I'll confess to being in the former camp, though I came to it slowly. We've been conditioned by advertising and fallen TV preachers to view any example of effective oratory as an empty con job. But there's more to substance than position papers for policy wonks, and I gradually began to see the substance in Obama. I thought his speech on race last week was probably the most remarkable political speech I've ever witnessed. I found it so honest, personal, forthright and courageous, I think it will one day be placed alongside the Emancipation Proclamation, the Brown Supreme Court decision, and King's "I Have a Dream" speech as a major turning point in America's racial story. And if that sounds silly now, the Gettysburg Address was not universally praised at first, either. Lincoln himself thought he blew it. Obama's speech was certainly the equal of John Kennedy's famous one on Catholicism, and probably surpassed it, if only because the racial divide has proven so much more intractable in this country than the religious one.
But to explain the other side, the almost visceral anti-Obama sentiment, I search in vain for a single sentence that could be criticized by anyone. I thought it must be frustrating for the pundits, for to quote the speech at all is to quote something important, insightful, and inspiring. On Fox News that night, Sean Hannity and Newt Gingrich dealt with it by endlessly replaying Rev. Wright's inflammatory rhetoric and then talking about it as if Obama's speech had never been delivered. I've heard other pundits criticize the speech by saying that while Obama did speak eloquently and effectively about the broader issues of race, he failed to sufficiently and personally rebuke his pastor. That's the pundit's way of saying, "Do sweat the small stuff."
Well, the right-wing talk radio hosts are going to flog this horse to the end. They'll ignore the facts they have to and invent the facts they must. That's what they do, and in this campaign especially, they have little else to work with. They can't hardly campaign on the economy and the war.
More disappointing is Hillary Clinton's campaign, which has all but openly stated their last-ditch strategy is to make Obama appear unelectable. The delegate math looks pretty impossible for them now, so what choice do they have (other than the unthinkable -- a graceful withdrawal)? I watched Bill Clinton this weekend not very subtly question Obama's patriotism, and the only thing I can give him credit for is that his heart didn't seem much in it. It must be painful for "the first black president" to stoop so low, and I feel his pain.
For me, the most telling part of Obama's speech was the part about his white grandmother, because it reminded us that while he is black, he is just as much white. In a way unusual among Americans -- and unique among prominent politicians -- he embodies the experiences of both groups, and he can relate to the perspectives, hopes, and fears of both. He sees the ways that both are right, and both are wrong, and he offers a way to bridge the gap.
Indeed, while by nature he is half-and-half, by nurture he is actually much more white, raised almost entirely by his white mother and grandparents, with the exception of his years in Indonesia in mostly white environments, finally attending mostly white colleges. Remember when the big question about Obama was whether he was "black enough"? Only as a fully-grown adult did he make the conscious choice to self-identify as a black man and immerse himself in the black community.
And now I think I'm starting to get it. There is some racism in the reaction to Obama, and some who would never admit to such will cling to any slender reed that gives a reason to vote against him. But the reaction from a greater number of whites, though it's visceral like racism, I think is more akin to the reaction of a spurned lover, the sour grapes reaction of one who, having taken the object of his desire to the most expensive restaurant, bought the most expensive bottle of wine, and put on the best display of his charms, is met with the response, "I'm not impressed."
Unlike the Steinbergs, Obama could never have "passed" for white. But he certainly could have been the smartest black guy in any room he chose to walk into. He could have remained "Barry" -- hell, stick an apostrophe in that last name and we'd all be buying him a Guinness. Countless others, with far fewer credentials, when offered the opportunity to enter a life of comfort and privilege, leapt at it, and I don't blame them.
But shown the lures of Wall Street, Obama chose those of Stoney Island Avenue on Chicago's grimy south side instead. That's an almost inexplicable choice for most white people to comprehend, so the decision that from almost anyone else would be seen as a laudable marker of self-sacrifice and character, from Obama is seen as a threat. It's a challenge to the system and all that it stands for, a challenge to all of our assumptions, a challenge to our own self-image of self-congratulatory, divinely-favored perfection.
And there's even more than that.
Almost 50 years ago, when Sammy Davis Jr. married a Swede, it got him disinvited to Kennedy's inaugural ball. They took the name "White House" seriously back then. Now Tiger Woods can do the same and no one cares. So you can't say we haven't made any progress.
