Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

The American Dream at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama stand together in the Blue Room of the White House, before a brunch celebrating the Inauguration, Jan. 18, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

WE HAVE been to the mountaintop with Dr. Martin Luther King, and in Michelle and Barack Obama we have seen the American dream manifested.

No matter your politics, our country has moved major steps forward from when we were founded.

We are a more perfect union.

We’ve still got a long way to go.

, , , , , , , , , ,

60 Responses to The American Dream at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

  1. secularhumanizinevoluter January 20, 2013 at 8:15 am #

    “We are a more perfect union.

    We’ve still got a long way to go.”

    She swings….it’s a hit……that ball is OUTTA HERE!!!!!!

    • Taylor Marsh January 20, 2013 at 10:00 am #


      And I’d also like to say that I just *love* First Lady Michelle Obama’s new bang look for the occasion.

  2. jjamele January 20, 2013 at 12:51 pm #

    When I was in college, my government professor told his class that the first black President would be a Republican who would pull a “Nixon goes to China” by cutting Social Security and Medicare. He’d get away with it because liberals and African-Americans would either be so enthralled and protective of our first black President, or too intimidated with the prospect of being called a racist to criticize him. He also said that no matter what his politics, no matter how indifferent he was to the poor and suffering, no matter how brutal he was in using American military power overseas, he’d get a pass and be considered the heir to Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy- never mind that MLKjr would certainly be horrified at what the party of FDR and Truman and LBJ has become under his direction. That was one smart professor, I wonder if he lived to see his words come true.

    • jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 8:18 pm #

      very wise, indeed

    • Solo January 20, 2013 at 8:39 pm #

      Exactly how do you know how MLK would react to President Obama? “No matter how brutal he was in using American military power overseas?’ You also need to bone up on your history. Those two men you are holding up as the Democratic Party ideal, FDR and Truman both killed thousands of civilians. You call Obama brutal because a few civilians being used as human shields have died in drone attacks but you love FDR and Truman? FDR signed off on the firebombing of Dresden Germany (20K civilian deaths) and Tokyo Japan (100K civilian deaths) during WW2 after it was clear the war was basically over. Then there is Truman dropping two nuclear bombs on Japan after it was crystal clear that we had beaten Japan. Yeah President Obama is brutal and FDR and Truman were humanitarians!

      • jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 8:43 pm #

        I actually agree with you on this one, Solo. The US will be paying for the bad karma from those nuclear bombs forever.

      • spincitysd January 21, 2013 at 12:02 am #

        Wow, great projection Solo. If anyone needs to bone up on there history it is you dear man.

        First off we have no real idea where MLK would be on the subject of BHO. He would be in his 80′s if where still alive today. Who knows what mental facilities he would have at that late juncture?

        But what we do know of MLK was his profound objection to the Vietnam war and to violence of any kind. In his last days, King was pivoting to a class understanding of the Civil Rights problem. He saw not just a race problem, but a poverty problem in the US. If allowed to develop, who know knows where he would of ended up? MLK starting something akin to Occupy Wall Street in the late ’60′s? The mind reels.

        Still, I cannot see a moral force like the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. having anything good to say to or about someone like Barack Obama; an utterly amoral man. King laid his reputation and his cause on the line to oppose Vietnam Solo. Bogus Barry had it both ways with Iraq. B.B. was against Iraq when he was in a safely Liberal bastion of Chicago, and then prosecuted the occupation to the last full measure when he was president. Obama only left Iraq because the SOFA expired and the Iraqis were in no mood to extend it. Were it not for that inconvenient detail, we would still have US forces on the ground in Iraq.

        And as for the slander presented on both FDR and Truman, your historical perspective is all wrong. Remember, for all the faults of both men, they were in an existential struggle with the Nazi state. To equate what they did in pursuing a war against the Hitlerite hords with the struggle against the non-state actors of Al Queda is to insult the Greatest Generation and the millions of people who died between 1939 and 1945.

        Anwar al-Awlaki was no existential threat to the United States; he ran Al Queda’s AV glee club. His major “accomplishments” were persuading a really dim African Man to nearly blow his junk up on an airliner, and to be tangental in the Fort Hood shoot-up. But Obama pink misted him all the same Solo. Obama did this on vague intelligence that our man in Yemen was saying some really nasty things and might be able to do something or other perhaps bad and or naughty. Obama aced an American citizen with no trial, no jury, no legal proceeding of any kind. He killed that man because he could, because he could get away with it, because he had the cover of being “Commander In Chief.” He acted with all the grace and finesse of a Mafia Don ordering a hit on some deadbeat gambler who welched on a bet.

