More than a decade ago, I sat down with @MarcMaron in his garage to tape something new called a podcast. This time, he came to me to record his last episode.
— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) October 13, 2025
We talked about the power of conviction, decency in an age of division, and the true story of America. I’ll miss Marc’s… pic.twitter.com/kM3sAgtjF0
For Maron's end-of-podcast thoughts, you need to listen to the second-to-last episode, here. This is his real sign off:
I live in, in an urgent state. I think that when you're self-employed and you do a lot of things, you're always chasing something.... Being on a mic is how I live my life. And I, and how I've, I've always lived my adult life, all the searching, which was never spiritual per se. I was fortunate in that, that I was not a spiritual searcher looking for the great answers to why we live or to whether there's a god or not, or to how to be spiritually sound and connected. You know, I was in search of myself and I figured if I could get that, you know, undertaking completed, maybe I'd, you know, I'd, I'd seek the bigger answers. This is all, in retrospect, this is me reflecting.... It was urgent. It's always urgent. This was urgent when I got up to do this. But it was always just about me on this mic.... Something happened in here. I can't explain it...To make people feel less alone in the most horrible places in their minds, in their lives, you know, in their situations, you know, of all kinds....
Posts
115 comments:
The division CAUSED by the one bitching about division on the podcast. He disgusts me.
Barrack Obama has resting bitch face. He never really looks happy.
I understand how he feels.
It is something a leader needs to understand about themselves or their leadership will suffer for it. Barrack Obama poisoned the world with his leadership because he is an unhappy man.
There is just something so incredibly off-putting about Obama. I have never understood his popularity.
Who is Barack Obama, anyway? I've never seen a world leader that is more of an unknown, which is not to imply that I've made a study of it. But looking at Barack, and a cardboard cutout of Barack, I perceive not much difference. His signature credit is the willingness to fight dirty, politically, and it has set the tone for a generation. Past that, he seems like something that was put in front of us to look at, but not to understand or comprehend. I feel as if I know much more about every other President during my lifetime, a sense of what kind of man they are / were, what their character is made up of. Obama, though - it's an empty room, my understanding of, and about him.
Why don’t his pants have a crease? Wasn’t that one of his selling points?
Why would we want to see kids shamed? Has he no shame?
Podcasts were not new in 2015! Someone needs to Community Note that post, LOL.
I've never heard of him. Erik Satie has a piano piece entitled second-to-last thoughts, though.
Good riddance the original pajama boi
I'm a podcast guy. In fact I introduced this blog to podcasting via the Joe Rogan Experience. I never listened to more than 5 minutes of Maron. He's not very bright and covers up that deficiency with phony moralism.
Pretty much a classic illustration of why I could never listen to Marc Maron for very long. Calling Barack in to finish off your career?
No one calls Barack anymore.
I know he has talent. I know he can be funny. But not enough for me to listen to him talk on a podcast.
He's for old lefties. This old righty just has no interest.
Just to make it even, I have no interest in Joe Rogan either.
Conviction is what he deserves
Theo Von and Tim Dillon are sucking up all the oxygen right now. Joe Rogan was for the 20-teens.
“My favorite part about the Obama era is all the racial healing.“
—— Jon Gabriel
He’s the gift that, unfortunately, will keep on fucking Americans for years and years.
Maron's podcast never really attracted me. I tried listening once or twice.
Hes temu john stewart
When Obama talks about "old-fashioned values", I assume he means he wishes he'd been one of the Borgias.
Maron: A weak, somewhat-clever man, made somewhat successful by enabling other weak people who are less clever to fleetingly feel better about themselves, by loudly affixing the blame for their failures and disappointments and self-loathing upon others.
Obama: kinda the same, except he was President.
I am Laslo.
So say we all, after 17 years you think he would have a clue nope
I am not going to read the transcript, since I don't believe a single word Obama says.
But the idea that anyone wants to hear what Obama has to say about "decency in an age of division" is hilarious (or sad).
The so-called "Great Uniter" did more to divide this country than any political figure I can recall in my adult lifetime. Not even close.
Maybe the Professor needs a new tag: "Decency Bullshit"
"Decency in an age of division." Barack Obama.
Fuck you, pal. You caused racial division like we've never seen since the Civil War. And your terrible policy towards Iran and Israel caused all sorts of death and destruction.
