Ron Robinson's Blog

BE GRATEFUL, NOT HATEFUL :)
OCTOBER 17, 2011 9:28PM

Herman "Bigsby" Cain: "Black White-Supremacist"

Rate: 37 Flag

As I said recently on the Huffington Post, I admit to being sickened by seeing so many of the same people commenting on HP who now support Herman Cain also say some of the most racist and hateful things about Black people and Obama. The hypocrisy couldn't be more evident. That's why I proposed that HP maintain this treasure trove of proof and do an offical content/discourse analysis that compares the comments these Cain supporters made in favor of Cain versus the racist views and sentiments they expressed against Obama, Blacks, Latinos, Muslims, etc. elsewhere on the website. This would prove false the bogus claim that these users (and others like them on the right) are NOT racist BECAUSE they support Cain.

I don't deprive Cain the success he's achieved in business. He's very intelligent, talented and clearly charismatic. I also don't doubt that he was placed on a face-track towards that success, especially as a Black Southerner who distinguished hemself by embracing the "Conservative Cause" and disavowing Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement while simultaneously benefiting from the fruits of their activism (p.s., the Civil Rights Movement did not end in 1964!).

Yet despite the success he's enjoyed, Cain's had the nerve to say that it's "YOUR FAULT. BLAME YOURSELF" if you're not as sucessful as him OR if you're facing tough times and are unemployed. YET out of the other side of his mouth he blames Obama for those conditions!  Cain's POLITICAL SUCCESS and support seems clearly related aggressive use of this kind of double-talk and blatant insenitivity, which is also reflected in his embrace of the racist, i.e., white supremacist narrative of the "birthers" and willingness to spread racist stereotypes of Black people, Muslims,  Latinos, Obama etc. In other words, the race-based hate that is the common currency of the so-called, "base," of the GOP/TP. And given Cain's extensive ties with the Koch Brothers, it seems doubtful that he's just a "fifteen minutes of fame" wonder, but will continue to publicly champion white supremacy for a long time to come.

WHITE SUPREMACY IS DOMINANT FORM OF RACISM IN AMERICA

In case you are unfamiliar with the decades-long defintion and description of of racism agasint people of color, especially Blacks and Native Americans, as "white supremacy," please see the following current resources (this is a mainstream coneptualization within the social sciences and humanities, especially among scholars who address issues of race, ethnicity, and culture):

The invisible weight of whiteness: the racial grammar of everyday life in contemporary America

State of White Supremacy: Racism, Governance, and the United States

Racism, Public Schooling, and the Entrenchment of White Supremacy

And here's author and scholar Tim Wise eloquently presenting an accurate portrayal of the phenomena/term "white supremacy:"

And Here's Cornell West talking about the phenomena of Black people who have internalized aspects of white supremacy themselves (what Frederick Douglass also called "mental slavery"). This is a phenomena that almost all Black people must come to terms with in their/our lives and it can be extremely painful (DuBois wrote about this in "Souls of Black Folks" in 1903. Recall his concepts of "double consciousness," "the veil," and "second sight" for instance. Also Frantz Fanon in the early/mid 1960's - "Black Skin, White Mask" and "The Wretched of the Earth" for example). I know I had to come to terms with it, as did my brother and my father (will be discussed in forthcoming family autobiography). However, some Black folks (as well as other people of color) become so infected by the virus of white supremacy that not only do they become completely blind to and/or in denial of the infection, but they transmit it proudly and happily (as in the subject of this tome and one particular Supreme Court Jurist to sadly name but a few with particularly virulent strains of it):

To summarize, white supremacy is a psychosocio-historic system of racial domination expressed through policies, laws, customs, norms, beliefs, attitudes, sentiments, language, behaviors, patterns of practice, etc. which maintain the superiority, privileging, normalizing, and universalizing  of White people and their ways of knowing and being and the subordination and disprivileging of people of color, especially Blacks and Native Americans, in most spheres of  life. This includes their cultural ways of knowing, being, communicating, speaking, etc. as well as their physical qualities.

"It operates on a continuum with mild forms of racism at one end leading to more severe types of racism at the other. For instance, when people of color deal with everyday slights such as not being served properly at a department store, or being followed in the store by security officers, this can be deemed as 'mild' forms of white supremacy in action. More 'severe' forms can be associated with the Ku Klux Klan attacks on people of color or heavy-handed policing in African-American communities." (see http://www.africanholocaust.net/html_ah/Notes%20on%20Understanding%20White%20Supremacy.html

In other words, the term and multi-faceted phenomena of "white supremacy" is not at all relegated to the terrorist and extremist versions embodied by the Klan etc. In fact, the extremist violence against Blacks was NEVER accurately conceptualized, defined, and  termed for what it was and what it is - RIGHT-WING WHITE TERRORISM. As such, unless this more accurate understanding of white supremacy in terms of systemic racism becomes more widespread, the underpinning of the racial issues that continue to plague the U.S. will continue to not only oppress Black folks and other historically oppressed racial minorities, but it will undermine the efforts of the "99% movement" to create the more fair, just, and equitable democracy envisioned by Dr. Martin Luther King. Sadly, those with the power to impose the view of white supremacy as limited to terrorist violence continue to hold sway in our society.

This includes White liberals and progressives as well. They too can produce and reproduce the phenomena of white supremacy in real time. In fact, I fear the turn criticism of Cain might take among White liberals and progressives, tempted to scapegoat Cain, but in their rush to appear "non racist" nevertheless resort to using stereotypic lines of attack against him.

It's important to realize that spreading the false and limited view of white supremacy as terroist Klan-type activity  taints those of us who use the more accurate defintion of the term (i.e., to describe the dominant form of racism in Amercia). Some have even gone so far as to stigmatize us as engaging in "abusive language" and/or "hate speech!" I wonder if those doing so realize that by positioning their limiting definitions of racism and white supremacy to be "superior," "supreme," and "the norm" - and ours as "abusive language"/"hate speech" that they actually reproduce white supremacy themselves. Regardless, the result is to once again place themselves in the "supreme" and "superior" position, whether they self-idnetify as conservatives, liberals, progressives, or what have you. That means that we have once again been rendered as "inferiors" even though we are the ones who primarily  suffer from the phenomena and are in the best position to accurately define it.

In fact, could you imagine ANYONE giving Black people veto power over the terms that White people have chosen to define biases against their particular ethnic/cultural/religious groups? Just another double standard we're expect to grin, bear, and suffer silently while others "set the agenda."

CONSERVATISM = RACISM/WHITE SUPREMACY IN AMERICA

Speaking of white supremacy, Republican leaders with a history of it, like Haley Barbour (Mississippi White Citizens' Council apologist) and Newt Gingrich (Obama was raised by his Kenyan, "Mau Mau" terrorist, white people hating father) are now saying that Republican/Tea Party members' support of Cain is "PROOF" that they're NOT racist. It seems that trying to "prove" that their backlash against and hatred for Obama and "big government" and "liberals" (which they see as synonymous with "the Blacks," "reparations," "illegals," etc.) isn't racist is a potent motivation for their vocal support of Cain. So is the possibility of receiving life-time dispensation and exoneration for a life time  marred by racist/white-supremacist sentiments in return for that support. Of course, they don't see it as racism/white-suprmemacy, but as good old fashion, "Conservatism."

Not so, according to author and journalist Bakari Kitwana in his coverage of this so called "Conservative Backlash." Nor according to Political Science Professor Robert C. Smith, who has empirically demonstrated that in American politics, conservatism and racism are the same and always have been. And perhaps even more poignantly, Chauncey DeVega captures this point succinctly in the provocative title of his piece, The Rotten Heart of White Conservatism: The Nonsense Argument That is White People are Oppressed in the Age of Obama.

On a personal note, regarding the support of these "conservatives" for Cain, my father (who's an 83 year old Black man born and raised in the South during Segregation and has seen it all) is admittedly sickened by this phenemenon and how the media has played along with it. I wonder if the media is afraid to raise the issue of Cain's racism and that of his supporters for fear of receiving an avalanche of organized hate mail and death threats from the Tea Party. But they shouldn't fear. Black folks and fair-minded people from all walks of life feel the same way towards this support for Cain and agree with how Sean Penn recently described the Tea Party, i.e., as the "Get the N-word out of the White House Party." 

And if Cain can help then get the job done, then even better. 

 "CLAYTON BIGSBY, BLACK WHITE SUPREMACIST"

That's why many people are beginning to metaphorically refer to Cain as the "Clayton Bigsby" of the GOP/TP. They feel that Cain is a shill for masking the Koch Brother funded white supremacy/racism of those who hate Obama, "big government" and "liberals" (aka, "N-word lovers"). Who's Clayton Bigsby? In case you've never seen it, here's Dave Chappelle's brilliant satire of the type of "Black White Supremacy" preached and practiced by his fictional character, "Clayton Bigsby" (Please sign-in to YouTube and give a "thumbs up" to AdamElseify's comment on Herman Cain. Somehow his previous "cough-Herman Cain-cough" comment disappeared, a day ago, and it wasn't the uploader who deleted it. In fact, he liked the comment. It earned over 60 "thumbs up" in 1 week! Come on folks give it some love.)

 
Exploring this satirical Bigsby analogy a bit further, Cain's metaphorical "hood" is represented by his willingness to express racist sentiments, support racist narratives, and pander to the white supremacy of the GOP/TP base. Take away that part of his "message" and his support would dry up as quickly as Bigsby's after he removed his literal hood.
 
Within the context of pandering to white supremacy, consider the fact that Cain  had the nerve to stick up for and lie on behalf of Hank Williams, who compared our first Black President to Hitler - a monster who was responsibl­e for 50 million deaths, including hundreds of thousands of American casualties­. Cain told Lawrence O'Donnell during his interview that Williams never mentioned Obama in his Hitler analogy. IN FACT, when Fox interviewe­r, Gretchen Carlson, specifical­ly asked Williams whom he was referring to, Williams unambiguou­sly answered, "Obama."

