Between Barack and a Hard Place: Racism and White Denial in the Age of Obama

51gkuU+mqeL._SY344_PJlook-inside-v2,TopRight,1,0_SH20_BO1,204,203,200_Race is, and always has been, an explosive issue in the United States. In this timely new book, Tim Wise explores how Barack Obama’s emergence as a political force is taking the race debate to new levels. According to Wise, for many white people, Obama’s rise signifies the end of racism as a pervasive social force; they point to Obama not only as a validation of the American ideology that anyone can make it if they work hard, but also as an example of how institutional barriers against people of color have all but vanished. But is this true? And does a reinforced white belief in color-blind meritocracy potentially make it harder to address ongoing institutional racism? After all, in housing, employment, the justice system, and education, the evidence is clear: white privilege and discrimination against people of color are still operative and actively thwarting opportunities, despite the success of individuals like Obama.

Is black success making it harder for whites to see the problem of racism, thereby further straining race relations, or will it challenge anti-black stereotypes to such an extent that racism will diminish and race relations improve? Will blacks in power continue to be seen as an “exception” in white eyes? Is Obama “acceptable” because he seems “different from most blacks,” who are still viewed too often as the dangerous and inferior “other”?

Tim Wise is among the most prominent antiracist writers and activists in the US and has appeared on ABC’s 20/20 and MSNBC Live. His previous books include Speaking Treason Fluently and White Like Me.

This guy ran the tech that won Obama reelection

EXCERPT:

Harper Reed, the CTO for Obama’s 2012 campaign, tells us why Obama won, why the GOP lost and what will define 2016

The Chief Technology Officer for Barack Obama’s re-election campaign probably does not look like what you think he looks like.

In fact, Harper Reed — the Obama for America CTO who led a highly-regarded team of engineers in support of last November’s victorious candidate — likes to compare his looks to those of his predecessor, the CTO for Obama’s 2008 campaign, as he did in this side-by-side photo he showed while speaking at Rhizome’s Seven by Seven conference in April:

No, Reed is not the buttoned-up, neatly-coiffed exec you might expect to run the technology behind the most important election in America; but regardless of his sartorial choices, or the way he shapes his bangs in the morning, Reed has achieved unqualified triumphs, both as CTO for Threadless, the popular online T-shirt storefront, and then as CTO for President Obama’s reelection run. … In other words: You may question his beard, but you can’t question his success. … Since November 2012, Reed has turned away from politics, turning his attention to a stealthy mobile payments app (as well as a repository of pizza GIFs). And though he’s no longer plying his trade in Washington D.C., he did reflect on what made the Democrats successful in 2012, what doomed the GOP’s chances and a couple of the issues that may define the race in 2016 in a recent sit-down interview with Yahoo! News.

READ THE FULL STORY

Obama Intentionally Hurting the Nation

By Richard Larsen

EXCERPT:
We have a President who is intentionally hurting the nation and the people he’s entrusted to serve. In the name of the sequester, the White House’s own plan to clinch a budget deal last year, Obama is willfully and intentionally doing as much damage as he can. This is not subjective, but is verifiable fact.

The President rejected a proposal by the Senate Republicans to give the President more flexibility to pick and choose which programs should be cut to reach the $85 billion spending reduction over seven months mandated by the so-called sequester. That would have given him the opportunity to meet the requirements of the budget deal, without affecting the people our government is supposed to be serving. Keep in mind, that these legislatively mandated reductions are not cuts in actual spending, but only reflect a 2.5% reduction in the growth of government spending.

According to the President a few weeks ago, “There’s no smart way to do that [the sequester cuts],” he said. “These cuts are wrong. They’re not smart, they’re not fair. They’re a self-inflicted wound that doesn’t have to happen.” This is a surprising admission that his own plan is, in fact, stupid!

Actually, Mr. President, there was a smart and prudent way to do it. …

From the comments:

  1. jayhook says:

    Show me one politician that doesn’t place politics in front of the American people. Now congress is going to make exceptions on the sequester for the rich who travel, this includes the very same congress that is being ignored in the article.

    The republican held congress said the sequesters were exactly what they wanted, and now we are placing all the blame on the president. Blame needs to be given to both groups as they fight for power and control.

  2. Disgusted Reader says:

    jayhook,

    Sequester was all Obama’s, he wanted it and now he doesn’t? Plenty of blame to spread around, feel free to share it. Now when it finally comes into play, guess who gets hit? Not the White House, but average citizens who through no fault of their own want to travel but can’t because? No, spite is the new way of doing things in D.C. and it sucks.

    Tired of the blame bus, it came on one administrations time in office. Give credit where credit is due.

    Please stop those who make money from traveling to make more but don’t stop those that spend it in large amounts from traveling? Is that the way it doesn’t work. 3 Watch Lists and all 3 failed to find an obvious perp? Cut their money, big time, the lists are a waste and will never find anything. Oh, mom is on the list too. Go figure.

    Article after article calling out Obama on the sequester the past few weeks. Take your pick. I won’t even suggest one for you. How much crow can Obama eat before he has his fill and we have enough of him?

    You’re right it’s about power and control, good observation. Heaven help us if the wrong people get the power and control.

  3. ike says:

    …”as painful as possible.”

    Since this phrase has the infamous hug of quotation marks, we are left to assume that someone in the administration actually said that. This is not the case. Mr. Larsen is being sloppy at best.

    DR,

    Do you remember telling me that they (the Left) were the only ones who did that?

Read the full story from the Idaho State Journal