![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
PUMA PAC has asked people to comment to their educational thread. Many people claim to not understand why many Democrats (or left-leaning Independents) are not overwhelmingly supporting Obama. Here is my comment.
I am a black woman who is not voting for Obama. I used to be a Democrat; this year I changed my voter’s registration to “no party”. Here are the reasons why.
The Obama phenomenon is not new to me. I grew up in the black pentecostal church and saw this phenomenon all of the time. A man gets up in the pulpit and spends the next hour tossing out cliches that, when strung together, say a whole lot of nothing and include no practical advice one can apply to one’s everyday life. Yet, what he says is carefully chosen to pluck at people’s heartstrings. The bulk of the congregation is played like fiddles; they cry and shout and jump and are moved by the pretty words. The man is declared a “man of God” and “a great preacher”. If anyone dares to closely examine what he says and points out the lack of content, that person is nearly crucified. Their emotions were stirred, so the gross lack of content in his words and lifestyle are overlooked, and they will fiercely attack anyone, even a fellow church member, who says otherwise.
Obama is the same.
One day this man no one knows makes a speech at the Democratic convention. Suddenly the Democratic Party is bowing at his feet. No one is willing to look at the fact that he has done *nothing* to indicate he has the strength of character necessary to lead this country. Once he manages to get to Congress, no one is willing to look at the fact that his seat was barely warm, before he began campaigning for president. Those of us who question the wisdom of putting someone with absolutely no experience at that level are fiercely attacked by our own party. We point out that if Senator Clinton had done the same thing, she would not have been likely to get far in the Democratic Party primary, let alone make it to the convention, and we are shouted down. No one is able to say what, of substance, this man has done. But suddenly, he is qualified to be president of the nation, when he has spent more time campaigning for president than he has spent on Capital Hill doing the job he was elected to do?
There is a look into his character: he will neglect the job he was elected to do in order to pursue personal/political gain.
Then the word started coming from the foot soldiers about the caucus fraud they saw with their own eyes. We were told about the pressure put on delegates at the convention to change their Hillary votes to Obama; the foot soldiers saw that, too. We saw the rules committee give Obama delegates for a state where his name wasn’t even on the ballot. Many of us wrote to the mainstream media and let them know about these things. Yet, the mainstream media remained *silent*. Why are they working so hard to protect a man who supposedly has done next to nothing? Why were they not vetting him more thoroughly?
Then news of his questionable and scary associations came out. But for me, that was not even necessary. I had seen enough to know this man cannot be trusted. We don’t know what we are trusting, if we put our trust in him to lead this country. The pretty words mean nothing. I want to see a track record, and there is none of substance or quality. There is, however, a track record of empty words, caucus fraud, sexism, race-baiting, secret meetings, and media silencing. I refuse to vote in support of that sort of track record, so I will not.
Added for my blog: As for the effect that will have on my country, the Democratic Party should have thought of the bigger picture before they pulled strings to shove an unqualified, potentially dangerous politician down our throats. They should have pushed forward someone qualified, someone with a track record of protecting the middle class, someone with a track record of fighting for women's rights. Instead, they pushed down our throats this flash in the pan, for reasons they will probably never admit to. (Sexism, classism, and political corruption come to mind.) If we are burned, the party is to blame, not those of us who have enough clarity of mind not to be fooled by pretty words. I refuse to give up my vote out of fear and loathing. I will use my vote for what is right. If I vote according to fear, if I vote according to party pressure, I may as well not vote at all, because that is sham democracy, not true democracy.
Someone else who commented on the thread made a very good point: the last time Americans were swayed by feel-good words in spite of the person's spotty track record indicating he was unfit to lead the nation, we ended up with our current president. I didn't vote for that sort of thing last time, and I will not do it this time, either.
I am a black woman who is not voting for Obama. I used to be a Democrat; this year I changed my voter’s registration to “no party”. Here are the reasons why.
The Obama phenomenon is not new to me. I grew up in the black pentecostal church and saw this phenomenon all of the time. A man gets up in the pulpit and spends the next hour tossing out cliches that, when strung together, say a whole lot of nothing and include no practical advice one can apply to one’s everyday life. Yet, what he says is carefully chosen to pluck at people’s heartstrings. The bulk of the congregation is played like fiddles; they cry and shout and jump and are moved by the pretty words. The man is declared a “man of God” and “a great preacher”. If anyone dares to closely examine what he says and points out the lack of content, that person is nearly crucified. Their emotions were stirred, so the gross lack of content in his words and lifestyle are overlooked, and they will fiercely attack anyone, even a fellow church member, who says otherwise.
Obama is the same.
One day this man no one knows makes a speech at the Democratic convention. Suddenly the Democratic Party is bowing at his feet. No one is willing to look at the fact that he has done *nothing* to indicate he has the strength of character necessary to lead this country. Once he manages to get to Congress, no one is willing to look at the fact that his seat was barely warm, before he began campaigning for president. Those of us who question the wisdom of putting someone with absolutely no experience at that level are fiercely attacked by our own party. We point out that if Senator Clinton had done the same thing, she would not have been likely to get far in the Democratic Party primary, let alone make it to the convention, and we are shouted down. No one is able to say what, of substance, this man has done. But suddenly, he is qualified to be president of the nation, when he has spent more time campaigning for president than he has spent on Capital Hill doing the job he was elected to do?
There is a look into his character: he will neglect the job he was elected to do in order to pursue personal/political gain.
Then the word started coming from the foot soldiers about the caucus fraud they saw with their own eyes. We were told about the pressure put on delegates at the convention to change their Hillary votes to Obama; the foot soldiers saw that, too. We saw the rules committee give Obama delegates for a state where his name wasn’t even on the ballot. Many of us wrote to the mainstream media and let them know about these things. Yet, the mainstream media remained *silent*. Why are they working so hard to protect a man who supposedly has done next to nothing? Why were they not vetting him more thoroughly?
Then news of his questionable and scary associations came out. But for me, that was not even necessary. I had seen enough to know this man cannot be trusted. We don’t know what we are trusting, if we put our trust in him to lead this country. The pretty words mean nothing. I want to see a track record, and there is none of substance or quality. There is, however, a track record of empty words, caucus fraud, sexism, race-baiting, secret meetings, and media silencing. I refuse to vote in support of that sort of track record, so I will not.
Added for my blog: As for the effect that will have on my country, the Democratic Party should have thought of the bigger picture before they pulled strings to shove an unqualified, potentially dangerous politician down our throats. They should have pushed forward someone qualified, someone with a track record of protecting the middle class, someone with a track record of fighting for women's rights. Instead, they pushed down our throats this flash in the pan, for reasons they will probably never admit to. (Sexism, classism, and political corruption come to mind.) If we are burned, the party is to blame, not those of us who have enough clarity of mind not to be fooled by pretty words. I refuse to give up my vote out of fear and loathing. I will use my vote for what is right. If I vote according to fear, if I vote according to party pressure, I may as well not vote at all, because that is sham democracy, not true democracy.
Someone else who commented on the thread made a very good point: the last time Americans were swayed by feel-good words in spite of the person's spotty track record indicating he was unfit to lead the nation, we ended up with our current president. I didn't vote for that sort of thing last time, and I will not do it this time, either.
