Colorblind dream?
One reason Republicans heart Obama: He steers away from racial politics.
Peter Wehner writes, “Barack Obama is running a color-blind campaign.” The Washington Post reports, “Race and gender have only occasionally dominated the battle between Obama and Clinton. … Clinton has sought more than Obama to highlight the unique nature of her candidacy.” Obama supporters chanted “Race doesn’t matter” at his South Carolina victory party, echoing Obama when he said, “I did not travel around this state and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina.”
But can race not matter in a nation as deeply wounded as ours? Today the New York Times said that despite Obama’s desire to transcend racial tensions, “from Day 1 his bid for the presidency has been pulled into the thick of them.” Some African-Americans view his campaign with suspicion. Analysts point to his success with black voters and say that race still divides us. Some supporters – looking at the discrepancies between polls and Obama’s actual votes – suspect a silent racial bias among white voters.
Shelby Steele, Hoover fellow and author of A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win, explains the tension to PBS’ Bill Moyers. Steele says whites see Obama’s color-blind campaign and possible presidency as a sign of America’s redemption. (See this post from Rolling Stones’ Tim Dickinson.) Obama relieves white anxiety, but he also puts African-Americans on guard, Steele said: “Barack Obama is saying, … ‘I’m going to simply ask you to treat me as though I’m not black.’ … Well, it’s a nice bargain. But boy, does it make blacks nervous. Our blackness is our power.”
Obama admits he gets more African-American votes but still claims, “That doesn’t mean that the race is dividing along racial lines. You know, in places like Washington State we won across the board, from men, from women, from African-Americans, from whites and from Asians.”
Obama is gaining support among white voters in some states. Obama wins the white male vote and captures the white youth vote, too. Some African-Americans support Obama because they object to racial politics. One supporter told Newsday.com, “It’s not about black. It’s not about white. It’s not about gender. It’s about what’s right.”
Obama voter Kathleen Geier is pessimistic about Obama’s ability to transcend race: “Even if he is elected, in no way will that show that somehow we have ‘gotten beyond’ race.” Jeff Jacoby counters, “Is the colorblind idea nothing but a dream? It need not be.”













Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top30 Comments to “Colorblind dream?”
Some have suggested that if Obama triumphs he will owe nothing to the pigment-obsessed race hustlers/grievance meisters. They must fear this since they’ll lose any influence on the White House they might have with a guilt-plagued white liberal. As Obama himself has pointed out repeatedly, he racked up huge wins in areas of the USA not known for a high percentage of AfricanAmericans. He appealed to them as Americans and as nothing else.
Unlike the hustlers and grievance-meisters, he hopefully wont see a need to resort to rage or “We’re gonna get ours! Our time has come!” harangues. If he truly can transcend and render irrelevant the antiquated race obsessions of both blacks and whites, Obama will have helped Tiger, Venus and Serena make King’s dream of a performance or character-based meritocracy a reality in our lifetime.
Report comment to moderator
I also have a naive hope. Let’s assume that Hillary is defeated in the primaries and Obama secures the nomination and wins in the general as well. They say only a hard-core anticommunist Cold Warrior like Nixon could go to Beijing and toast Mao and Zhao En Lai.
To my thinking, only a fairly liberal black man will be able to call out the welfare system and demand its overhaul, reform or complete radical dismantlemt: “I’ve looked at the data and seen the spreadsheets but Ive seen things far more important than that. I’ve seen and I know what a fatherless family is. The welfare state has contributed to family breakdown, illegitimacy and absentee dads. It has unleashed a pathology in our communities, I’m here to drive a steak through its very heart.”
Sadly, I doubt we’ll ever hear thos words spoken by Barack H Obama
Report comment to moderator
The Washington Post writes; “Barack Obama is running a color-blind campaign.”
Just wait until he is opposing a Republican and the NAACP and others begin to make ads for him.
Report comment to moderator
One reason Republicans heart Obama: He steers away from racial politics.
What a load of horse manure. Behind the scenes, Obama’s campaign is based on and revolves around racial politics. Every appearance he makes, or doesn’t make, every speech he gives, is carefully arranged and analyzed to appeal to one racial group or another. Even his lapsing into “folksy” black dialect a few weeks ago when he spoke to some black group was planned ahead of time.
He has two sets of advisers for his campaign. The top tier is all white (read Jewish), and they call most of the shots, most of the big issues, and all of the ones that involve not letting Obama show too much of his blackness, for fear of scaring off white voters. The second string is all black, and they handle “the black vote”, etc, including placating blacks who feel like Obama is kowtowing to white people too much. When Obama announced his candidacy, he wanted his racist white hating preacher to give the invocation. His white advisers told him “no way Jose.” He wanted to go to Jena and “stand with the brothers” in that farce, and they told him to fuggedabout it.
He transcends race? He steers clear of racial politics? What a joke. How does WoW publish this stuff with a straight face? His segregated campaign managers deliberately steer him away from his racial politics for image sake, because they know the average American voter is a dolt and will fall for it, but behind the scenes it’s race, race, race.
http://snipurl.com/1zl0e
Report comment to moderator
How about a thread on Obama’s accomplishments and experience? Is that possible?
If he can move in the direction of a color-blind campaign, why can’t journalists?
Report comment to moderator
Night Train,
I think that WoW has simply framed an issue for discussion, selected various quotes to spark that discussion and posted it here so that you and others can comment on it or challenge it.
Thanks for chiming in. You made some good points worth noting.
I still think a better idea would be to try to generate a discussion of Obama’s experience, accomplishments, and promises.
Report comment to moderator
5,6
YES
Report comment to moderator
How does WOW publish this stuff with a straight face? Self-deception is a powerful thing.
Report comment to moderator
“What a load of horse manure. Behind the scenes, Obama’s campaign is based on and revolves around racial politics.”
Nail.
Head.
Night Train FTW! (Just to prove I’m an equal-opportunity agreer.
)
Report comment to moderator
Whatever happens behind the scenes, he’s doing a good job of looking like he’s transcending race. That’s getting him somewhere, which is a good sign. But, I don’t think we’ll have a black President until the day comes when we can say “black” without wondering “should I have said ‘African-American’?” Maybe I have it backwards; perhaps a black President is exactly what it would take to bring that about.
Joel Mark wants to discuss BHO’s accomplishments and experience. Well, he served in the Illinois legislature for a couple of terms. Then, he ran for the Senate virtually unopposed and won. Six months later, he decided to become the first serious black candidate for President.
There’s no way to discuss his accomplishments without bringing up race; a white man with his experience wouldn’t be qualified to introduce a major candidate, much less be one.
Report comment to moderator
“One reason Republicans heart Obama: He steers away from racial politics.”
No comment other than this expression “heart” really annoys me. It’s goofy. JMO.
Report comment to moderator
It’s not like Sen Obama can escape being black, the same way that others of us cannot escape the facts of our own background. Transcendence does not mean forgetfulness, but it does mean that he does not let this fact define him.
I would agree with StuBob[10], that this is at least the appearance of race blindness. I would only add that appearances can be very important. What is significant is that the Senator is among the most prominent on the left side of things to model this freedom from racial identity politics. In this he actually follows a path that John McWhorter, Stephen Carter, and Shelby Steele have already walked down.
At the bottom of Senator Obama’s rhetoric is a hope that many on the left and the right share: that who we are is not bound up or exhausted by the aspects of our identity, that there are greater things which bind us together. This view of a new, common identity that respects the accidents of a persons life is profoundly rooted in Scripture — this is far more a Christian view than that of the Enlightenment or post-Enlightenment.
Report comment to moderator
Harris wrote; “At the bottom of Senator Obama’s rhetoric is a hope that many on the left and the right share: that who we are is not bound up or exhausted by the aspects of our identity, that there are greater things which bind us together.”
Sorry Harris, but this sounds like classic Obama-speak. I suspect you mean well here and the context of the conversation clues me in a little as to your point. But I prefer clarity to statements like that.
And just what are the “greater things that bind us together?” That would be worth spelling out.
Harris wrote; “This view of a new, common identity that respects the accidents of a persons life is profoundly rooted in Scripture…”
When Paul said that he no longer regards people according to the flesh, perhaps he was ignoring the “accidents of a person’s life” more than respecting them. What the Bible respects are not so much the “accidents of a person’s life,” but the intentional aspects of life; the decisions we make, the mission we accept, the sins we confess, the promises we keep, and so on.
Report comment to moderator
Obama wants us all to be hopeful about being united and united about being hopeful (applause & cheers).
Obama is the polar opposite of John F. Kennedy, who said “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.”
Every speech I have heard from Obama, when he gets past the circular rhetoric about hope, change and unity, basically tells listeners to ask what their government can do for them.
Report comment to moderator
That’s real nice, StuBob. Of course, it’s pure hallucination, but it’s still real nice. If a white GOP candidate belonged to a “White-Centric” church whose preacher is a pal of David Duke and had given Duke a Lifetime Achievement award, I’m sure you’d be saying that he, too, “modeling freedom from racial identity politics”, wouldn’t you? Sure you would.
Report comment to moderator
@ Night Train (#4)
Mind telling us where you got those facts?
Report comment to moderator
NT — That’s Harris you’re quoting. I was pretty much agreeing with you, although I’m a little less pessimistic.
Davidsess — Google “Rev. Jeremiah Wright.” Obama’s pastor is a liability, to say the least.
Report comment to moderator
So in other words, by all appearances Obama’s campaign steers clear of racial politics, but in reality he’s just trying to maintain a non-racial image.
And how is that any different than steering clear of racial politics?
If a candidate cares about not being perceived as “the black candidate,” he would do well to listen to savvy political advisers that keep him from events that would get him painted that way in the news media. If your standard for a nonracial campaign is that Obama not be black, of course it’s impossible. The best you can ask is that he not make his blackness a plank in his platform. And he has done that remarkably well. You want to fault him because he’s done it intentionally?
Report comment to moderator
Funny. JFK’s family doesn’t think so. And I bet they knew him better than you.
Report comment to moderator
Just a note about Jeremiah Wright. If you read the New York Times article linked, it sheds more light on Obama’s relationship with him and Wright’s relationship to the campaign. Obama decided not to put Wright on the program for the campaign announcement because “the attention would drag the pastor into a negative spotlight and might distract from efforts to portray the senator as a candidate capable of unifying the country.”
Report comment to moderator
We need to evaluate Obama on his positions. In 2007, according to The National Journal Ratings, he had the most liberal Senate rating with 95.2 compared to Hillary Clinton’s raring of 86 which placed her at 16th,
Another point about Obama is that in two Illinois terms he voted “present” on about 130 occasions, which is an extraordinarily high number for such votes.
This “Colorblind Dream” issue is a distraction from the real point that Obama is a died in the wool liberal with rather skimpy experience to qualify for the presidency. His promise of bringing “change” to Washington is rhetorical froth, lacking in any clear substance.
Report comment to moderator
Mind telling us where you got those facts?
Click the link at the bottom of my post.
NT — That’s Harris you’re quoting. I was pretty much agreeing with you, although I’m a little less pessimistic.
Sorry, Stubob. I really need to learn how to read.
So in other words, by all appearances Obama’s campaign steers clear of racial politics, but in reality he’s just trying to maintain a non-racial image. And how is that any different than steering clear of racial politics?
The point is the image is the opposite of the reality that goes on behind the scenes. A man who eschews racial politics would never attend a church pastored by the racist white-hating Wright, let alone call him a hero and one of his best friends and principal advisers, let alone want him to pray at his campaign kickoff. A man who steers clear of racial politics wouldn’t have wanted to go to Jena to rabble rouse with Jesse and Al. It’s his campaign managers that put the kibosh on the Wright appearance and the trip to Jena. Obama doesn’t steer clear of racial politics; his controllers steer him away from his racial politics in order to cover up his real views and to paint him as a man who doesn’t play racial politics. Playing racial politics behind the scenes in order to convey a public image of not playing racial politics is still playing racial politics.
Obama decided not to put Wright on the program for the campaign announcement because “the attention would drag the pastor into a negative spotlight and might distract from efforts to portray the senator as a candidate capable of unifying the country.”
Well, yes, Alisa. If Mike Huckabee attended a proudly “White-Centric” church pastored by a ranting racist who not only pals around with David Duke, but had given him a Lifetime Achievement award, and if Huckabee had asked this “pastor” to pray at his campaign kickoff, it would certainly “distract from efforts to portray Huckabee as a candidate capable of unifying the country”, don’t you think? Obama didn’t exactly “decide not to put Wright on the program”. He was ordered not to, against his wishes, by his campaign managers. The same with Jena. He wanted to go down there and establish some street cred among blacks, many of whom at the time didn’t regard him as a “real” black man. But his controllers told him it would be political suicide because it would turn whites off, and so he didn’t go.
Report comment to moderator
Eventually Obama will have to campaign with something other than “hope” and “change” 9such as what exactly it is he hopes to change).
I do respect him for minimizing the race angle in his campaigning. I like his charisma. I just don’t like hispolicitac record – he is to the far left of the Democratic end of the spectrum.
Report comment to moderator
NT:
Your argument then is that Obama is a closet racist who is well managed by his advisers to appear beyond race.
I have seen no evidence of that in his speeches or personal appearances, and the only real evidence you have of it is is a weak guilt by association argument.
Obama should be judged on his own ideas and positions, not on those of his pastor. I’d say the same of Huckabee and Romney.
And even if Obama wanted to have his pastor speak for him or go to Jena (neither of which mark him as a racist in my book: Jena was popularly misunderstood as a civil rights crisis, so it’s not surprising he would share that popular misconception), you cannot know that Obama was “forced” to back down by his “handlers” rather than chose to heed his advisors. Since you cannot possibly know, your perspective seems like an willfully negative view that calls your own fairness on the matter into question.
Report comment to moderator
Obama should be judged on his own ideas and positions, not on those of his pastor. I’d say the same of Huckabee and Romney.
Oh, baloney. You would not, and we all know it. If Huckabee belonged to a “proudly White-Centric” church pastored by a man who loves David Duke and gives him awards, and if Huckabee called this pastor a close friend, an inspiration, and his hero, you most certainly would not be saying that. Almost everyone on here would be denouncing MH, as would you. The media frenzy would be non stop until he quit the race. Even quitting the church wouldn’t satisfy people. He’d have to drop out of politics for ever. But because Obama’s black, the fact that his hero and inspiration is a white hating racist pal of Farrakhan’s, and the fact that he freely choses to attend the racist church pastored by this guy, is “weak guilt by association”.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
People are such hypocrites when it comes to race, and they’ll say the craziest things when pressed on they hypocrisy. “I’d say the very same thing if it were Mike Huckabee and David Duke.”
Right.
Report comment to moderator
I wrote; “Obama is the polar opposite of John F. Kennedy, who said ‘Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.’”
I continued; “Every speech I have heard from Obama, when he gets past the circular rhetoric about hope, change and unity, basically tells listeners to ask what their government can do for them.”
JJF responded, “Funny. JFK’s family doesn’t think so. And I bet they knew him better than you.”
What they “think” about Obama and JFK does not alter anything I said, nor does it alter the huge difference between them that I pointed out. I think that a strong ideological connection between JFK and Obama is off base and I stated why (above). I also think the connection the Kennedy family is making is more an emotional one than a substantive one. It’s my opinion, and I gave a reason for it.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train, 25,
You are on to something there.
Report comment to moderator
Victor Davis Hanson in an NRO piece, The Better Ticket?, today makes a salient point:
…moderates and independents are surprised that the non-race candidate has been winning overwhelming block racial support. One might have expected Obama, in a race against the liberal wife of the first ‘black’ President to garner 50 percent or 60 percent of the African-American vote, but not 80 percent. That disparity might in itself prompt a like counter-reaction among whites, Latinos, and Asians that legitimizes voters taking into consideration race — as Hillary’s surrogate Gov. Rendell, in perfect Clintonian fashion, has just “suggested.”
i.e. Given the realities of racial politics there could well be a backlash among moderates and independents should they feel that they are being railroaded by a candidate who is subtly playing the race card.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner in #2: “…I’m here to drive a steak through its very heart.”
I think that should be “stake.” I don’t know about you, but I eat steaks.
Report comment to moderator
I’m glad I grew up in western Washington state. I never really had any racial tension… maybe ’cause there aren’t a whole lot of “blacks” there compared to other states. But still, it didn’t seem like anybody cared. Oh, and two of my sisters are adopted from Liberia, so I have a mixed-descent family. I’m proud of that, really. I hope that’s not a sin.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!