Even more troubling, Cain falsely portrayed the Civil Rights Movement as essentially over by the time he finished high school, and that was why he  didn't participate -  he was too young.
 
IN FACT, Cain had graduated Morehouse College, Dr. Martin Luther King's own alma mater, BEFORE King was assassinat­ed while leading the movement to help CHANGE America to BEGIN to include people like Cain. Yet Cain depicted the movement as long over. How hateful, ungrateful­, and disrespect­ful to King's ultimate sacrifice AND the Movement can one be!
 
TRIBUTE TO DR. KING MEMORIAL AND THE 99% MOVEMENT
 
Finally, In contrast to Cain's disgraceful treatment of Dr. King's legacy and disdain for the 99% Movement (and to the hijacking of Dr. King's legacy to promote an agressive form of white supremacy), I leave you with this respectful call for us to pick up where Dr. King left off, as the 99% Movement is beginning to do. Here's President Obama's excellent speech at the dedication of the Martin Luther King Memorial yesterday making this point:
cRon Robinson
 

 (c) Ron Robinson

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Excellent article. Having a African American front runner such as Cain makes them not-racist just about as much as choosing Palin for VP made them not sexist...we all know how well that one turned out...I am glad you wrote this- I have been disgusted by their "adoption" of Cain as their frontrunner, as if their endorsement of him + his color suddenly = an open-minded and just party...dream on- anyone who uses their brain at least some of the time will easily see through this- I would be sad if someone were to compare me to Clayton Bigsbyesque character, but Cain didn't bother to participate in the Civil Right's Movement and lied about why- his only interest is self interest
Herman Cain is at 14:57 of his fifteen minutes of fame by the media. He is another finger puppet being manipulated for the benefit of their $2B in campaign funds that they'll receive in 2012.
@toritto - Thanks bro! And you go that right regarding Cain and the Kochs.

@ Haley - Thanks so much. I'm glad I was able to speak for the disgust that you feel about this as well.

@ old new - I think that because of Cain's close ties to the Kochs and the other reasons I gave above, he's going to have a lot more than his "fifteen minutes." Watch on in horror - when he gets his key slot on Fox.
They are so transparent in their hypocrisy...
To put it simply he is a sell out to his race as well as to the majority of the working class. this is presumably part of an authoritarian belief system that leads those in power to believe they should be entitled to dictate the truth to the rest. When he said Clarence Thomas was his type of Supreme Court Justice, well, you get the point. they're often refereed to as "Uncle Toms;" however I consider this mistaken since if you go to the book where the original Uncle Tom got started you'll find that he wouldn't beat his own people. He may have sold out in a more subtle way by accepting the version of truth that was pushed on him but the original Uncle Tom was well intended; I wouldn't say the same about Herman Cain.
@Patrick - they are transparent to you and me, but so much America has been hoodwinked and swindled into always giving them the benefit of the doubt. that's why the study I've suggested would help bring attention to this hypocrisy and the normalization of it in the media

@zacahary - you are right about Uncle Tom in the original story. That's why I don't refer to Cain and his ilk (e.g., Thomas) that way - but as "Clayton Bigsby's" since their impact is so much more malignant and devastating, not just to Blacks, but to the majority of Americans. It ain't cute and doesn't deserve to be pandered to why those of us who accurately describe and rightly stigmatize their destructive behavior get brandished as engaging in "abusive language." THAT's how they're able to continue to operate with impunity and supremacy - WE're the ones who get scapegoated and railroaded while they and/or their wives collect millions.
@Patrick - they are transparent to you and me, but so much America has been hoodwinked and swindled into always giving them the benefit of the doubt. that's why the study I've suggested would help bring attention to this hypocrisy and the normalization of it in the media

@zacahary - you are right about Uncle Tom in the original story. That's why I don't refer to Cain and his ilk (e.g., Thomas) that way - but as "Clayton Bigsby's" since their impact is so much more malignant and devastating, not just to Blacks, but to the majority of Americans. It ain't cute and doesn't deserve to be pandered to - especially while those of us who accurately describe and rightly stigmatize their destructive behavior get brandished as engaging in "abusive language" for doing so. THAT's how they're able to continue to operate with impunity and supremacy - WE're the ones who get scapegoated and railroaded while they and/or their wives collect millions peddling policies that promote white supremacy and the interests of the 1%.
You are so right, Ron. The conservatives are touting Cain as their new "savior" and golden boy just as they were trying to jam Sarah Palin down our throats, thinking that would appease the female population. So transparent. Well-said.
Thanks Erica! And we've certainly seen how much trouble Palin's been able to stir up over the past few years. Remember the crosshairs? Just ask Gabby Giffords about how her followers practically shut down the street where Giffords' office is located in the months prior to her shooting - and how her staff was daily exposed to threats and intimidation...
Actually I liked Cain until he started talking about the Occupy Wall Street movement being out to steal the Cadillac's of Americans who worked for them. At that moment he lost my vote and probably millions of others too. The Koch brothers will learn when they are hung upside down by meat hooks on 7th Ave just like Mussolini. Its to bad your boy Obama doesn’t have the plumbing to seize the advantage and make it happen. Great videos Ron!
@ Jack - Thanks! btw I wouldn't count Obama and the Dems out on how they intersect with this movement. Electoral college dynamics dictate a lot of strategy - and now that the Rs having succeeded in potentially disenfranchising an estimated 5 million likely Dem voters in States where they control the Governorship and legislature and are tampering with how electoral votes in States like Pennsylvania and New York get allocated, things are even more dicey for 2012.

Not to mention the billions in special PAC monies that Rove, the Kochs and others are raising, that will most likely exceed what Obama raises, no matter how high the number (thanks to Supreme Court "Citizens United" care of the Nader voters in Florida during the 2000 election). As such, a key variable that drives election strategy is the fact that 94% of the time, the candidate with the most money wins. That's about as significant a "main effect" that you can get in any sphere of life, along any dimension.

@ a W - Thanks!
♥Rated.
Thank you.
I have long felt that Herman Cain was their token black man, their symbol that their approach to politics must be a balanced one, and his own behavior completes that thought for me. This guy to me is a wanna be, like so many suckered into what they know inherently is a wrong way of thinking, moving toward it as if they could really get something out of it or give something very good to it. I think he is not presidential material. I think that the Kochs have a relationship with him and know how to manipulate him much better than any of the other Republican 'stars'. They, like Cheney, want a Bush type idiot to puppet. They figure a black guy shows them up good especially since they go up against a black sitting president. Cain would have some interest for me if he was never affiliated with the Kochs in the past, had some kind of track record and leg to stand on himself like Obama had to begin with. I liked what Barbara Walters said today on the view when told that there were 30 billion people on the planet as of today, she said something like "And the Republicans still can't pick a candidate." I loved the way Elizabeth Hasselback squirmed as she is a primo republican idiot and why I no longer even watch the show regularly.
Nicely done, Ron. In the past several years, I have heard so many white supremacy fantasy apologists complain that certain Black people are racists. Sadly, in Jesse Jackson's case, he has uttered statements which are fully, reprehensibly racist. But one OS blogger recently commented on my post about the financial crisis that Al Sharpton is a racist. This may or may not also be true. But this blogger, TheBadScot, mentions it as if to imply that Sharpton's racism is somehow the cause of the financial crisis. As is his way, he drops his filth and then does not defend it. But if he believes it, he is deranged. Which gets to the point. Some of these people seem to be suffering some sort of anxiety that they think racism is the equivalent of racist oppression. I would love to see some of our resident OS Black Phobia sufferers address the definition of racism listed here in this post, and then explain how this is the source of all of their ills. Why do white people feel put upon by civil rights activist enough to call them "racists?" Please have TheBadScot, or Citizen Justice explain their perspectives on that one.
A long post but a good post. I agree about Cain, particularly after his recent comments about Hank Williams jr., the Wall Street protesters, and Clarence Thomas. My attitude toward Thomas is that he fits the description of what in the 1960's we used to refer to as "token." The first Bush administration was looking for a conservative Black jurist and he was the best they could do because most Black jurists have way too much sense to be conservatives. Let's just say that Thurgood Marshall he's not - he's about as comparable to Thurgood Marshall as Dan Quayle was to John Kennedy. I've read Cornell West and Tim Wise. When I started reading the post, I was trying to remember the name of that Dave Chappelle routine but you already knew about it.

People who think that supporting Cain means they're not racist are the same people who think that racism in America is a thing of the past which has been proven by Obama's election. Don't we wish. These are people stupid enough to think that Affirmative Action has swung the pendulum far enough that Blacks are actually economically advantaged now relative to the general population. Apparently, they can't read statistics.
Every person of any "race" which dominates a country/geographic area, etc is a racist.

Everyone discriminates. You go to the store and pick up a pepsi, you discriminated against coke. It's how our brains work - pepsi was more appealing to you. People who look like you are more appealing to you because they are more likely to share gene traits with you. You want your genes to advance, so you favor the people with the most in common with you.

If you are dominant in an area, that makes you a racist...flat out. How you control your racism defines if you are a good or a bad person.

Herman Cain is an idiot. His supporters are likely to be idiots and your idiot index is the precursor to your crappy racism index.

President Obama is a shill who studied and taught constitutional law and now he wantonly violates the constitution at every turn.

