Jack and Jill Politics - Latest Comments in New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

CraigHickman — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:28:15 -0000

Wrong thread.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Jeff Kuper — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:44:47 -0000

Yes, I'm trying to understand where AA's are coming from because, as I said, it's important and whites and blacks clearly don't think the same way on many issues and I want to better understand the difference.

I'll try to do a better job of explaining these two beliefs about "sensitivity" and "less racism than AA's think" (which is really part of the same argument.). First off, let me say, you are absolutely right that you and basically all minorities experience racism on a daily basis. I understand and deplore this. But lets take a step back and look at it from a larger perspective.

Take the next 10 events in the country that are viewed differently by AA's and whites. Let's say that on each of the issues that 80 percent of blacks view each of these events as proof of racism and that 80 percent of whites think that the issue has little or nothing to do with race and, even if it was racial, it wasn't racist (a very important distinction). What I'm saying is that out of those 10 events just because AA's believe that they were racist doesn't make it so. And just because whites didn't think it was racist doesn't mean that it wasn't. Therefore I think that blacks may be "too sensitive" and believe there is more racism out there than actually exists and that whites aren't "sensitive" enough and that there is more racism out there than they think.

To bring it closer to home if one of your male friends tells you that he got on an elevator today and there was a white women in there and she moved to get as far away from him as possible I think that some AA's would view this as the more subtle form of racism that is prevalent in society. And you may be right. But it is only a guess and a perception and not necessarily reality. It may be the case that this woman went home to her friends and said "I was so embarrassed today. My lunch did not sit with me well and I was real gassy and as I was riding in an elevator a guy hopped in. I had to squeeze to keep from farting and moved toward the corner of the elevator just in case I couldn't hold it in."

So the racism that was earnestly perceived was not racism at all and was merely a funny incident. But that funny incident has real effects if it is perceived as racism and it has to grind on you, wear on you, and it has to make some people sick to their core to have to live under these conditions. But of course, in our hypothetical situation, it was more likely that she either was afraid of a black man and consciously moved away or wasn't consciously aware but still moved away due to "latent racism".

I hope that clears it up a bit.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Nick Renkoski — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:12:29 -0000

This is a bit of a thread jack because it doesn't necissarily have anything to do with the Obama cover, but I get pretty sick and tired when I'm told that racism isn't what it used to be in this country. B.S! It may be a little different, it's not the Klan anymore, but racism in America is very much alive and well.

Jeff, it's terrific that you're stretching yourself in this way. Racism in not a "Black" problem. It threatens the entire country, white and otherwise, so the more you can learn and sophisticate yourself to this the better. Lord knows, I'm still learning too, we can never fully understand another person or what it feels to be in their skin, but we can train ourselves to be empathetic and attuned to the real nature of the world around us. So Jeff, a piece of advice. When discussing race, it's best to avoid blanket statements like "most African-Americans" or "you probably know," because one of racisms greatest feats is convincing the majority that minorities are all the same or have the same experiences. Not true. There's nothing I can pretend to know about a Black person before I get to know that person just as there is nothing I can pretend to know about you just because I know you're white.

We've all been taught in school that racism was a fad in the '50's and that MLK fixed it and everythings great now. NOT TRUE. I don't know if there is "more" racism than whites believe or "less" racism than Black believe because racism is racism. There are no shades. I will say this; in 1965 a study was done that polled white people. It asked if they believed Blacks were given equal treatment in America. In 1965. 75% of whites said yes. They did the same poll in 2005 with the same results. Now, if we were so wrong then, what makes us so enlightened now.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

GreenLadyHere — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 02:49:40 -0000

Jeff: Yes the First Amendment exists so you are entitled to state that you believe that "there is less (racism) than what AA's believe there is." However, EXPERIENCING acts of racism is NOT a "belief "system. It is REALITY as you demonstrated with the co-worker incident in " 'liberal' Northern California just a few years ago". I can almost guarantee that this same/similar incident occurrs daily.
To your point of "but I'm trying to understand" and "getting a different perspective": You have formed your opinions - "AA's are TOO SENSITIVE"; "there is less(racism) than what AA's believe there is". So, again, you are trying to learn??? Continue in your quest.
Check out rikyrah's post below.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Jeff Kuper — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 02:19:51 -0000

With tongue firmly in cheek, yes, we should shut down dialogue when we disagree, the world would be much better off that way!

Anyway, sure, I admit I don't quite get it. I can only guess at what it is like to put up with the crap that you and other minorities have to put up with. I can only imagine what its like to have people to treat you differently because of the amount of melanin in your skin. I can only imagine the rage that I would feel if I wasn't given a promotion (or offered a job) simply because of the body I was born into. I fully understand that there is a lot more racism out there that you and most AA's have to deal with than I and most whites think there is.

Hell, I was shocked when I was talking to one of my former co-workers and he related a story about how our black co-worker and he went to an apartment complex five minutes apart and one was given an application while the other was told that there were no vacancies. I don't need to tell you which one got the application and which one didn't. And this was in "liberal" Northern California just a few years ago.

