Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics

Lambasted for Not Drinking the Obama Kool-Aid
Expert guest post by Michael
K. Fauntroy

It’s hard out here for Black pundits/analysts/commentators who haven’t
come around to drinking the Barack Obama is the best-thing-since-sliced-bread-how-did-we-ever-exist-as-a-nation-without-him-this-is-
our-last-best-chance-to-elect-a-Black-president-so-we-better-support-him-see-I-told-
you-racism-is-dead Kool-Aid. I have learned an unfortunate lesson in observing
the Democratic presidential nomination fight: In too many segments of the country
– Black and White – to express any skepticism about Barack Obama
is considered political heresy. I’m blown away by this discovery, because
it suggests a dangerous group think: Obama is the only agent of change and to
not praise him at every opportunity is to support the status quo (And, oh, by
the way, Hilary is the devil!).

Michael Fauntroy

This is a strange position for me to be in, as I think he has the instincts
to be a really good president. I don’t consider myself an Obama critic,
just someone unwilling to critically analyze his candidacy. I am a progressive
registered as an Independent and my preferred candidate is not in the race,
so I get a little touchy when callers and blog respondents assume that because
I’m not yet ready to drink the Obama kool-aid, that I must be in the tank
for Hilary Clinton. Not true. I think it’s narrow-minded to think that
just because one is lukewarm to Obama that they must want Hilary to win. Between
you and me: I’ll take Al Gore over either of them in a heartbeat.

I realized all this during a radio interview in Atlanta the day before the
New Hampshire primary. I had the temerity to suggest that we shouldn’t
overreact to his Iowa win. I reminded listeners that Jesse Jackson won Vermont
– a state every bit as White as Iowa – 20 years ago and that many
White Democrats have been voting for Black candidates for years, so we shouldn’t
jump up and down over Obama’s caucus win. I knew I was in trouble, though,
when the music bump before the interview began featured a caller who said she
supports Obama “100 percent” and would vote for a Black man over
a White woman every time. I thought: “wow, by that logic, you’d
vote for Ike Turner, Alan Keyes, and Clarence Thomas over Hilary Clinton.”
How ridiculous.

While I got slapped around by a few callers (and gently by the host, an Obama
supporter), one caller was particularly unhinged. He called himself an “Obama
Republican,” which struck me as oxymoronic (or maybe just moronic), and
went on about how Obama showed leadership in the Illinois legislature in opposing
the war and that I was out of line for not giving him credit for this. I reminded
the caller that Obama has not opposed one nickel of Bush spending to continue
this travesty, but, alas, I was deemed unduly critical of “the Brother,”
not to be taken seriously. By the way caller: Do you know how easy it is to
oppose something when you have no skin in the game? Can anyone say for sure
that he would not have voted to authorize Bush’s foolishness in Iraq if
he were a member of the Senate in 2002? I’m willing to bet that Obama
would have done as all the Senate Democrats who wanted to be president did:
vote to support Bush so that their Republican general election opponent couldn’t
say they were soft on terrorism.

All I’ve tried to do is add some reason and caution to the over-the-top
response that many voters have for Obama. And I’ll keep doing it. I have
thick skin, so it’s no big deal to me.

Michael K. Fauntroy is an assistant professor of public policy at George
Mason University and author of Republicans and the Black Vote. A registered
Independent, he blogs at: MichaelFauntroy.com.