The Obama Phenomenon and the 2008 Presidential Campaign

[TheTennisBallKid]

Well said, Voronwë. In total agreement. I am very interested to see how the differences between Obama's background and the majority of the black American demographic will shape things in this race.

No pun intended, of course.



ttbk

[axordil]

VtF--
Oh, I certainly think they are both thought-provoking! The number of letters they elicited was quite high by Salon standards, and some were insightful in their own right.

It would be interesting indeed to hear what the author of the first piece has to say about the relative "blackness" of Clarence Thomas, or Condy Rice for that matter.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

From Wikipedia's article on Rice:

Racial criticisms
Rice's rise within the George W. Bush administration initially drew a largely positive response from many in the African American community. In a 2002 survey, then National Security Advisor Rice was viewed favorably by 41% of African American respondents, but another 40% did not know Rice well enough to rate her and her profile remained comparatively obscure.[150] As her role increased, some African American commentators began to express doubts concerning Rice's stances and statements on various issues. In 2005, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson asked, "How did [Rice] come to a worldview so radically different from that of most black Americans?"[151]

Other writers have also noted what they perceive to be a distance between Rice and the black community. The Black Commentator magazine described sentiments given in a speech by Rice at a black gathering as "more than strange – they were evidence of profound personal disorientation. A black woman who doesn’t know how to talk to black people is of limited political use to an administration that has few African American allies."[152] When Rice invoked the civil rights movement to clarify her position on the invasion of Iraq, Margaret Kimberley, another writer for The Black Commentator, felt that her use of the rhetoric was "offensive". Stan Correy, an interviewer from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, characterized many African Americans involved with civil rights and politics as viewing this rhetoric as "cynical".[153] Rice was also described by Bill Fletcher, Jr., the former leader of the TransAfrica Forum, a foreign policy lobbying organization in Washington, D.C., as "very cold and distant and only black by accident."[150] In August 2005, American musician, actor, and social activist Harry Belafonte, who serves on the Board of TransAfrica, referred to African Americans in the Bush administration as "black tyrants".[154] Belafonte's comments received mixed reactions.[150]

Rice has defended herself from such criticisms on several occasions. During a September 14, 2005 interview, she said: "Why would I worry about something like that? ... The fact of the matter is I've been black all my life. Nobody needs to tell me how to be black."[155]

A few notable African Americans have defended Rice from across the aisle, including Mike Espy,[156] Andrew Young, C. Delores Tucker (chair of the National Congress of Black Women),[157] Clarence Page,[158] Colbert King,[159] Dorothy Height (chair and president emerita of the National Council of Negro Women)[160] and Kweisi Mfume (former Congressman and former CEO of the NAACP).

[vison]

This is the part that makes me shake my head: that a black person must represent some preconceived persona -- as set out by SOME other black people -- or she's "not black". What a dreadful thing that is. It is racist, and it doesn't matter which "race" is saying it.

I am no fan of Ms. Rice, far from it. My dislike of Ms. Rice is not based in any way on her colour, but on her apparently fanatical and peculiar devotion to Mr. Bush, and by extension, to his policies and actions. What is she supposed to do, to prove her "blackness"?

There will never, ever, be an end to the influence of racism in American politics until everyone gives up "race" as a position from which to judge others.[/i]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It's just not that simple, vison. At least in my humble opinion.

[vison]

It's just not that simple, vison. At least in my humble opinion.

Nothing is ever "that simple". But things have to start somewhere. From an outsider's point of view, and I am most certainly an outsider, I can't see why Ms. Rice isn't "black enough" and that dreadful Jesse Jackson is. He revels in every stereotype he supposedly rages against, and comes across as so determined to maintain his influence that he will cut down those he claims to "support". "Be black my way, or you ain't black at all", seems to be the rallying cry of some folks.

I know Jackson is some kind of icon, but I don't get it. He's at least as bad, in his way *IMHO* as Ms. Rice is, in hers.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'm certainly no fan of Jesse Jackson's (and even less of Al Sharpton's), and I don't really see what he has to with any of this.

"Be black my way, or you ain't black at all", seems to be the rallying cry of some folks.

I don't think that is it at all. For instance, you don't see the same kind of backlash against Colin Powell that you do against Condoleeza Rice. Looking again at Wikipedia, you don't find the kind of vitriol that I quoted above about Rice. Instead, you find this:

In Season 2 of Chapelle's Show, Colin Powell is drafted by white people in the Racial Draft sketch. However, the move is challenged by the black delegation, who only give up Powell when the white delegation agree to also take Condoleezza Rice and to renounce all claim to O.J. Simpson. This portion of the sketch highlights Powells wide acceptance by all Americans, regardless of race.

