Posts
I grew to like you over the last year.
I've always thought of you as dangerously naive at best. Eloquent, gifted, genuine, yes. But dangerously naive at best.
I couldn't vote for you -- but not because of your funny name or your lunatic pastor. I couldn't vote for you because you say we should raise taxes (even on the rich, who I'm convinced already pay too much), and because you say we should abandon Iraq (which I'm convinced would be surrendering a war we must win), and because you don't respect the Second Amendment (which I'm convinced should disqualify any politician from any office).
Still, I've liked your message of unity and your ability to inspire. And, since your rise I've hunted, quite frantically, for young conservative leaders with your talent. (To my relief, I found Bobby Jindal.)
And I've long said if you beat Hillary Clinton, you will have done your country a tremendous service. But anymore I'm having a harder and harder time rooting for you.
First came your wife's comment about being proud of America for the first time — conveniently, right after you started winning primaries. Then came your own words about your grandmother, who is just a "typical white person" — a racist, or at least someone with racist tendencies. (I'm a "typical white person," I suppose, and I'm no racist. In fact, little makes me angrier than when it's insinuated I am.)
Sometimes people say things they don't really mean. But this is a pattern.
Last week, we heard your comments about small-town America. Someone at a San Francisco fundraiser asked you why it's so hard for Democrats to win in rural areas. You said:
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them ... So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them ..."
Is that a minority? HEY CLETUS, GET THE GUN! (If only we had a job to go to, some time in the last 25 years ...)
Here's a thought: Maybe gun rights voters know gun control laws kill people and steal freedom.
Here's a thought: Maybe some of us have moral objections to an immigration system that forces rule-followers to wait decades for legal status, and rewards border-violators with amnesty.
Here's a thought: Maybe some Americans cling to their church because their pastor is a nice person, because they find love there, because there they have something they can believe in.
Here's a thought: Maybe, just maybe, us simpletons in small towns find it harder to be bigoted than all o' y'all cityfolk. Maybe, in small towns, where everybody knows your name — and how hard you work, if you pay your taxes, how well you treat your neighbors, how often you volunteer in the community, and whether or not you're a good parent — people see the content of your character, so they don't give a hoot about the color of your skin. (But I grew up in a small town where about a third of the population is of a different race than me. What do I know?)
And here's my favorite thought of all: Maybe small-town folks are — really — capable of thinking. All on our own.
You're wrong about why small-town Americans don't vote for Democrats.
We don't vote for Democrats because we're self-reliant so we don't like the government trying to "solve" everything for us. And because you tell your rich friends in San Francisco that we're dumb. And because, each election, whichever one of you is running for president traipses all over the country telling us you have all the answers, that you're the one on our side, that you understand and respect our way of life.
But each time, a little bit here and there slips out — and by the end of the campaign, we can tell what you think about us. And we manage to learn who you really are.
And we see you're just a horse's ass.
12 comments:
I just read this same post (Dear Barack: You're wrong about small towns), only it was forwarded to me via e-mail I just wanted to say: GREAT WRITING! I really enjoyed reading it. You write so well and it said everything I would have liked to have said only in a much better way than I would have been able to.
GREAT PIECE and so dead on! I look forward to following your future posts!
Just think-- He is just an intelligent, black member of the United Church of Christ. We would rather vote for a white Methodist with no brain!!
Maybe so, Will, or maybe not. Here is another thought for you: maybe, just maybe, you'll show your readers where Democrats ever declare things that you accuse them of?
Just read this article in an email. Keep it up! I'm definitely checking this blog more often and adding the link to my page.
Dear Will,
Interesting letter to Senator Barack Obama. I thought it quite witty and true to heart for the Republican majority in America. I appreciate your candor, and your eloquent ability to express contempt for an individuals position without resorting to proving yourself exactly what he might deem you to be, a typical, small town, white, Republican. Especially when you called Barack Obama a "horses ass." Nothing typical about it I suppose. Other than everything you said smacked of main stream Republican strategy, gained by listening to too much Rush, Hannity, Roberts, Ingram, or whomever you love to mimic. I, on the other hand, would like to give you a true mid-west, white, conservative, small town, perspective. And yes, Will, I too cannot vote for Obama. I love babies and marriage too much.
