Okay, I’ll Say It. Why Is Obama President? Because He’s Black.

Political Correctness Run Amok


This is an issue that constantly comes up in conversation lately, particularly when people express their puzzlement that Obama’s “likeability” polls so high coming into the election. “How can his policies be so bad, yet people still seem to like him so much?”, I constantly hear.

Well, the question they should be asking is how such an incompetent perpetual-campaigner and golf-pro-wannabe ever got elected to that office in the first place. And as far as I’m concerned, the answer is very simple: because he’s black. Or half-black, to be exact.

Would this guy be President?

Let’s face it. If a white guy named Barry O’Bannion had put his hat in the ring with a resume that included zero private-sector experience, zero state-level executive experience, and only two years of experience in federal office, he’d have been laughed out of the primary. Yet that’s exactly what Barry Obama did, and he got away with it. His entire 2008 campaign consisted of shameless sloganeering devoid of actual policy proposals: he was the “not Bush” guy; “Hope and Change”; “Yes, we can!” and “Si, se puedes!”; “Transform America”; and pretty much nothing else.

How did such abysmal vapidity succeed in propelling this empty suit to the White House, you ask? Because for far, far too many voters this was the opportunity to show how enlightened we’d become. We’re actually going to elect a Black Man as President! Aren’t we just oh so sophisticated and open-minded! What a great country!

And why do the polls even now show Obama having such high personal popularity? In my estimation based on human nature, for the exact same reason. When polled, many people are hesitant – at the least – to express a negative view of the amateur in the White House for fear of being thought of as “racist”.

And they may well have good cause. In an administration that was supposed to put “racism” to rest, we’ve reached the point at which any criticism of Obama’s policies is automatically “RAAAACIST!!!” Far from removing racism as an issue, it’s been amplified beyond all sanity.

Of course, the reason for this is because Obama’s policies have been so disastrous for the country that he can’t possibly run on his record and hope for re-election, so he and his supporters have to stifle any policy criticisms at any and all costs.

Let’s hope they don’t get away with it this time. Let’s send this nimrod back to the driving range, where he belongs.

© Brian Baker 2012

49 comments on “Okay, I’ll Say It. Why Is Obama President? Because He’s Black.

  1. gunnyginalaska says:

    The FIRST (and hopefully LAST) affirmative action president in American history. Epic Failure.

  2. Gray Ghost (Mississippi) says:

    Although in many ways, I believe that your reasoning is a little simple Brian, still I am an electrical engineer. And as an electrical engineer I believe in the “KISS” rule of engineering. That is, “(K)eep (I)t (S)imple, (S)tupid”. Therefore I will not mention that the GOP in 2008 had nominated the most lackluster candidate since Bob Dole. I won’t mention that the country was tired of Bush43 and his “compassionate conservatism” (which was nothing more than Liberal Lite).

    Instead I will completly agree with you, Obama was elected because he was a young, articulate black (to quote Joe Biden). He had ZERO experience in the private sector. He had ZERO experience in the military. He had ZERO experience in economics. He had ZERO experience in foreign policy. And he had very little experience in the public sector. He was nothing more than an “empty chair”, as Clint Eastwood so aptly put it.

    He was, as Gunny said in his comment, an AFIRMATIVE ACTION president, elected not because of his intelligence or leadership but because of his skin color. But I will also expand my comments and say that at best Obama is a socialist while at worst he is a “closet” marxist. He does not know how to select qualified people for his staff or his cabinet. And he gives every indication of being bought and paid for by Soros. I will even go so far as to say that it is my belief that he is a non-practicing muslim.

    In any event, the sooner this mistake (i.e., the election of Obama) is behind us the better off we will all be.

    • BrianR says:

      Grey, you’re missing part of the picture. Maybe I wasn’t clear. The main point I was making is that if Obama had been “O’Bannion”, he wouldn’t have even made it through Round One of the primaries, let alone been the nominee. Clinton would have been nominated, and bad as she is, she’s better than Bat Ears by orders of magnitude.

      And in the General Election, do you really think “O’Bannion” could have gotten away with simnply CLAIMING to be the “not Bush” guy without ‘splainin’ how? Even against a sucky candidate like McAmnesty?

      As to Bat Ears being a socialist: hell yeah! I’ve been saying that for years! And he’s not the only one, either. Pretty much their whole party’s gone down that road once Nancy the Red Pelosi and Dingy Harry Reid (the pedophile and cross-dresser, I have from “reliable sources”) took the gavel.

      • Gray Ghost (Mississippi) says:

        My bad. Continue what you were doing.

        (D*mn, I love “communicating” with you Brian. Some day I hope we get to meet in person and talk.)

      • BrianR says:

        LOL, Grey!

        I love it, too. There are some really, really bright folks who comment here and in our circle.

        I think it’d be great to meet F2F, too. Buck and I may get a chance to do that, as he may be coming out this way on some personal biz, and if he does we’re gonna try to hook up.

  3. clyde says:

    Good post. Only problem is,he AIN’T black. Half-white,half-Arab African something or other. Couple that with an absolutely asinine media leading the charge…… The biggest trouble with openmindedness is more often than not,the brains fall out.

  4. CW says:

    I think there’s a lot to what you’re saying and it certainly made a difference to black voters, as evidenced by their record-setting turnout. But if race was the primary factor then we have to wonder why people like Jesse Jackson and Alan Keyes didn’t do better in past elections. They’re blacker than Obama is.

    Ironically I think a lot of liberal voters liked to BELIEVE they were voting “for the first black president,” when really they were just suckers for Obama’s Elmer Gantry style political speeches and empty platitudes. It just proves what phonies they really are.

    • BrianR says:

      CW, I don’t think there’s any analogy at all with Jackson or Keyes. Both were already known entities. Keyes is conservative, and therefore “unacceptable”. Jackson has the persona of a race hustler with radical policies, and the demeanor of a guy from the “hood”, and is therefore unelectable.

      Obozo was a complete tabula rasa, and as such represented whatever policy proposals a voter wanted to project onto him, whether accurately or not.

      What the “black” demographic would vote for was completely irrelevant; that demographic always votes Democrat no matter what. By themselves, they can’t elect anyone to national office, other than in congressional districts in which they predominate.

      Obozo’s color, and lack of a record to which one could refer (he had no discernable positions on anything, and never defined any), made him “acceptable” to whites, and that’s what I’m talking about.

      As to your second para: yep. That’s what I’m talking about.

  5. Nee says:

    I have said it a hundred times…without saying it. You are correct that the only reason The Pied Piper IS president is because his skin has pigment. And those people who were ignorant enough to believe that pigment equaled brains got nothing more than a narcissistic, self-involved kid as the President. I went off the other day on this because I am so mother effing over the racist meme, you CAN believe it!! Pigment- challenged thinkers are in denial, still, that this poseur is the man to run the our Country for four more years. I am stunned beyond belief to hear them say that he has done so much for them!!
    And we have The ME meltdown with other allied embassies now coming under attack and who is running the show?

    • BrianR says:

      Perfect, Nee. Dittoes.

      Yeah, I was fed up with the constant pussyfooting around this aspect of the ObaMessiah’s presence in the Oval Office. It came up again the other day in a convo I was having, and I decided to just stick my finger into the eye of the issue and get it down in black and white.

      Maybe if a lot more people start doing the same thing — especially in larger forums — we can get this idiotic “everything’s RAAAAAACIST!!!!!!” BS off the table once and for all.

  6. captbogus@yahoo.com says:

    Gunny has it right. This is just an extension of affirmative action. People who can’t compete on college entrance exams are given preference over people who can, only because of skin color.
    Now someone who has no experience in managing any type of business and must not have a very impressive college score but is promoted..to the highest office in the land… because of skin color.
    Aside: He didn’t have to run against a very formable opponent. Think that was deliberate in order to hide his stupidity??? Could be, could be.

    • BrianR says:

      Well, of course it’s affirmative action. That goes without saying. Any time someone’s “qualifications” are based solely on race or ethnicity it’s affirmative action. And the fact that Obozo’s only “qualification” was his race is exactly what I wrote.

      As to McAmnesty: yep. He was the worst possible candidate, he and Bald Hillary, as I wrote repeatedly four years ago. He was too inept to make Bat Ears take positions on anything, further complicated by the fact that the two of them were pretty much on the same page about everything anyway. They varied to some extent on degree, but pretty much agreed on the basics. So it was pretty much impossible for the SOB from Arizona to really do much as far as calling Bat Ears out.

  7. Sgt Relic says:

    Spot on!

    I think I’ve commented previously on the similarity between the election of Obama and that of Douglas Wilder, the first black Gov. of Virginia(since reconstruction). People just got caught up the “being first” mindset, and Virginia suffered the consequences. I will say that at least Wilder had long experience in the state legislature. It didn’t make him a good Governor, but he did have more substance.

    I think you have carte blanche on this one. If Samuel Jackson,because he is black, can say he voted for Zero because he is black, surely you can say whites voted for O for the same reason.

    Barry O’Bannion wouldn’t have beaten Hillary, but if he had, he would have received a high 90 percentile vote from blacks, just like every democrat. The only questions about the black vote will be in whether they will turnout like ’08, and will he get 99% again. Anything less looks bad.

    Good post! Oh, BTW, you’re a racist! LOL!

    • BrianR says:

      Interesting, Sarge!

      You think O’Bannion would heve beaten Hillary? I don’t see how; O’Bannion would have had to state policy positions, and would have been absolutely ridiculed — by the Dems during their own convention — for his lack of experience and qualifications, especially when compared to a seasoned old pro and Dem fave like Hillary. He’d have been just another punk-kid white-guy nobody.

      I don’t see it, in all honesty.

      It must have really pissed Hillary off! Hilarious…

      Thanks for the kind words.



  8. captbogus@yahoo.com says:

    I’m beginning to believe the two parties really do take turns. Why else would anyone as dumb as McCain (a) be the darling of 2008; and (b) not only refuse to campaign on Obama’s many …shortcomings..but prohibit Palin from saying anything negative about O.?

    • BrianR says:

      Well, one of the faults of the Establishment GOP is their constant “it’s his turn” nonsense as far as electing candidates. Look at Dole. Who ever thought HE had a chance of actually winning, for Pete’s sake?

      The Dems’ weakness is their propensity for trying to nominate the most socialistic candidate they think they can sneak by the electorate. McGovern, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry are good examples there.

      As to McAsshat: arrogance to the point of hubris. He always believed his own press releases about what a great “maverick” he is, and com-puh-letely misjudged what that meant to voters.

  9. captbogus@yahoo.com says:

    Well what the dumb sonofabitch couldn’t see was folks don’t want a “maverick”.
    He is definitely a legend in his own mind.
    But with all this raghead uprising crap guess who the MSM has on for a “conservative” spokesman?

  10. Couldn’t agree more. you hit the nail on the head,

    • BrianR says:

      Thanks, Paladin.

      I took a quick look at your blog just now and see some good stuff there, too. I think I’m going to go back a little later today and read more, post a few comments.

      Thanks for stopping by and taking the time to comment.

  11. jevica says:


    GREAT post. Exactly right.

    Glad you brought up about McLiberal not hitting BHO on his complete lack of quals to be a Senator, Sanittation worker let alone President. You are 100% correct [in my opinion] BHO not Black Hillary might very well have been the first female President.

    I can’t believe the MSM, etc. telling us how brilliant BHO is what sycophants [A person who acts obsequiously toward someone in order to gain advantage; a servile flatterer]

    I could go on and on but Carter must feel great that this guy got elected, now he is no longer the worst President in recent memory.

