It's the politics, stupid! Voters don't want a lecture on race

jackson_dem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-13-08 07:43 PM
Original message

It's the politics, stupid! Voters don't want a lecture on race

I've been reading the replies to this issue from Obama supporters. I must begin by saying whatever happened to "unity" and a "post-racial" politics? Blaming one race isn't unifying and it sure as hell isn't "post-racial". Now on to the meat of the matter. Wright, while undeniably a racist, makes some legitimate points. That doesn't fucking matter. Do you think the rethugs are going to give the context of his remarks (remember "I voted for it before I voted against it"? Those folks are now going to give context?)? The only way to explain it is by giving a lecture on race relations. Are you kidding me? Are you serious? You think voters are going to sit there and listen to a lecture on race relations (I suppose Obama will channel Perot and buy infomercials because you aren't going to fit it all in during a 5 minute interview on CNN!)? Moreover, while it is true blacks, and minorities in general (you know, like GLBT folks who have been told to "get over it" and Latinos and Asians who have been tarred as racist by supporters of one candidate.) have suffered greatly in our history. Even today much discrimination exists (remember the "white name/black name" study from a couple years ago?). None of it is going to help Obama. Barack Obama. He is the last minority in the country who can use that as a defense. Minorities have suffered; Barack Obama has lived a charmed life that practically anyone, certainly anyone in politics aside from Bill Clinton (since he has been a successful two-term president), would love to trade with. Even Bush. If he were Obama at least he would be remembered in the history books for one good thing, breaking the racial ceiling to the White House. Let's recap Obama's life since his teen years (yes he was once poor but go ask John Edwards how that works with the media and voters...): prep school, Columbia, Harvard Law, marries a Harvard lawyer who becomes a wealthy executive, gets elected to the Illinois legislature, elected to the U.S. Senate thanks to two scandals, becomes a millionaire, best-selling author, Grammy winner, celebrity, and now front-runner to become president. Even if he loses he has had a hell of a life. Trying to portray Obama as somehow being a victim just isn't going to fly with voters, all of whom would give anything to be in Obama's position. Think about it. Think about how things play politically. Let's say this defense is used. You have a woman on welfare hearing some rich politician or rich non-politician surrogate (Axlerod) talking about how much Obama has suffered. What do you think the reaction of the woman on welfare, the man who is losing his job because General Motors shipped it to China, the senior citizen who looks back at his long life and sees not a happy skipping life of audacious hope but of heartbreak after heartbreak will be? That defense will fucking backfire on Obama.

Obama is running largely on his judgment. This is a big case of terrible judgment. What other politician goes to a church with a racist pastor? Even the rethugs aren't reckless enough to do that. The problem for Obama is you can't erase 20 years of assocation with this guy, who is not some mere crony in a national campaign. He is Obama's mentor, spiritual leader, and pastor. This goes to the heart of who Obama is, especially in the light what Obama himself has said about how important religion is to him (there is that judgment again: he basically invited an investigation into his church by running the most religious Democratic campaign since Carter).

This will be a huge problem in the general election. Let's put aside discussion of who started the racial flap regarding the Clintons for the moment. The bottom line is they were severely damaged by it. They had a three decade long record of staunchly fighting for equality. Yet they, respectively, went from leading with black voters and being a revered president who was affectionately called the first black president to 10-15% black support. That happened to two folks with long records and one who was in the White House for eight years and positively affected the lives of almost every American (whether you like to admit it or not the Clinton years were a great time for America). Now imagine what will happen to a guy with no record. I doubt he would fall to 10-15% white support but if the attack gets anywhere, which judging the history of racial swiftboating, suggests it will he is done. Whites are three out of four voters. Lose even 10% of them and that means 7.5% of the vote is gone in one fell swoop.

He is half white. He can cite this as an obvious defense. How can he be racist against himself and his mother and grandparents? Too bad this will only have a limited effect. I haven't seen any articles saying he is going to be both the first black president and the 44th white president. He has run as a black person, not a biracial one, and is seen as such. He didn't take the Tiger Woods route on his background and give them all an equal place. Nor should he be attacked for this. As he once said, when he tries to get a cab he is considered black. Still, as far as the politics of this go he would have had a lot stronger hand if had taken the Tiger Woods approach. How many people even know his mother was white?

To vote against Obama solely because of Wright would be a mistake; to ignore it altogether when deciding to vote for him would be equally as bad. Obama has many general election liabilities that have not really been tested and Wright ranks right up there on that list.