The second amendment smacks to the heart of our freedom. Too many people ignorant of the true intentions of that right have turned it into a "right to self defense" or "the right to hunt." The fact is, it is the right to bear arms in case the government ever becomes tyrannical. It is the right to have the means to overthrow a government that has over stepped its bounds and has taken away the precious liberties our founding fathers instilled. Yet, you have a problem with this scenario as well. What good would your 12 gage or .45 do when confronted with an Abram tank? How about your guns vs. an F-18? The fact is, Mr. Manly, your Republican majority has ensured our second amendment is absolutely worthless by building up a permanent military so strong, that any tyrant would easily crush any rebellion. The second amendment is effectively a "right to hunt" or "right to self defense" amendment against animals and thieves. I agree with keeping it. EVERY liberty should be afforded to the law abiding citizen. But I think you are naive, every bit as naive as Barack Obama, if you think the amendment is anything more than a symbol of what the forefathers did. It is a statement and a sign of how far we have fallen. So in one sense Barack Obama is right.
You cling to what is already dead, for the purposes that made it so important, and rail with it as one of your litmus tests for political office candidacy, because you have no creativity, foresight, high end sight or savvy to confront what frustrates you every day. The fact is, voting Republican will never make the second amendment what it was. They can never solve your problems. Their evil is as bad as Baracks. But you will cling to yoour 12 gage, vote Republican, and pretend (delude yourself) into thinking you are the more patriotic American. Oh, and to the large military comment you might respond to with the "safety" argument. The last war we fought, from an unprepared, small military, lasted only 4 years (WWII). Your big military brings the need for big contracting to stay employed and big ranks to stay busy. Big military leads to long wars and world occupation. Sorry, I vote for a small military and 4 year wars.
You can have Iraq and Vietnam. A war we must win is what you say Iraq is. What is winning? When do we declare victory? According to the rules that define the "war on terror," winning will never occur, only inevitable fighting. Again we see you and your parties naive thought process. The facts are you cannot "shoot" an ideology. You cannot destroy what is not tangible. Islam and Christianity have been involved in this type of warfare for thousands of years, and you cannot predict a different outcome when there is no precedence to support it. Terrorism wins. I submit for reference on Pat Buchanan's book "Where the Right Went Wrong." The fact is we will exhaust our resources, exhaust our will, and end up like the crusading Christians, marching back home to find our lands gone, our countryside covered by tyrannical "leaders," and the rich holding the keys to America. Be they rich Obama's or rich Bushes. We have only suffered one major terrorist attack in over 230 years of history. (Pearl Harbor was not terrorism).
So because we have been attack free for 7 years, does not mean the current strategy works. You need to wait 223 more years before you prove that theory. What those who are not naive would do is analyze the data in front of them. The economy is hurting with the cost of living, the dollar is plummeting, the rich are richer, the poor are poorer. Rights are being stripped from Americans in the name of freedom. Read your Revolutionary War history. Safety from the terrorizing Indians and evil French was the same argument used by Britain to try to persuade the colonies into accepting their rights be stripped to "finance" the King's army. Who is benefiting from this war? The military (benefits and pay increase as to the size, already addressed earlier), the federal government (lawmakers, executive office), and the contractors (East India Trading) are those whose interests are most served. Your Republican party is out to grab as much money and power as possible, on the backs of the brave men and women who fight and die. Are you to naive to see it?
So the way to solve this issue is close the border and focus on America. However, after 20 of the last 28 years of Republican leadership, the borders are worse, there is no solution to immigration, and we have fought 2 wars and occupied more of the Middle East than anyone since Brittan gave it back after WWII. We are safer, not because we keep enemies away, but because Big Brother can torture and spy on them in our neighborhoods without due process? Is there not a more naive strategy than this? Will the systematic dismantling of everything the founders stood for lead to more peace, prosperity, and harmony? Are you really this naive, Mr. Manly? So what do the Republican do?