    Remember its all the fault of who now?

  12. jevica says:


    Do you believe this man? “Karl Rove: My new group isn’t out to get the tea party, I swear” Would you buy a used car from this man?


    “How do we distinguish the disqualifying soundbites, like Akin’s rape comment, from the non-disqualifiers, like Paul’s take on the CRA? Will the answer perchance depend on how likely a candidate is, if elected, to make trouble for the GOP establishment? If you’re more of a libertarian than a “big government conservative,” it’s awfully hard to trust Karl Rove to separate the wheat from the chaff in primaries.”

    “Exit question: Isn’t all of this just a variation on the old debate of whether it’s better to back strong conservatives in every race and risk ending up with a very principled congressional minority or better to support RINOs strategically in some states where conservatives are less likely to win and maybe achieve a squishier majority?”

    Now polls [hate them]

    “WaPo, Gallup: Wide support for path to citizenship in immigration reform”


    “Two polls today show that immigration-reform proposals offered by a bipartisan group in the Senate enjoy wide support, at least in concept. The Washington Post approaches the questions in the context of how it impacts Barack Obama’s approval ratings, and they see a turnaround for the President since last summer. More importantly, though, the key issues of normalization have a significant consensus — but border control even more so”

    Why have any borders at all, just have outreach all around the world and let anyone become a citizen.

    • BrianR says:

      I wouldn’t trust any poll from WaPo and/or Gallup. They’re pretty much agenda-driven, and stack their questions and sampling.

      As to Rove: he’s in hot water for getting caught, and just like a weaselly political hack — which he is — he’s trying to wriggle his way out of it.

  13. jevica says:


    Have you seen this by ramirez? Great as usual. BHO says we kill them never mind water boarding.


    • BrianR says:

      Good cartoon.

      The socialists hide behind a warped interpretation of the Geneva Convention On Warfare, of course, that recognizes that once a combatant has been captured or surrenders, certain standards of treatment apply. However, the key element in the Convention is that the combatants have to be IN UNIFORM, a little technicality that the Commissar and his minions conveniently forget.

      • jevica says:


        When Bush [43] was POTUS I tried to explain the very thing to my LIBERAL [very] brother-in-law, never could get it across.

        If Bush tried the same stuff BHO is doing the MSM would be storming the White House with pitchforks [not really] but it’s ok for BHO to do it.

      • BrianR says:

        Oh, hell yes. The usual leftist double standard. “It’s good for me, but not for thee”.

  14. jevica says:


    “For all practical purposes, employer-based health insurance as a benefit ten years from now is not gonna exist, if everything happens the way Obama and the Democrats have designed it. That is the purpose.” [remember you can keep your health insurance {who said that}]

    “CBO Update: Obamacare Will Cost $1.3T, Account for 53% of All Federal Spending — and 7 Million People Will Lose Insurance”

    “ObamaCare Exchange Subsidy Cost Hiked By $233 Billion

    “The CBO’s new baseline estimate shows that ObamaCare subsidies offered through the insurance exchanges — which are supposed to be up and running by next January — will total more than $1 trillion through 2022, up from $814 billion over those same years in its budget forecast made a year ago. That’s an increase of nearly 29%.”


    I guess it will just cost you to keep your health care

  15. jevica says:


    Sorry to go off topic but I wished to introduce some levity.

    Tobacco Smoke Enemas (1750s – 1810s)

    The tobacco enema was used to infuse tobacco smoke into a patient’s rectum for various medical purposes, primarily the resuscitation of drowning victims.

    A rectal tube inserted into the anus was connected to a fumigator and bellows that forced the smoke towards the rectum.

    The warmth of the smoke was thought to promote respiration.

    Doubts about the credibility of tobacco enemas led to the popular phrase “blowing smoke up your ass.”

    Amazingly, it is still in constant use in Washington , D.C. , by the best senators and representatives that money can buy.

