Posts Tagged ‘Sarah Palin’

Very interesting thread happening over at Eugene Cho’s blog about the controversial Newsweek cover featuring Sarah Palin. I even shared my two cents over there. I’m not a huge Palin fan, but I do question Newsweek’s judgment in using that image. Would love to hear what you think.


Read Full Post »

National Public Radio’s fascinating roundtable on race and the presidential election continued today with a segment on Morning Edition and another on All Things Considered. This is a reconvening of the diverse panel of black, Latino, Asian, and white voters from York, Pennsylvania. Their candid discussion is worth your time.

A few questions occurred to me as I listened to this morning’s segment that I’d love to hear you interact on:

  • What does the McCain/Palin slogan “Country First” suggest to you?
  • Who is Joe Six-Pack?
  • When Sarah Palin says things like, “[Obama] is not a man who sees America as you and I see America. We see America as a force for good in this world,” what does she mean by “we”?
  • Does Barack Obama include pictures of his white grandparents in his political ads as a way to reassure white voters?
  • Would an African American with darker skin have gotten as far as Obama has in a presidential race?
  • What does it really mean to be patriotic?
  • Do you think there will be any type of post-election violence motivated by anger and tension from either side of the race line? 

Those are just a few of the questions that spring to mind. You may have others. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Read Full Post »

My wife, Dana, was touched this morning when she heard a news report about John McCain’s attempt to curb some of the hostility at a campaign rally in Minnesota. After a week of increasingly angry crowds, stoked by speeches in which McCain and running mate Sarah Palin regularly raised doubts about Obama’s character and past associations, it seemed McCain suddenly realized that it was important to put on the brakes, as folks continued to disparage Obama with bitter remarks such as “terrorist” and “off with his head.”

Realizing the danger in allowing such emotion to go on unchecked, and perhaps recognizing how far removed his rallies had become from the virtues of honor and respect that he once extolled, McCain reasserted himself and attempted to change the tone. Here’s one moment from the event, as recorded in an Associated Press report:

“If you want a fight, we will fight,” McCain said. “But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments.” When people booed, he cut them off.

“I don’t mean that has to reduce your ferocity,” he said. “I just mean to say you have to be respectful.”

And then this:

“I don’t trust Obama,” a woman said. “I have read about him. He’s an Arab.”

McCain shook his head in disagreement, and said:

“No, ma’am. He’s a decent, family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues and that’s what this campaign is all about.”

I’ve always liked John McCain precisely because he’s a leader who has been willing to show civility and respect amid the divisive, partisan bickering of Washington politics. I’m hoping his courageous stand in Minnesota portends a return to that old John McCain.

Read Full Post »

Alright, I’m just gonna go ahead and post on this. I’ve been trying to resist, since it seems all I ever blog about anymore is Obama and race. But the cultural Zeitgeist is what it is.

Earlier this week, Politico ran a series of articles on the role of race in the current presidential battle. The pieces covered all the now-familiar terrain, speculating on how big of a role race (or racism) could play in the upcoming election. For me, the most interesting piece was a report on “How Obama Quietly Targets Blacks.”

One of the most fascinating aspects of Obama’s campaign has been the delicate balance he must strike between reaching white voters and black voters. The unspoken understanding has long been that if Obama does too much to appeal to the African American community, he’d scare off many in the white community. While I think this is silly and perhaps insulting to many white voters who have no problem with Obama’s skin color, I also think it’s true a lot of the time. Again, the Zeitgeist is what it is.

And so, for the majority of his campaign, Obama has found it necessary to treat the African American community the same way a bashful eighth-grader does that pretty girl in English class—glancing at her only in quick snatches, lest his secret crush become a topic of public discussion among all the middle-schoolers. Here’s one of that Politico article’s most riveting quotes:

“What [Obama] has done is he’s shunned black voters — but he knows that they know that he’s black. And he knows that they know in our communities we have a certain feeling that he’s got to do that to get those white votes,” said Kevin Wardally, a New York City political consultant who worked for Hillary Rodham Clinton. “We inherently believe that what he’s doing he has to do — he has to not be in Harlem to get those white votes.” 

