Washington Post endorses Obama

| October 26, 2012

Yes, I know, I’m shocked, too, by the fact that the Washington Post endorses Obama for President this election year. But the way that they do it should shame all Americans. The guilt-ridden white liberals at the Post are trying to make the election about race again. In an accompanying article to their endorsement in the editorial section, they report that the election polling is breaking down along ethnic lines;

The slippage among whites is something of a setback for Obama, who campaigned on bridging the racial divide in his election and has sought to minimize rifts that have arisen in his presidency. Although Democrats typically win minorities and fare worse among white voters than their Republican rivals, Obama outpaced previous losing Democratic candidates with both groups.

Less than two weeks before the election, the evidence suggests that a much more sharply divided country will head to the polls.

And, of course, liberal bomb thrower, Eugene Robinson, who won a Pulitzer Prize in 2009 for cutting and pasting Obama campaign literature to the pages of the Post doesn’t mince words trying to bring the guilt-ridden liberals back into the fold;

It is too simplistic to conclude that demography equals destiny. Both men are being sincere when they vow to serve the interests of all Americans. But it would be disingenuous to pretend not to notice the obvious cleavage between those who have long held power in this society and those who are beginning to attain it.

When Republicans vow to “take back our country,” they never say from whom. But we can guess.

[…]

Four years ago, we asked ourselves whether the nation would ever elect a black president. The question was front and center. Every time we see the president and his family walk across the White House lawn to board Marine One, we’re reminded of the answer.

The intensity of the opposition to Obama has less to do with who he is than with the changes in U.S. society he not only represents but incarnates.

Yeah, well, I’ve not voted for many more white people than others for the very same reasons I’m voting against Obama, so explain that, Washington Post. And since it seems that a larger percentage of Blacks are going to be voting against the white guy, maybe you liberals should look at that with a less-jaundiced eye.

Category: 2012 election

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ex-PH2

I think Dr. King is spinning in his grave.

valerie

Last I checked, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Debbie Wasserman were white.

Veritas Omnia Vincit

When all your other liberal arguments are failing, it’s time to throw the race card and attempt to change the dialogue from issues of relevance to an exchange of race baiting rhetoric.

People voted for Obama regardless of his skin color because they were sick and tired of the Republicans and Obama offered a hope and change line of rhetoric that struck a chord with Americans disenchanted with politics as usual, of course once Obama was elected and continued all of the same politics as usual the electorate turned away. They turned away, not because Obama is black, but because he failed on every level to deliver the most important things he promised; balanced budgets and middle class jobs in manufacturing. That doesn’t make the voters racist, it makes them wise. I would love to see the electorate start forgetting about party and start remembering what every candidate promised to do and vote them out when they fail to perform as promised.

In the private sector if you don’t produce you are quickly terminated and replaced, it would be appropriate to remind Washington that most of us have a far different performance standard we are held to and we are going to expect our duly elected representatives be held to the same.

2-17 Air Cav

The endorsement begins thus: “MUCH OF THE 2012 presidential campaign has dwelt on the past, but the key questions are who could better lead the country during the next four years….” SHuh? Say again? The suggestion, of course, is that we should all turn a blind eye to the past—as in, the past four years of obama’s administration and, instead, look to the future. Gee, and here I thought that the fellow who was elected on hope and promises in 2008, when he had no executive experience whatsoever, would prove to the doubters that he could and would succeed. Now that he has failed miserably, we are advised not to look at the past four years. The editorialist must be pissed at obama for giving him or her nothing but obama’s race to generate votes for the guy. This is known as the Chris Matthews Justification.

Hondo

2-17th AirCav: just another example of a standard “Progressive” tactic: when confronted with fact, change the subject or launch a false attack the one confronting you – and if possible, do both simultaneously.

Twist

No matter how much they try to change the subject to the race card, fact is that Obama failed to do what he promised to do so he needs to go. If Romney fails to do what he promises or what needs to be done then I will help kick his ass to the curb in 2016.

OWB

The only reason needed to vote against the current occupier is pretty simple, and has nothing to do with the race of either him or the voters. When someone asks for my support, I expect more maturity than what is offered: we are supposed to ignore the previous four years (the time when it was his job to be the leader of the free world) but continue to blame any mistakes of the four/eight years before that (when it was someone else’s job)?

“But Suzie did such and such,” didn’t play well when I was 6 years old and it still doesn’t today.

MCPO NYC USN (Ret.)

BREAKING NEWS:

Washingtom Compost Endorces Obama

One word: DUH!

Devtun

Chris Matthews, Chavez, Castro, Nutjob, Putin, Karzai, Farrakhan, the foreign press also endorse The Messiah…

Speaking of Farrakhan, look at who he’s hanging out w/ our pal – GEN Colin Powell… http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/the_friends_of_colin_powell.html

El Marco

this is my surprised face

={O

Thou shalt not defy “The One”.

Common Sense

A number of prominent black people, Samuel L Jackson for one, have plainly admitted that they voted for Obama because he’s black (half-black so it must be purely the color of his skin) and said they will do so again.

So who’s racist?

Detn8r

Samuel L is only voting for the Black 50% of Obama. The white 50% is where all the problems come from.

I only love the white side of my Step-Daughter, her father is black. Oh wait, that’s bullshit. I absolutely love my Step-Daughter! And her father has become one of my Best Friends. He is retired Army, works for the Gov. and is from Brooklyn, guess who he is voting for? You got it, Romney, remember, I mentioned he is retired Army. I do believe he voted for Obama the first time around for the hope and change, not the matching tans. Two of his brothers voted Republican then and are going to again.

I do believe him and I need to set down and put this race thing behind us over some good old corn liquor. That is what friends, veterans and brothers do.

Old 21B

If these rags would state that if you vote for Romney because he is white you are racist they would be half-correct…they should finish the thought by also stating that if you vote for Obama because he is black you are also racist…but they won’t. What they will say is that if you vote for Romney, for any reason, you are racist but if you vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black you are enlightened.