In 9 months in office, Trump has accomplished more for the American people and the world than you did in 8 years. Just STFU.
"Who is Barack Obama, anyway? I've never seen a world leader that is more of an unknown, "
I feel like I understand Obama better than any President of my lifetime. Perhaps because we're close in age and it isn't hard for me to imagine what it was like to be one of the few black kids in a White upper middle-class milieu in the '70's and '80's. I've seen that kid and watched the accommodations, and manipulations, he made to be popular , despite what must have been an unavoidable sense of alienation. So, yeah, you become a certain kind of cat.
Not one you'd let anywhere near the White House, certainly.
It is really hard to think of a more terrible person than Barack Obama.
He did his level best to install a Soviet government in our country.
I have no doubt that he would have purged the country of enemies if he had the chance.
I dubbed him among other things alinskis sorcerers apprentice most of his tricks seem to be failjng there are still a few marks
Anyone who can brag about bombing weddings and killing people with drones like he did is capable of killing millions of people.
The worst part would be him telling us how he was the source of goodness and the best person in the world for doing it.
He is just so awful.
Thanks for posting this. I love podscribe. Marc Maron has done over 1600 podcasts and I've been able to get most of the ones I wanted to listen to. I find him a uneven interviewer. He's good with other comedians and other showbiz folks. Especially, if they're good talkers and can get off 3-4 good/interesting sentences in response to his rat-a-tat questions.
He's less good with people who need time to give long answers to his questions. Or need to be drawn out. And of course, when he talks to people outside of showbiz, he's really out of depth. Like this one with Obama.
I mean "Trump made Canada come together" and why can't we in the USA do the same? Wah? Canada didn't go together. They don't like Trump's tarriffs because it will cost Canadians jobs and money. Other than a shared economic interest, Canadians have little in common. Its not broken up because the central Government has not tried to oppress one part of the country on behalf of another part. Quebec does its own thing, and there's more federalism then the USA. Also, foreign policy isn't a big issue. Canada's central government cant endlessly get their country in wars.
I love the way Obama talks in this vague, coded, language which sounds so reasonable but is really just pushing the ol' left agenda.
He's so concerned about Trump "authoritarianism" or labeling "simple protests" "domestic terrorism". This is a man who used the FBI-CIA to start Russiagate to destroy Trump! And said zero about Biden using the FBI-DOJ to go after Biden's enemies.
And i loved the big shoutout to his buddies "Bill Clinton and George Bush". Yep, the dynamic duo that love "Democracy" and want to spread it around the world - unlike you know who.
Material wealth and fame are anathema to the Obamas?
And why does Barack have Michelle's hairbrush framed on the wall?
We got Trump because of Obama and Bush. And got even more Trump because of Biden. I'll give Biden and Obama credit, they told the same Leftwing BS, but it really just a matter of language. In terms of actual policy you always knew what they were about. Bush II, on the other hand, was just a Goddamn liar. He never would've won his primary in 2000 if he'd been honest about his beliefs. Nor would he have won re-election in 2004. He saved "Amnesty" and "social security reform" along with nominating Harriet Miers for his 2nd term.
Ah well dumping on Obama may well become a national sport. He did fool a lot of people.
Last comment. People on the Right seem to have a think about Obama. They seem to dislike him more than Clinton or Biden. Dunno why. He's not a scumbad like Clinton, and his record on policy is better than Biden's. He's a leftist, but seems to be more decent in comparison. I'm not saying he's decent man, i'm just saying compared to Biden/Clinton.
Oh you silly man obama is the wurst of them, if you dont know that
Authoritarianism- Tell me how you support Antifa without telling me you support Antifa.
Chaos and terrorism and perversion thy name is oba.a
last episode means the end of shitification
Back then their shell was occupy
Authoritarianism means please don’t follow the money…
…bet his lawyers were hovering off camera like Belichick’s girlfriend…
You know there are huge questions about Russia Hoax and Obama's involvement. Did he ask about that?
I don't need to hear Obama lie about decency. Explain why he helped Hillary push her hoax.
Speak truth to power.
Maron is a shallow and stupid man
I didn’t have to pay for his needles and rehab at the end- good…Did I?
David Samuels Interviews MLK Biographer David Garrow on Barack Obama - Tablet Magazine
Real insight not this warmed over tripe
as frightening as it is with what's happening
…this coded language means leftie bullshit follows so you can stop listening now…
"ChrisC said...
