BlogHer - Message to Michelle Obama: Honesty and Politics Do Not Mix (Or Black Girl, Know Your Place!) - Comments

Patriotism=Turning a blind eye to injustice?

Margaret Lozano — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:52:44 -0600

I agree with many who have already posted. It is not unpatriotic to be ashamed or even disgusted with America's record on civil rights. I applaud Michelle Obama for her honesty. And who wouldn't be proud of their husband running for president?

http://earthly-paradise.blogspot.com/

I don't see anything wrong

Tanilan — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:34:22 -0600

I don't see anything wrong with Michelle's statement. I feel the same way! I am not ashamed to be an American. But I am ashamed of this countries history as it deals with the issue of race.

That is the problem with politics today. We want honest candidates, we want to hold them and their families to a higher standard; but they can't speak candidly or openly about how they feel. That is a double-standard.

America needs people who are willing to say what they mean and mean what they say. For too long, we have been lied to by these grinning, baby kissing politicians. It IS time for change.

Thank you, Kim

leaustin — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:48:04 -0600

"We will be talking about real change in this country when a Michelle Obama can speak from the specificity of her experience and have that recognized as another part of what it means to be American."
Amen. Yes, we probably will never be a truly colorblind society, but we have come a long way and you have to give people credit for trying. We can only go farther if we continue to have rational open-minded discussions that provide learning opportunities for all. An open mind requires faith and hope in mankind, and bravery in the face of past unjust experiences. Michelle would make an amazing First Lady. Then SHE can run for Senate and then for president!

Linda
http://www.moonbridgebooks.com
http://moonbridgeblog.blogspot.com

You can't separate this from America's race or gender history

Kim Pearson — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 10:29:15 -0600

Hi Linda,
First, you are right that at this stage of the campaign, there will be a lot of nitpicking over the words spoken by Obama or anyone associated with him because he is experiencing success at the polls. That said, Michelle Obama has been a target for a while. I remember some months ago that there were people who looked at her askance because she made some jokes at her husband's expense, and some writers speculated about her being a sassy black woman -- not that there was anything wrong with that, they were quick to say. Yes, that hearkens back to the flap over Hillary's "cookie-baking" remark in the '92 campaign, but the additional layer of race was there.

Hillary Clinton has been talking about the election as a matter of:

"[W]hether we're going to once again be proud of our country, and our leadership, and our moral authority in the world..."

The outcry over those comments has been tepid, even though they weren't that much different from Mrs. Obama's.

Second, here's a clip of Ms. Obama's remarks:

Like LainaD, I didn't see anything inflammatory or unpatriotic in what she said. Nor was there anything specifically racial. But O'Reilly's use of the word "lynching" has unmistakeable overtones. More important, the reactions to her comments, from supporters and detractors, have referenced race and class in ways that misrepresent both her statements and American history.

Last thing. About 100 years ago, black vaudevillian Bert Williams had a popular song called "Somebody Lied" that said, in part:

"George Washington, so his'try says would never tell a lie;
I wish there were more Washingtons
I do I hope to die

"When I was but a little boy, somebody felt my head:
Says he 'you'll be a President some day'
that's what he said.

"Somebody lied, Some lied you see,
There never was a President
that ever resem- bled me
Somebody lied, As plain as you can plainly see
Somebody lied,
As sure's you're born, Somebody falsified to me."

This was considered great humor at the time., partially because it was accepted as self-evident that someone who looked like Bert Williams could never be president. Even the idea of some phrenologist coming to such a conclusion after touching a black boy's head was laughable. The idea of a black president has remained the stuff of fantasy and farce until this election. And the tacit acceptance that the Oval Office was out of reach is a lingering remnant of Jim Crow.

So when Michelle Obama honestly speaks about her excitement about this moment, as she did in the Larry King interview below, only a historically uninformed or disingenuous person would construe her to be unpatriotic.

But we have a real failure to communicate in this country when well-meaning commenters like Joe, who chime in,

When a 40 something says that this is the first time that she has felt pride in her country she needs to consider the effect of those remarks on the white audience.

Black people have been considering the effect of their words on white people ever since we came out on the losing end of the Columbian encounter. That's at the core of Du Bois' concept of "double consciousness:"

"The history of the American Negro is the history of this strife, — this longing to attain self-conscious manhood, to merge his double self into a better and truer self. In this merging he wishes neither of the older selves to be lost. He does not wish to Africanize America, for America has too much to teach the world and Africa; he does not wish to bleach his Negro blood in a flood of white Americanism, for he believes that Negro blood has yet a message for the world. He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both a Negro and an American without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows, without having the doors of Opportunity closed roughly in his face."

We will be taking about real change in this country when a Michelle Obama can speak from the specificity of her experience and have that recognized as another part of what it means to be American.

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|

In a capitalist society

lainad — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 09:22:31 -0600

We will never have a colourblind society.