        Spare me, Solo, your fanboi missives about Barack Obama. He and George W Bush deserve to be frog-marched to the Hauge for War Crimes. They both deserve to spend the rest of their lives sitting in a rebuilt Spandau Prison, an object lesson in ultimate accountability. Sadly, both these men will never be held to account. Sadly, the rot that affects our foundational institutions will continue a pace.

        • Solo January 21, 2013 at 1:02 am #

          Hmmm! Are you really deluded to the point where you believe that if MLK was alive today he would share your deranged hatred of the first African American President? Georgia Congressman John Lewis who unlike you actually knew MLK stated that if he was still alive he would definitely be an Obama supporter. Who’s word should people take an actual MLK acquaintance or you. Your ilk like using dead black people to trash a live ones, after all the dead one’s aren’t around rebuke you! Amoral? Christ, reading your posts is like reading a rant from a Teabagger. A few years ago killing terrorists was good thing but now that President Obama has proven himself skilled at protecting the American people all of a sudden killing terrorists is a bad thing. As for your attempts to demean me for being a Obama fanboy let me be clear I AM A PROUD OBAMA SUPPORTER and if you have a problem with that, too bad. I am not a flaky liberal when I make a decision I stick with it and see it through to the end.

          As for that slander accusations please by early 1945 the tide of WWII has clearly changed in the favor of the allies which made the firebombing of civilian targets like Dresden and Tokyo of questionable military value. Truman’s drop of the A-bomb on not one but two Japanese cities were clearly of no military value and were done to break the will of the Japanese people. Facts are a bitch aren’t they? President Obama is a war criminal and should be frog marched to the Hauge? I don’t think you should hold your breath. Hmmm! I wonder if the families of the people OBL killed 12 years ago would agree with that opinion? I wonder if those American hostages he ordered rescued from Somali pirates would? President Obama is a good President doing a better that adequate job under difficult circumstances and according to recent polls the majority of his fellow American believe that too.

          • spincitysd January 22, 2013 at 3:05 am #

            Lovely bit of Ad Hominem Solo, I see “attack the man” is still your favorite response.

            And I still see you have absolutely no grasp of real history. Um, breaking the will of a people to effect the end of a war is called strategy my dear Solo. EI, that is what you do in a war, you break the will of the nation to continue fighting. Do I really have to explain these kinds of things to you?

            Much wiser heads have debated the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima and whether it was a wise or moral thing to do. Dan Carlin probably is closest to the truth is that the monopoly that the US enjoyed colored policy greatly. We only really had issues with the bomb after Uncle Joe developed one of his own for the Soviets. More to the point, I’m not going to beat that dead horse anymore than needs be. Much of the criticism leveled against Truman about the bomb decision seems to me laced with far too much anachronism. If you were looking at the possible casualties an invasion of the home islands would incur, which the men of the time were, you might cut Truman a little slack.

            But to the main point, that FDR and Truman were fighting a war that was an existential struggle against the Nazi terror, you have no case. Against the secondary argument, that the current “GWOT” is not even close to same kind of war that WWII was, you again have no case.

            I will also point out that there is no way to hold either Truman nor FDR accountable as they are now safely dead. Obama, being alive, is another kettle of fish all together.

            And on that score, the indiscriminate use of drones, all on the sovereign territories of other nations, is in my mind a war crime. It is a quantum leap in the incautious use of force. Far too many innocents are getting killed, women, men, children, in these strikes. Don’t get me started on how many wedding parties and other totally innocent gatherings have been vaporized by piss-poor intelligence. Again we have elites acting badly out of the belief they have a weapons monopoly.

            I also note that you have no real rejoinder to the murder by drone that Obama committed on Anwar al-Awlaki. That all by its lonesome was a war crime. Actually it was more a Mafia Hit by other means, but let’s not quibble. To support that action, the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, is to allow the President Of The United States to act as judge, jury, and executioner. Obama committed the premeditated murder of a US citizen, and there is no other way to look at it. No holding up of the corpse of OBL will change that. No reference to John Lewis will alter that fact. Not holding Obama to account for that one act means that you grant a Republican president the same power, the same murderous tool at his or her disposal. This is not about Obama per say, it is about holding our president accountable when s/he oversteps the boundaries of his office.