There is just something so incredibly off-putting about Obama. I have never understood his popularity."
I mean, you got the first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man.
I shot teh tariff
But I didn’t shoot the revenue
Oh noes, NOOOOOO!
Some fear among a big chunk of the country. And I, I, and you know, one of the problems with the American political system is although we have political parties, we don't have a parliamentary system. So, so basically the president, in my case, Democrat, I leave office and there's no obvious person who's now the shadow prime minister, the leader of the party for the Democrat. For the Democrats. Right? Yeah. And so there, there were a lot of terrific people who were doing good work, but, you know, we have this weird situation where you don't have a, a designated person who's Right, right
…the pig fuckers protecting Democracy fantasizing about ending Democracy…
Character matters, honesty matters, kindness and empathy matter - This represents the America I love.
The current administration is so far removed from these basic truths.
…empathy is not inviting ten million people here under false pretenses, that’s political desperation with ten million victims. Could have tried switching to popular policies…
Barack The Lightbringer talking about “decency in the age of division?” LOL!
Thats his standup act
"Character matters, honesty matters, kindness and empathy matter "
Talking about these things things while doing nothing is none of those things. In fact those who talk about them are usually trying to claim some kind of virtue they never earned by their actions.
I never got the attraction of that lifelong fraud of a human. His election sparked the new age of lies and corruption in America, unequaled before.
Dunham (12:58): “The current administration is so far removed from these basic truths.”
Joe Biden: “We [Democrats] choose truth over facts.” August 8, 2019. Dunham took this to heart. Joins Honest Antony Blinken and Biden officials taking credit for Middle East peace and return of the hostages, reiterates “Russia, Russia.”
Like JFK,, BHO was a lightweight, more style than substance.
People on the Right seem to have a thing about Obama. They seem to dislike him more than Clinton or Biden. Dunno why.
I don't entirely get that either. We got Obama because we had Bush, and he was a better president than Bush or Biden. If he's disliked more it's because he's more recent and also because of the "hidden hand" in his presidency -- that is the appointments he made of people who would give us the mess of the Biden years.
Clinton looks more like a conventional politician. His youthful leftwing ties were fewer than Obama's and he was able to conceal them. Obama couldn't hide those ties as well. Ironically, it was middle of the road Joe who was the real disaster. Clinton was also more competent and intelligent than either Obama or Biden.
Talking to Obama and not asking about his illegal actions against Trump is like interviewing Nixon after he left office and not asking about Watergate. It's not a serious interview. It's more like what Kamala did for Willie Brown.
The two of them in that room: the moment that years of sexual tension dissipates, and you are left with knowing that you were used, and that there is no graceful exit.
I am Laslo.
Laslo nails it at 11:24.
And again at 2:03!
People on the Right seem to have a thing about Obama. They seem to dislike him more than Clinton or Biden. Dunno why.
Of those three, Clinton is the most likable. Biden is the least likable. And Obama is right in the middle. Boring Jan Brady. That's who you are.
Biden is stupid and incompetent and a full-on dementia patient. That's why a lot of right-wingers assume Obama was the power behind the throne. So he was responsible for Biden's cluster-fuck of four years.
I say, no. I think that's a lame-ass conspiracy theory. Biden was running the White House. Except when he was mental and out of it. And then it was his staffers, drunk with power, and his wife, even drunker, who were running things.
Why would anybody do exactly what Obama wanted, when he's completely out of power? You listen to him, sure, but you do whatever the hell you want to do.
It's clear from Obama's attempts to get Biden to resign, and the attempt to avoid having Kamala Harris in charge, and the attempts to campaign for her, that Barack Obama in 2024 was impotent as shit. He was like Clinton or the other Clinton or Kerry or any of them. Former presidents are celebrities (or non-celebrities) with almost zero power, except for charisma. And he's got no fucking charisma.
Sorry, right-wingers, but it's clear that Joe Biden was the worst president since Woodrow Wilson. And he is responsible for how bad he was. Not Obama. Who didn't even want him to run.
Let’s not forget how, in January 2009, Obama walked into a thriving economy — one “on solid ground,” as his opponent John McCain assured us during the campaign. And within a year, Obama somehow managed to crash it, sending the world spiraling into the worst downturn since the Great Depression. Then came seven long years of “decline” and “hanging by a string.”
But then something miraculous happened: Trump arrived. Overnight, the “worst economy in history” became “the envy of the world.” The markets soared, the factories hummed, and the people cheered — all while he heroically defeated the Democrat hoax known as COVID, which, as we all remember, disappeared in about two weeks.
Sadly, the ungrateful voters spoiled the story by electing Biden, who promptly overturned Trump’s perfect economic apple cart. Some people just don’t appreciate greatness.
Obama killed Osama bin Laden.
I'm not going to list all of Biden's foreign policy fuck-ups, but holy shit, he was way worse than Obama.
Both of those idiots thought that Iran should have nukes. So that's incredibly stupid, and dangerous.
But Biden also fucked up in Afghanistan, he fucked up in Ukraine, he fucked up in the Middle East. He accidentally started two wars, through sheer weakness and stupidity.
Saint Croix, if you say so. But most credible and notable historian scholars and studies beg to differ on how good or bad presidents were. They placed Trump 45 2nd worst in U.S. history. The only thing that saved him from dead last was the exceptional high scoring of his ability of persuasion.
Obama is the left-wing equivalent of Richard Nixon. That's his level. He has fans, but no friends.
There is no right-wing equivalent for Joe Biden. He is so bad, to find a worst president, I got to go back a century and name that fucker who hated the Constitution and free speech and democracy and sucked us into a useless land war in Europe for no fucking reason at all. I'm mad and my parents weren't even alive then. On behalf of my grandparents, who were too nice to speak this way, "Fuck you, Woodrow, you racist fucker."
My initial 2008 characterization of Obama as a piece of shit has held up. That was in the midst of estrogen rallies.
Ronald J. Ward, you lost me at "most credible and notable historical scholars."
Are you seriously citing academics, 99% of whom are Democrats? Spare me your appeal from authority. Your authoritarian authorities can't even run their universities today. With their Hamas encampments. I don't give a rat's ass what the Ivy League has to say about anything.
Thankfully, "most credible and notable historian scholars" get the same number of votes as they rest of us...
Saint Croix, fair enough — you don’t trust scholars or historians. But if we throw out academic rankings, research, and documented historical comparisons, what standard do we use to judge presidents? Personal feeling? Party loyalty? Crowd size?
The irony is, even conservative historians who rank Trump poorly aren’t doing so because of ideology — they use measurable indicators: public trust, institutional stability, international credibility, corruption indices, and crisis management. Those metrics don’t care if you have an “R” or “D” after your name.
Rejecting every form of expertise just because it comes from a university isn’t skepticism — it’s surrendering judgment to partisanship.
Stuttering Clusterphuck of a miserable failure.
Going out with a whimper.
I admit, I've never understood the draw of podcasts as I've never listened to one.
And trotting this preening, pretentious ass out there ensures I never will.
"most credible and notable historian scholars"
I have a PhD in systematic theology with a minor in church history. I spent most of my academic career focused on history (theology came about because having read a lot of historical writings I really wanted to think constructively too).
Historians are mostly good about interpreting the past. But they're terrible about interpreting the present. The fact that any historian would weigh in on Trump's ranking as president shows, by definition, they are acting on personal politics not credible academic assessment. Because he's still President! It goes to how CS Lewis talked about the importance of reading old books in comparison to brand new ones. We know the errors and impact of older works but are blind to the errors and trends of our current age.
More, academic historians in particular are not isolated beings. They exist in guilds and departments, they are dependent on those for promotions, whether for positions or for accolades. Almost every soon to graduate PhD I have known over the last 20 years has become curiously vocally progressive and made sure to assert the approved opinions on certain people/topics.
Just like a scientist who uses their degree to weigh in on whether there is a God in some kind of official way so too a historian who weighs in on the quality of a President within the last decade or two. Both are using their credentials to make personal judgments about which their credentials don't actually help them at all.
It's all personal ambition or preference framed in pseudo-academic terminology, the social science version of the doomsday clock.
Appealing to History Professors is authoritarian.
Historians are only good in their speciality. Bechloss who specializes in mid-20th century history, has no standing to judge 19th century presidents. And he doesn't know anymore about the Presidents since Reagan since you or I do.
Further, those with strong political biases are worthless in "grading US Presidents". The USSR and Nazi Germany had historians. I don't think you'd trust them to give an unbiased judgement about Polticians. Bechloss can't be trusted either.
Historicans used to men of learning and somewhat objective. At some point, most of them because leftists with an agenda. Howard Zinn is a historian. Nough said.
So, people don't care what they think. Credibility gone.
Just so people know, Marc Maron had a show on "Air America" as did Al Franken. It was supposed to be the leftwing answer to Rush Limbaugh and Conservative talk radio. Needless to say it lasted about a week. But Maron is a hardcore leftist.
Zinn was a leftist propagandist
Like galeano in latin america
There’s a few things revealing here. it shows how easily people redefine expertise itself when it conflicts with their narrative. Rather than debating the evidence that leads historians to rank Trump near the bottom, simply shift to discrediting the entire discipline of history.
I actually agree that historians closest to an event can get caught up in contemporary bias — that’s why those early rankings usually emphasize quantifiable measures like unemployment, debt, international standing, legislative success, and corruption scandals.
That said, we don’t need the passage of centuries to see certain patterns. Historians didn’t need 200 years to know Hoover fumbled the Depression or Nixon damaged public trust and was actually a crook. Trump 45 presidency has already been one of the most documented, investigated, and analyzed in modern times — the evidence exists in real time.
And if distrust of academia means we dismiss every field that relies on peer review or institutional accountability, then all we’re left with are talk-show hosts and gut feelings. History becomes whatever team we’re on.
Ive read peoples history and open veins youre welcome
One upon a time i thought beschloss was a fairly reliable historian but he removes all doubt around 2008
History is a genre of literature. A historian is a writer first, and a scholar second - if that. As for what history to read - to understand the modern world one should read "History of United States Naval Operations in World War II", Samuel Eliot Morison, Ed., 15 volumes. That is America's Iliad, a dramatic narrative of mechanized war, collective effort and national mobilization. Anyone who has not read this has no useful input into anything serious.
American literary classics in addition - a best-of list
"Admiral of the Ocean Sea" SE Morison
"The Conspiracy of Pontiac" Francis Parkman
"History of the Conquest of Mexico" William Prescott
For some people there is also that feeling of foreignness about Obama that can be perceived in different ways -- ethnicity, religion, ideology, even sexuality. It helps if you understand that while he wasn't typical of Americans born in 1931, or 1941, or 1951, or even as he was in 1961, he's more representative of Americans born in 1981, 1991 or 2001.
For many people there's a feeling that you've seen that he's an empty suit, that the emperor has no clothes, yet many people don't believe it. It wasn't hard to believe that Biden was a naked emperor running around without his head, but for a long time people resisted admitting that about Obama.
"And if distrust of academia means we dismiss every field that relies on peer review or institutional accountability"
No - not at all. History isn't science. Lots of fields - economics, history, study of politics, anthropology etc. have tried to steal the cloak of the hard science and use the credibility of physics or chemistry to claim they're "scientific". And they're not.
History is just reading stuff and summarizing it, and giving interpetations. Almost anyone can do it. They may not make a living at it, but they can do it. How many can understand high level physics like string theory?
As I stated, you've had Nazi historians, Commie historians, whig historians, etc. Objectively, ones as good as the other as long as they keep to the historical facts.
So, no we can respect hard science, and not respect the current historians.
Irving gellmans three volume set on nixon, hes only up to 1960, cuts through the sargasso sea of lies and omissions rather diligently
You don't need to be a historian to see that Trump has been a better president than Biden (or Bush II). Historians tend to be prisoners of their own narratives. Hack Chuck Klosterman talked to a hack amateur historian about how Reagan was a terrible president but people were too stupid to realize it at the time. Reagan wasn't an ideal president by any means, but the 80s public was judging him by how he affected their lives. The amateur historian and many professional historians were judging him by how he measured up to their desires -- more government programs, more regulation, more taxation, more approval by liberal authorities.
The Obamacracy is a "burden"... burden of punch drunk hysterical progression over and through la la land.
The tarp bailed out the banks who proceeded to buy back their stock at a discount did they rescue the underwater borrowers
I actually like Marc Maron's podcast. I like his stand-up, too. He's interesting. Really human. I don't have the patience to listen to anybody for 3 hours. But I've heard a fair number of his clips that are enjoyable. Honestly, I don't think I like him any more or less than Joe Rogan. People who do stand-up are the best podcaster, in my opinion. Because they do a lot of improv and they are in the moment.
What is keeping me from listening to that podcast, even a little, is how boring Barack Obama is. We all know his life story already. And his thoughts are ordinary, boring, pablum for the mind.
Obama expressing the motivation behind liberal virtue signaling by affluent and superficial people who have no reference for God or the goodness of the US and its historical heroes. His critique is especially applicable to the degenerate popular culture of his people and its rap legends.
I feel like Obama was an important president, because (people on the right and left are going to yell at me for saying this), he's an African-American.
I like that our majority white country put a black guy in the White House. It helps me, morally and spiritually, so I can scoff at the NYT and their 1619 project. I know there is injustice in the world. Obviously there is. But there's really no need to go back one, two, three, four, five centuries and say that the USA will never atone for slavery, we are permanently racist and evil. I like that I can say, "We put a black guy in the White House. Let your ancient grudges go. Stop your shit."
I know electing Obama doesn't atone for slavery. But it's a nice thing our country did. One of many. So, while I consider his actual job performance to be the moral equivalent of Richard Nixon, I think his election says very nice things about our country.
The fact that any group would place Trump at the bottom of Presidents says a lot more about them than it does him. History will make fools of these "historians".
Nothing should matter other than accomplishments, and if you think Trump doesn't have more than most Presidents, then you simply have TDS. The Democrats would not have needed to tried every possible dirty trick to stop him if they thought he was ineffective.
Most of the world is on their way to considering him one of the greatest men of history, but historians....
There are hundreds of Black Americans that would make a better President than Obama, and most of them are far more Black than a guy that's half-White, was raised by White people, grew up with mostly White friends and and went to White schools. His Blackness was mostly performative. That we elected him instead of one them only shows that we have low standards and still suffer from the low expectations of soft racism.
"Nixon damaged public trust and was actually a crook"
As presidents who were not rich when elected, fairly incompetent crook.
(Worth in 2022 dollars)
Clinton 245,000,000
Obama 70,000,000
Nixon 20,000,000
Well no i dont think putting obama in taught any lessons except how discern leftism the same crew swallowed the 1619 project and the hank rogers and diangelo act they learned nothing
I think harold ford is one of the rare figures who seems like a miderate thats why hes in banking the rest are a freak show booker crockett it just gets worser and worser
He carried all the grudges of the old world as well as those of the new one recalls how even dr who before it totally went down the rat trap was taken with him
He is one of 'the worst full of passionate intensity' as yeats put it
To be fair howard dean or chris murphy is equally useless
https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1977839280278896652
There are hundreds of Black Americans that would make a better President than Obama.
I think the number is tens of thousands. But none of them were running!
most of them are far more Black than a guy that's half-White, was raised by White people, grew up with mostly White friends and and went to White schools.
He grew up in Hawaii and I'm sure he had a lot of mixed race friends. Your commentary is vaguely racist -- and I thank the AP Style Guide for you capitalizing White, thanks for bringing back racial thinking, AP, you racialist fucks -- but let me go ahead and concede your point.
Obama "acted white," which is a racial concept that we heard about many decades ago. He's a highly educated Ivy Leaguer, he's not athletic, he focused on scholarly pursuits, he's nerdy. Joe Biden made a similar racist observation. Like he was shocked that a black man could speak English and knew how to shower. "That's textbook, man!"
(I really think Obama gave Biden the job because he wanted a white man. And he wanted one who was dumber than he was. And Biden fit that category).
Anyway, Obama was very, very calm, as a president. Not emotional at all. And that reassured a lot of white people (I suspect, can't prove it). His persona is kind of like Sidney Poitier, if that makes sense. Upper class black guy. And, of course, large numbers of black people voted for Obama because he identified as African-American.
His race was symbolic to a lot of people. I get that. To me, the president is a really important job, so I'm not going to vote on the basis of a feel good symbol. A lot of black people won't vote for Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, or Tim Scott. Same thinking. We think that politics is more important than symbols.
My big thing is that we ought to reject the whole concept of race and racial thinking. It's dehumanizing and unhelpful to humanity. We ought to stop dividing people that way. It's sloppy as shit, and tells us nothing about individuals. Clarence Thomas, for instance, is way blacker than Obama. Both as a skin color and as a biography. But a lot of black people would not vote for him. And a whole different set of white people would vote for him.
