|
That's mediatakeout's view of it and they are certainly entitled to it.
Everyone should calm down and consider the following:
It was never appropriate for Michelle to be there by herself. The event was for Hillary and Barack to attend the State Of Black America conference in Louisiana and discuss issues relevant to blacks. We all need to know that Barack consistently has avoided discussing the black agenda or plights of black America. He is very concerned that doing so would alienate the white supporters. He's shunned a lot of black organizations. Sending his wife wasn't appropriate and I don't blame Tavis for being offended by it.
You can't have the wife of a candidate debating the opposing presidential candidate, that's foolish and that's how the media would have played it. And let's be honest, the black collective has already fallen for enough hype on Obama.
If I have to look at both men, Tavis gets more respect from me than Obama. Where as Tavis talks about and addresses black issues on a daily basis, Obama is just as ignorant or evasive on black issues as whites. Time to start really looking at the character of Obama and quit blindly making excuses for what he consistently demonstrates.
In regards to her 'explanation'. She was very clever in her connection between what Tavis is doing and what Obama is doing. They don't share the same ideals. Tavis has a specific pro-black agenda. Obama has a generalistic, populist agenda. There is huge difference between the two. Notice that when she talks about her husband she doesn't use the word black agenda or anything close. She, like any typical politician, is slick in her words.
She also points out the fact that Obama is focusing his tiime on winning the election, justifying Obamas shunning of an important Black conference. What she failed to disclose is that of all the Senators running for President, Obama attendence is less than half - far worse than even Hillary Clinton.
So, in a nutshell; Obama doesn't show that the black agenda is important to him. Obama is barely fulfilling his obligations as a Senator, where he has had years to invoke change via legislation. If he was a poor Senator, why would he be any different as a President?
My people; please start looking at the facts of the matter; stop letting the media define how we vote, why we vote and who we vote for.
the Truth is out there, seek it out.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|