FISA + Obama • Jackson + Obama • that New Yorker cover • Al Gore steps it up

Not much time for blogging these days. Embarrassing since Ernest Hardy, whose laptop just died-

(a moment of silence for the importance of the loss of that appendage-like tool for any freelance writer).

-has still managed to keep posting. But he's a professional writer, while I am something of a different animal.

In the meantime, the world keeps turning and events and moments keep occurring that I want to jot down to consider later; with url links etc. So this little stream-of-consciousness ditty will be a placeholder for those future considerations. Bear with me.


Obama & FISA ("I beg your pardon, I never promised you a rose garden...")
Last week, before I could even wrap my head around it, the FISA bill passed, AND Barack Obama voted for it. Yikes. I was, well, not exactly comforted, but rendered somewhat less despairingly flummoxed by an article cited by Eileen, a J'sTheater reader. On July 10th, the New York Times published Op-Ed columnist Gail Collins' "The Audacity of Listening," wherein Collins remind us that Obama never promised us a rose garden of radical change and accountability, instead what he offered was the building of a "new consensus" which actually means a new form of political compromise. It's just that the new form of compromising ("you've got to give a little...") looks a lot like the old form we've been (allowed ourselves to be?) subjected to. Another point Collins makes:

"...if you look at the political fights he’s [Obama] picked throughout his political career, the main theme is not any ideology. It’s that he hates stupidity. “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war,” he said in 2002 in his big speech against the invasion of Iraq. He did not, you will notice, say he was against unilateral military action or pre-emptive attacks or nation-building. He was antidumb."

Jesse Jackson... (he what?!...where?!)
Then while I was busy woodshedding away, the Rev. Jesse Jackson decided to go on Fox News. As I said to my friend Dr. P when we conversed about this over the phone, 'What?! He went on Fox News! People, Fox News is not a friend to black people. Didn't the Rev. Wright conflama teach people anything?' Black + FoxNews = Unfair/Underhanded Coverage. Don't try to be the exception to the rule. Fortunately, Jackson wisely declined Bill O'Reilly's "invitation" to appear on his show to explain his comments.

Really, have we learned nothing from the Clinton campaign and Brian Springer's documentary Spin (1995)? Springer recorded satellite feeds of news outlets for a full year and then edited into a documentary which showed what people said when the cameras weren't broadcasting signal to the networks, but the feed was still rolling for satellite capture. In all fairness, this film never got the major release it deserved. If it had, its current standing would be on par with the best of Michael Moore's work and Errol Morris' The Fog of War (2003). Among its various illuminating lessons on media communications, Spin demonstrated how Clinton learned early on that the camera never stopped rolling. He was always campaigning, even while getting a make-up retouch during commercial or station breaks.

Also, fortunately, former Time columnist Jack White penned a response to the Jesse Jackson response to the (in some quarters) controversial Obama Father's Day speech which I still haven't heard. On July 10th, The Root published White's "When the Man Is One of Us" along with Temple University professor Marc Lamont Hill's "Defending Jesse Jackson... Kinda" on July 17th. White's piece makes the following point about the Obama candidacy and the upending of certain expectations around marginalization and race that some African Americans may not have even know we have:

"We haven't really been in a place this confusing since 1954, when the NAACP's crusade against segregation culminated in the Brown vs. Board decision and the walls came tumbling down. It's fair to say that we were so focused on winning that fight that we weren't prepared for the victory or its aftermath. We've spent nearly 60 years since then trying to figure out what kind of relationship we want to have with America and with each other. For the most part, we, like Jackson Sr., have seen ourselves as outsiders battling for justice and a seat at the table. Our default has been to protest. And while that mindset has served us well, it has, in a flash, been made damn near obsolete by the prospect, even the likelihood, that one of us may soon become the most powerful man in the world. If that happens, how can we seriously argue that we're being held back by anything but the limits we place on ourselves? "That, it seems to me, accounts in part for the frustration some of us are feeling by what we interpret as Obama's move to the center [the FISA vote, etc.]. We are simply not accustomed to one of our own playing real, power politics..."

I'm not sure I agree with this last point. I think many of us have seen power politics being played by African American politicians--just not inhabiting the position of a presumed presidential candidate. White goes on to discuss the Obama Father's Day speech and what he considers a growing "new consensus that places more emphasis on a public discussion of personal responsibility than on protest, on publicly delving into our own shortcomings and dysfunctional behavior." A consensus among who I'm not sure: Obama and Bill Cosby?


