Letters to the Editor
-
@AKA Smith
I understand why you focus on those Barack supporters who are really intense and say extreme things about his opposition to the war, how they make it sound as if THAT ONE THING proves they have the right candidate...It's annoying and unfounded, I agree.
But outside the sort of magical thinking that both sides engage in to prove they have made the right choice, I think the Hillary vote issue is more complicated than either extreme ever wants to talk about. I think Barack voting the fund the war is simply not as simple either. And I'm willing to agree that his opposition to the war should also be looked at in context. After you start letting the issues not simply be "proof", it becomes a far less satisfying conversation because rather than having that consoling feeling that comes with knowing you are on the right side of the issue, you are left a bit more confused and unsure what it all means.
I mean would it really matter to you if Hillary had opposed the war, not given Bush the authorization and then had funded it in the way she and Barack have? Would you see that as a sign of weakness in her or do you think there is a way to understand how she could have not voted for authorization but felt the need to, provisionally, support it via funding in those ways? I wonder if it would really have made a difference in how you feel about Hillary. It would for me, but not like that would turn her into a hero or prove she is the right choice. This is a little unfocused but I hope my point/question makes some sense.
p.s. I happen to think the kind of uncertainty and confusion that comes from letting these issues be a bit complicated is exactly the direction we'd have to move in culturally for any real, sustainable differences to take root. And I know that can't happen overnight. But I have no hope for the future if it depends on simply the "right" side winning elections more often.
-
@ethics_professor & sugarman
When I wrote those post I tried to be as brief as possible; in and out. I left out some of the conversation with my daughter. When she asked me about our "reputation" I told her to ask some of her White friends and colleagues what they really feel about Black people. Not to be afraid to engage them seriously; listen and learn, and hopefully, teach some. Sugarman, I am surprised that as a Jew you would misread my point. Assuming that your race - or religion - being frowned upon by others means throwing in the towel is wrong. I hope I didn't give that impression; I thought I said just forge along. My oldest daughter graduated (with honors) from Seton Hall University and my son is an Intelligence Specialist with the Navy (boy, do they need that). But they all are learning something that I never told them, that the most difficult journey for a Black person is not becoming well-educated or sucessful (and you have to give props to the many White people in this country that fought for that too) but breaking the pathological traps we have laid for ourselves (that should answer ethics_professor) and that achievement itself gives lie to the cliches that became excuses for racism.
And too many don't want those excuses to die; (why was the term "acting white" coined? It wasn't by a Black person, but so many of us bought into it - pathological trap)
I'd like to almost retract one statement, "everybody hates Black folks". I said that after Kinky Friedman was rolling off numbers that Latino's vote for Hillary ten to one. And that came out of me because we always think of Spanish people as our "Latin Brothers"; but, engaging them in dialogue, I've been shocked to learn what they really think about "American Negrito's". But I will say this: I've never been afraid to ask, and if you ask the question you better be prepared for the answer. And I've always talked to all races about Black folk, and gotten all kind of answers. This may be rushed, but gotta go.
-
I don't get it...
I keep thinking I'm missing something; I watched a lot of Wright's speech in Detroit the other night, and I've seen most of the short clips of him that have turned up everywhere, but I still haven't haven't heard him say anything that merits epithets like "hate-spewing", "racist", or "outrageous". The most potentially offensive thing I heard was the "God damn America" bit, which in its Biblical context I didn't find all that outrageous; he was talking about God condemning a nation that wrongs its own citizens, and anyone who thinks the good old USA has never wronged its own citizens, especially its poor and its minorities, just hasn't been paying attention.
He talked about 9/11 as "chickens coming home to roost", which simply means that what goes around comes around... the people who attacked us that day were responding to actions that the US has perpetrated. He didn't say that they were right to do so, just that they did it because they were angry about things the US has done. That seems obvious, to anyone who doesn't believe the elementary school logic that they did it because they "hate freedom"!
The most "outrageous" statement I heard from him was that AIDS was a plague loosed on the black population by the US government; I find that extremely unlikely, but I don't find it unbelievable that a black man who's aware of the Tuskegee experiments might think it's a possibility.
I've even heard his statement that this country is "controlled by rich white people" condemned as racist. Can anyone who knows this country seriously argue with that?
His support of avowed anti-Semite Farrakhan is certainly troubling, but I don't know that he ever said he agrees with everything Farrakhan stands for, and it's not hard to argue that Farrakhan has done (and stood for) some good things as well.
I've been combing the internet looking for a statement by Wright that will explain the horror and outrage that fill the media (and the letters to Salon), but maybe I'm not looking in the right places...
Will someone please post a direct quote from the pastor that you find to be unequivocally racist, hate-filled, or at least totally outrageous?
Until I see that, I'll remain saddened that Obama, in his repudiation of Wright, appears to be exactly the "pragmatic politician" that his former pastor claimed him to be.