As I read that, I wondered how some white readers would interpret this statement. Would it seem to them that Obama is being sneaky or disingenuous? Would they be able to recognize the sad irony in all of this? The thing is, white politicians can often be very upfront about appealing to the cultural sensibilities of white voters. For instance, when Sarah Palin talks about Obama not feeling that “our great country” is perfect enough, something tells me she’s not thinking of non-whites when she says “our.” If an African American politician like Obama were as brazen with black voters, he wouldn’t stand a chance.

I confess that I was intrigued by these Politico reports. But to tell you the truth, I think these types of articles are getting old. Every day brings another examination of the role of race. Will the “Bradley Effect” rob Barack Obama of the presidential race, even though the polls keep putting him well ahead? Will the “Bubba Vote” save John McCain? Did McCain mean something sinister during the debate when he said, “That One”? Are Sarah Palin’s frequent slams against Obama before mostly white audiences (“This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America”) racial code for something else?

I could give you my opinion, but what difference would it really make? Who really cares anymore? Are any of us truly ready to see the argument from the other side’s perspective? Some will call it racism. Some will call it down-and-dirty campaigning. It is what it is. And depending on your personal experience, your political affiliation, your cultural background, and perhaps the color of your skin, you’re going to have a different opinion about the meaning of it all. Honestly, at the end of the day, none of that really matters.

What does matter, however, is how we’re treating our fellow citizens, how we’re treating our brothers and sisters. Sometimes I almost think it would be best to put real life on hold during the high theater of this phase of the election season, when emotions are high and partisan rhetoric is running at a fever pitch. In these latter days of the race, there’s usually no room for banal values like respect, compassion, and grace. Right now, it’s all about getting our guy (or gal) elected.

Read Full Post »

With the collapse of the U.S. financial system, all other news tends to pale in comparison. Still, sticking with the main theme of this blog, here are a few of the interesting news items and blog posts that I stumbled across over the past week.

Read Full Post »

Thanks to Erika Haub for directing me to Mixin’ It Up, the blog of Jelani Greenidge. Jelani is the son of Pastor Henry Greenidge, whom I interviewed a decade ago for my Christianity Today profile of Tom Skinner. Jelani is an eloquent and provocative young writer. His recent post, “An Open Letter to a Young Republican,” is a heartfelt commentary about politics, faith, and the need for grace between passionate Christian supporters of John McCain and passionate Christian supporters of Barack Obama, like Jelani. I appreciate both his frankness and his humility, both much-needed qualities in the pursuit of genuine reconciliation. I encourage you to check him out.

Read Full Post »

I don’t want to get too partisan here, but most of you have probably figured out I lean toward Obama in the current presidential race. I realize that many will immediately think I support him because he’s black, and there might be some deep psychosocial truth to that. But, honestly, my main interest in him has more to do with the spirit of racial and cultural reconciliation that I detect in his message and manner—this was also a chief reason why I voted for George W. Bush in 2000. Nevertheless, I really don’t want to promote one candidate over another on this blog. When I talk about Obama here, it’s usually because of the social and religious questions that his candidacy highlights and stirs up.

We touched on this latest question in an earlier post, and I had no intention of pursuing it any further, but it’s been on my mind a lot the past couple days. So, here it is: In American politics and society, is it more acceptable to play the gender card (especially when the alleged victim of the sexism is white) than the race card? I ask this question sincerely and without guile. I really would like to know.

I could ramble on at length about how one side seems to be able to get away with crying “sexism” and “you’re playing the race card” whenever they want, while the other side seems scared to death to even mention the word race (even in the wake of cynical comments about “community organizers” and “uppity” behavior), but I’ll save that for later. However, I will excerpt from a reader comment on TheRoot.com that made me wonder about this question. The comment was in response to an article that contends Obama is playing too nice and needs to start getting as mean as his opponent. The reader cautioned against this, saying:

A snide remark from a Black mouth is not digested the same as a snide remark from a White mouth. Obama is not stupid. He is a Black man in America who understands how the game is played. And if he starts meeting barb for barb, we will all surely lose, hands-down! I have been tempted to question his tactics as well…it’s hard, but in the end, it will be worth it. Meanwhile, I’m praying.

What do you think? Is Obama constrained by his race—and perhaps, now, by his gender—from getting too down and dirty in this presidential contest?

Read Full Post »

Heart Barracuda.jpg

I’ve been sort of disappointed by the various music artists who have protested the use of their songs by the John McCain presidential campaign in recent weeks. The latest is the rock band Heart, led by sisters Ann and Nancy Wilson. The Wilsons are upset that the McCain/Palin campaign played their classic song “Barracuda” following McCain’s Thursday-night acceptance speech.

“Sarah Barracuda,” of course, is the nickname that was given to Sarah Palin when she was a basketball star in high school. When I first heard that tidbit, I said to myself, They’ve got to use that Heart song when she does her RNC speech. “Barracuda” is renowned as a kick-butt song by female rockers, and Palin was portrayed from the start as a sort of kick-butt politician. So it was the perfect theme song for her. Well, they didn’t use the song after Palin’s speech, but they did crank it up when she strode on stage after John McCain’s.

So here’s my ambivalence about this matter of musicians (presumably for partisan reasons) objecting to the use of their songs by political campaigns. On the one hand, I respect the right of an artist to not want her art used for a purpose or cause with which she disagrees. I certainly wouldn’t want someone taking something I’ve written out of context to, for instance, promote racism or something that runs counter to my faith.

But isn’t popular music in another category? Music is a universal force; it transcends our differences. Regardless of what the composer was thinking when she wrote it, music’s going to do what it’s going to do. It speaks to each of us in different ways. Songs can take on meanings that have absolutely nothing to do with their lyrics, because of the memories we attach to them (e.g., senior prom, summer vacation, wedding reception, etc). It’s impossible for the musician to control the way his or her music will ultimately be felt or experienced by the listener.

According to the Wilson sisters, “Barracuda” actually refers to the forces of corporate greed and not a hard-nosed heroine. But I would submit that it doesn’t matter. If most folks hear the song as a “tough chick” anthem, there’s no reversing that.

In fact, in some ways isn’t it unfair for an artist to come out years later and tell you you’re supposed to be thinking about the meaning of his art in a different way than pop culture has understood it over the years? For instance, after author J.K. Rowling completed her mega-popular Harry Potter series she decided to announce that Dumbledore was gay. The fact that this revelation came after the author not saying anything about the character’s sexuality for seven books struck me as unfair to faithful readers who had already formed their own image of who that character is. (I also think of filmmaker George Lucas using digital effects to alter scenes in his original Star Wars movies, years after fans had grown accustom to seeing them as they were.)

Similarly, to me it seems unfair for a popular musician to, in effect, tell certain listeners, “No, this song was not meant for you!” Instead, I think it would be better to adopt the attitude of the country-music duo Brooks & Dunn, whose song “Only in America” was used both by George W. Bush in 2000 and, more recently, Barack Obama at the DNC. In a statement, Kix Brooks wrote:

Seems ironic that the same song Bush used at The Republican Convention last election would be used by Obama and the Democrats now. Very flattering to know our song crossed parties and potentially inspires all Americans.

So, I guess the point of this rambling post is to get your opinion on the matter. Are Heart, and the other musicians before them, being spoiled sports? Are they letting personal politics get in the way of the power of their music—not to mention the extra royalties they can earn?

And then there’s this bigger question: Once the art is created, should the artist retain the right to tell people how to think about it and how to experience it?

Read Full Post »

So sorry that I’m still stuck on the issue of politics; we do talk about other stuff here. But, hey, it’s an election year, right?

This week, questions of sexism and gender roles have come to the forefront with the nomination of Alaska governor Sarah Palin as the GOP vice presidential candidate. But this USA Today interview with former Republican lawmaker Dick Armey about how Barack Obama’s chances of being elected president are most threatened by “the Bubba vote” (i.e., white working-class voters often from rural areas) got me to thinking about the racial dynamic again. Here’s a quote from Armey:

“The Bubba vote is there, and it’s very real, and it is everywhere. There’s an awful lot of people in America, bless their heart, who simply are not emotionally prepared to vote for a black man.” 

Later Armey suggests that there probably will not be an equivalent sexist backlash against a female candidate on the GOP ticket. From the article:

On the other hand, Armey said, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s name on the GOP ticket should not produce much of an anti-woman vote. “We’re very far down that path,” he said. “We’re not as far down the racial equality path.”

Armey seemed to be doing an incisive social commentary, as well as proudly proclaiming why his party would triumph this November. What do you think of his statements?

Related Article: This is an interesting Washington Post piece on a similar topic, and perhaps one of the reasons I feel so depressed and alienated as I watch the RNC on television.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: