If you can't call him "uppity..."

...then I guess you can call him arrogant and call it a day. Two election cylces ago a no-name guy from Texas who happened to be from a political family came onto the scene. He had a know-it-all swagger and smirk I would have loved to have whipped off his smug face. He was acting, as some would say: arrogant. We (okay, not me, but people), liked that, voted for him and he became #43.

Now, two cycles later, we are back at arrogant. We have a no-name (or funny-name) candidate, who has burst on the scene, a general bad a**, who gives speeches and attracts way more people than bees to honey. Some say he looks "presidential." Some say he is looking arrogant. Why was arrogant okay 8 years ago for the person running for the most powerful position IN THE WORLD, but today, no? Do we want someone to look like he doesn't know what he is doing? Like the person they mean when they say "Somewhere a village is missing an idiot?" (Insert own Val Kilmer or GWB joke here)

I think this article put it best. By saying stuff like Obama looks "arrogant" the other side is saying one thing: he is an uppity negro (I do not use the other word, unlike one Jackson who shall remain nameless) that doesn't know his place. Arrogance will get you strung up. Read on:
http://www.theroot.com/id/47536

A Washington Post writer called Obama a man of "profoundly limited achievement." Yes, my jaw is on the ground. I cannot comment any further.