of everyday hard working Americans.
I don’t think it’s Obama’s job alone; it’s all of our responsibilities, which is why we saw the rise of the Occupy Movement last fall, which lead to Obama’s Buffet Rule.
It may never get passed, but at least it’s a start to something bigger, it gets the national conversation to change, it makes people take a closer look at the richest 1 percent in the country.
I guess West’s argument is that Obama hasn’t fought enough or isn’t fighting hard enough, so his point is valid, just a poor choice of words.
Either way, the point remains; West’s criticism is based upon Obama’s actions – NOT his skin color.
Shaka Griffith is the News/Politics Editor of GlobalGrind.com Follow him on twitter @Darealshaka.
