Korean Man's Blog
Korean Man's Blog

Some thoughts and observations about the world today

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Rating 3

The tragedy of Barack Obama

Posted by korean_man, Oct 12 2008, 06:04 PM

As most of us know by now, Obama is the product of a mixed race marriage: his father was from Kenya (black), and his mother was from Kansas (white). He was born and raised in Hawaii, spending a few years in his youth in Indonesia. His parents divorced not long after he was born, and Obama was thereafter raised by his mother and maternal grandparents.

From the start, Obama was very atypical of most American blacks: Obama was NOT raised in a black family. He was raised in a white family consisting of a white mother and white grandparents who were his direct blood relatives -- and who could only transmit to him white/European culture and values. In that sense, Obama did not have an "African-American experience." In fact, he had a very European-American experience, no different from that of other white Americans.

There's another thing that separates Obama from most other black Americans: he has no slave ancestors in the US -- a key part of the so-called African-American experience. This is important, since -- unlike most blacks in America -- Obama has no personal, family connection to any historical wrongs committed by whites against blacks in America. The fact is, he had NO ax to grind with whites for past historical grievances.

So with his unique background, and with no historical ax to grind with whites, did Obama embrace and honor his white family who toiled and sacrificed in order to raise him? Did he honor as well that European part of his heritage?

No. On the contrary, he rejected the love and sacrifice of his white grandparents, ultimately developing a hostile, resentful anti-white attitude that expressed itself in "community organizing." His days as a "community organizer" in Chicago is in fact a career of anti-white militancy.

As Canadian political columnist Mark Steyn said recently about Obama:

QUOTE
...there’s a tragedy about Barack Obama, because he didn’t have to be a guy who mired himself in all the grim pathologies of the racial grievance industry. I thought when he first appeared on the national stage, that he was a character more like Colin Powell. Colin Powell and Barack Obama are both the children of British subjects. In Colin Powell’s case from the West Indies, in Obama’s case, from Kenya. And the advantage of that is that they’re not part, they’re not part of what we call now the African-American experience. They’re not part of the Jesse Jackson-Al Sharpton narrative. So there’s something very bizarre about Obama in effect artificially trying to find ways of identifying with that particular, I would regard, that particular self-defeating narrative.


Obama could have chosen a different path. But somewhere during his formative years, he chose to identify with what Steyn calls the self-defeating narrative -- the "African-American" -- and then built his entire political career around that new, artificial identity. We begin to see why he chose to associate with the most extreme, unrepresentative segments of American society -- people like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers -- and why he dedicated his career as a "community organizer" to leftist, black separatist causes that were by definition anti-white and anti-American.

Obama was blessed with advantages most blacks in America don't have. He was raised by a middle class white family -- his very own blood relatives. He had no African slave roots in America, and therefore no personal connection to a history of white victimization of blacks. And in the end, he completely threw those advantages away. Instead, he became, by conscious choice, just another African-American, "mired in all the grim pathologies of the racial grievance industry."



Comments

  nagasawa, Oct 8 2008, 06:01 PM

Obama is a moderate. Kucinich is one of the more liberal members in Congress.

  korean_man, Oct 11 2008, 03:12 PM

QUOTE(nagasawa @ Oct 8 2008, 07:01 PM)
Obama is a moderate. Kucinich is one of the more liberal members in Congress.


A radical can take positions that make him a "moderate." Obama has been very clever voting the party line throughout his Senate career, never taking public positions that would turn off mainstream voters. He could not be a US senator or presidential nominee otherwise.

It's his track record as a Chicago "community organizer" that reveals him to be a far more shady character. Since his college days, Obama has had a history of associating with communists and left-wing, anti-white radicals.

You think a "moderate" would be a member of a virulently anti-white church for 20 years? Would a "moderate" choose to hook up with an unrepentant communist radical (Ayers) to jump start his political career? And don't forget Obama's ties to the radical group ACORN, which is a corrupt, leftist, vote-getting operation playing to the resentment of poor blacks towards whites and the capitalist system.

Kucinich is very liberal (he supports "gay marriage" for example) and probably unsuitable for the presidency, but he does not have a track record like Obama's that is anti-white and anti-American at the core.

This post has been edited by korean_man: Oct 12 2008, 06:52 PM

 
« Next Oldest · Korean Man's Blog · Next Newest »