Just give a good man...I don't even care if I necessarily agree with his political ideology. As long as he cares about people over money and is willing to change course when what he is doing isn't working, I'm sold. I don't need to know a single other thing about him, including race...or gender, as all men as sexist, but that's another story.
The MLK Memorial looks like Martin was taken to the Cloud City and frozen in carbonite, by the way. I hear he should be relatively well preserved, if he survived the freezing process. Someone should get Leia to Obama's palace and try to revive him while everyone is asleep. We could kinda use him to wake the rest of the sleepers up these days.
@FasunA - Thanks!

@ Sheila - Thank you! Glad you mentioned Cheney - He and his daughter are stumping in Ohio to support the Republican Governor's reactionary assault against the unions and efforts to disenfranchise voters and push the same Koch Big Energy Greed etc. that got us into this Economic mess in the first place.

@Bill - you named it bro. That's why I had to make the post longer than I wanted (wink wink Kosher) :) Even though you and I and just about every every scholar of color in the social sciences has been using "white supremacy" to define the dominant form of racism in the U.S. for decades, the term is still not understood broadly. I fault those with the power to determine what terms are acceptable for us to use in our struggle against racial oppression etc. The term is so mainstream in our circles that most of time it's not even defined, or little time is taken to do so because it's not necessary to have to repeat something we've been using for decades.

But the fact that even White liberals and progressives who ought to know better deliberately deprive us of the use of that term, as if it's some out of this world concept, just shows you how segregated the world is that they choose to inhabit. If they had close friends who were Black intellectuals there wouldn't even be an issue. But that would mean we would have to be included as peers in the hierarchy of the networks of power, friendship, and employment they traverse.

I recently got a cold slap in the face when my use of the term white supremacy was labeled "abusive language." You would think that since the Bakke decision 30 some years ago and Rehnquist Court's establishing "racism against whites" (aka "reverse racism") as the primary race discrimination issue the Supreme Court has addressed ever since (and the lower Courts too), people would realize that the term "racism" has been so totally co-opted and used by so many against US, that it has lost its meaning and value in truly capturing our plight.

Studies have been conducted about the types of cases being heard by the Courts, and it's now White folks who've been deemed the primary victims.
That doesn't mean they are in reality. But it does mean that their complaints and claims are given preference over ours. Yet as you can see from OS new user, "Malcolm XY"s comments below - it doesn't even make a difference what arguments we proffer or empirical evidence - THEY will always know best.

I know YOU at least remember that it was Clarence Thomas who when he was given the position of heading up the EEOC proved his "Black white supremacist" bona fides by quashing race discrimination cases filed by Blacks but processing those filed by Whites. BECAUSE he was so good at that as well as backing the Corporate side in employment cases he was nominated to the Supreme Court - NOT because he was a brilliant mind or had any meaningful Judicial experience).
@MalcolmXY - welcome to OS. I see you joined today and made me your first stop and then favorited a rightwing user. I guess you've got your priorities all figures out
@Kosher - Thanks Bro. Yes, it was a longer post than I wanted (see my "wink wink" comment to Bill above about this). I'm glad you appreciated it. You are right on with all of the points you made and I appreciate your sharing them here.
@FasunA - Thanks!

@ Sheila - Thank you! Glad you mentioned Cheney - He and his daughter are stumping in Ohio to support the Republican Governor's reactionary assault against the unions and efforts to disenfranchise voters and push the same Koch Big Energy Greed etc. that got us into this Economic mess in the first place.

@Bill - Thanks Much! btw regarding the term "racism" - you hit the nail on the head. That's why I had to make the post longer than I wanted (wink wink Kosher) :) Even though you and I and just about every every scholar of color in the social sciences has been using "white supremacy" to define the dominant form of racism in the U.S. for decades, the term is still not understood broadly. I fault those with the power to determine what terms are acceptable for us to use in our struggle against racial oppression etc. The term is so mainstream in our circles that most of time it's not even defined, or little time is taken to do so because it's not necessary to have to repeat something we've been using for decades.

But the fact that even White liberals and progressives who ought to know better deliberately deprive us of the use of that term, as if it's some out of this world concept, just shows you how segregated the world is that they choose to inhabit. If they had close friends who were Black intellectuals there wouldn't even be an issue. But that would mean we would have to be included as peers in the hierarchy of the networks of power, friendship, and employment they traverse.

I recently got a cold slap in the face when my use of the term white supremacy was labeled "abusive language." You would think that since the Bakke decision 30 some years ago and Rehnquist Court's establishing "racism against whites" (aka "reverse racism") as the primary race discrimination issue the Supreme Court has addressed ever since (and the lower Courts too), people would realize that the term "racism" has been so totally co-opted and used by so many against US, that it has lost its meaning and value in truly capturing our plight.

Studies have been conducted about the types of cases being heard by the Courts, and it's now White folks who've been deemed the primary victims.
That doesn't mean they are in reality. But it does mean that their complaints and claims are given preference over ours. Yet as you can see from OS new user, "Malcolm XY"s comments below - it doesn't even make a difference what arguments we proffer or empirical evidence - THEY will always know best.

I know YOU at least remember that it was Clarence Thomas who when he was given the position of heading up the EEOC proved his "Black white supremacist" bona fides by quashing race discrimination cases filed by Blacks but processing those filed by Whites. BECAUSE he was so good at that as well as backing the Corporate side in employment cases he was nominated to the Supreme Court - NOT because he was a brilliant mind or had any meaningful Judicial experience).
@ Kosher - Thanks bro. I'm glad you appreciated even though it was indeed longer than I intended. I gave a wink and a nod to you in my response to Bill which goes into why I turned out so long. Anyway, I agree with all of your points and really appreciate you sharing them here.
This is great analysis. It reminds me of Joan Scott's writing about gender: about how gender is about power, and how women can align themselves with men against other women in order to hold onto power.
@ fingerlakes - Many thanks! and thanks for coming over and sharing you insights about the use of gender and Joan Scott's work. Great analogy.
I AM a sociologist and will tell you that there is an irreparable psychopath or sociopath in each and every one of those ugly assed sellouts.

After the ethical exposure of Clarence Thomas, here comes Cain.

As OJ Simpson lost his mind, here are two more Uncle Toms who will never process that all the adoration and attention from White people is not real.

They do not realize that their their masters are fickle and that their adoration is very fragile.

They fool themselves into thinking that they are invincible black men and women. By the time they are caught stealing, or they kill someone, it is too late.

For them. But the rest of us understand that justice will have been served.
Pretty much dead on. But the supremacists are a very narrow clique. They also hate Jews, liberals, people who think and anyone with long hair - regardless of color. Cain is about as Oreo as you can get.
@ zuma - Thanks and LOL at your description. I'm also glad that you've entered the words, "Sociopaths" and "psychopaths" into the mix because their behavior (as well as that of their masters in their party) betray the symptomatic indicators of those very dangerous maladies .

@ Harry - thanks! btw The consensus definition of white supremacy/supremacist among scholars of color and others in the social sciences and humanities that deal with race is not what you are referring to which is right-wing terrorists/extremists. I tried to do the best I could to make this distinction clear in my post. Perhaps I need to make it clearer.
To all of the above: yep. I'm wondering about one of your comments in this thread though:

"@MalcolmXY - welcome to OS. I see you joined today and made me your first stop and then favorited a rightwing user. I guess you've got your priorities all figures out"

After reading that, I looked on MalcolmXY's page and saw he has friended two OSers, James Emmerling and myself. Since James is famously not a rightie, I guess you were referring to me, so I need to ask; what makes you think I'm a rightwinger?
@nanatehay - Thanks for the "yep" and for pointing out my error. I thought I saw someone I recognized as a rightie, but I was flipping pretty quickly through blogs pages and might have made a mistake trying to post my comment before midnight EST. Definitely wasn't you and I have no idea who James is.
The hypocrisy of right-wing Republicans is evident to anyone with a clear mind and intact conscience: they are striving to disenfranchise 5 million poor, disabled, elderly and minority voters, by imposing additional documentation requirements to vote. Studies have shown that voter fraud is extremely rare in this country. Since the majority of these voters are Democratic, it is obvious that the true motivation of Republicans is to win in 2012 and beyond. We have also seen efforts in a number of states to restrict early voting and otherwise hamper voter registration drives.

Besides legal action, the only way that I can see to counter this anti-Democratic trend is to launch a MASSIVE voter registration drive nationwide. This drive must be extremely hands on, in that numerous potential voters will have to be walked thorugh the registration process, and in many instances driven to the DMV, for example, to obtain a state-issued ID.

To have a significant impact, this drive must rival (in terms of intensity) the voter registration work that was done during the civil rights movement in the South.

If those involved in the "occupy America" movement would turn their attention to the nuts and bolts work of registering potential voters who have been targeted by the right, then I think that their street demonstrations would have a dramatic, more focused political impact.

The only way to defeat these right winger's who lack a conscience is to stand up to them and fight the good fight. That's my view...
Great post. I tire of the presumption in such white attitudes as "We will decide if we are racists or not, thank you! Your experience and perceptions don't count." Also, "We can sit in judgment of you but you have no right to judge us." the implicit double standard rests on racist beliefs and assumptions, I believe. Rated.
@Mxy - I played nice with you in the beginning by NOT making an issue of your abuse of the username you chose. But you burned down the strawman factory you built with your last comment by blowing completely out of proportion my initial comment to you. You then put yourself on par with Cornell West and demanded that I OWE both you and him what YOU've decided HE needs in order to glorify YOUR demand.

I don't owe you anything. So you can stop playing innocent and a victim. You deliberately chose a username, "MalcolmX" and then put a "Y" on it as if that gives you license. You made one of your first acts after joining OS to come onto my blog, which obviously featured a race-related article. And then after supposedly reading my post have the nerve to do something Malcolm X would NEVER do - equate discrimination with the act of choosing between pepsi and coke and minimize the phenomena of white supremacy by saying every body discriminates and everybody is a racist if they dominate in an area. According to your definition that means Blacks are racist BECAUSE they dominate in basketball.

