Race and Religion on the Campaign Trail
A few days ago in Philadelphia, Barack Obama gave a major speech explaining his views on the status of race relations in the United States and the relevance of race in the Presidential campaign. The speech was prompted in part by continuing public discussion of some incendiary statements on racial matters that have been made by his long time pastor and friend, Jeremiah Wright, of the Trinity United Church of Christ. Obama has distanced himself from the remarks, but has not rejected the preacher personally. Wright, who retired from his pastorate last month, had a position on the Obama African American Religious Leadership Committee, but has now resigned.
Obama's race has continuously been referred to during the campaign in term's of "first viable African American Presidential candidate", just as Hillary has been similarly referred to as the first such woman. The 1984 Democrat V-P candidate, Geraldine Ferraro, while serving on the Clinton fund raising committee, took the discourse in another direction when she said Obama would not be where he is in the campaign today if he were not black. She inferred black men have a special advantage and implied that Obama was a sort of token. After her remarks were widely criticized, when given a chance to back off, Ferraro shot back that she was just exercising her free speech right and being honest, and she then said she was wrongfully being attacked as a racist, which she claimed was a tactic to intimidate white people from speaking out. Ferraro eventually resigned from the Clinton team, and Hillary handled her remarks about like Barack has handled the intemperate remarks of Wright.
The Obama speech has been well received from diverse quarters. He spoke of his personal experience as an African-American being raised by his white family. He referred to the sad racial history of America, but his focus was on the need to go forward to address and improve race relations as part of making progress on all the other issues we face as a nation.
That we have made great improvements in race relations in this country is apparent from the fact Barack Obama has a significant lead over Hillary Clinton. For historical perspective, consider that when John McCain's father was serving as a Navy Officer in WWII, the armed forces of the United States were still racially segregated, and non-whites were not even allowed to become commissioned officers in the Navy. The civil rights and "Great Society" programs of the 1960s helped many African-Americans achieve a piece of the American dream, but a disproportionate number of African-Americans today are still not realizing that dream. Until all Americans, regardless of color, more fairly share the economic benefits of living in this country, racial tensions will persist, particularly in hard financial times.
Polling to determine racial bias, and to a lesser extent gender bias, is subject to a unique factor of politically correct responses not accurately reflecting inner feelings that may be acted upon in the voting booth. In the past, pollsters estimated the size of the factor and adjusted the results for a black candidate accordingly. At best, the estimate was just a guess. If Barack Obama is the nominee of the Democrats, pollsters will have the opportunity to estimate or guess the racial factor on a national basis. Books will be written for years on the impact race played in the 2008 Presidential election, but I doubt we will ever have a definitive answer, unless all the polls show Obama favored by a decent margin and then McCain wins.
I think Obama's race will work against him with some Hispanics, Asians and blue collar and older whites. It will work in his favor with some of the small number of African-Americans who might otherwise vote Republican or not vote, and with some independents and normally uninvolved voters who see him as someone obviously different from the "typical" older white male candidate.
Particularly after the last two Presidents, a man with libido trouble and a stone throwing hypocrite, some Americans are concerned about the religious values of the next President. Those on the religious right, who normally embrace Republicans, are trying to close their eyes and hold their nose as they consider a tepid kiss on the McCain cheek. Hillary Clinton, correctly or not, is not seen as a religious person. The perception of her as a calculating decision maker does not endear her to those who believe decisions should be based on a strict moral compass.
I doubt one out of a thousand Americans can tell you who Hillary's pastor is, or John McCain's. Reverend Wright brought Barack to Christ, officiated at the marriage of Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized their children. I wonder who ministers to the Clintons and McCain and who officiated at their weddings and baptized their children. Ironically, this flap over the words of pastor Wright may actually work in Obama's favor, by planting the reality that he is a church going Christian, by reminding African-American church goers who have drifted Republican that he is one of them, and by laying to rest the false seed some have been trying to plant that he is a Muslim.
The Obama speech has now brought him another benefit. Bill Richardson was so impressed with it that he has announced his endorsement of Obama for President. I really like the idea of an Obama/Richardson ticket. Richardson has diverse experience which can be of great help to Obama, and being half Hispanic, he will have great appeal to Hispanic voters.
9 Comments:
I think if the Democrats were to pick a ticket with Obama/Richardson they would be demonstrating for the third straight election they don't care about electability. Having the Presidential candidate being either a racial minority or a woman demands a very much center focused male as the Vice Presidential candidate. That leaves out Richardson but also Edwards.
John from Phoenix
I think you may be correct about the need for a centrist male VP candidate. The votes up for grabs are independents and moderate Republicans, both groups with which McCain has traditional appeal. Because of his ethnicity and his service in the Clinton cabinet, Richardson may be seen as more liberal, whether true or not. Some people are even suggesting the possibility of a nominal Republican as a VP on the Dem ticket. What about an Independent - no, not Lieberman again, but maybe Jeffords from Vermont? Who is a possibility from the South?
Tom,
I read that now we have a new Obama speech to discuss, the "Bitter Speech", and I hope to read your views on it. Here's my take: I was delighted with what he said. What he said is true, and I liked the way he said it the first time better that his rewriting of it after he received so much criticism. Still, I liked that he did not retract the essence of the statement, just tried to take the edges off it.
We all know there is a lot of hate out there, and it is not all in small towns. Whole neighborhoods of Phoenix could be described by Obama's words. And in the more enlightened neighborhoods of Phoenix, there are a lot of people who are reluctant to express their hatred, but seethe quietly.
Another question: have you seen anything about the Phoenix Mayor calling for a federal investigation of Joe Arpaio? This sprung from the sweeps Maricopa County Sheriff Joe (the toughest sheriff in America) has done in Phoenix and other cities in his county rounding up illegal immigrants under the smallest pretext. His posse, many of them trained volunteers, arrest people in largely Hispanic neighborhoods for such offenses as spitting on the street, j walking, cracked windshield, etc. They then ask their immigration status following ICE regulations, and put them in jail. They eventually get deported.
Finally people are speaking up. Mayor Gordon has asked the feds to investigate whether Arpaio has broken four specific federal civil rights laws. And now Obama has spoken. I may vote for him after all.
John from Phoenix
John, I lifted your "bitter speech" comments to start a new article. As for your local Sheriff, I don't know that the Federal investigation would do a lot under the Bush administration, but I bet it will be much more vigorously pursued when a Democrat is in the White House. I wonder what McCain has been saying about it.
McCain has bravely demonstrated his position on the "illegal" immigrants. His stand almost cost him his party's nomination, and still might. In the interests of his own survival he has now adopted the stand of securing the borders first and dealing with the status of the immigrants later. This is not a brave position to take, but it is a very practical one.
I have not heard that Clinton or Obama stuck her/his neck out so far on fair play for the Central and South American immigrants. Have you?
John from Phoenix
I think immigration is a mixed bag issue that cuts across so many traditional political lines that all three remaining candidates are reluctant to get embroiled in it. Most voters don't put immigration high on their issue list, and those that do are sharply divided on their positions. Closer to November, I think we will see last minute ads in targeted markets where immigration is an issue.
Tom,
You are speaking as a northerner. Immigration is just about the only issue in Arizona, and probably for other border states (except for those who are losing their homes). Remember that California and Texas have very large electorates. My hope is that the American people will tire of the issue by November and that the antics of clowns like Sheriff Joe of Maricopa County will incite revulsion among the American people as they see the heartbreak of families broken up by the insane enforcement of immigration laws on people who were certainly enticed to come to this country for jobs unfilled by "true" Americans.
Your unconcern about this issue must be due to where you live, in the North. You just haven't been touched by it.
John from Phoenix
The Gallup poll shows that immigration is only ranked #14 on the list of the most important issues to voters in electing a President. As for increases in the Latino population in the States from 2000 to 2006, the Census Bureau figures show Arizona at #19, with a 37.3% increase, just a little ahead of Washington State with 30.3%. Local demagogues and hometown media often play on exenophobia for their own purposes, making it appear more important to voters than it actually is, which may be how it is in Arizona.
Tom, Your last comment has been eating at me for some time. I think I understand why. Immigration may rank 14th in issues overall, but we don't elect Presidents overall. We elect them through the Electoral College. I think immigration is the number 1 issue in Arizona so its concern with this issue would be paramount - except John McCain has supported a "comprehensive solution" i.e., amnesty in many peoples' minds. How that affects the final vote remains to be seen. Will Arizona Republicans stay away from the poles rather than vote for such an apostate? Personally, I hope so.
John from Phoenix
Post a Comment
<< Home