They support larger border patrol (because the only big governments acceptable are the ones who carry guns, and the only trillion dollars worth spending are to finance wars, not help social policy), fences, and the systematic rounding up and prosecuting of criminals who have jumped our borders. The minute men (a disgrace to those two centuries past who proceeded them) take our their anger on the migrant worker. The illegal alien is now he target of their aggression. Why are they watching the border? Why are they not all on the steps of the capitol with their shouts and anger? Why do they raid the farm lands and hillsides where these illegal's hide instead of the offices of those who support weak enforcement of weak legislation? The real criminal is the federal government in this issue, and the businesses breaking the laws. Is it because the guns on the other side are too big for these minutemen to oppose? Is it because the leaders these men have put into office hold too much power and too much influence, so they have antipathy toward those who are here out of desperation? The real minutemen had guts, courage, and wisdom enough to defy those with the power, who were responsible for the problem. Today's minutemen delude themselves, vote for those who are responsible for the problem, and cling to their antipathy and amendments with the most extreme naivety.
Last, but not least, 40+ years of "equality" after hundreds of years of slavery, does not give the white man any ground to claim "time out." History will show that the repercussions of slavery will take much longer to undo. It was barely a generation ago that suffered Bloody Sunday. Barely a generation ago that suffered the assassination of MLK Jr. It is still today that Americans, who are not naive, fear for the life of Barack Obama. The typical white person does NOT understand the plight of the black American. Maybe never will. To sweep the realism of angst under the rug and say it shouldn't exist because 1965 is gone, is naive. To say that the typical white person in the 50s and 60s was completely on the level of understanding the other race and holds no bias, is naive. Every person of every race hold bias. America for hundreds of years was drawn down the lines of negro and white. 40 years ago men were still hung, shot, and beat because of it. The typical white man or white woman understood NOTHING then, like the typical black man d8id not understand the whites. A naive and partisan individual who cannot think for himself, will say that calling an old lady in the 60s and 70s "typical" because they had racial bias, is racist. The fact is, it is REAL! Republicans have buried their head in the sand to long on this issue, and try to distort anyone who speaks out about it in truth. So for it being the first time for a black woman to be proud of her country in relation to the forward progress its politics is making in terms of race (in context for those who are not just sound bite experts) is completely reasonable.
I wish you could have written an article that truly thought for itself, Mr. Manly. As it is that talent you claim to have along with all other small town white folk. As for me, I find your work a witty regurgitation of every other mainstream Republican. So this white, mid-west, pro-life, pro-family, pro-borders, pro-guns, small military, expansionist hating, racial relating, military industrial complex fighting American will vote for neither. Rather I will have the balls to select not the lesser of two evils, but the man who hates all evil.
I hope he (?) is running this year!!
Wow, Mr. DuBois. You are what you are accusing Mr. Manley of.......
Please get out your history books about WWII.
Will-Will-Will:
Shame on you for degrading such a noble creature as a horse. A jackass would not befitting as well because of the invaluable asset to the farmer for keeping away coyotes from the live stock. A mule is also out of the question because of the heavy burden man puts on the backs.
I truly believe the most fitting comparison would be a skunk's ass. Boy, do they really smell foul as well as the stench long after they leave the area.
Jim Martin
Maryville, TN
God bless!!!
I had just enjoyed reading your piece and was scrolling through the comments when I hit Du Bois' comment. I think he mistook the word comment for dissertation. Since it contained the "typical" shallow Democrat blather I was able to skim it quickly.
I'm surprised he was able to find the time on Juneteenth to pen his diatribe. That's like a national holiday for Dems.
Great job Will!
Good luck Will, the Navy is a great place to do your part. I'm sure President McCain will have plenty for you to do somewhere in the world. Your writing about Obama is right on, and hopefully more people will be blessed to read more at some point in the future. Maybe the Navy will find a place to properly utilize your writing talent. Don't hesitate to let them know who you are.
I agree with DuBois, Will. You've pretty much regurgitated the same right wing talking points that have gotten red state America to vote against its self interest again and again without discussing anything of substance, i.e. Obama vs. McCain on the issues. Best of luck.
I agree with you 100%. And by the way, I joined the NRA yesterday. I'd encourage others to do the same.
Post a Comment