            This is not fuzzy headed liberal thinking, this is defending the rights we have under the constitution. This is about Limited Government and Balance Of Power. This is about checking the power grab of the Executive Office. The President cannot act as Judicial Power, he cannot be allowed to kill a US Citizen on whim or some vaguely defined “intelligence” only he is privy to. That way lies madness. That way lies the destruction of our Republic. Again I ask, do you want a Republican to have this type of power, because s/he will if we give Obama a pass on the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki.

            Final point. As much as I admire John Lewis, he cannot speak for Martin Luther King Jr. Only King, in his writings and his life, can speak for King. And looking at the pivot that King was making at the end of his life, looking at his outspoken opposition to the killing in Vietnam, looking at the progression of his political and spiritual journey, I find it laughable to assume he would be a fan of Obama. King was a moral force, the still, small voice attempting to speak to our better natures. He was grounded in a radical interpretation of Christianity, highly seasoned with Gandhian notions of non-violence and civil disobedience. How that square peg of moral righteousness could be made to fit the round hole of Obama’s a-moral vision is a conundrum that is best answered: it could not. I can see why John Lewis could want to drape Obama in the mantle of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; it is a totally human thing to do. JFK cultists keep musing that Jack would have pulled out of Vietnam in his second term. It’s possible, it’s also possible JFK could have figured out a way to make flying pigs. What Lewis is doing here is indulging in anachronism, assuming that MLK would have followed the same path he did. It assumes Kings thinking and progress woud be exactly like Lewis’. But that assumes way too much. It is much more likely, chaos theory being what it is, that Mr. Lewis and Dr. Kings paths would have diverged. It is more likely that MLK would have drifted further left, maybe to an OWS kind of mentality. He was drilling down into the underside of our culture, on the violence of poverty and how it twists the human soul, when he was gunned down. Who knows where that journey would have gone if it was allowed to continue? It is one of the great “what ifs”, one of the great counterfactuals of our history: what if King had not been gunned down in Memphis that day? I have guesses, but who really knows? The real Martin Luther King was incredibly complex, incredibly learned, incredibly charismatic, and incredibly flawed. This cardboard cut-out of King that partisans off all stripes carry around, this decolorized, this bland chimera, this saccharin fairy tale spoon-fed to us, is not the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. not in any true sense. And I despise the base fools who would claim that he would be cool with any current politician. Dr. King had to deal with the political elite of his time, but he always did it with a goal in view. Not for him the Fanboi emotionalism of those who would claim his mantle.

          • Solo January 22, 2013 at 6:42 am #

            Spincitysd: Anwar al-Awlaki got exactly what he deserved. If you want to call President Obama a war criminal for a killing a terrorist go right ahead! This man renounced his American citizenship, joins a terrorist organization after said organization declared war on the United States attacked us and killed thousands of our citizens. He then directly participates in plots to attack us but somehow he should be treaty like any common criminal. There is a difference between war and civilian law enforcement. Thanks to President Obama’s anti-terror efforts for the first time in my lifetime the American people actually trust a Democrat with their security.

  3. angels81 January 20, 2013 at 5:53 pm #

    As we celebrate the life of MLK and the start of the second term of the first Afro American President, we have some posters who come here and can’t put politics down for one day. They can’t see past their dislike for Obama, and just enjoy the fact that we have come along way since that terrible day when Kings life was ended. If King was alive today, he would be standing proud on the podium with the President, not trashing him on some blog.

    • secularhumanizinevoluter January 21, 2013 at 8:53 am #

      Exactly Angels!……Heaven(as if there actually were such a fantasy place) knows I am not a fan of everything President Obama has done either in the run up to nor through out his first term….but the plain old fact of the matter is he DOES, perhaps more so then any other President this country has elected, represent the reality of MLK’s dream.

    • spincitysd January 22, 2013 at 3:37 am #

      “If King was alive today, he would be standing proud on the podium with the President, not trashing him on some blog.”

      Meh Angels81, I seriously doubt MLK would be invited to the inauguration, not the real MLK who most likely would had nothing good to say about Iraq, Afghanistan, our drone policy, imperial over-reach, income inequality, etc., etc., etc., etc.