The New Yorker... (rueful head shake)
But still I say we're fortunate to have the Jack White comments to brace us, because right around the corner comes The New Yorker July 21st issue cover. This proves that White could have included not just African Americans in his article's tagline statement: "[Jackson's] latest gaffe shows how none of us is really ready for this moment."

In between moments of looking at various emails landing in my inbox featuring the cover, outraged comments about the cover, a link to the full size JPEG of the cover... I sat aghast, literally speechless, thinking where's Mark Twain when you need him? Or at least hadn't the New Yorker realized that some/many people 100 years later still don't get Twain's racial satire--but they really expected people browsing a news kiosk for 5 minutes to get this New Yorker cover? Plus if they really wanted to satirize the media misinformation why don't the actual sources of said misinformation of the Obama's appear central in the satire? However, I had the presence of mind to visit writer Tayari Jones' blog which always offers grace, joy, incisiveness, and the real served up in equal portions. This day was no different as Jones had linked to comments by writer Victor LaValle (whose writing I love), published by his friend fellow writer Maud Newton on her blog. LaValle (bless him), under the title "The New Yorker cracks up," lays it out, and goes where Jack White didn't. White liberals have lost it. While people have worried about whether or not the white folks in middle America would vote for Obama, they should have been worried about their left-leaning friends. As Lavalle does the negotiated read (thanks Stuart Hall) on the cover, the following points are made:

"The magazine has defended itself, saying this picture is meant as satire, but I’m not quite sure who the joke is on. Is the joke on Michelle and Barack? No. They say the joke is about the fears and anxieties that exist about Barack and Michelle in the White House. But normally this kind of picture might also include the true subject of the satire, maybe a sleeping figure in the lower right hand corner who represents these fearful masses. Maybe George Bush or Rush Limbaugh. Or, unfortunately, even Jesse Jackson. The image of the Obamas would be inside those fluffy lines that indicate a dream. "But if nothing like that is in the picture whose nightmare could this be?"

Whose indeed?

The most pointed insights LaValle reserves for the Older White Liberals aka OWLs, and their conflicting instincts towards "rational liberalism and irrational fear" who at dinner parties that some of his white friends have been at (and where no blacks were present) question Obama as presidential material. But not on position on specific issues, or his voting record, or his experience, but with the intangible assessment, “I don’t know what it is, but there’s just something about him that I can’t get behind.” LaValle characterizes these OWLs as "over 50, generally well-off and liberal to a fault." Basically The New Yorker's core readership, who as it turns out might yet... vote for McCain???

These are strange days indeed.


Al Gore's 10 year Plan
On the upside, Al Gore is concerned about the survival of the nation, environmental stability, and global accountability and he's pledging to do even more about it. He's joined We Can Solve It, and his video address is shooting around the internet, along with a petition demanding "America must commit to producing 100 percent of our electricity from renewable energy and other clean sources within 10 years."

Yes, I signed it. A big selling point for me was Gore's insistence that coal miners should not be displaced by this policy change, and should be first in line for the new jobs created by a new solar energy focus. Also, his memorable tagline "we should be taxed on what we burn, not what we earn" regarding a reduction in income tax that would be shifted to a fossil fuel tax equivalent to the cost of environmental damage caused by fossil fuels. Right On.

If you want to find out more about this effort and see/hear Gore's speech check this We Can Solve It webpage.


Endnote:
• FoxNews video of the Jackson comments during the broadcast break (brought to you by the Coal Industry: Go Global Warming!) on Fox's Talking POINTS. Bill O'Reilly's subsequent Talking Points editorialize about how "unlike what Jackson himself often does" FoxNews won't be speculating as to the motivation behind Jackson's comments, "or describe his comments in any pejorative way," while both he and the scrolling intertitles next to him (with headers like "OBAMA BASHING" speculate as to Jackson's motivations (e.g. "now some believe that there's a rivalry between the two men, but we've seen no evidence of that other than [pregnant pause] , what you've just heard." ) And all of this gets framed as Rev. Jackson "having some negative comments about Senator Obama's recent support of faith-based based charities operating with government funds." Which is certainly off-point from Jackson's comments but this fudging allows FoxNews to paint Jackson as against a popular, but nonetheless-charged Bush/Reagan policy (Uh hello, separation of church and state), and take a solid dig at his standing as "a man of faith."
• Barack Obama's Father's Day Speech text, courtesy of The Huffington Post.
• Al Gore speech video from CNN.

The minister-candidate double standard

New York Times Op-Ed columnist Frank Rich has managed to provide some larger context for the controversy surrounding Barack Obama and Reverend Jeremiah Wright, in today's column "The All-White Elephant in the Room." His column questions the double standard of scrutiny experienced by Obama regarding his relationship with Rev, Wright versus that of white Republican current and resigned presidential candidates John McCain, Mike Huckabee, and Rudy Guiliani to their religious leader associates and endorsers. Here's an excerpt which discusses one of various YouTube videos of Rev. John Hagee, who has endorsed John McCain, after McCain sought out the minister's endorsement:

...white televangelist Rev. John Hagee, lecturing in front of an enormous diorama. Wielding a pointer, he pokes at the image of a woman with Pamela Anderson-sized breasts, her hand raising a golden chalice. The woman is “the Great Whore,” Mr. Hagee explains, and she is drinking “the blood of the Jewish people.” That’s because the Great Whore represents “the Roman Church,” which, in his view, has thirsted for Jewish blood throughout history, from the Crusades to the Holocaust.

Mr. Hagee is not a fringe kook but the pastor of a Texas megachurch. On Feb. 27, he stood with John McCain and endorsed him over the religious conservatives’ favorite, Mike Huckabee, who was then still in the race.

Are we really to believe that neither Mr. McCain nor his camp knew anything then about Mr. Hagee’s views? This particular YouTube video — far from the only one — was posted on Jan. 1, nearly two months before the Hagee-McCain press conference. Mr. Hagee appears on multiple religious networks, including twice daily on the largest, Trinity Broadcasting, which reaches 75 million homes. Any 12-year-old with a laptop could have vetted this preacher in 30 seconds, tops.

Is there more? Yes there is, and none of it is getting the level of playback currently being experienced by Wright's original decontextualized sound bytes, or apparently the new ones after his perhaps ill-advised attempt to address the press on their terms (and in their own house) regarding their characterization of him to date.

Endnote:
• YouTube "John Hagee compares Roman [Catholic] Church to Hitler"
• NYT reporting on Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson's televised comments blaming 9/11 attacks on the United States having become "a nation of abortion, homosexuality, secular schools and courts, and the American Civil Liberties Union."
• YouTube "Falwell and Robertson on The 700 Club after 9/11"
• Media Matters for America article "Will MSNBC devote as much coverage to McCain's embrace of Hagee's support as it did to Obama's rejection of Farrakhan?" which provides a number of instances of hate-mongering remarks from Hagee.

Update: With thanks to New Black Man ("A Hand Clap of Praise for Bill Moyers") Bill Moyers' May 2, 2008 essay on Reverend Wright after his conversation with the minister last week on PBS.

What a little black girl knows...

I know this photo has been making it's way around the 'net. My friend Q said she had already gotten it four times before I forwarded it to her. But I have to post it here; otherwise I know I'll want it for something later and then will have to spend hours searching for it online. As I wrote to some folks to whom I forwarded it: I know it's wrong to smile at this straight-on read (poor Hillary, but I guess this little black girl wasn't buying whatever Sen. Clinton was selling ). But really, can you blame me...?

The information I still don't have is 1) a credit for this photo, 2) knowledge of where and when it was taken, and 3) a name for the little girl.

Recently, I was talking to some folks about the Obama-Rev. Wright situation, but more to the point about the primarily style, but-brilliant, candidate (Obama) versus the primarily substance (but what kind of substance?) candidate (Clinton), implied race-baiting (Clintons) unfortunate mis-stepping (Obama), scary resentment for having forsaken her own political career for her philandering charismatic husband (HC), and thank goodness for a solid (and better?) half (BO re: Michelle Obama). All of which had us throwing up our hands and wondering what's next for the country. I want to believe in Obama's presidential leadership abilities as much as the next audaciously hopeful citizen, but wish he had more experience, and a more definitive political presence. I'm disappointed too that the dynamics between Clinton and Obama have gotten so intransigently negative in the past few months. Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee (central organization of the national Democratic Party) who claims to have been attempting to influence the tenor of their responses to each other behind the scenes finally gave up and made a public statement about the potentially negative impact of their campaign rhetoric on the Democratic party as a whole. His concern being the larger consequences that could play out down the line, no matter which one of them gains the party's nomination. We'll all find out soon.

Barack Obama Addresses Questions of Race & Rev. Jeremiah Wright in Philadelphia March 18, 2008

For the archives:
Interactive video and transcript of the Illinois Senator and Democratic Presidential Candidate's speech from the New York Times.









Endnote I:
The response of Rev. John H. Thomas, General Minister and President of the United Church of Christ, the religious denomination to which Senator Obama and Rev. Jeremiah Wright belong, to the recent controversy over some statements made by Wright's as pastor of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, Sen. Obama's home church can be read here, along with responses from some UCC members to both Thomas and Wright.

Endnote II:
Video of an address by Rev. John H. Thomas honoring Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright's ministry at Trinity UCC on Sunday, February 24, 2008. This video also appears at the end of the above-linked statement by Rev. Thomas on the UCC website.



Endnote III:
As has been pointed out elsewhere, and in Rev. Thomas's comments the United Church of Christ is a predominantly white religious organization and Trinity is one of the few predominantly African American churches among its membership. It is also reported to be the UCC's largest congregation.

Endnote IV:
Rod 2.0 notes the ill-advised release of the 1998 photo of Bill Clinton and Rev. Wright to the media by the Obama campaign, and links to the NYT response commentary by Kate Philips. This is disappointing given Obama's words about conceding to a politics of division:

"For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism...We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she’s playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we’ll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, 'Not this time.'"

Faith is not a facile achievement, but I definitely want to see a candidate who can hold to a committed faith in her/his own beliefs, particularly the ones to which he/she asks me to ascribe and share.

Endnote V:
Fox News and ABC News soundbyte excising of selected sermons by Rev. Wright. Again for the archives, and not because I support the soundbyte analysis methodology (30 seconds or less from a likely 30-40 minute sermon) engaged by these media outlets and others.

Endnote VI:
From Kalamu Ya Salaam's e-drum, Jon Stewart's post-Obama speech commentary on the Daily Show (to quote Ya Salaam: "watch the whole thing.")

May we each know "a more perfect union" in our respective lifetimes.

I Just Can't Help It...

Yep, I'm feeling that righteous yet pragmatic hope. Much of it due to Michelle Obama, but that's fine by me--clearly Barack Obama has the wisdom to listen to her since a recent Wall Street Journal article quoted him as saying: "She's too smart to run. It is true my wife is smarter, better looking. She's a little meaner than I am." (I'd like to think he was referring to her sarcastic humor, not a generally mean disposition). Admittedly, I was having some trouble with his waffling, and the whole campaigning with black southern homophobes (OK, still have a problem with that) before she took a more prominent role in the election. So just for the ease of access I'm putting will.i.am's "Yes We Can" Obama song below. Definitely an improvement over his "I Got It From My Mama" celebration of female intergenerational inheritance which focused exclusively on corporeal aspects of legacy. Too bad he wasn't talking about those various women's integrity, intelligence, creativity, leadership skills, athleticism, and/or artistry, to which a self-assured and sensual voice (instead of the eternally girlishly coy one in the song) could respond: "I got it from my mama." Would have been a great Camille Yarborough moment--but that's another conversation.

Speaking of other conversations. I was reading Maureen Dowd's February 6th New York Times column, "Darkness and Light." I've been appreciating Dowd's perspective on this election, and the Clinton force that is "Billary" as she's termed the election campaign partnership of Bill and Hillary, as well as the complex gender and partnership dynamics at play with any consideration of Hillary Clinton as president elect. But this column really broke down some key aspects of Hillary Clinton's relationship to power, and what may be at stake for nation in staying with the old versus reaching for the "audacity of hope." At then end of the column Dowd also addresses what Obama will have to do to prove he's ready to handle the Republican attack machine. Below a couple of striking quotes from Dowd:

"Hillary Clinton denounced Dick Cheney as Darth Vader, but she did not absorb the ultimate lesson of the destructive vice president:

"Don’t become so paranoid that you let yourself be overwhelmed by a dark vision...."

And later in the column she nails the key dilemma, and then compels questioning of what the true nature of that dilemma is:

"Better the devil you know than the diffident debutante you don’t. Better to go with the Clintons, with all their dysfunction and chaos — the same kind that fueled the Republican hate machine — than to risk the chance that Obama would be mauled like a chew toy in the general election. Better to blow off all the inspiration and the young voters, the independents and the Republicans that Obama is attracting than to take a chance on something as ephemeral as hope. Now that’s Cheney-level paranoia."

You can read the entire column "Darkness and Light," here.