But I'm trying to understand because I think it's important for me to grow as a person and I think it's important for our country for each of us to try to grow as individuals and as a society. Being raised post-MLK I am sick of racism and sometimes it amazes me the level that still exists.

And yes, maybe I'm wrong, but here is another of my beliefs that you may not agree with, but I believe that, generally speaking, there is more racism in our country than whites believe there is but at the same time I think that there is less than what AA's believe there is.

Now, I don't have a real good idea how you would react to that statement because I don't know you. But I believe that some AA's would be mad at that statement (much as you were mad at my previous statement) and others would say, well, yes, of course. What is the breakdown of those that would agree and those that would disagree, I don't know. I could guess (as could you) but I would trust your guess better than mine because you probably know a lot more African-Americans than I do.

Anyway, here is another thought, if an AA went to, say, an Irish Catholic website because they were interested in getting a different perspective on things and made a comment and announced he was black and then he was told that "NO MORE THOUGHTS NEEDED!" what percentage of AA's would consider it racist? It's an interesting thought experiment and exploring these differences in thoughts, I believe, is worth it because it can led to better understanding and hopefully a better world.

(Not to say that I took your comments as racist)

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

GreenLadyHere — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:13:44 -0000

Jeff: . . .AA's are human and fallible and probably TOO SENSITIVE."

You really had a fairly good "RAMBLE" going on which almost started to sound as IF you were, somewhat, getting "it". This was, in my opinion, firmly negated by "probably TOO SENSITIVE."

I won't even go back and re-state other statements which should have given me the clue to expect that last statement. "I wish you well"??????? "We" are NOT sick - just "Sick and tired" of the RACIST CRAP that goes on DAILY!
So, I wish YOU WELL! And please - NO MORE THOUGHTS NEEDED!

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Jeff Kuper — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:44:57 -0000

Hey Bronze Trinity,

No white person can fully understand what it means to be a minority in this country. Some (liberals) think they can but when it comes down to it they are only fooling themselves. So, yes, a lot of whites don't have sensitivity toward AA's. Some are trying to work on it and some don't give a damn.

Now, you know how a lot of people say that we should have a serious national discussion on race but we never do? Well, if we ever did I think an interesting topic would be perceptions of the different races. One thing I was told by an AA on the internet (and in my experience it seems to be largely true) when we were discussing some issue around a decade ago was that whites and blacks perceive thinks radically different. I forget the issue but all the white people were saying that the issue had absolutely nothing to do with race and the AA said that "for us everything has to do with race".

Now, I had never thought about it quite like that but it did turn on a light a bit in my head and your post (and many others) seem to confirm this. In this particular instance I (a white) don't see any racist intent and see it as actually making fun of ignorant right wing white people and really had very little to do with Obama. But you are obviously very hurt by it and basically state "screw" white people.

So, yes, whites don't have a good idea of what insults AA's because, I think, a lot of whites don't view the world in a "everything has to do with race" mentality. For example, Bush is routinely portrayed as monkey or a chimp. White people (except maybe the Klan types) don't view this as an affront to whites. But if Obama was portrayed in a similar fashion the uproar would be huge and, I believe, but perhaps I'm wrong, that you would feel even more insulted than about this satirical cover.

Anyway, I've rambled enough and will end on this thought. Yes, whites are human and fallible and probably not sensitive enough. But perhaps AA's are human and fallible and probably too sensitive. I wish you well and would welcome any thoughts.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Karmi — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:43:15 -0000

Look like you are replying...guess you felt like being nasty, huh. Anyway, my posts are not spam...they are links, and they were not all together some hours ago...roughly 8hrs ago. Has something to do with points, e.g. Jibreel Riley's posted 2 hours ago, has 2 points and it's at the top.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Lily — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:09:29 -0000

How many times are you going to spam the same post? But thanks for the icon in your name makes it very easy to skip your posts.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Jeff Kuper — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:09:25 -0000

I think your analogy is a bit off. Look, not that it matters a lot but it will tell you a bit where I'm coming from, I'm a white, conservative (moderate libertarian actually), Gen Xer that has never voted for a Democrat. When I saw Obama give his acceptance speech and give Michelle the fist bump I literally paused the TV, looked at my wife and said "How cool is that? You would never see any of the Republicans do that." Then came the "terrorist fist jab" comment from a Fox person and I'm thinking "WTF?!?!?!" and "man are the people on "my side" seriously out of touch".

In short, a person who would come up with the "terrorist fist jab" comment deserves to be ridiculed and made fun of. Now, where the analogy falls flat is that a person that repeats the jewish canard deserves to be more ostracized than ridiculed because it is more pernicious than ridiculous. Thus, I viewed the cover piece in its intended light which is lampooning a ridiculouos comment from the right.

Now, it sucks that so many people are ignorant and don't get it (I'm talking about the people that think Obama is a Muslim not the people on this site). So in this vein I kinda of think that Obama protesting this is like Bush protesting all the monkey/chimp cartoons. In short its silly for a President or Senator to take satire seriously.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

Lily — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:08:03 -0000

Still don't like the cover.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

CraigHickman — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:53:54 -0000

Some of his supporters are already doing that by taking the name Hussein as their middle name.

