Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
It is the media that perpetuates this race-gender thing. And it is you who should get lost Mr. what's your name Thrasher—hiding behind your pseudonym for pusillanimous behavior. I've worked and lived in Africa more years than you have probably been on this earth. So don't "cum bay ya" me. You don't know what you are talking about. You remind me of the Wizard of Oz. Loud voice, little guy behind the curtain. Grow up and learn something about people besides perpetuating negativity.
You're right. I remember when South Carolina did not elect its first black governor. But Theo Mitchell was a deeply flawed candidate, so the comparison isn't quite fair.
But wait - you're comparing Theo Mitchell to Hillary Clinton. Actually a very apt comparison.
Still, yuck.
But I did vote for Theo. Didn't like it one bit. And here's where the comparison may be most apt: when Carroll Campbell won, I didn't care, and honestly, I still don't look back and say, "Wow! I wish Theo Mitchell had won!"
So maybe I'll come around, vote for the D on the ticket, and not care much. And if the D is a she, and she wins, I'll do my very, very, very best not to smirk and say "I knew it!" every time "clean coal" gets a new tax break and every time anything positive or progressive breaks down in the Senate because 60 continues to be the new 51. Maybe I'll eventually remember that Barack Obama asked us to appeal to our "better angels" and I'll find an issue or area where I can work to make a difference, and keep my blinders on to the larger world that is yet another Clinton administration.
OR - MUCH BETTER - I'll work my ass off on Saturday and help Barack Obama win (white votes too!) in South Carolina, and I'll go somewhere on Super Tuesday to do the same.
So, until February 6 or beyond, I'm just not entertaining the notion that I will have to figure out what to do in November.
The media has created the racial/gender issue. I don't support Clinton but I don't for a minute believe there was anything racial about any of Bill Clinton's remarks. He made a good point on NPR today. He said we went through the past 40 years or so fighting for civil rights not so we can avoid race and racial issues all together but so people can be free, can speak freely, about whatever the heck is on their minds without fear of being called a racist.
It's not Obama who is complaining either. His grievance has to do with how the Clintons have distorted his record. It has nothing to do with race or gender or who deserves more pity and what not.
It's the media that fans the flames of race and gender because framing the story around black and white issues everyone can understand makes for good headlines. Headlines people will buy and read. Us against them, man vs. nature, good vs. evil, etc. The problem is that there is no longer any clear line between entertainment and news. News agencies have to be entertaining if they want to survive.
That is not to say that racism and sexism are not forces at work in our lives. It is simply to say that the media exploits it for profit, no longer out any desire to report what is the case, but just to distract and entertain you before they go on to tell you what Britney Spears is doing today or some such crap.
I live in Illinois, and as communications director of a state planning agency in the late 90s, I was contacted constantly by Obama's office with in depth and thorough questions. His office was in contact with our agency about as much as all the other state legislators put together. He hires brilliant people-- such as when he snapped up Tom Daschle's chief of staff upon entering the Senate. I've followed his career since then, and I've been extremely impressed at every level.
Vis a vis the disingenuousness of your replies-- the William Jennings Bryan administration, Academic experience does not always do well in the real world, etc. We would prefer candidates that didn't perform well academically? We would prefer candidates that are mediocre orators?
My point is that "inexperience" is a code word. Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Teddy Roosevelt had less experience upon becoming president than Obama. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt, and Bill Clinton were younger. Mitt Romney's only political experience is four years as Governor of Massachusetts, and yet you don't hear people questioning his experience.
Kind of what I was saying!
When we elect a president or, really, anybody, we're not supposed to be rewarding someone for past accomplishments. We're supposed to be picking somebody who will do what we think will be the right things in the future. And it's always kind of a leap of faith, because we don't know what the future will bring. Past experience is valuable in that it informs us about a candidate's policy positions and strengths and weaknesses, but it's certainly not the be-all, end-all. Certainly, anybody who's young (and especially anybody who's young and NOT from a politically connected family or family of politicians) is going to have a kind of short "official" resume compared to an older, more-connected candidate.
Personally, I think Obama has the right stuff, whatever that stuff is. That's meaning no disrespect to any of the other Dems, of course.
One tiny quibble with your comment: Mitt Romney and his followers argue that he has this great long list of past accomplishments besides being governor (business turn-around specialist, Olympics chief, blah, blah, blah). I mentioned him because while that record may be good on paper, most people seem to be recoiling at him in person.
Your question is incorrect, since Obama is half-white as well as half-black. If he were only black, it still wouldn't be an historic run as several black candidates have run for president before him.
You worked in Africa and that means what??? I have worked in a damp factory ...
Apparently because I dared to disagree with your shallow empty fairy tale post I am now a cartoon figure out of the WIZ....
You can do better right.... Given all of that african work history and working with those colored light skinned blacks..
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