But Obama married a black woman, and no "high yella" either, no Lena Horne, Vanessa Williams, or Halle Berry, no white man's fantasy of a black woman. But Michelle Obama seems as intelligent as she is beautiful, and like Obama's white mother, she's not afraid to stand on her own two feet. I bet that's what Barack fell in love with most of all, and how ironic. For centuries, the Great White Fear about black men was that they lusted after our women, and now we find ourselves threatened by one who apparently doesn't. I guess some black guys just can't win for losing.
So Obama's great audacity was not so much his hope but his decision to turn his back on a white world and choose to live in a much tougher black one, and even to join a black church, with a fiery pastor and a commitment to social justice. Of course Rev. Wright spoke out. He spoke out when he saw the jobs of his congregants being shipped to sweat shops overseas for the sake of an absentee landlord's quick buck. He spoke out when, for a generation, the world's wealthiest nation withdrew its resources from low-cost housing and schools for its least-advantaged citizens and put them into prisons instead. And he spoke out when insult was added to injury in the name of "welfare reform." He spoke out loudly, angrily, even shrilly. Who else was going to do it? Sean Hannity? Newt Gingrich? The whole sorry slew of Beltway pundits who now sit in his judgment?
It's obvious now that this election will be in large part about race as long as Obama's part of it. No matter that tent cities are springing up in Los Angeles, drawing desperate whites, blacks, and Hispanics alike, in the wake of the home mortgage crisis. No matter that these same people are being handed the bill to bail out the very Wall Street millionaires who ripped them off in the first place. No matter that the dollar is crumbling or that the ice sheets are melting. No matter that our kids are dying in the midst of the most naked land-and-resources-grab since we stole half of Mexico (which the anti-American Abraham Lincoln also denounced and then was relegated to the political wilderness for a decade. The more things change . . .). It's a testament to the power of race in America that it surmounts even all that.
It will be difficult for Obama, and even more so for his family, but that's the price of a public life. I'm sure those Wall Street partnerships are still yours for the asking if you want one, Barack.
But race it is, and I say, "Bring it on." I'm ready to tear every last, ugly, pus-filled, racial scab off this nation's body politic and see what lies beneath. Let's see what we're made of. Let's see who we really are as a people.
Gregg Gordon is a writer, musician, activist, and otherwise ne'er-do-well in Columbus, Ohio.
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little." - Edmund Burke
This was very good. Again and again we see the 'manufactured consent' when we are told that some ' other people' have a grudge against us and they send Obamas at us to get even. That issue about his pastor was a crock from the start. Who cares? We are at war, our people are dying, we have criminals in power- those are real problems. We should embrace a young, charismatic man who even by birth represents all of us.
by
Mark Sashine (44 articles, 19 quicklinks, 228 diaries, 3254 comments)
on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 12:59:56 PM
It seems to me that most important issues since our own revolution have been supported or denied 51% to 49% or nearly so. I have hopes that we come down on the right side of this one. Obama is perhaps the only hope we have, I will support him and trust that you do also.
by
Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 300 comments)
on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 at 2:57:25 PM
Nice article and interesting idea. Contrary to popular opinion, I've always thought that racist aren't always against interracial marriage. They're for it when the *Diasporan can have anyone on the planet. Then, it becomes a "pick me," phenomenon.
Even though I like your article, I can't help but call your attention to a disturbing line, namely, that Barack "could have been the smartest black guy in any room he chose to walk into." I'm sure you intended to highlight his intelligence, but in so doing, you diminish the intelligence of other black men. Your comment suggest that there are no black men who could be smarter than Barack. Finally, you limit the comparison to black men, inferring that men of other races can be smarter than Barack . . .
*Diasporan: A descendant of a survivor of the African diaspora.
by
Hargrove (7 articles, 2 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 9:30:15 AM
A fair point. No, I certainly don't mean to imply that Barack Obama is the smartest black person on the planet. That would be stupid. How could I know? It was a bit of hyperbole. I was merely noting the obvious that he's a very smart guy -- I would submit editorship of the Harvard Law Review as evidence -- and smarter than most people, black or white.
Thanks for your comment and for giving me the opportunity to clarify.
by
Gregg Gordon (25 articles, 44 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 183 comments)
on Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 11:10:19 AM