      As someone who gets too far into the weeds of history as it is, I have a sore spot for people who wants to reduce King to “I Have A Dream.” It’s a grave injustice to the man. I do not want to jerk Secular’s collar too hard here, but we do need to remember how grounded King was in a radical Christianity and how it colored his politics and his whole life. The real MLK, if he had not naturally passed away by now, would have been a lot more nuanced about Obama than any of us would guess. We need to remember that King was much more than the Reductio Ad Absurdism of the “I Have A Dream” speech, just as Abraham Lincoln was much more than the Reductio Ad Absurdism of the “Gettysburg Address.”

      And yes it really does send me into conniptions to have Obama and King name uttered in the same breath. This is because King’s vision of a just society was so much more than mere integration of the races. Or is it so hard to remember the “content of their character” part of “I Have A Dream.” Yes we have our first black president, but that man has some very serious flaws. We need to remind ourselves of that lest our self-congratulation gets out of hand.

  4. jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 6:44 pm #

    It’s impossible to know what King would have said and done in the age of Obama. He might have chosen the opportunity to call out Obama for decimating the black middle class, and white America for its constant patting of itself on the back All is conjecture.

    • Solo January 20, 2013 at 8:43 pm #

      President Obama decimated the black middle class? Wow!

      • spincitysd January 21, 2013 at 12:08 am #

        It is more correct to say Obama did nothing for those hurt worst by the Housing Bubble collapse. Those people were inordinately in the working class, with African Americans and other minorities being the worst hit. As Joyce and other OWS sympathizers would say; the banks were made whole while the ordinary people were left holding the bag.

        Obama left the black working class as he found it : screwed, glued, and tattooed.

  5. angels81 January 20, 2013 at 7:07 pm #

    What a bunch of crap, you sound like some right wing Fox news commentator. To make a statement like ” Obama decimating the black middle class” is right out of Glenn Becks mouth. I know you are a Obama hater, and I question you saying you are a progressive left wing type. The more I read most of the crap you post, the more I wonder if you are a racist to boot.

    • jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 7:13 pm #

      and, oh yeah, yer an idiot

      • angels81 January 20, 2013 at 7:33 pm #

        At least I’m a honest idiot, unlike you.

        • jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 7:44 pm #

          Taylor hates “pissing wars,” so this may all get deleted, but, no, in fact, you are not honest. You went for the racist card when you felt cornered. I call that dishonest bs, and yes, idiotic.

          Good day to you.

          • angels81 January 20, 2013 at 8:01 pm #

            No, its my honest opinion about you.

          • jinbaltimore January 20, 2013 at 8:27 pm #

            Aw. Bless your heart. I said good day.

  6. fangio January 20, 2013 at 8:03 pm #

    Obama has done nothing for black Americans; absolutely nothing. He could not even bring himself to pardon some of the thousands of black men locked up in Federal prisons on crack cocaine charges. Did he give them the pride of having a black man in the White House, yes he did. I still remember the faces of the black people in Grant Park the night of the election when it became clear that he would actually win. It certainly was a sight to see. Of course, as we all now know, he had no use for them. His past and future was with white and wealthy America.

    • Solo January 20, 2013 at 8:51 pm #

      Like you give a damn about African Americans!

      • spincitysd January 21, 2013 at 12:13 am #

        Um, it matters not a whit if Fangio cares or does not care about African Americans. You just surrendered the field to Fangio; good job Solo! Another wonderful fail and resort to argumentum ad hominem, keep it up fanboi!

        • Solo January 21, 2013 at 1:13 am #

          A person motivation doesn’t matter? Good to know.

          • fangio January 21, 2013 at 1:38 am #

            What does my motivation have to do with anything? You just couldn’t win the argument so you just changed the subject. You actually do that a lot. Your knees must be really sore.

  7. angels81 January 20, 2013 at 8:40 pm #

    Yes, and black Americans felt so angry at Obama because he betrayed them that they just stayed home and did not vote for him in large numbers. Also, we see how bad he does in the polls with the blacks that he betrayed because they know how bad he is for them. Talk about being deluded.

    • fangio January 21, 2013 at 12:50 am #

      I said they have pride in having a black man in the White house, why don’t you learn to read; besides, who else would they vote for, Mitt Romney.

      • angels81 January 21, 2013 at 8:46 am #

        So what you are saying is, the only reason Afro Americans voted for Obama is because he is black? If Obama betrayed Afro Americans so badly they could have just stayed home and not voted or voted third party like some on the far left did. Of course third party candidates didn’t have much to say about the plight of Afro Americans either.

        I detect a double standard in your argument.

  8. ladywalker68 January 21, 2013 at 12:09 am #

    Pissing contests aside, I congratulate President Obama and Mrs. Obama on being an example of the “American Dream” at work.

    That said, I agree with Taylor we have come a long way and have along way to go. I will take it a bit further and say that I believe we might be in retrograde and the American Dream declining for all walks of life.

    See me in 20 years and lets see if it is still possible for someone born poor or middle class to move up. My gut is telling me with the way things are going with cuts in education, we may have seen that last of such dreams.

  9. spincitysd January 21, 2013 at 12:31 am #

    Riddle me this Taylor, what use is it to elect this first black president if he hands over the keys to the New Deal castle?

    To me results matter, and in the first term of BHO I see absolutely nothing worth celebrating. A week recovery made worse by not correcting the fundamental flaws of crony capitalism is nothing to be proud of. A wet sloppy kiss to the Health Care incumbents, bought and paid for by a further entrenchment of the abomination known as the Hyde rule is nothing to be proud of. Continued Imperial overreach abroad, combined with the shredding of our civil rights at home is nothing to be proud of. And the continued attempt by Obama and the rest of the clueless elites to ruin the greatest advance in reducing poverty in the USA, Social Security, is nothing to be proud of.

    I think it is way past time we stop patting ourselves on the back on how post racial we have become and seriously deal with this fifth columnist of a Democrat occupying the White House. We need to make it clear that political oblivion awaits Obama or any other politician who attempts any kind of Grand Bargin with Social Security or Medicare.

  10. TPAZ January 21, 2013 at 4:18 am #


    Thanks for the link:

    Don’t You Dare Conflate MLK and Obama, by BAR executive editor Glen Ford

    “Had King survived, his break with Obama would have come early.”

    Back in 1964, under prodding from a BBC interviewer, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. predicted that a Black person might be elected president “in 25 years or less.” Four years later, shortly before his assassination, King confided to actor/activist Harry Belafonte that he had “come to believe we’re integrating into a burning house.” We now see that the two notions are not at all contradictory. At least some African Americans have achieved deep penetration of the very pinnacles of white power structures — integrating the White House, itself — while conditions of life for masses of Black folks deteriorate and the society as a whole falls into deep decay.

    The fires lit by the “giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism” that Dr. King identified in his 1967 “Beyond Vietnam: Breaking the Silence” speech are consuming the world, now stoked by a Black arsonist-in-chief. Domestic poverty hovers only a fraction of a percentage below the levels of 1965, with “extreme poverty” the highest on record. Black household wealth has collapsed to one-twentieth that of whites. Today, more Black men are under the control of the criminal justice system than were slaves in the decade before the Civil War, according to Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow.

    The intervening years have shown that Dr. King’s 1960s visions were not in conflict: the rooms at the top floors of the national house may have been integrated, but the building still burns.

    The deepening crisis of capitalism, the triumph of Wall Street finance over industrial capital, the increasing imperial reversion to international lawlessness in a desperate bid to maintain global supremacy — all this was predictable under the laws of political economy. Had the assassin’s bullet not found him, Dr. King would have continued his implacable resistance to these unfolding evils, rejecting Barack Obama’s invasions, drones and Kill Lists with the same moral fervor and political courage that he broke with Lyndon Johnson over the Vietnam War. Absolutely nothing in King’s life and work indicates otherwise.

    “The very notion of a grand austerity bargain with the Right would have been anathema to MLK.”

    One school of thought holds that corporate servants like Obama could not have taken root in Black America if Dr. King, Malcolm X and a whole cadre of slain and imprisoned leaders of the Sixties had not been replaced by opportunistic representatives of a grasping Black acquisitive class. In any event, had King survived, his break with Obama would have come early. Surely, the Dr. King who, in his 1967 “Where Do We Go from Here” speech called for a guaranteed annual income would never have abided Obama’s targeting of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in the weeks before his 2009 inauguration. Forty-five years ago, King’s position was clear: “Our emphasis must be twofold: We must create full employment, or we must create incomes.” The very notion of a grand austerity bargain with the Right would have been anathema to MLK.

