I watched Colin Powell's assessment of the presidential race on Meet the Press the other day with my wife and her uncle in D.C. As soon as he was done, her uncle made similar comments to Side Bar. So that was good.
In the days after, conservatives like Joe Scarborough and I'm sure many others who I don't listen to like O'Reilly and Limbaugh have been saying things like, "Well, of course Colin Powell endorsed Obama. They're both black."
Umm... I'm guessing they either (a) didn't actually listen to Colin Powell speak (unlikely), or (b) listened and felt like Colin Powell was being disingenuous. Either way... where is the outrage directed towards "respected" talking heads not only suggesting this, but saying it outright?
Compare this with the Don Imus outrage. Don Imus, a comedian, was attempting to use a colloquialism to be goofy and came off as racially insensitive, which he was and should arguably be castigated for, which he more than was. He referred to the "nappy heads" of the Rutgers women and called them "hoes", which is obviously silly as he has no idea if infact they are hoes or not. The general tone of what he was saying was demeaning, as these women were not trying to be public figured, nor are they asking to be commented on for their appearance and sexuality, and Imus thrusted them into the spotlight unfairly.
Now, here we have people saying that Colin Powell cannot make an unbiased statement about Barack Obama because somehow, despite his remarkable government experience and intellect, despite everything he articulately just stated after being given an uninterrupted half-hour on network TV to do so because his opinion is respected that highly, he is somehow swayed by the fact that both he and Obama have dark skin and this renders him incapable of being objective. Or, worse, that black people aren't ever really honest and will blindly stick up for another black person despite any other possible factors? Either way, it states quite clearly that, by implication, if Colin Powell, a Republican and Bush-Cheney supporter, cannot be trusted to put his blackness aside and be objective about this, why can we trust any black people with any decisions where there might be other black people involved? They are all lemmings who have no intellect, apparently, and can't wait to collaborate with other black people to stick it to the white man or something.
I don't understand why people aren't outraged by this. Personally, I think I'd be more upset about being told I'm a moron because I'm black, and that I shouldn't be trusted with a vote, than if some goofy dumbass comedian called some basketball players "nappy headed hoes". Am I overreacting?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
You know, generally when you write slamming someone for being racist, it's good form to include a link so people can read the comments and decide for themselves.
I found the Limbaugh comment you're referring to here.
"Secretary Powell says his endorsement is not about race," Limbaugh wrote in an e-mail. "OK, fine. I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed. I'll let you know what I come up with."
So now that we have the meat of the comment you're trashing, would you like to answer the question, rather than just bash your strawman? Has the Republican Colin Powell ever endorsed any other inexperienced and very liberal candidates for high office? I don't believe he ever has, and those types of candidates aren't in line with the beliefs Powell has stated in the past. So why Obama? There must be a reason...
Maybe you could enlighten us with your thoughts on that in a post rather than just writing to smear people as racist without even bothering to quote them properly? Where did you learn your journalism, the New York Times? ;)
For the record, I wasn't referencing that Limbaugh comment per se. I wrote "I'm sure many others who I don't listen to like O'Reilly and Limbaugh have been saying things like..." My blog post was responding viscerally to Joe Scarborough literally saying, "Of course he endorsed Obama, he's black," and to comments I've heard around in my life these past couple of days.
Regarding the reason that Powell "really" endorsed Obama... did you listen to what he actually said? If not, watch the clip. He spent about 10 minutes straight giving his reasons as articulately, thoroughly, and definitively as anybody from either side has given his their reasons for anything. I think he could (and did) give his reasons better than I can.
It's dangerous to try to guess people's motives and always assume that they are disingenuous. Can we assume that Lieberman must be full of shit to endorse McCain, and that there is some hidden, ulterior motive, because he was Gore's vice president? We listen to his reasons and objectively evaluate those reasons. I think we owe Colin Powell the same courtesy.
The fact that Powell has never made such an endorsement before speaks volumes and he should be praised for it. This should add more weight to the endorsement rather than discount it. Regarding your request for including the "meat of the comment" that you mentioned, here is a follow up to the quote that you posted, to put it in proper context:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0w_w7qG-C8
Here you hear Rush Limbaugh clarifying HIS OWN COMMENTS and shouting "It is totally about race." You then hear Chris Matthews talking about the dangers of guessing people's motives (better than I am here).
Also, what about all of the white Republicans, such as Christopher Buckley and Scott McClelland, who have never endorsed a Democrat before, but are now endorsing Obama? The Chicago Tribune has never endorsed a Democrat in about 150 years until now. Is that because he's black? Saying that Colin Powell is endorsing Barack because he's black is just the right's way to discredit a thoughtful, genuine and important endorsement. They are probably worried that this may cost them a couple of percentage points.
It's a giant leap to assume that somebody making a change in their thinking means that there must be some ulterior motive. That implies that we are static beings incapable of change or progress, and I hope that this is not true.
But would Obama be where he is right now if not for his race?
Would a white senator with as little experience as Obama has even be mentioned as a possible Presidential contender? Would any white senator as liberal as Obama is, no matter how experienced, be in this position?
It's impossible to deny that much of Obama's success is due to his race. Pointing this out doesn't make one a racist.
Where would Obama be if it weren't for his race, you ask? Probably about 5 - 10 percentage points HIGHER than he is right now!
Why? Read my recent blog post here and see if these ideas resonate with you at all. Many racist people, especially in middle America, haven't gotten beyond Barack's appearance/name, and won't actually listen to him, just as many sentimental people will see John McCain as a war hero and lean that way without listening to what him.
And no, it is not racist to opine that somebody's success can be attributed to their race and not of their own merit. It is racist, however, to state that Colin Powell is either lying because of his race, or too racially biased to make an objective decision since he is a black man.
Post a Comment