How could I have been so wrong in my way of thinking? I actually believed that the leader of a democratic country was in fact supposed to be its biggest champion for civil rights, equality and justice for all? I Stupidly thought that the President of the United States of America was supposed the biggest civil rights supporter, its champion of equality for all; no matter what political faction won the election. (Democrat or Republican) I foolishly thought that no matter what gender, race, color, or religion the President of the United States of America turned out to be they were expected to insure that all of the citizens of the United States of America were treated equally, because that is what is written in the American Constitution, but in all this it would appear that I am wrong. I found it disheartening to find out that in this day and age a Black person elected to represent the citizens of the USA as a member of the United States of America‘s federal government and who marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would say the things that he did about how Barrack Obama must conduct himself when giving Martin Luther King Jr.’s commemorative speech. I have been reading and hearing this type of thing in news interviews where politicians of all stripes races, religions and creeds try to explain why Barrack Obama must forget that he a Black man and ignore any injustice to Black people while he is in office and leave it to the next White President to deal with, lest his actions be misconstrued as racially biased.
What other President of the USA has ever been asked to separate his own identity from improving the lives of Americans? Has it not always been assumed that the President of the USA would automatically do the right thing in terms of his personal feelings, knew his job and his role? I find it demeaning and insulting that because Barrack Obama is Black that everybody assumes that unlike the White presidents that have served before him Barrack Obama will not do the right thing, for the right reasons. Why is it that Barrack Obama is expected to ignore the plight of Black People in the United States of America, if the USA has come so far? Why would it be so terrible for him to try to fix the many injustices that befall American Black people every day? Why is fixing this kind of wrong that is still going on in the United States of America considered to be leaning one way more than the other? Why in a supposedly colored blind democratic country where all citizens are supposed to be considered equal is there so much worry over this issue; there was no such worry for all of the other White presidents that served before him? Is this a real fear, or a red herring put out there by people who are afraid that a USA president may actually do his job and stand up and right a wrong that should have been righted years ago and many governments ago? It would appear to me that the election of Barrack Obama did more to show the prejudices still alive and well in the USA regarding Black people and visible minorities than it did to highlight any great progress in the fight against racial discrimination in the United States of America.
Americans who like things the way they have always been on the equality front for the most part hamstrung this president and his presidency. Some politicians, the press and their supporters have taken unprecedented steps to undermine Barrack Obama’s every attempt at doing good for the people of the USA, even if it means personal suffering will have to be endured by the most fragile of the USA’s citizens, because he is a Black man and they feel compelled to act out against him. Now they have wrapped this racism up in a blanket of economic and money issue spin, but intelligent people know it for what it is. This method of dealing with Barrack Obama’s presidency was designed to make Barrack Obama, the Black man look ineffectual, so that the people of the United States would think twice before they stepped away from the norm and elected another visible minority to the office of President of the United states of America for fear that nothing would be allowed to happen that would make their lives any better, because of their choice. The politicians and the press that are outraged that a Black person could actually run and win the office of President of the United States of America not once but twice cry about policy and priorities as if the plight if the Black people in America is not a priority that needs to be addressed and as if somehow the Black thing will somehow right itself in time if Black people can wait, hmm another 300 to 400 years. Is it enough for the President only to be the champion of the Constitution of the USA when a White man is in office; a White man that can be trusted to do the right thing by all?
I thought that there were no Black Americans, Jewish Americans, Muslim Americans, or Christian Americans, when it came to the American Constitution and the American Justice System and that everyone under the law and the constitution were just simply Americans, if this is so why has everyone worried about the birth place of the president, the color of the president and his religious affiliations, even now in his 2nd and final term?
Are we to believe that the right to exist of Israel and all other concerns of the Jewish people has not been pushed and brokered for by Jewish politicians? That if a Jewish president was elected in the USA that he would be asked to stop being a Jew and forget Israel for the time he or she is in office and do what is right for all Americans? I think not; I think the press would have a field day calling down all those who would say, or think such Anti Semitic things. If we look at the response in the press on the rare occasions where Obama refers to himself as a Black man you will see just how racist and one-sided the American press can be and how ingrained in the American scheme of things that Black people are somehow different from Whites like good is to evil, or smart is to dumb and so matter what education they have, whether they win an election or not they just cannot and should not be trusted to do the right thing; for so long has it been this way that even prominent Blacks holding public office find nothing wrong in continuing the status quo and rally behind their White colleagues demanding that President of the USA forget that he is Black while in office .
- After he offered a deeply personal response to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida, opponents said he went too far by “siding” with the family of the slain teen by saying “if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. Which led Washington Post columnist to go off once again on yet another racist tirade.
- Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker suggested earlier last week that Obama’s identification with Martin may have “nourish[ed] the killing passions” of the black youths who randomly shot and killed a white Australian baseball player in Oklahoma.
- David Garrow, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, says that Obama – even at a moment so steeped in the nation’s racial history – is typically reluctant to spotlight his own identity. “The White House’s attitude is that everybody in America who’s black knows that he’s the first black president,” he said. “Black America doesn’t need to be reminded. And, simultaneously, with much of white America, reminding them that Obama is black is not necessarily a positive.”
- Terry Edmonds, former chief speechwriter for President Bill Clinton and the first African-American to hold that position feels that, Clinton wasn’t at risk of criticism for “being too deferential to the African-American community,” Edmunds said. “President Obama has that challenge.”
I would share with you what a black man, who marched and spoke and stood beside martin Luther King Jr. would say and prompted me to write this post.
“The president is the president. He’s not a civil rights leader, ” Rep. John Lewis, the only living speaker from the 1963 march said Sunday. “There’s a difference.” Obama’s presidency – after five years and two decisive elections – is a self-evident tribute to the realization of King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. But his job title also means that he’s charged with separating his own identity from the task of improving the lives of all Americans, creating a balancing act as he prepares to deliver an anticipated address from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial marking the anniversary of the march. “His message has to be about policy and his priorities about moving this country forward and lifting all boats through his efforts,” said Terry Edmonds, former chief speechwriter for President Bill Clinton and the first African-American to hold that position. Read whole article here: Obama must balance history with policy as he commemorates the March on Washington
I would close asking these questions:
If the leader of the country can not stand as champion for the oppressed, the down trodden, or seek to use his, or her office to right a history of injustice and the mistreatment of a minority in his country then what is his or her role in the running of the country ?
If the President of the United States of America is not the champion of the American Constitution and the driving force behind its being adhered to, then what is his or her purpose?
What greater priority could there be for a leader of the country than to protect the country’s most vulnerable citizens?”
I disagree with those that would say that the things that, Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker said above, or for that matter what Rep. John Lewis said, because they both said in a different way that to keep America strong a Black president must pretend that he is not Black and that he is not moved by racial discrimination faced by a racial minority, because he is from that racial minority, lest he be believed to be unfair, or blamed for the actions of 2 juvenile delinquent Black children, who murdered a white athlete, because they were bored.