Obama and Racist Voters

May 14th, 2008 By: marc moore | Tags:

Barack Obama’s youthful volunteers have met more than a few of America’s less savory characters while on the campaign trail, according to a story in the Washington Post. Obama’s skin color - he’s black - if you weren’t aware, is for some voters the most important thing about the man. Sad, but that view is held by voters of all ethnic groups.

Here’s perhaps the most honest reason for the obsession:

One Pittsburgh union organizer told her [Documentary filmmaker Rory Kennedy] he would not vote for Obama because he is black, and a white voter, she said, offered this frank reason for not backing Obama: “White people look out for white people, and black people look out for black people.”

I don’t think that Barack Obama would be uniquely kind to black Americans - the weight of presidential responsibility would, I think, preclude that. However, I do believe that many people act and vote as if he’s going to fulfill the truism if elected.

Unfortunately I can’t claim to be fully immune from the disease either. As a fiscal conservative it’s difficult to separate Obama’s stated goal of expanding the welfare state - and thereby increasing expenditures on federal giveaways - from his program of race-influenced, if not race-based, social justice.

As a matter of philosophy I’m opposed to welfare programs programs, particularly when implemented at the federal level using income tax dollars, regardless of who is being helped by them.

Yet it’s painfully obvious that blacks benefit more from social welfare programs than other ethnic groups. For example, an admittedly 10-year-old study in Michigan demonstrates that blacks accounted for 40-50% of some welfare programs while making up only 12% of the state’s population.

Therefore, a vote for Obama is a vote for more subsidies to black Americans. At the same time, a vote against him can be viewed as taking that money away from them - a racist act, according to some.

I doubt that we’d be having the same kind of conversation about Obama taking care of blacks if Obama were a conservative. I also doubt that he would be raking in 80% of the African-American vote against Hillary Clinton if he subscribed to that fiscal ideology.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. wj
    May 14th, 2008 at 02:45
    Reply | Quote | #1

    It may be worth noting that Obama has come out explicitly against race-based affirmative action.  Instead, he appears to favor something that would give someone a bonus for rising above difficult circumstances, but not merely for the race of their ancestors.

    It’s still affirmative action, and I can see how someone can be opposed to that on principle.  But it is definitely not a matter of favoring people based on race.

  2. Faith
    May 14th, 2008 at 13:14
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Has anyone done a study of how many Clinton supporters watch Jerry Springer and/or are on welfare?  1 of every 6 West Virginia voters receives food stamps and probably enjoys Clinton style drama and scandal… impeachment, Lewinsky, Paul V. Clinton

  3. Charity
    May 14th, 2008 at 13:19
    Reply | Quote | #3

    I would like to know how the West Virginian voters got the label "blue collar" "working class" voters if 1 of every six of them receives food stamps while only 1 of every 10 receives food stamps in most other states.  West Virginia is 95% white, but they didn’t vote for the one guy in the contest that has risen up from food stamp poverty level — because he is black.

    Obama ‘08 and ‘12

  4. AMBER
    May 14th, 2008 at 16:07
    Reply | Quote | #4

    [admin]: Highly amusing use of the term “Obamabot” considering you are copy-pasting. Despite giving me a laugh, comment deleted for spamming.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500