You don't use the name of Malcom X in vain like that, come out of nowhere and appear on MY blog, write what you did and then have the nerve to demand or expect anything, especially respect after abusing the name of Malcolm X to espouse the opposite of what he fought and died for. And then try and pimp brother West after trying to pimp me - talking about the respect that's owed brother West and if I don't do what YOU say I have to do that means I've slighted HIM - and YOU will not stand for that! You have the nerve to say that after trying to pimp the credibility of Malcolm X to push your agenda and your overblown accusations against me?

I engage with all kinds of perspectives and ideas. But when somebody engages in the kind of deceitful behavior that you have, play victim, and try and turn the tables around on me on my own blog, they've abused the privilege.
@Donegal - Thanks so much! You hit the nail on the head with your observations, which you expressed brilliantly.
@Patrick - Excellent insights. Couldn't agree with you more. These practical and pragmatic issues of political power have got to be addressed and strategies formulated to deal with the issues you raised.
Interesting read. Somewhat bothersome to me. There an argument that race *should* have nothing to do with one's politics. There's also an argument that a successful black person is seen as a "sellout" or an Uncle Tom, or an Oreo....choose your term commonly used by the left.

I think what it comes down to is that liberals cannot understand how a member of an oppressed class of people can become successful within the mainstream culture.

I am bothered by Cain enormously. I think the guy's all wet with his politics. Yet, I cannot denigrate his success at playing the game of business. He worked his way through Morehouse (his dad was a chauffeur at Coke in Atlanta); got an MBA; went to work at Coke and later left (because, he says, he was his father's son and thus held back from promotion); moved to Pillsbury; worked at Burger King from the bottom up to learn; moved to Godfather's and bought a failing company and turned it around....all the usual stuff we celebrate about successful people.

What's going on here, I think, is that white liberals ascribe certain characteristics to members of a racial minority which they must ipso facto possess. This is wrong.

Whether or not the Kochs are in this guy's campaign or not, I don't know. I don't agree with his goofy program. It's simplistic and not at all workable. On that basis alone, I cannot vote for him.

We progressives celebrate black entertainers, sports figures, civil rights activists, etc., yet we tear down any black person who achieves within the (culturally dominant white) business world or who happens to hold conservative views.

Why can he (Cain) not be a conservative who happens to be black, rather than a black who has deserted his race for his conservative views?

Must all Jews be supporters of Israel? Must all Catholics support the IRA? Must all Hispanics be for bilingual education?

Are you getting my drift?
Let me quickly add that my takeaway from the Chappelle video you posted was exactly my point: Absent the knowledge of Bigsby's color, he would be completely accepted by the birds of his racist feather.
Flylooper,

No one said that "a successful" Black person is seen as a sellout. You inserted "successful " and distorted the message. Cain and Thomas are not sellouts because they are successful. It is not the success that makes them sellouts. Divorce yourself of that notion.

There is a social justice effort underway that cannot be denied. The conditions for Black Americans, women, GLBT, non-Christians, and a number of others groups is not as it should be. To be a member of one of these oppressed groups and to deny it, or to actively work against the effort is selling out. It has nothing to do whatsoever with "success." In individual cases it may be lucrative to do so. In the case of Cain, one can presume that the Kochs are funding him heavily. It can be lucrative, but it is not the success that is the issue. It is the betrayal that is the issue. Cain said that Black Democrats are brainwashed. That is selling out. The Vichy French sold out. It has zero to do with what they earned before or after. Slipping that term "successful" in is rather offensive. That sets up the false dichotomy that the side seeking social justice is only doing so because they are not successful. That is not true, nor has it ever been true. It implies a false motive. No one said "successful." Don't you be caught doing so.
Flylooper,

You asked, "can Cain be a conservative who just happens to be {B}lack..."

The answer to that is, of course, yes. But that is not an accurate description of what Cain is doing. Cain is not merely "conservative." Cain sets himself up as an active enemy of liberalism, social justice, and Democrats. It was Cain who derided Black Democrats as "brain washed." That is false and disparaging. Blacks are predominantly Democratic, myself included, because the Democratic party is more heavily committed to social justice. The GOP is reactionary with regard to same. The selection for Black Americans is intuitive unless you abandon the concern for social justice altogether. Cain has abandoned them for his reasons, whatever they are. That's fine. Some don't have it in them to advocate for something. If that is what you require, so be it. But don't stand in the way of those who are actually agitating for progress. That's immoral.

There is a good movie image that I like to point to in order to demonstrate the role of a sellout. If you remember the Cecil B. DeMille film "The Ten Commandments" starring Charleton Heston, reference the character Dathan played by Edward G. Robinson. There were the two social strata depicted in the film, the Egyptian rulers and the Hebrew slaves. Dathan was Hebrew, but he dressed like an Egyptian, and worked as an overseer for the Egyptians over the Hebrews. No one begrudged Dathan his success. It was his brutal management of his fellow Hebrews that made him a sellout. In the moment when Moses appeared lost on Mt. Sinai and the Hebrews were becoming anxious, Dathan suggested the construction of the golden calf as a standard, and suggested that the Hebrews march back into slavery in Egypt. If they carried the golden calf in front of them, Pharaoh would be merciful.

Cain plays the part of Dathan in the current day struggle. You could see Cain saying that American Blacks are brainwashed by Moses (DNC) and need to abandon social justice and return to yokes and shackles. That is selling out. It is not the "success", it is the treachery.
I’m a white man who has seen incredible strides made in racial sensitivities in our country during the 75 years I’ve been alive…and I am happy and proud we’ve been able to make them. I also recognize that we have a hell of a lot further to go before we get to where we rightly ought to be.

I know several fellow whites who simply cannot get past their irrational hatreds and fears of people who are not white—and I can easily see how they hinder our move toward finally wising up and getting to that “where we rightly ought to be.”

It is subtler with people like Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain; more difficult to see. In fact, some of us tend to hesitate in taking them on, because no one want to suggest a person of any color cannot have views consistent with parts of the conservative agenda.

But even with their success in life that could easily be used to further our travels in the correct direction, people like Cain and Thomas seem intentionally to just drive off the road. Bottom line: They do as much harm to the cause of racial justice as clansmen or any other white supremacy advocates.

Courageous article you wrote here, Ron. And on the mark.
Well-stated and well-documented, Ron. That Cain cannot see that he is being used in the ugliest way possible is beyond me.

Lezlie
@MXY - please DO NOT post any more comments on my blog. You have abused the privilege with your over the top accusations, disrespect, veiled threats, and lack of remorse. This is NOT about your ideas or perspective. I have not addressed you by your full username these last two times because of how you have abused the privilege of taking Malcolm X's name as your username name on my blog. It is MY right to take this preemptive action. Please respect my decision and refrain from violating it. Thank you.
@MXY - please DO NOT post any more comments on my blog. You have abused the privilege with your over the top accusations, disrespect, veiled threats, and lack of remorse. I have therefore deleted your comments. This is NOT about your ideas or perspective. I have not addressed you by your full username these last two times because of how you have abused the privilege of taking Malcolm X's name as your username name and conducted yourself on my blog. It is MY right to take this preemptive action. Please respect my decision and refrain from violating it. Thank you.
@Flylooper - Thanks for sharing your reflections. I appreciate what you're trying to convey. Personally, I don't deprive Cain of his success at all. He's a extremely intelligent and charismatic person with a lot of talent. Puts to shame many others in his Party. It's the actions he's taken which I only in part discussed, that I find reprehensible. I'm a successful Black man and I don't see myself as a sell out. I personally know Black Republicans (and white ones) who have NOT adopted the kind of aggressive posturing and shilling on behalf of white supremacy that Thomas an Cain have engaged in. My 83 father, a Black man born and raised in the Segregated South, became conservative when he was in the Army and expressed those sentiments when I was growing up. I adopted them myself. My favorite TV show was Bill Buckley's on Sundays. But my father and I had awakenings after my older brother did and we began to open our minds to more progressive perspectives and were willing to explore how we had internalized white supremacy like so many other Black people have had to in one way or another deal with. Some, like Cain and Thomas become activists on behalf of white supremacy and THAT's what makes them disgraceful to us. The 90% of Black people that vote Democrat are NOT brainwashed. We know damn well the Republicans are hostile to our interests. There will always be a small minority who will hitch their wagon to the Rs. That's their choice. Frankly, it's better for them professionally often times if they do. I used to be a Corporate Exec and was an outlier among Republicans who knew my politics and treated me accordingly - like an outsider.

@ Bill - Great insights. Thanks so much for sharing them
Thanks for this Ron, a lot here. It's the Tea Party's dream come true. I like Sean Penn's statement as I have realized how many people feel this way that before Obama and hid their racist views pretty well. I feel our nation is more polarized than ever, I don't see an end to it anytime soon.
@ Frank - Thanks! Very much appreciate it. Part of me really struggled with writing and posting on this subject. But after talking with my dad - I'll repeat, he's an 83 year old Black man born and raised in the segregated South who's outraged over the phenomena of the racist roots of Cain's POLITICAL SUCCESS and Cain's adoption and championing of white supremacy - I knew I had to do and try and do well.

@ Jane - Thanks much! Please help spread it around. The more eyes that see it the better :)

@ Lezlie - Thank you! I'm afraid that people like Cain and Thomas long ago made a calculated decision to hitch their wagons to those who could accelerate their rise to fame and glory - and quite frankly, that means doing EXACTLY what they've been doing. We know who really calls the shots in this country - the 1% - and the Republicans are their political arm.