I'm not sure that the same kind of reclamation can be done with propaganda like this. I think it would be best to let it fade away.

Which is why I almost didn't even come in here but here I am.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

GreenLadyHere — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:53:12 -0000

craig: YEP! I e-mailed her to tell her so.
Oh Yeah - I saw her on an earlier panel during the primary race. Her
response to the question of billary "stealing" the primary race from
Mr. Obama: "If she does, Black folks would riot in the streets."
Rest of the panel: CRICKETS**********
Fade to black! :>) :>)

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

GreenLadyHere — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:51:45 -0000

bison1: Co-signing with rikyrah. Anyway, I would need to know a person's "credentials"[i.e., political position, length in the blogsphere, breadth in the blogsphere, etc.] BEFORE I would contemplate a major political action.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

CraigHickman — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:48:24 -0000

She's been pretty good of late.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

rikyrah — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:26:22 -0000

OMG,

I just saw Michelle Bernard on Hardball from yesterday, commenting on the New Yorker cover.

Obama needs to hire her.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

rikyrah — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:15:45 -0000

fade away

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

bison1 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:13:34 -0000

Wha if Don Imus did this?

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

bison1 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:47:38 -0000

Do you see any value in the Obama campaign and/or supporters co-opting the image represented in the New Yorkers cover “Politics of Fear” Rather than condemning the cover as incendiary, take ownership of the image. For example, in the 1960s African Americans took ownership of the word black as a term of self-identification, beauty, and pride. Would it be over the top, if Obama supporters made posters, t-shirts, etc. of the covers image? If the Obama supporters took ownership of the image, and then reconstructed it for its own purpose– to fight the smear spawned by the politics of fear. In other words, since the image is already out in the public domain – take a post-modernist approach to reconstruct its political utility. Or shouldn’t we go there? Just allow the story to fad away?

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

bison1 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:38:43 -0000

The New Yorker cover confirmes every negative subliminal message that was planted during the primaries. The satirical intent is lost because it is also depicts the living nightmare that many American’s envision. The cover makes Michelle Obama his running mate rather than wife. Both are to be equally feared. Even if Obama’s campaign is not saying it– you are getting two for one. It pictures Michelle Obama as the reincarnation Angela Davis. She is to be feared just as much as Obama, she holds the firepower, the balls, the phallic symbol and wears the combat boots. She is the driving force behind black revolutionary activism. She is the angry black woman. For her, the revolution goes on. She is portrayed as a life member of the Black Panther Party, and he is viewed as the mirror imagine of a Muslim Jihadist–Osama Bin Laden in camouflage. They are depicted as the ultimate subversive black couple who seeks to destroy the ideals of American. Once they are in the White House, they will trample on everything that American holds dear and sacred. This couple will desecrate the holy sanctum of American patriotism. This was illustrated by the burning of the American flag in the fire place as they trampled on the presidential seal in the oval office while giving each other the terrorist victory sign–the fist bump. The cover beefed-ups the chatter about possible reparations for black people. The cover is appropriately titled ‘The Politics of Fear’. The New Yorker’s image and representation affirms every smear that low information critics and those who just have disdained for the Obama’s harbored. The cover takes a lot of distortions, lies, and misconceptions about the Obamas and puts a mirror up to them and this image validates them for some Americas. Smears are perpetuated not just by those miscreants who wish them to be taken as truth, but also even by those who repeat the smears innocently or in effort to dispel them. Each repetition makes the smear sound more familiar and, psychologists tell us, easier to believe. The cover is offensive, misogynist, anti-Islamic, racist, and just plain reckless journalism. The cover is incendiary.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

bison1 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:31:44 -0000

I do not know who really gets the intent straight-out? I do no believe that the regular subscribers of The New Yorker -- -- no matter how superior they feel their intellect is -- do on some level feed into the parody of the caricature of the Obamas.. The sad realty, our politics are not that sophisticated. I know the liberal politics of the magazine, but this does not represent that strain. The satirical intent of the cover is lost because it is also depicts the living nightmare that many American’s envision. The New Yorker’s image and representation affirms every smear that low information critics and those who just have disdained for the Obama’s harbored. Wittingly or not, this cartoon encourages racism, misogyny, hatred, violence, vilification of Muslim and actively undermines Obama's campaign. The editors should have known that anything that gives off even a whiff of racism is not going to render the desired satirical message. It is just plain reckless journalism.

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

rileymayhem20 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:10:33 -0000

Bambi Obama...yes Bambi! Are you going to coddle this guy all the way to the White House. Geesee, grow a pair (so Rev Jackson can snip them off).

I'll hold my breath until one of you defend Condi Rice with the same zeal!

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

rileymayhem20 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:07:30 -0000

Call me when they apologize to President Bush 1st

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

rileymayhem20 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:06:25 -0000

Liberals Bashing Liberals... I love it

Re: New Yorker and Obama - Makes Me Wanna Holler

NO ID — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:59:08 -0000

the issue at hand would be "smeared." to say you are muslim is only negative if you believe that islam is negative. to say you're the devil...when it comes to bush, let's just look at the iraq war never mind anything else. i'd say it's not a "smear," calling bush the devil at all.