[axordil]

The cogent question for me is, why are some methods of leveraging one's minority status OK and others not?

As an aside, the notion that whites would only support Obama because it makes them feel less guilty is fundamentally repugnant to me. While I can understand how someone would choose to think that way, I find it unhelpful and wrong-headed to assume that white liberals would reject one black candidate because they were REALLY black while embracing one that was FAUX black. As Vison notes, it is entirely possible to simply not like someone like Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton, or for that matter Clarnence Thomas, or for that matter George W. Bush, simply because they are jerks with rotten positions on the issues, no matter what their race or cultural background.

What I find really troubling, though, is that some minority groups seem to go through this sort of circular firing squad maneuver all the time, and others don't. That leads me to the suspicion that there are people involved who profit from victimhood/outsider status, and don't ever want that to change.

It kind of makes me glad that pagans aren't more politically organized, because I rather suspect we'd do the same thing.

[tinwë]

While I can understand how someone would choose to think that way, I find it unhelpful and wrong-headed to assume that white liberals would reject one black candidate because they were REALLY black while embracing one that was FAUX black.

It isn’t so wrong, however, to assume that whites would reject a candidate, any candidate, who came across as a single issue candidate, which is what all of the black candidates we’ve had so far have been. I think it is possible that Obama would not be perceived that way because he doesn’t seem to percieve himself that way. I would guess the same would hold true for Rice.

And, come to think of it, I don’t believe she has ruled out running in ‘08, has she?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Rice has repeatedly stated that she is not running. Of course, that doesn't mean that she won't change her mind.

I heard today that Kerry announced that he is not running. I'm glad to hear that

[axordil]

VtF--

While Powell was born in Harlem, his parents immigrated from Jamaica. Evidently that makes a difference too, in some minds.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Good point.

[vison]

Well, I, for one, was glad to hear Mr. Kerry say he wouldn't give it another shot. Now, if he would just find something to do in, say, Bermuda or Australia or Japan, for the next two years. . . . .

What I find really troubling, though, is that some minority groups seem to go through this sort of circular firing squad maneuver all the time, and others don't. That leads me to the suspicion that there are people involved who profit from victimhood/outsider status, and don't ever want that to change.

I often think the same thing, about various First Nations politicians in Canada. Power, regardless of how it is achieved, is a very addictive drug. A leader might seem to belong to the "powerless" group to the mainstream, but within that group he controls things, and has no incentive for change. As well, he knows that if real change comes, and the "outsiders" become part of the mainstream, then he has no power base.

[Faramond]

I really think that news people, especially those who cover politics, just adore the presidential races, and they can't wait to get them started. It's rather cute. I wonder which race they would most want to cover ... I'm guessing McCain v. Obama.

And once one person starts running, the rest need to also start running lest they "fall behind".

...



So ... who has the early lead in NH?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I do.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Sen. Joe Biden opened his long-shot bid for the Democratic nomination on Wednesday with a big gaffe. Talking about Obama, Biden said "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Ouch.

Biden isn't a racist, but he does have a talent for putting his foot in his mouth. I don't know that this will have any long-term negative implications for his campaign, but it sure won't help.

[axordil]

I've seen the clip, and it's pretty clear there's a period between "African-American" and "Who's (or was it he's?) articulate." Still kind of a patronizing thing to say even then, but not quite as outright offensive. Biden is really a much better Senator than he would be a President.

[Primula Baggins]

This isn't the first time he's put his foot in his mouth. I agree with Ax that there was a break after "African-American" (in fact, the interviewer interjects something), but that still doesn't remove the patronizing aspect of the remark, as Voronwë says, and it also doesn't mitigate the fact that he's saying there has never been a mainstream black candidate before. Many would dispute that.

[axordil]

Depends on how one defines mainstream. In a modern context Shirley Chisholm, who was in the House at the time she ran, was certainly more "mainstream" than Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, or for that matter Alan Keyes. But in 1972, one could argue that the mainstream still excluded both women and blacks, alas.

[vison]

I don't know anything about American football and I certainly don't know anything about the coaches and players. But I am shocked, to be honest, about the fuss being made about the fact that the 2 coaches in this year's Superbowl are both black men. I would have thought it would just be par for the course, somehow. But then I think about Warren Moon and all I know about Warren Moon is he used to play football in Canada, he's a black man, and he was the first black quarterback in the NFL? Is that true? How many black coaches are there in the NBA? When I get my glimpses of basketball on TV (and they are glimpses, it's a game I don't fancy) I see a lot of black men playing but what about the coaches?

*sigh*

I'm not sure where I'm going with this, just that a black football coach shouldn't be such a big deal. It's 2007, not 1957.