    Were Martin alive, he would skewer the putative leftists and their “lesser evil” rationales for backing the corporatist, warmongering Obama. As both a theologian and a “revolutionary democrat,” as Temple University’s Prof. Anthony Monteiro has described him, MLK had no problem calling evil by its name — and in explicate triplicate. His militant approach to non-violent direct action required him to confront the underlying contradictions of society through the methodical application of creative tension. He would make Wall Street scream, and attempt to render the nation ungovernable under the dictatorship of the Lords of Capital. And he would deliver a withering condemnation of the base corruption and self-serving that saturates the Black Misleadership Class.

    He would spend his birthday preparing a massive, disruptive action at the Inauguration.

    • jinbaltimore January 21, 2013 at 4:44 am #

      You’re welcome. Unfortunately, like most persuasive arguments, it holds no sway with the Obamabots.

      • Solo January 21, 2013 at 8:23 am #

        Obamabots? You mean like all of MLK’s children and all of his surviving associates like Georgia Rep John Lewis? The fact that one of MLK’s daughters (Bernice King) is actually participating in the today’s inauguration festivities today blows your “Had King survived, his break with Obama would have come early.” That assertion assumes that if he had lived MLK 2013 would be exactly same as MLK 1968! How can anyone believe that the intervening 45 years would have had absolutely no impact of his political philosophy? Next time when you leftists want to make a point don’t point to another leftists as your evidence because all that link led to was just another guy (who as far as I can tell was kid when MLK died and didn’t know him personally) expressing his “opinion”! Glen Ford! Now there is a reliable source of information.

        • jinbaltimore January 21, 2013 at 8:29 am #

          If the intervening 45 years had changed Dr. King’s philosophy to the extent that he embraced Obama’s drone program, preventative detention, extracurricular assassinations, robbing of the poor to give to the rich, etc., etc., then Dr. King would not be the hero we celebrate today.

  11. jinbaltimore January 21, 2013 at 4:38 am #

    • Solo January 21, 2013 at 8:51 am #

      It’s no secret that a lot of the old school rights leaders like Cornel West, Jesse Jackson and Tavis Smiley resent Barrack Obama because not only did he just come out of no where and get elected President (something none of them could manage) he doesn’t come out of that civil rights tradition. To a lot of those timers if your grand papi wasn’t a sharecropper in the south, if your ancestors weren’t slaves your not authentic! Success breeds envy but congrats of finding one of the few blacks out there who don’t like the Obama’s. I am sure you think that means something. Taking the exception and making it out to be the rule isn’t terrible difficult.

      • whitepaw January 21, 2013 at 1:23 pm #

        Solo — I have a question for you (not sure if you are African American or not), but your reply above reminded me of what I heard repeatedly during the 2008 election. That African Americans may not have supported Obama to the extent they did had he been married to a woman of a different race (mostly a white woman, but other races as well). The fact that Michelle has ancestors that were slaves made a huge difference to Blacks. This was not just stated by pundits, but I recall hearing this from Blacks who were interviewed. If this is true, is this just the opinion of the “old-timers” you referenced above or would this be the consensus of the majority of Blacks? Just curious. Thanks

        • Solo January 21, 2013 at 10:03 pm #

          I have no idea which AA you are talking to but they love and support this President! Michelle connects more with average black folks but that doesn’t mean a lack of affection for Barrack. They would have voted for him even if he was married to a non-black woman.

          • whitepaw January 22, 2013 at 6:00 pm #

            Thanks Solo for the reply. Next question is why do Blacks love and support (have affection for) Barack Obama? Is it because of his policies? Because of his race? Because he is a Democrat? Again, just curious where the affection comes from? I assume it is pride based on his race?

          • Solo January 23, 2013 at 3:52 am #

            Whitepaw: African Americans feel about President Obama the same way you as a white woman would feel about a President Hillary Clinton! I have come across attitudes like yours before, an attitude that while other communities are allowed to take pride in one of their own doing good African Americans are required to be universal. Obama4ever!

          • whitepaw January 23, 2013 at 9:11 am #

            Neither race nor gender are reasons for someone to get my vote. Qualifications and performance are.

          • Solo January 23, 2013 at 1:41 pm #

            Whitepaw: If you are actually truthfully claiming that a Hillary Clinton Presidency wouldn’t have any special meaning for you well then you are one of the few white women who feel that way!