Anyway, Obama's skin color was completely irrelevant to his performance as president. But (I suspect) it was highly relevant to his election as president. If that makes sense.
But his skin color regretably made it much harder to criticize
And he was emotional about white policemen and white latinos about afflicted palestinians and gays less about working class youth of all types 'learn to code bitter clingers'
Thats ideological blinders that keep us in the dark
The press justifies his angry jibes making it look more like haysbert or freeman rather than samuel jackson
Obama - HARD PASS.
“Nixon damaged public trust and was actually a crook.”
Curiosity nudged me to see which idiot had written this horseshit. I should’ve known it would be serial fabulist Ward the Cleaver.
"My big thing is that we ought to reject the whole concept of race and racial thinking. It's dehumanizing and unhelpful to humanity. We ought to stop dividing people that way."
Well that's nice. Except most blacks, Jews, leftists, and every other group except conservative whites thinks differently. Glenn Loury is damn smart guy and pretty reasonable. Go tell him he needs to stop thinking about Race.
Most USA conservatives, aren't really conservative. They're white liberals - from 30 or 60 years ago. They're spencer Tracy in "Guess who's coming to dinner". Stuck in the - "we should all be color-blind and treat everyone as an individual". Except, the Left and liberals have moved on way past that. And they're not going back.
To them "the color blind society" was just the first step in getting buy-in to a pluralistic society where various "communities" Jewish, Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. battle for resources, rights, and public space. You know what "Community" doesn't believe it that? The White community. And there losing power and they're not getting it back.
narciso: that was a fascinating interview with Dave Garrow in Tablet Magazine. I've known Dave for 30 years, and he is the most generous and hard-working and completely honest academicians I've ever met. Using a verboten FBI dump, he had to grapple at a very young age (23-25) with uncovering the dark side of MLK's private behavior while protecting his public life and decent women still living, and he took a lot of grief for that and far worse with the Obama book, but he never deviates from reporting what matters in what he finds. He earned a Pulitzer at 26.
Even when we disagree , I know he'll always give me a thoughtful and moral hearing.
He is also the sole source who managed to interview Bernardine Dohrn to learn the truth about Obama's real, eight-year, intimate relationship with Ayers and Dohrn. Anyone still interested should read his Obama book, Rising Star. Yes, it's 1200+ pages with nearly as many pages of footnotes. But it has an index, or, buy the Kindle edition. The book tells a story far larger than Obama.
When he sent me an early copy, I almost broke my nose reading it in bed. I had to cut the book into pieces in order to read it safely. The Kindle wasn't yet available. I recommend that, unless you have a nose that needs an excuse for plastic surgery.
And he was emotional about white policemen and white latinos
That was a performance. He had his people find a case, anywhere, and they found Trayvon Martin. And he federalized this case, and made a huge deal out of it. He played the race card. "If I had a son, he'd look just like Trayvon." He had not done that, in his first term. It was an attempt to manipulate people, and get out the vote. Reprehensible, and I think he caused a riot or two with this move.
But his skin color regretably made it much harder to criticize
That's a strong point. I remember Rush was always fearless about it. "I hope he fails," etc. But now that we've elected the first black president, it's not longer an impossible dream. It's happened before, so it can happen again. And people feel much more confident attacking Obama. We're not afraid of being called racists. That whole paradigm is 20th century. Interracial dating is utterly common now. And (I feel, can't prove it) our society has become a lot better on the subject of race. Ordinary people are way better about it. We see the humanity of other people.
The ones who are worse, ironically, are the elites, the people in the Ivy Leagues, and people running corporations. They went on an anti-white crusade that was quick and ugly and did not last long.
Who?
I cannot picture the congenial and civil Dave Begley saying "f-you." This world needs its Dave Begleys: he is a far better person than I. Someone must have hacked into his computer.
Its a hefty volume
AMF
I came here from the blog "Ethics Alarms", which linked to this post today. I see a lot of commenters talking about the caliber of recent presidents, and I wanted to share said blog's multi-post effort to uncover the Worst President Ever. I recommend reading each part of the series, or at least the very first, to get an idea of the reasons behind the ratings, but if you want to skip all that here's the final decision:
https://ethicsalarms.com/2025/01/12/the-worst-president-ever-part-7-the-worst-of-the-worst-revealed/
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.