    Yes by the PSP and the Democrats.

  16. jevica says:


    “The fact that governments, state and federal, are involved in so much of the health care system is he reason why the price has skyrocketed. There isn’t any competition per se. You’re not in charge, and the consumer needs to be in charge of what is spent by that consumer for that consumer.”

    “We’ve never walked back an entitlement in this country. We’ve never canceled one or taken one back.” Medicare, Social Security, Obama Care, etc.

    “Democrats Panic Over Sequester Cuts, Resort to Same Old Lies About Republicans”

    Krugman Admits: We Need Death Panels, I thought it was Palin [what ever happened to her?]

    • BrianR says:

      Weeeellll…. you know how it is. Ridicule something, right up until you decide you think it’s a good idea after all.

      It’s only “ridiculous” if a non-lefty says it. The minute a lefty says it, it’s good policy.

      Otherwise known as “standard leftist hypocrisy”.

  17. jevica says:


    “Earlier in the evening, Krugman had already vocalized his satisfaction at President Obama’s apparent lack of concern over the exploding cumulative deficit. However, in a moment of brutal honesty, the esteemed Princeton professor revealed his long term prognosis. According to the professor,

    Eventually we do have a problem. That the population is getting older, health care costs are rising…there is this question of how we’re going to pay for the programs. The year 2025, the year 2030, something is going to have to give…. …. We’re going to need more revenue…Surely it will require some sort of middle class taxes as well.. We won’t be able to pay for the kind of government the society will want without some increase in taxes… on the middle class, maybe a value added tax…And we’re also going to have to make decisions about health care, doc pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits . So the snarky version…which I shouldn’t even say because it will get me in trouble is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this.”


    “Kooky Paul Krugman Calls for ‘Death Panels’ to Cut Health-Care Costs — Really!”

    “This opens Krugman up to charges of hypocrisy, since he called the “death panel” accusation a “smear” in a March 22, 2010 column and an example of the “dishonesty” of Obama-care opponents in a June 29, 2012 column. Does this mean Krugman accepts Sarah Palin’s argument that Obama-care’s cost containment strategy will require health-care rationing?”


    “Beyond Obamacare

    WE need death panels.

    Well, maybe not death panels, exactly, but unless we start allocating health care resources more prudently — rationing, by its proper name — the exploding cost of Medicare will swamp the federal budget.”


    Steven Rattner, a contributing opinion writer, was a counselor to the Treasury secretary in the Obama administration. Steven Rattner was the car czar. He was the first car czar.

  18. jevica says:


    The Post Office situation.

    “MSNBC: My, the GOP is really out to get the Post Office, aren’t they?”


    “This is so perfectly, painfully demonstrative of the United States’ current conundrum: Every single one of our many government outlays has its respective interest group(s), who will fight tooth and nail to make sure that particular bit of our oversized federal budget doesn’t get eliminated. Everybody wants to cut spending, just not their spending — and any GOPer that dares to point out the obvious fiscal realities will be relentlessly demonized. The end.”

    • BrianR says:

      Yup. Budget cuts = GOP cruelty, according to the socialists.

      The only conclusion one can draw is that they have absolutely no interest in cutting any spending anywhere, no matter what.

  19. jevica says:


    The reporters are out in the snow, etc. telling us to stay home, “”On CNN, there is a reporter standing out in the snow, and she is telling people what it’s like in the snow so that you don’t have to go outside and risk your life to find out what it’s like. The reporters will do that for you, and they will tell you not to do what they are doing — as a public service.”

    “. . . in crises and emergencies like this, we broom all those regulations. If you are suffering from great fear and anxiety, we’ll help. We’ll allow the weather to be discussed for New York, Boston, the whole corridor there.” Over and over and over, enough, I can look out my window.

    Turn in Your Guns to Stop the Wacko Left-Wing Killer on the Loose in California
    I this around you?

    “New HHS “family penalty” rule leaves spouses, children unprotected”


    “Small wonder that Michael Ramirez portrays ObamaCare as snake oil in today’s IBD editorial cartoon”

    Remember you can keep your Doctorand/or health care, if you like them, what hipocratic B. S.

  20. jevica says:


    What are they up to?

    “Democrats don’t have a lot of leeway with immigration special-interest groups to make the “substantial period of time” much more substantial than 10 years. Which is ironic, because the group they’re ostensibly fighting for here — illegals — might very well accept Rubio’s longer time frame for citizenship in exchange for the right to work legally in America immediately. That’s been Raul Labrador’s point all along: Most illegals he’s encountered as an immigration lawyer don’t care about becoming citizens, he claims, they care about jobs. Democrats, of course, care about the opposite; they’re willing to supply cheap labor to business even if it depresses wages for U.S. citizens in the expectation that they’ll net millions more Latino votes a decade or so from now. (And big labor is happy to support them in the expectation that today’s illegal worker is tomorrow’s legalized dues-paying union member.) So the 10-year timeline for green-card eligibility may budge a little among Schumer and crew but it won’t budge much. Will Rubio?”

    “Dem senators: Legalized illegal immigrants will have to wait around 10 years to apply for a green card”


    • BrianR says:

      Yeah, it really doesn’t change the bottom line: these people are here illegally, and shouldn’t EVER get any kind of “regularization”.

  21. jevica says:


    “New plan: mandatory gun insurance”


    “Whenever people make the “slippery slope” argument, naysayers arrive in droves to proclaim that hyperbolic extremists are creating straw men to frighten the public. I seem to recall a time when Obamacare was being debated where some of us were asking the question, if the government can force you to purchase a product such as insurance to regulate private activity, is there any human commercial engagement which they could not regulate? Pshaw, said the critics. You’re clearly being hysterical.”

    “Does it pass constitutional muster? I’m hearing a lot of people saying no. But many of those same folks said that about Obamacare. And according to the Supreme Court, as long as you call the insurance mandate a tax, there’s no problem. So now, if gun regulations fail to pass, apparently we can start a new fight over “gun insurance.” And if the Supremes call it a tax, it would likely pass. Welcome to the 21st century. I hope you enjoy it. Or at least survive it.”

    “Insurance as Punishment
    The latest assault on the Second Amendment.”


    They never stop, do they?

    • BrianR says:

      The big fly in this idiotic idea is enforcement. How are they going to do that?

      Obamacare’s “tax” is enforced through the IRS, which tacks a penalty onto your bill if you don’t have insurance (though I’m still doubtful of enforcement, because how can they tell if people do or don’t have insurance?).

      In the case of a state requirement that gun owners have some form of “insurance”, how are they going to know who’s supposed to have it? They can’t even make sure that all CAR drivers have insurance.

      It’s yet another idiotic idea probably going nowhere.

  22. garnet92 says:

    Brian, you were right – I had not seen this post, I think it was before I was a fan of the Island. I also wrote about the same assessment of Obama back in 2007-2008 leading up to his coronation. And, like you, I knew that it was purely because he was “black.” Your hypothesis that Barry O’Bannion couldn’t have made it past the early primaries is spot on – I doubt that he could have secured enough contributions to even compete in the primary. He proves, every day, that he has NO skills past bullshitting. He is no leader, he can’t pick qualified advisors, he is an absolute failure. But a failure who is idolized by his followers. We (the country’s voters) made a MASSIVE mistake when we elected this fraud. Gotta quit before my blood pressure explodes. Best to you, I’ll be back soon.

    • BrianR says:

      LOL, Garnet.

      Sounds like we both nailed it. Every time I think about it, I have to keep my BP meds nearby. I don’t want to gigve the SOB the satisfaction of giving me a stroke.

  23. Okay, I’ll Say It. Why Is Obama President? Because He’s Black. « The View from the Island

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s