@Rita - Thank you! You're right. Cain is the "Tea Party's dream come true" but like you also said, Sean Penn STILL has it right.
Racism keeps poor people divided.
Congratulations on a very thorough examination of the patient and the disease, which I believe has returned to epidemic proportions in this country, thanks in no small part to the politicians trading on the Southern strategy and corporations trashing the economy under the guise of globalization, or as I refer to it gobblization.

Ralph Nader quipped that globalization was "the rising tide that lifts all yachts. " I countered that it was "the tsunami that sinks all life rafts." That this tsunami negatively affects minorities more than whites is just one more sign that the ideal of racial and economic equality are still only a hope.

What does this have to do with Cain, and how can one hope to explain behavior such as his and that of the even more despicable Clarence Thomas? That's fairly easy. As I've said many times, without rationalization none of us could last a day. The surest sign that Cain has rationalized his compromise with racism is his pathetic attempt to excuse his cowardice by claiming he was too young to become involved in the Civil Rights movement.

While it may be true, as Cain and others seem to be suggesting, that blacks had no more obligation than whites to become involved in that movement, it defies common sense to suggest that blacks didn't have more reason -- and thus more motivation to be involved in the movement. To hide on the sidelines, to fail to speak out let alone act, in such circumstances is a form of cowardice.

Let me also add that racism knows no color. Personally, I find it racist when blacks give Obama or any other person of color unconditional support. I also object when I am criticized for daring to criticize Obama's policies or tactics. In my view, that kind of over-reaction is racist as well.
@ Tom - thanks bro. Love this line of yours about what you call "Gobbilization" as a counterpoint to Nader's "tide that lifts all yachts"

... "'the tsunami that sinks all life rafts.'"

To which I might add: "and drowns all hope."
@Tom - p.s. Not giving Obama "unconditional" support does NOT make one racist, nor does giving Obama "unconditional" support. Black women who were "unconditional" Hilary supporters were NOT racist either even though they did NOT support Obama. Also, the way you define the term racism/racist as "knowing no color" is precisely why we use the term "white supremacy," since the term "racism" has become so devoid of distinction through its misuse and overuse that it has to lost the ability to convey the racial nature of socio-historic oppression in America that has left the average White family with a median net worth 20 times greater than that of Black families.

It's like saying everybody is a human being. Ok. I guess one could argue that some people can be more human than others, but the term becomes devoid of carrying salient information relative to distinguishing what Gregory Bateson would call "the difference that makes a difference."

The Court system in the United States is a perfect example. Ever since Rehnquist became Chief Justice, the Supreme Court's focus on "racism" and "race" turned to primarily ruling in cases that made Whites the primary victims of racism (what some used to call "reverse racism"). The lower Courts have followed suit. And of course one of the most egregious examples of this perversion in our Nation's history occurred in the Court's decision to halt the recount in Florida and give Bush the Presidency - They used the 14th Amendment, which was passed after the Civil War to ensure that BLACKS were treated as citizens and afforded the Constitutional protections that were denied them by the "Dred Scott" decision, to claim the overwhelmingly White voters in White districts in Florida would be discriminated against if the vote count continued!

THIS when we all know from ALL of the studies done, both before and after the election, that Black voters in record number were disenfranchised in Florida, purged from the voter rolls and treated as felons, even though they were NOT, but because Jeb Bush, Gov. of Florida, hired a crony firm to identify people with similar names as felons to be stricken from the roles and not allowed to vote. Not to mention all of the other chicanery that went on in Florida in Black communities with the broken voting machines, Police road blocks to prevent them voting, other forms of harrassment and so many other things that have been documented.

So, yes Tom, I'm grateful that you helped point out how totally impotent the terms, "racism/racist" are to convey the "difference that makes a difference" in the lived, embodied reality of Black folks in America.
@Tom - p.s. Not giving Obama "unconditional" support does NOT make one racist, nor does giving Obama "unconditional" support. Black women who were "unconditional" Hilary supporters were NOT racist either even though they did NOT support Obama. Also, the way you define the term racism/racist as "knowing no color" is precisely why we use the term "white supremacy," since the term "racism" has become so devoid of distinction through its misuse and overuse that it has to lost the ability to convey the racial nature of socio-historic oppression in America that has left the average White family with a median net worth 20 times greater than that of Black families.

It's like saying everybody is a human being. Ok. I guess one could argue that some people can be more human than others, but the term becomes devoid of carrying salient information relative to distinguishing what Gregory Bateson would call "the difference that makes a difference."

The Court system in the United States is a perfect example. Ever since Rehnquist became Chief Justice, the Supreme Court's focus on "racism" and "race" turned to primarily ruling in cases that made Whites the primary victims of racism (what some used to call "reverse racism"). The lower Courts have followed suit. And of course one of the most egregious examples of this perversion in our Nation's history occurred in the Court's decision to halt the recount in Florida and give Bush the Presidency - They used the 14th Amendment, which was passed after the Civil War to ensure that BLACKS were treated as citizens and afforded the Constitutional protections that were denied them by the "Dred Scott" decision, to claim the overwhelmingly White voters in White districts in Florida and therefore by extension George Bush would be discriminated against if the vote count continued!

THIS when we all know from ALL of the studies done, both before and after the election, that Black voters in record number were disenfranchised in Florida, purged from the voter rolls and treated as felons, even though they were NOT, but because Jeb Bush, Gov. of Florida, hired a crony firm to identify people with similar names as felons to be stricken from the roles and not allowed to vote. Not to mention all of the other chicanery that went on in Florida in Black communities with the broken voting machines, Police road blocks to prevent them voting, other forms of harrassment and so many other things that have been documented.

So, yes Tom, I'm grateful that you helped point out how totally impotent the terms, "racism/racist" are to convey the "difference that makes a difference" in the lived, embodied reality of Black folks in America.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Ron, if you'll grant that this is one of the worst possible ways to have a discussion of something as incredibly complicated as race and racism, I'll try to expand on my views a little under these far less than ideal circumstances.

First, let me say that because of my NA heritage, I come from this subject from a very different angle. Unfortunately, in this country the subject of race is all too often confined to a black and white issue. In my view, that is another false dichotomy. As a person with at least some NA heritage, I can assure you there is much to be said regarding the color red and racism.

The mistreatment -- to put it mildly -- of Indians is in many ways on a par with that suffered by slaves. It may be a small consolation, but at least slaves held value as livestock, and thus exterminating them was not considered a viable option, as was most certainly the case with Indians.

Most Americans -- black and white -- are not aware that it was General Sherman who coined the expression The Final Solution when he was put in charge of dealing with "the Indian Problem". Nor are most Americans aware that Hitler credited the American experience with the Indian with providing the blueprint for his Final Solution to "the Jewish Problem".

It may be apocryphal that Sherman also coined the expression "the only good Indian is a dead one", but there's no doubt he and his henchman Phil Sheridan helped popularize the saying. Here's some more from Sherman on the subject -- if you can stand it:

"We are not going to let a few thieving, ragged Indians stop the progress of the railroads. I regard railroads as the most important element to facilitate the military interest of our frontier."

"During an assault, the soldier cannot pause to distinguish between male and female, or even discriminate as to age. We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination – men, women and children."

Then there's the matter of religion. Whites were all too fond of pontificating about Jesus and Christianity -- while owning slaves and slaying Indians. This was especially galling to Indians who were already practicing what Jesus taught, rather than merely spouting platitudes and behaving hypocritically.

One of my favorite observations on the matter was from Plenty Coups:

"At first, we tried to understand the White Man’s religion, but we found there were too many kinds to understand, and scarcely any two White Men agreed which was the right one to learn. This bothered us a good deal until we saw the White Man did not take his religion any more seriously than he did his laws. He kept both of them just behind him, like helpers, to use when they might do him good in his dealings with strangers. These were not our ways. We kept the laws we made, and we lived our religion. We have never been able to understand the white man, who fools nobody but himself."

So you see, NA's, too, have a cultural legacy that makes them take offense at the notion of white supremacy. Nor is discrimination against Indians merely some historical anomaly. In many place in the American West, Indians are referred to as "prairie niggers".

I hate to even go here, but by almost any standard measure -- poverty, alcoholism, domestic violence, infant mortality, life expectancy, housing, unemployment -- the statistics among reservation Indians are even worse than those for blacks.

This is not intended to diminish the suffering of blacks in this country, or the discrimination they continue to face in almost every aspect of their lives -- even wealthy, world-famous athletes and entertainers must face some of that. But it is to suggest that the question of race is not as black and white -- in both senses of that expression -- as it is too often portrayed to be.

Finally, let me confess to my own prejudices and my own inability to see the world as others see it or to walk a mile in another man's shoes -- or moccasins. Obviously, I cannot see the world thru your eyes, though God knows I've tried to keep my eyes and heart open to other people's perspectives.

Given that I have done so, I can't help but feel a certain resentment when I am accused of racial insensitivity. I may be guilty of that on occasion, but I also know that usually the person who accuses me of such a thing is equally unaware of their inability to see the world thru my eyes.
Terrific stuff, mate! I wonder what Chauncey Gardiner would think of Clayton Bigsby. Louise, the black maid who looked after Chauncey, would say,

"It's for sure a white man's world in America.[...] Yes, sir, all you've gotta be is white in America, to get whatever you want."

Then Chauncey would tell Bigsby, "As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden."

Bigsby would have a conniption fit, "ROOTS? You mean that slave shit with the coon tuh ken tays?"

Mr. Ron Robinson, is this post "a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves..."? Ron, methinks I see a pubic hair on your coke can.

Zip your fly and Apologize to Cain this instant!

RE: The HuffPo Tenured Commenters
During the 2008 election it was heavily rumored that an army of "commenters" were hired to troll all web comment boards. They may be unemployed now, but years of honing their craft shouldn't go to waste. Whether they are professional trolls or just dabblers, the amount of people with too much time on their hands to jump into shit creek and add to it... It's a big bad shitty creek out there and those trolls won't let it dry up.