          • ogenec January 23, 2013 at 2:04 pm #

            Solo, I really must commend you on your composure. I know you must hate having to answer serial questions from Johnny One Notes who already think they know the answer to their questions. whitepaw believes with every fiber in her being that African-Americans voted for Obama because of race, and despite his lack of qualifications. She’s been slinging that since before she and her buddy Rico Not-So-Suave were put in moderation for some abhorrent Treyvon comments, but ain’t nothing changed – she has the true religion.

            Solo, you need a Luther!

          • Solo January 24, 2013 at 6:50 am #

            Ogenec: Whitepaw thinks that people can’t see where she’s coming from but they can. Her Trayvon Martin comments were ugly but not surprising.

      • jinbaltimore January 21, 2013 at 5:56 pm #

        so…criticism of the president from the left = meaningless they are not realistic, criticism of the president from the :”old school rights” = meaningless, because they are jealous…hee hee…o.k.!

  12. secularhumanizinevoluter January 21, 2013 at 9:01 am #

    It says all one needs to know about the Obama Derangement Syndrome crowd that they just can’t let a historic event like the SECOND Inauguration of the FIRST Black person elected…and by an over 50% majority in the popular vote and a CRUSHING majority in the electoral college one might add….without dragging out of the fever swamp the usual, parroted litany of anti-Obama screeds.
    For all of his and our faults I say congratulations President Obama and congratulations America……one step closer to the reality of what we should, could and hopefully one day will be as a People and nation.

    • Solo January 21, 2013 at 9:29 am #

      Let this marinate for a sec! In the entire 237 year history of this country only six President’s have won two elections with better than 51% of the vote. Only two Democratic Presidents have done it and Barrack Hussein Obama is one of them. President Obama is the embodiment of everything this country says it stands for, his personal story is the ultimate up by your bootstraps story. Born to a poor single teenage mother living in what can only be described as a shack with one window Barrack Obama makes it all the way to Harvard, the Illinois State Legislature, then the United State Senate and finally the Presidency. Those facts along bare mentioning!

      • fangio January 21, 2013 at 10:07 am #

        He won because there was no one else to choose from and he made it to the Senate through good old gerrymandering. And what’s wrong with a shack with one window, it was good enough for Elvis.

        • angels81 January 21, 2013 at 10:38 am #

          Keep eating those sour grapes, you and the Romney folks have a lot in common. I love how you think you can speak for the 51% who voted for the President by saying the only reason was, because there was no one else to choose from. Maybe, just maybe people voted for Obama because they wanted to vote for him. I know I had a choice, I could have voted for Romney, I could have stayed home, I could have voted third party. I’m sorry you felt you had no choice.

        • Solo January 21, 2013 at 11:01 am #

          Senators run statewide not in districts. Senate races can’t be gerrymandered! Elvis? Really? Elvis? Wow!

  13. TPAZ January 21, 2013 at 11:00 am #

    “Riddle me this Taylor, what use is it to elect this first black president if he hands over the keys to the New Deal castle?”

    Will someone answer this question?

    • Solo January 21, 2013 at 11:05 am #

      Riddle me this TPAZ, when did President Obama hand over the keys to the New Deal Castle? What part of the New Deal is different today from what is was the day President Obama took office?

      • angels81 January 21, 2013 at 11:10 am #

        Geez, Solo, you beat me to the punch.

    • angels81 January 21, 2013 at 11:08 am #

      First tell us how and when is he going to hand over the keys to the New Deal. Also, “IF is a really big word, so I ask you, what IF he doesn’t hand the keys over? We can all play the “IF game to we are blue in the face, but it gets us no where. Obama is not King, he can’t do anything by himself. It will take more then the President to hand the keys over.

      • secularhumanizinevoluter January 21, 2013 at 1:11 pm #

        O.D.S. a sad affliction of political and emotional immaturity in individuals of the supposed “progressive” persuasion who whine, squeal and stamp their feet if every single thing a President or any elected official does doesn’t fit THEIR idea of how a “progressive” elected official should govern.

        • angels81 January 21, 2013 at 1:30 pm #

          They seem to have something in common with the right wing tea bagger crowd. They both seem to be purists when it comes to their politicians.

          • secularhumanizinevoluter January 21, 2013 at 4:43 pm #

            And look at the wonders the teabaggers have done for the Republican brand.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong