I turned on the TV tonight, curious about the election results. I have known for weeks that Obama would win, there was no doubt in my mind. So, as I turned it on, and saw the pollsters calling the election, it was confirmed.
Thats fine. I didn't vote for him, there are many things he stands for that I disagree with, some very strongly. All that aside, I hope that he will do at least some of the things he has promised to, though being a politician I won't hold my breath, just as I wouldn't have for McCain. I don't believe tomorrow (or late January) will see any revolutionary bipartisanship. I think the powers that be in each party will continue to publicly eviscerate one another. Nancy Pelosi won't all of a sudden quit being one of the most shrill and divisive people in America.
That being said, if he can do something about green energy, if intelligent immigration reform happens, etc. etc. all the better. I am not one who thinks the country will now hit a tailspin and fall into the depths of depravity. The guy I voted for didn't make it, its not the end of the world.
HOWEVER
I nearly threw up with the 'journalists' talking as soon as they called the election. These supposedly unbiased purveyors of information where nearly in tears, speaking of how emotional this was. And spoke of how now, we were finally able to, as a country, overcome racism. WHAT???? So, those who voted for Obama were voting for an end to racism? And those of us who voted for John McCain did it out of a deep seeded sense of hatred for the black man?
I have seen racism, some pretty awful examples while I lived in Texas. This isn't an end to racism anymore than a McCain victory would have proven we were still steeped in it. Seriously, I wanted to punch Tom Brokaw in the jaw.
Then came McCain's speech. While on the whole, I thought it was fine, I was again disturbed by how much race was brought into it. As he said that Black people should feel a special feeling of something.
So, individuals, who happen to be black, should feel more for this president that another?
I'm sorry, I am sickened by how pervasive is the idea that race has anything to do with who a person is. Until it becomes truly irrelevant, both those who espouse to fight racism, and those who are steeped in hate, will be helping it to stick around.
13 comments:
In his I have a dream speech, Dr. King said that he dreamed of the day that a man would be judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. How is voting for Obama because of his skin color any worse than refusing to for the same reason? Both are a clear failure to move beyond racism.
I agree with you that narrowing it down to the idea of being racist if you didn't vote for Obama is disgusting. Quite frankly, I feel certain many racist individuals voted FOR Obama. They are just a different kind of racist.
It's hard for me to share your disgust at these journalists for daring to cheer for their guy. We haven't had unbiased news in a long time; I'm just used to it. People say they want objectivity in news reporting, but it's the partisans who get the ratings.
I was watching a bit on NBC right after they called it, and to be fair, they were careful to say something like, "It's a very emotional night for all Americans, regardless of who they voted for." That irked me just a bit, since I wasn't really emotional about the outcome. Overall, my reaction was sort of "Meh." I was never particularly excited about either candidate. But that's nothing new. Ever since 1988, the first election I really took an interest in, neither major party has nominated a presidential candidate I could really get behind.
I agree with your points about racism. This obsession with the skin color of the president-elect makes me uncomfortable.
Regardless of who you vote for... even if you were to completely despise Obama... you, as a man who loves his American history, has to be so pleased with this election. I don't care if you like Obama or not, or if you voted for McCain or not, This is a first for our nation, and it's a pretty cool first. A black man in the White House is a big deal. Regardless of who that man is.
And although i probably didn't see whatever you saw where the journalist says, "we finally came over racism." or whatever, but I'm perfectly willing to give that journalist the benefit of the doubt and assume they meant a legacy of racism referring to... you know... the past. If not, that's dumb. but I choose not to believe that people who are going crazy over a black man winning the presidency actually believe that people who didn't vote for him are racist.
All that aside, I agree with tiffany for saying that if someone voted for Obama based on his skin color alone they were hurting rather than helping.
If only we could all be as advanced as Steven Colbert, who literally doesn't see skin color.
"This is a first for our nation, and it's a pretty cool first. A black man in the White House is a big deal. Regardless of who that man is."
Sorry, but I couldn't possibly disagree more with this statement.
It should completely hinge on 'who that man is'. That is the whole essence of my point.
I am not blind to the historical signifigance, but the exact point you tried to make there, is my problem.
It should matter who the man is. Content of his character. Not, wow, that is awesome, a black guy is president.
My argument is that that shouldn't matter in the least. Clearly it matters to a lot of people. I find that sad.
It shouldn't matter what color someone is, ever. It shouldn't matter for the good, and it shouldn't matter for the bad.
To say that it is awesome to have a black man in the white house, regardless of who that man is is, in my opinion, naive. Would you be happy to see Jesse Jackson in the White house, or Louis Farrakan? (sp)
No. Why? Because they aren't good men. It would still be the same level of historic. It would still be the first black man to be president. No one, in my opinion, should be excited to have Barack president BECAUSE he is black. They may have many other reasons to be excited for him to be president, but by definition, if his color elicits a judgement independent of who he is, that is racist.
And I can't stress it enough, that goes for both positive and negative judgements.
Why is it that "a black man in the White House is a big deal."? Because our ancestors six generations ago owned black slaves? Because two generations ago black citizens were denied the right to vote or required to use separate drinking fountains? Those forms of racism haven't mattered in a long time. To those who say this election finally proves it's possible for a black man to be elected President, I say it was possible before anyone commenting on this post was born.
Talking about Obama's race is a way of avoiding talking about the substantive political issues. What kind of a president is he going to be? Will he use the bully pulpit and control of Congress to implement the scarier parts of his party's agenda? Will we see socialized medicine, more tax credits for people who don't pay taxes, higher taxes for those who do? What will happen to the military? The intelligence agencies? The federal judiciary?
People who disagree with Obama's ideas but go along with the line about how great it is to elect a black man are missing the point, as surely as an employer who passes over applicants for being black.
No, you still don't get what I'm saying. How could you possibly think that race is the only thing I find important about this election? You can't be blind to race, Dan, you want to call seeing someone's skin color racist, so be it, I've been called worse by you. I'm talking nothing more than history. That's it. Period. Nathan, black slaves=history, segregation=history, a black man gaining the presidency=history. I stand by that. If you don't care for history, fine, then I guess you don't have to buy my argument that it's a cool fact that we're going to have a black man in the white house. But if you are even slightly interested in history, you should be able to see how cool it is for those of us who happen to love history to be interested in such a thing. Other things I'm interested in? I was alive to experience 9/11. That's cool. Is it cool that thousands died? No. it's cool to witness something that my children will study about in school. Black man headed to the white house- a cool fact. If McCain would have won, my tune would be something more like: woman as vice president- cool fact. I don't think it would have been right for anyone to vote based on race. Regardless of which way they voted. However, now that the voting is finished and the president is chosen,let me restate: it is a cool FACT that we are going to have a black president. Hopefully he does more than that to define his presidency. But a fact remains a fact, and I'm pretty interested in it.
So it's "cool" in more of a trivia sense, like Harry S Truman was the first haberdasher to become president.
No, Nathan. Nobody thinks that's cool. Just as nobody thinks it's cool that you can probably speak more than one dialect of Klingon.
Typical retort by Nathan. Embarrassing.
It did not matter to me that Obama is black. It did not matter to most of the people that I know that he is black. I do not believe for one second that he was elected because of or in spite of his race, even though there are those that voted that way.
It is so much more important that he be a man of honor and integrity. I too have been very annoyed at many of the comments that have been made about race in the media. People are talking WAAAY too much about race.
Having said that, I believe that it is notable (not just as trivia) that a black man has reached what is arguably the most important individual position within the United States. I don’t believe that I truly need to explain this comment because you all understand what I mean even if you do not agree, so I will not.
I also believe that based on the fact that he will be VERY visible and that he already fits certain criteria to be a positive role model, he has a great responsibility especially to the young black people in the world, and more specifically in the U.S. (I am willing to explain this more but I don’t think I need to.)
I think that Daniel and Nathan are both splitting hairs. It seems that both of you have focused on a specific and insignificant parts of Karen’s comment to make an unimportant point. Unimportant because I don’t think anyone reading this blog would disagree. It is obvious from Karen’s comments that she agrees with you and that you agree with her. Karen is not one of those people writhing and crying on the ground like she just touched John Lennon.
I may have misunderstood karen's point. I'll admit that. However. She took offense where it was not meant. I did say I thought her stance was naive.
But please karen, I never called you a racist, get over yourself.
I quoted you exactly so as to not misrepresent, what I clearly misunderstood was context, which, I think you could have explained the same way you did in your response without getting so snippy.
As for you Mark, I wrote the initial post because I didn't find the point unimportant. Not because I thought I'd get a lot of argument from the few people who actually read this, but because I thought the point itself was important, and I like to vent on my blog. If you find the point unimportant thats fine, I don't.
I never said you were a racist Karen, I responded to you, then I re-emphasized the problems I had with the reaction from some nationally, particularly media personnel.
I didn't get snippy, if you think that, you're still reading something in my posts that isn't there. *sigh* I'll just attribute it to the curse of the youngest. It's inescapable.
Dan.
When I said that your point was unimportant, I was not referring to the blog post, I liked that, I was talking about your response to Karen. The part that was unimportant was what appears to be a nit picky disagreement with her comment.
Of course this is where you get to vent. I like that about blogs.
Post a Comment