Herman Cain is the new Ross Perot of Political slapstick. I don't take him seriously as a presidential candidate and no one else I know does. What he needs is to a hire a couple of good comedy writers because he hasn't got the 'natural' comedic chops that Ross Perot had. [Perot had bug-eyed weirdos dancing to Patsy Cline's "Crazy" from a blaring sound system on a flatbed truck wheeling down the streets of Manhattan.] Perot was a brilliant entertainer.

When Cain's chops fizzle out and the -2% of the public loses interest in his antics he better be prepared to go out with a bang like Ross did... "My daughter is threatened to be falsely outed as a lesbian homosexual into gay sex by alien rogue forces in order to destroy her wedding day." I'm muddy on his exact words, but it was something like that! Some such marvelous crap Perot spewed before vanishing back into the mansion that he built via weaseled government contract dollars.

White Supremacy. Yes Herman Cain is gunning for a membership card. But he'll still have to use the servant's entrance. And the other "real" members will repeatedly mistake Cain for the guy in the toilet who hands out soap and condoms.

In the end Clarence Thomas will get the last laugh.
@Tom - I revised my post prior to your last 2 comments and you probably didn't see what I added, but I believe it has relevance to all people of color to varying degrees and different ways, i.e., "internalized white supremacy." Within the social sciences and humanities, e.g. ethnic studies domains, scholars that examine issues of race, culture and ethnicity use the term white supremacy to describe the system that was initially created (and inherited from the Brits) in America and its subsequent evolution. They/we also discuss the equally relevant psychosocial phenomena of "internalized white supremacy" that we must deal with (or not) in various different ways. That includes Native American s as well (NA scholars also utilize the terminology of white supremacy and define in relation to their history and experience): Here's what I said above. Maybe this will also further the discussion, which as you advise, requires more multi-sensory and multi-modal contexts:

"And Here's Cornell West talking about the phenomena of Black people who have internalized aspects of white supremacy themselves (what Frederick Douglass also called "mental slavery"). This is a phenomena that almost all Black people must come to terms with in their/our lives and it can be extremely painful (DuBois wrote about this in "Souls of Black Folks" in 1903. Recall his concepts of "double consciousness," "the veil," and "second sight" for instance. Also Frantz Fanon in the early/mid 1960's - "Black Skin, White Mask" and "The Wretched of the Earth" for example). I know I had to come to terms with it, as did my brother and my father (will be discussed in forthcoming family autobiography). However, some Black folks become so infected by the virus of white supremacy that not only do they become completely blind to and/or in denial of the infection, but they transmit it proudly and happily (as in the subject of this tome and one particular Jurist to sadly name but a few with particularly virulent strains of it)...

In other words, the term and multi-faceted phenomena of "white supremacy" is not at all relegated to the terrorist and extremist versions embodied by the Klan etc. In fact, the extremist violence against Blacks was NEVER accurately conceptualized, defined, and termed for what it was and what it is - RIGHT-WING WHITE TERRORISM."
@ Charlie - LOL. Thanks so much for coming over and chiming in with your wonderful insights, satire, irony, and humor - all of the things that fall on deaf ears in the trollosphere (I love to zing them good over on Huffington Post where I'm a Blogger and where they're organized into swarms and spreading their poop). Will say more when I get more time later - got to run and teach a class.

In the meantime, regarding good ole boy CT - if I might adapt the closing zinger from Chappelle's skit - it will be CT's wife who has the last laugh, after he divorces her for being a "nigger lover," and she gets all the money she's made from pimping his "black ass."
@ Charlie - LOL. Thanks so much for coming over and chiming in with your wonderful insights, satire, irony, and humor - all of the things that fall on deaf ears in the trollosphere (I love to zing them good over on Huffington Post where I'm a Blogger and where they're organized into swarms and spreading their poop). Will say more when I get more time later - got to run and teach a class.

In the meantime, regarding good ole boy CT - if I might adapt the closing zinger from Chappelle's skit - it will be CT's wife who has the last laugh, after he divorces her for being a "nigger lover," and she keeps the money she's made high tech pimping his "black ass."
ron, great take on cain. what about obama? his betrayal of black and white americans. now he is the face and "decider" who will launch further destruction and exploitation of africa, beginning with libya. sorry, i can't watch obama praise mlk. it is too hypocritical and sickening for me. libby
@ Charlie - LOL. Thanks so much for coming over and chiming in with your wonderful insights, satire, irony, and humor - all of the things that fall on deaf ears in the trollosphere (I love to zing them good over on Huffington Post where I'm a Blogger and where they're organized into swarms and spreading their poop). Will say more when I get more time later - got to run and teach a class.

In the meantime, regarding good ole boy CT - if I might adapt the closing zinger from Chappelle's skit - it will be CT's wife who has the last laugh, after he divorces her for being a "nigger lover," and she keeps the money from "high tech pimpin' his black ass."
@Libby - Thanks! Always good to see you. A few things. 1. "betrayal" is one of the strongest emotions that human beings experience, along with "revenge" which is the response to "betrayal." to use terms like that to describe Obama can only be made in relationship to the degree of what you expected from him in relation to what YOU perceive he promised AND the weight you give to those promises HE didn't fulfill over which HE had control over and others DID NOT have mitigating power AND the weight you give to those issues important to YOU that you feel he didn't address the way YOU feel he should.

There are literally hundreds of issues that people care about. The achilles heal of the Left is that it expends its energies on "issues" and how they were addressed, and for each one that wasn't addressed in the most liberal fashion or ideal way, then that constitutes a "betrayal." Add up all of those negative emotions and what do you get - "revenge" "anger" etc., i.e. the kinds of emotions that lead to Republican victories, Supreme Court nominees, stripping of all regulations, etc. etc. etc.

On the other hand, the Right is focused on "power" and uses issues to take it and keep it and defeat the enemy towards whom they direct their negative emotions, while they act as the backbone and boots on the ground to support their elected officials and enact a conservative agenda.

Want to talk about betrayal? This is what it looks like. The Republicans promising to prioritize the economy and unemployment before the 2010 election. They won and look what they did - focused on abortion etc. and subverting every thing possible that could improve the economy and jobs and take actions to actually make it worse. THAT's betrayal.

This may be too much to ask, but go to politifact.com , the Pulitizer prize winning site which tracks the promises made by politicans and degree to which they were kept. Obama has kept the overwhelming majority of his IN THE FACE of the most organized resistance and demonization since any President since Lincoln - far more promises than any President in memory. Here's the website:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

But I must warn you. It's based on empirical evidence, which may not very well comport to the level of emotions that you have invested in, whether consciously or nonconsciously, in feeling "betrayed."

Also, please read my article on Crusader Christianity, which includes a plethora of links to reputable sources that critique the Obama presidency according to standards and methods that deserve a hearing. Plus, I believe my analysis also provides a pragmatic approach to analyzing the true power structure in this society that will enable us to conceptualize and purse realistic strategies to getting a more progressive agenda implemented:
http://open.salon.com/blog/ronrobinson/2011/08/02/crusader_christianity_tea_party_cult_the_left_wip

I
ron, whoa. so you accuse someone of being WRONG about Obama because they are EMOTIONAL about his amoral choices as President? I have a lot of blogs about the betrayals of Obama with the evidence. Be my guest. The man does not govern with a moral compass. But you keep on patronizing people who get that.
ron, hugh at corrente has been logging an obama's scandals list. he is now up to 294.

http://obamascandalslist.blogspot.com/
Once more into the breech ...

I wholeheartedly agree there is no place for the word betrayal in a critique of Obama's performance as President. I'll skip listing his accomplishments and failures -- ultimately, that's for each of us -- and history -- to decide.

It might be reasonably argued that Obama over-promised, that he created unrealistic expectations. Perhaps, but what politician doesn't? It was simply naive to imagine that he wasn't a politician. We all know -- or should know -- politicians make promises they can't keep, and that the worst of them make promises they never intend to keep.

Call me jaded, but I don't expect people to keep all the promises they make. Whether in politics or any other sphere, I save my harsh judgment for people who make promises they can keep -- but don't.

To illustrate, countless couples make a solemn vow to "love, honor and cherish till death do us part". Divorce statistics make it clear half of them fail to keep that promise. But in many instances, one person is not able to keep that promise because they other person chooses divorce.

Yes, Obama promised healthcare reform, and many on the Left expected that to include some sort of single-payer mechanism, or at least a public option. But given the recalcitrant Congress he had to deal with, the fact that did not happen was hardly a betrayal.

If Congress had passed single-payer plan and Obama had vetoed it, that would have been a betrayal. The fact that he got half-a-loaf (well, maybe a quarter-loaf) is hardly all his fault.

My criticism of him tends to be much more about his tactics, that is moving to the center to begin a negotiation, particularly when dealing with people who've made it quite clear they have no intention of compromising on anything. This seems to me either naive or foolish or both.

But to bring this full circle, Obama's shortcomings as a tactician have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he's black, tho they surely have something to do with the fact he is not an experienced old-hand dealing with the DC sausage-making machinery. On the other hand, that "outsider" status is one reason he got elected.

His inexperience surely contributed to his failure to get much of his legislative agenda passed. But ultimately, that has absolutely nothing to do with his color. No, when it comes to color, the real problem is that he's surrounded by white supremacists.
@ Libby - definitely not accusing you of being wrong about your emotions - rather that an emotion as strong as betrayal takes a lot of investment over time. that means that any data you look at that is empirically based, which does not originate from within the sources that have helped produce the emotion of that betrayal are going to create cognitive and emotional dissonance. you will then be confronted with either revising your epistemic investment and down regulating the emotion of betrayal, OR you will produce counter evidence that reaffirms and strengthens your emotion of betrayal and epistemic investment in framing Obama as "the enemy."
I'm a man of practicality and understand the dynamics of power and which networks possess more of it within our political-economy as well as how governments work at both the State and Federal levels. I understand that the people who mailed the weaponized anthrax to Patrick Leahey when he was Senate Judiciary Chairman and to Tom Daschle when he was Senate Majority leader to pressure them to go along with passing the Patriot Act, AND which killed a bunch of their staff - I understand that those networks are the REAL power behind it all and they ain't Democrats - or as many on the left like to inaccurately call them - "the lesser of two evils." NO, there's only one evil, and its the network that has access to weaponized anthrax, that can and will use "2nd Amendment remedies," that has created a situation where 94% political candidates that win at ALL levels are the ones that have the MOST MONEY, etc. etc. etc. THAT's the context within which realpolitk takes place - and I live in THAT world and strategize in that world and understand the constraints imposed on ANYONE who attempts to promote progessive change in THAT world. They CAN"T do it alone. They can ONLY do with with electorally organized bottom-up mass movements who can begin to put pressure in a forward direction that is ONGOING and that just doesn't expect our "elected representatives" to do it for us "because it's their job and that's what we hired them to do." That epistemic and emotional investment is where the Left has failed and led us in the wrong direction. When I imply "wrong" THAT's what I mean.
Geez Ron, this post sure has generated a bounty of comments. For the Repubs to insinuate that supporting Cain shows they aren't racist is akin to that old "some of my best friends are..." that got mocked out of existence in the 60s.

I can't pretend to know what motivates Cain or much about his psyche. The claim that he was too young for civil rights activity is awfully lame though. I side more with one of your commenters who said that he rejected Cain because of his loopy ideas. The 9-9-9 tax scheme is farcical, as is blaming the OWSers for not being richer. Imagine, the capitalist economic boom-bust cycle is better understood as cyclical laziness. What a doofus.
@ Tom - My last reply to Libby, also serves as the same context for my leap into the breach with you :)

I have ideas about strategy and tactics and policy initiatives that I have attempted through different channels to get a hearing in the Obama camp since the campaign. They have been a closed shop and have relied upon too few within that camp to determine too many things. I don't fault Obama for attempting to quickly stablize the economy and allay the fears of a market in free fall (esp. the investor class and "wall st.") in the midst of an imploding economy to hire high profile people which the market had confidence in like a bunch of Goldman Sachs people. Of course they were part of the problem in the first place. But the psyche is a funny thing. Fear by the market that people that they DID NOT KNOW were in charge would have itself served as a trigger for panic by the markets that could have driven the economy over the edge. as we've only found out within the last couple of months (see articles in the Economist etc.) the economic data they had at the time, as bad as it was, turned out to have greatly underestimated the problem. They did not have that data at it was not their fault that they didn't have it. It wasn't available.

That's why they estimated that there would only be 8% unemployment after the first round of stimulus. Given the dynamics in COngress, with as much opposition as there was already for the stimulus he proposed, including opposition from the Blue Dog Democrats (conservatives in Red States who must vote with the Republicans or lose in the next election and no amount of pressure from Obama can change that. their interest is in staying in their jobs), he probably did as best as he could. Everybody else had that data too.

Those were real constraints. But those constraints and the compromises made produced a stimulus half the size it should have been. Obama then spent his political capital on getting the best he could with Obamacare - over Republican filibuster threat and all out assault by Insurance industry if he pushed it further. Again REAL constraints.

But HERE's where my criticism comes in and part of what I tried but failed to get them to pay attention to. They should have taken the 13 million names and emails they collected during the campaign, data mined them to identify the most activist oriented people with the motivation and ability to help organize a bottom up pressure movement, as well as rank order of others who could be mobilized, and then turn over that list to an outside group who could then make that happen (since there is a legal fire wall constraining the winning party from directly exploiting the list that came from the campaign). Had they done that - which is a lot closer to the community organizing roots Obama had - I believe that would have given them a chance to put pressure on the Republcians and Blue Dog Democrats (i.e. "white supremacists") AND the media to help mitigate the constant pull to the right.

Other things I've written about on OS - like my article entitled: "Mr. President: We Need a New Proclamation Emancipation to Free Us From Debt Slavery" identified a unique, doable, and powerful solution to the debt and foreclosure crisis. They never considered this approach to my knowledge (read when you get the chance. I call for the Treasure Department, via executive order, to break up the FICO credit scoring monopoly and include other credit scoring community banking approaches that I give examples of that have worked in various communities.

Anyway, I'm trying to write this fast since I've got to get to some other things. But despite various issues of policies, tactics, strategies etc. and my failures to get a hearing for my recommendations, I know how important retaining positive emotions is, especially when there is a firestorm of negative emotions directed at Obama to undermine his likeablity factor, etc. I understand from my background in political psychology that social and political movements can not be mobilized and motivated to take action in the political arena if key elected officials, like Obama, or parties, like the Democrats, are portrayed as the enemy etc. or "not having backbone" and "are not doing the job we hired them to do" etc., then WE LOSE. PERIOD. Like I said in my post to Libby, I don't believe in the "lesser of two evils" bullshit. And if WE turn people on our side as one of those evils, WE LOSE to the to the one and only REAL EVIL. So I fight not only against that EVIL but I fight against those on both the Left and the right who nonstop mobilize negative energy against those on our side, which does NOTHING but lead to the victory of the REAL evil.
@Libby - You said that I "accuse someone of being WRONG about Obama because they are EMOTIONAL about his amoral choices" and that I "keep on patronizing people who get that." I think you misinterpreted what I tried to convey. Also, I spent time engaging an important issue in response to your talking about "betrayal." "Revenge" is the natural consequence of such a strong emotion as well as turning the "betrayer" into an "enemy." I don't have the mental energy to waste on lengthy responses in order to just patronize someone. I laid out a reasonable set of minimum criteria that would have to be met to reasonably generate an empirical basis for conjuring betrayal/revenge, and only you would know the weights you could give to each basis. So I didn't judge you as wrong, but rather offered a thought tool by which you could determine if the level of investment in betrayal/revenge had an empirical basis and was reasonable. I also gave you a link to a credible and fair source of information that does NOT originate from within the same network that is the source of generating the emotions of betrayal/revenge. To do otherwise would lead to nothing other than reinforcing your emotions of betrayal/revenge. What sense would that make.

I focused on the potentially destructive consequences of conjuring and reinforcing the emotion of betrayal/revenge and how the paradigmatic left wing, idealist "issue orientation" naturally leads to betrayal/revenge because of its own summative logic - each betrayal is added to the one previous causing one to be even more invested in that emotion and eventually revenge.

My motivation was for you to down-regulate that emotion. But I warned you that you'd be presented with information that would challenge the sense of ownership and vestedness that comes with an increasingly heavy investment in betrayal and its coupled consequence, revenge. That's not patronizing. That's recognition of the trajectory of that emotion.

Regarding some of the sources of those emotions, such as the links you left me and your framing of Obama as the enemy, I am exposed to a procession of such sources on the list serve in my department, since there are plethora of socialists and left wing people who share your framing of Obama and daily bombard us with betrayal after betrayal and a constant barrage of negative emotions against him.

Combined with the constant barrage of demonization from the right-wing, one can pretty much conclude, that the more these negative emotions against him are stoked, the more likely the REAL evil will win - you know, the ones with the "2nd Amendment remedies," who bomb abortion clinics, send weaponized anthrax to Democrat Senate Judiciary Chair and Senate Majority leader to intimidate into them getting the "Patriot Act" passed, who've created a system where 94% of politicians who win elections are the ones with the most money, who will have at least 2 Supreme Court picks, etc. etc. etc.

In my view, there is no "lesser of two evils." There's just that one evil and then the rest of us, and I'm not pleased with the prospect of another 1968 (Nixon), 1980 (Reagan), or 2000 (Bush) because we're busy turning people into enemies who are on our side even if they're not perfect, and fail to back them up from the bottom up. That's why the right wing is so successful and more powerful when they are in office - they back up the Republicans. And when Dems are in office, they're still backing Repubs while training all their guns and power against the Dems.

Finally, Neither Nader nor Kucinich et al are going to overcome those forces, nor overcome the multi-trillion dollar corporate sector that calls the shots. The unions have mere billions. How much more is a trillion than a billion? a 1000 times. How much more are trillionS than billionS? Thousands of times. Do the math. That's what ANY President, party, or movement is up against and why I believe it is dangerous to turn Obama into an enemy and constantly moblize the negative energies of betrayal/revenge against him and the Dems - Evil wins.

Anyway, its food for thought :)
@ Tom (see my above reply to Libby for additional context). HERE's where my criticism comes in and part of what I tried but failed to get the Obama camp to pay attention to. I recommended that they take the 13 million names and emails they collected during the campaign, data mine them to identify the most activist oriented people with the motivation and ability to help organize a bottom-up pressure movement, as well as rank-order other people in key States who could be mobilized, and then turn over that list to an outside political/community organizing group who could then try to make that happen.

(there's a legal fire wall constraining the winning party from directly politically utilizing the lists that came from the campaign).

Had they done that - which is a lot closer to the community organizing roots Obama had - I believe that would have given Obama and the Dems a chance to put pressure on the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats (i.e. the "white supremacists" you referred to) AND the media to help mitigate the constant pressure to move rightward by the multi-trillion dollar corporate sector and their political arm - the GOP/TP, astroturf groups, rightwing media, etc.

Other things I've written about on OS - like my article entitled: "Mr. President: We Need a New Proclamation Emancipation to Free Us From Debt Slavery" identified a unique, doable, and powerful solution to the debt and foreclosure crisis. They never considered this approach to my knowledge (read when you get the chance. I call for the Treasure Department, via executive order, to break up the FICO credit scoring monopoly and include other credit scoring community banking approaches that I give examples of that have worked in various communities.

Anyway, despite various issues, policies, tactics, strategies etc. and my failures to get a hearing for my recommendations, I still know how important retaining positive emotions is, especially when there is a firestorm of negative emotions directed at Obama to undermine his likeablity factor, legitimacy, etc. I understand from my background in political psychology that social and political movements can NOT be effectively mobilized and motivated to take action in the political arena to support Dems and confront the right, if key elected officials, like Obama, or parties, like the Democrats, are portrayed as the enemy etc. or "not having backbone" and "are not doing the job we hired them to do" etc., then WE LOSE. PERIOD. WE must be the backbone from the bottom-up and WE must be politically and electorally involved and a massively mobilized way, at the local, State, and Federal levels, which I've advocated for years now. L

Like I said before, I don't believe in the "lesser of two evils" conceptualization of the two party system. I also believe that if the Left turns people on our side, like Obama, into one of those evils, and along with the right-wing continues to demonize and mobilize negative emotional energy against him, WE LOSE to the to the one and only REAL EVIL.

So there you have it my brother, along with some of the criticisms that I have made, but not all of them, which I have expressed in more private venues where I feel they are best handled given the overall climate in this country and the white supremacist mobilization against this President and for the right-wing.
@ Tom (see my above reply to Libby for additional context). HERE's where my criticism comes in and part of what I tried but failed to get the Obama camp to pay attention to. I recommended that they take the 13 million names and emails they collected during the campaign, data mine them to identify the most activist oriented people with the motivation and ability to help organize a bottom-up pressure movement, as well as rank-order other people in key States who could be mobilized, and then turn over that list to an outside political/community organizing group who could then try to make that happen.

(there's a legal fire wall constraining the winning party from directly politically utilizing the lists that came from the campaign).

Had they done that - which is a lot closer to the community organizing roots Obama had - I believe that would have given Obama and the Dems a chance to put pressure on the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats (i.e. the "white supremacists" you referred to) AND the media to help mitigate the constant pressure to move rightward by the multi-trillion dollar corporate sector and their political arm - the GOP/TP, astroturf groups, rightwing media, etc.

Other things I've written about on OS - like my article entitled: "Mr. President: We Need a New Proclamation Emancipation to Free Us From Debt Slavery" identified a unique, doable, and powerful solution to the debt and foreclosure crisis. They never considered this approach to my knowledge (read when you get the chance. I call for the Treasure Department, via executive order, to break up the FICO credit scoring monopoly and include other credit scoring community banking approaches that I give examples of that have worked in various communities.

Anyway, despite various issues, policies, tactics, strategies etc. and my failures to get a hearing for my recommendations, I still know how important retaining positive emotions is, especially when there is a firestorm of negative emotions directed at Obama to undermine his likeablity factor, legitimacy, etc. I understand from my background in political psychology that social and political movements can NOT be effectively mobilized and motivated to take action in the political arena to support Dems and confront the right, if key elected officials, like Obama, or parties, like the Democrats, are portrayed as the enemy etc. or "not having backbone" and "are not doing the job we hired them to do" etc., then WE LOSE. PERIOD. WE must be the backbone from the bottom-up and WE must be politically and electorally involved and a massively mobilized way, at the local, State, and Federal levels, which I've advocated for years now. L

Like I said before, I don't believe in the "lesser of two evils" conceptualization of the two party system. I also believe that if the Left turns people on our side, like Obama, into one of those evils, and along with the right-wing continues to demonize and mobilize negative emotional energy against him, WE LOSE to the one and only evil in the false "lesser of two evil" formulation.

So there you have it my brother, along with some of the criticisms that I have made, but not all of them, which I have expressed in more private venues where I feel they are best kept given the overall climate in this country and the white supremacist mobilization against this President and for the right-wing.
"Like I said before, I don't believe in the "lesser of two evils" conceptualization of the two party system. I also believe that if the Left turns people on our side, like Obama, into one of those evils, and along with the right-wing continues to demonize and mobilize negative emotional energy against him, WE LOSE to the one and only evil in the false "lesser of two evil" formulation."---Ron Robinson

BINGO!

What I don't get is that how smart people do not get this. I am suspicious of some who pretend not to comprehend certain dynamics. The "lesser of two evils" pretext is beneath a serious person from this century. The book on American national politics is to play to the outside in the primaries and then turn to the middle in the general. That is the technique that works in politics. National candidates run the gauntlet of left, right, and center in every cycle. The money factor has also exploded. Carter and Ford accepted zero in contributions in their campaign because it was regulated as such. Now contributions are essentially limitless. These are the realities of the political game. To suggest a strategy which ignores these things is absurd. Put another way, this is the process as designed. If there is a new, more efficient and fairer process with the potential to succeed, that needs to be invented. So far it has not been. One must use the system to change the system or overthrow the system. The bullshit about "broken promises" drives me completely nuts. There is a limit to what a President can do without support. Like you said, "we must be that backbone." I just do not understand how they can't understand this. It would take a cognitive disability to not comprehend that dynamic, and I do not believe that this exists as widely as it is displayed. Some of it is disingenuous. There isn't a President Kucinich or Nader, and there never will be. To understand that is to understand that the "broken promises" refrain is nonsense. And for the life of me, I don't see the broken promise. "Single payer", that is negotiated. The horsepower did not exist for it. Guantanamo, I presume that there were/are bigger realities which could not be divulged which made a change in strategy necessary. If you can't get a GOP congressman to accept a 10 to 1 reduction to taxation ratio, do you think you could get that congressman to accept a terror trial and incarceration in their district? I suspect, without knowing, that certain practical considerations were made for what could be accomplished. This is politics. Military tribunals suck. Guantanamo sucks. The march of the right wing and their Supreme Court, their campaign financing, assault on unions, etc are a raging wildfire. It is political triage. I say the man in the Oval Office is doing a damn good job!
AMEN BROTHER BILL AMEN!!!

I'd like to frame what you wrote - not just because it reflects what I wrote and believe, but because reading it makes me that much more grateful to know that Brothers like you are on this site and in the blogosphere who put to shame the "Nonsense Argument that White Conservatives AND Liberals Are Oppressed in the Age of Obama."
Excellent article, Ron. I just finished a piece that I'll put up tomorrow that I call "Herman Cain, the "happy-go-lucky" Darkie. Need I say more? :)
@ Fay - LOL. Nothing like a little "dark humor."
@ abrawang - Thanks for chiming in. Great to see you again. I love what you say here:

"For the Repubs to insinuate that supporting Cain shows they aren't racist is akin to that old "some of my best friends are..." that got mocked out of existence in the 60s."

Well, as you can see, what was "mocked out of existence in the 60s" has come back to haunt us "in spades" (pun intended). :)
@ Fay - p.s. I recently quipped on the Huffington Post that Herman Cain invited Michelle Bachmann to give the keynote at the upcoming conference he's organized. It's called:

"Why the Blacks owe America Reparations for Slavery." LOL.
Great post. I know Bachmann is going after Cain, given his current rise in popularity. At present, she's targeting his social conservative credentials, such as his statements on abortion. However, I wonder if she and others will try to unmask his acceptable blackness. Surely, Cain's pastor at some point said something controversial.
Great post. I know Bachmann is going after Cain, given his current rise in popularity. At present, she's targeting his social conservative credentials, such as his statements on abortion. However, I wonder if she and others will try to unmask his acceptable blackness. Surely, Cain's pastor at some point said something controversial.
Cain is a one-hit wonder who will fade from memory soon; for reasons you describe and because he is really doing nothing more than hawking his book. He is still making paid speeches and doing book tours. He didnt expect to be where he is, but because of the money behind him - some of which you identify - he is beyond his dreams and now so is his book.
I tend to think that all these flavors of the month, Trump, Pawlenty, Jindahl, Bachmann, Perry and now Cain serve only the purpose of providing cover for Romney so he wont be too deeply raked over in the primaries. He is Wall Streets boy this time.
good article.
Since I didn't say it in my earlier comment, I will here: you def deserved an Editor's Pick on this one. Great work.
@Erica - Thanks so much!

@ Mr. Robinson - as I've previously quipped, Backmann and Cain have made up. In fact Cain's asked her to give the keynote at the upcoming Koch sponsored conference he's hosting. It's called: "WHY THE BLACKS OWE AMERICA REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY."

@ Tim - Cain will be with us for along time. You can bet Fox, the Kochs and the Obama/"colored-people" haters will see to that.
Ron,
You are one of the people I really missed reading while I was off OS for a while. This should be read, discussed, and experienced in social studies classes around the country. This, is a real education.

I miss Chapelle so much, he is the only person in my mind that could trump Stewart and Colbert. Bigsby's reason for divorcing his wife was one of the most jaw dropping, fall down funniest things I've ever seen. I'm glad to have found this clip again.

This entire read, from beginning to end was one of the best things I've ever read. It is historical, yet contemporary, deeply threaded, yet hysterically ironic....superb.
Wow Heidi - your comment was the most satisfying and affirming and I really appreciate how you connected with its substance and irony through your own personal connection to this subject matter and Dave Chappelle's special gifts. Yes, that was a jaw dropping ending to his skit - Bigsby's commitment to the cause was that deep.

I really miss you too and am about to be less active in the blogosphere myself. In the mean time wishing you all the best!
Thanks Erica for your Editors Pick plug :)
I have called Herman a reverse Oreo. There must be some black inside somewhere.
@ONL - yeah. His heart.