No you were not being attacked. As you say, this is a forum for open ideas but again, when you casually dismiss the experiences that people unlike yourself face, I think there is room for criticsm - or perhaps a 'healthy disagreement' and a forum to clarify things.

Yes, the 'black girls' remark was incredibly sad.

Bill

leaustin — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:57:18 -0600

Sorry, Alainad, I'm not argueing about Bill. He deserves vitriol. I am arguing with newspaper headlines. And I'm sorry you thought I meant to stifle your opinion--I thought this was a discussion of open minds open to people of all colors and ideas without fear of being attacked. By the way, it was a black girl who said upon first sight said she accepted me because I was "not a regular white person." I thought it funny at the time, but now I think that's sad. Don't we need to strive to be colorblind and not ridicule people who try to see the world that way? That does take an open mind.

Linda
http://www.moonbridgebooks.com
http://moonbridgeblog.blogspot.com

Yeah, leaustin I'm talking to you

lainad — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:32:19 -0600

Leaustin, you are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I and every other commenter on this post. This post was originally filed under the Race, Ethnicity & Culture section where we discuss race, ethnicity & culture. I try and focus on current events being discussed in the blogosphere by other bloggers who focus on the above topics. Many of those topics are not the most ‘positive,’ as people use their blogs to highlight topics that among other things, inform others and hopefully spark awareness and change. If this offends you, then, uh…..sorry.

It’s is well, interesting that you see the ‘brown’ in everything, and you are not a ‘regular white person.’ Perhaps one day I will aspire to be just like you, as you implied that I and / or other commenters seem to believe that we see everything in black and white, that this is simply just another case of Blacks playing the victim. Until the day I am suddenly transported to Saturn or Uranus, I will continue doing what I do because I am based in reality. Being ‘colorblind’ is a novel idea, but not realistic.

Obviously there is a disconnect between realizing that some people’s experiences differ from your experiences, but that does not mean (and I take great offensive to this but am certainly not surprised) that it means that concerns from Black folks and people that support anti-racist behavior (and yes, sometimes outrage), are somehow trite and insignificant because you personally have not experienced them.

This is not meant to be a personal attack…really, but your post does raise some interesting issues that actually support the reason for this section at Blogher. I can only speak for myself but it is the attitude in your post that I am trying to change, the mindset that because issues of race and racism are raised, that the person who is raising them somehow racist against all white people, the implication that blacks and other people who face discrimination on an everyday basis should just shut up and basically ‘concede’ to the fact that in this case, people like Bill O’Reilly can evoke a term that serves as a symbol of extreme hatred and violence primarily against African-Americans directed towards an African-American public figure.

Are we not allowed to voice our opinion? I am not a citizen of the US but if I was I would think that if I was, I would have the right to not only voice my opinion and work towards eliminating behavior from public figures – TV reporters 'journalists' whose jobs mean that they somehow represent at least a portion of society - that is offensive to not only myself, but to others who believe in anti-racism and a just society for all.

The straw-man arguments that you used to defend your position are weak and unfortunately commonplace as a way to diffuse critical conversations about racism. They need to be backed up with concrete examples as to how this post implies that all whites are branded as racists. Then again, if that’s what you want to believe, so be it. But as I am obviously not as socially evolved as you, I think you are greatly mistaken. For far too long Blacks have been told that we should somehow ‘ignore’ and ‘dismiss’ these incidents as they are deemed as not important by those who have never suffered the levels of discrimination that affect how they are perceived and treated in all aspects of their lives – careers, educational opportunities, housing and their personal and everyday interactions. The ‘well-meaning’ person who makes these suggestions inadvertently implies that such situations that we face are either somehow our fault and do not realize the voracity of said comments – not just personally but how we, and people that look like us are perceived by the greater society. And these perception do affect how people are treated in all the above areas listed above.

This post is getting too long, but I just wanted to respond.

I just spent some time

Bluttercup — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 02:42:50 -0600

I just spent some time writing a comment which agrees with your position. When I tried to preview it,
the entire essay disappeared. Perhps you can offer some advice as to how I can mamage to preview
something and post it.
By the way, that is a typo in my name. It should read Buttercup.

Buttercup

"I'm saying this particular

Yvette Perry — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:35:21 -0600

"I'm saying this particular blow-out is not REALLY a race issue."

Then why the use of the term "lynch"? Further, why "lynching *party*"--especially if you've ever seen the photos of White men, women, and children in a party atmosphere, smiling and posing with the mutilated corpses, enjoying picnic lunches...

Consider other, more ready at hand terms he could have used; "witch hunt" comes immediately to mind. So why "lynching party"?

And note that he never said something like "let's *not* have a lynching party." He only said he did not want to have one UNLESS further evidence could be found that Mrs. Obama was militant, unpatriotic, whatever.

If others making similar attacks against Mrs. Obama's words really should be given the benefit of the doubt and are merely practicing politics as usual, then shouldn't it be up to them to distinguish their critique from O'Reilly's?

Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast

I would vote

JenInShanghai — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:27:59 -0600

For you.
Why aren't you running for President?
That was incredibly well-put.
Thanks.

Are you talking to me?!

leaustin — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 22:11:21 -0600

Does everything have to be just black and white? I'm sorry, but I see a lot of brown in everything, including myself as I am not a "regular white person," not that that should really matter, ladies. I see you assume the worst. Not everyone is an ignorant racist pig just because they look white. The media and especially talking heads like O'Reilly need to be taken with a huge grain of salt because their jobs are to look for trouble and magnify the negative. Sounds like Bill did his job well. In no way do I dismiss his lynching comment which borders on evil because he knows very well what he's doing; on the other hand, I put very little stock in anything the man says. Unfortunately, many people don't understand that he is paid well to be a trouble-maker.

Just because black people have been abused does not mean they are always abused by everybody that looks white, including news reporters and editors. With that attitude, this country will never move forward in race relations. Ignoring Bill, the attacks on Michelle's not-worded-well comment are the usual mean-spirited politics, combined with the fact that powerful women of all colors have an uphill battle. Personally, I love that Michelle is a strong, intelligent, outspoken woman--and she could be purple for all I care--but she, like any white, black, red, yellow, brown, or purple woman will be attacked for the mere fact that she is a woman who dares to be strong and intelligent and outspoken. Many countries are just like that. Sorry, ladies, I don't intend to get into a flaming debate here, but prefer to think the better of others (except Bill) until proven otherwise.

Linda
http://www.moonbridgebooks.com
http://moonbridgeblog.blogspot.com

Bill O'Reilly

sb11 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:36:53 -0600

As far as Bill O'Reilly is concerned he is a mouthpiece for the Bush whitehouse....who are hatemongers, they start trouble racially, as well as gay/lesbian hatemongering....you'd have to be a complete moron to believe anything out of that lying mouth of Bill O'Reilly and yes I believe the lynch comment was mean't to have racial overtones. He did it on purpose but he is a real pig and bully anyway!

racial & black woman can't speak out publicly is wrong

sb11 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:23:50 -0600

I don't believe that >>Michelle said that her husband's White House campaign had made her "really proud" of her country for the first time. that wasn't what she said at all . That may be your interpretation of what she said. But in all actuality her husbands campaign wasn't mentioned in the original comment. Personally I don't care what she said, I am not a flag waving hypocritical republican that capitalizes on anything as against your country. But in truth she did say "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country"..............that is the line they capitalized on. For myself I have stuck my foot in my mouth many a time; and if Michelle Obama stuck her foot in her mouth...it isn't the end of the world. This is one of those republican I go to church and pick up and hold babies during the campaign moments that they love so well, who if they go to church they are crooks the rest of the time. I wouldn't take it racially, but just a political opportunity to turn their Independent voters that could vote democratically against the candidate by way of what the wife said about the country. It is just political b.s. .....if Cindy McCain or Bill Clinton would have made the remark...it would have been treated the same

Excellent Post Megan!

AnnDelusian — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 17:36:18 -0600

O'Reilly WAS using the word lynch to be provocative and ugly. Several media people have been chastised for using the word, why not him?

Kudos Megan

lainad — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:09:35 -0600

You are far more eloquent than I!

Message to Michelle Obama: Honesty and Politics Do Not Mix (Or Black Girl, Know Your Place!)

lainad — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:04:52 -0600

At a rally in Milwaukee last weekend, Michelle Obama did something that apparently is very rare in the political arena (and apparently something a Black woman should never, ever do in public) – giving her honest opinion when speaking to potential voters for her husband. Here is the offending gaffe:

"Hope is making a comeback and, let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change….. And let me tell you something. I need to believe that we live in that kind of nation, where hope and possibility and unity is still what drives us.”

What is the problem? you are probably asking yourself. And why is Laina yet again, bringing up race?

Here she is explaining her remarks.

The problem is, is that the above statement was deemed ‘unpatriotic’; that a) she was previously not a proud ‘American’ and b) she was only now proud of the ‘land of the free’ – you know - the country with all ‘dem folks who boast about their‘Freedom of Speech’ and all that stuff – because her Black husband actually has a chance of becoming president. And no, I wasn’t the first person to interject race. Apparently, what some are so miffed at is that what she was actually saying that she has a chip on her shoulder ‘cause she Black and all, and therefore disrespected folks (i.e all the Americans she should be groveling to).

A member of the American Disabled Veterans group, in turn, accused Mrs Obama of racism.
"Ms Obama, your comments are nothing short of unpatriotic, racist and downright shameful," he wrote.
Cindy McCain, the wife of the Republican frontrunner John McCain, also waded into the controversy.
"I am proud of my country. I don't know about you? If you heard those words earlier, I am very proud of my country."

How dare she!

In Fear of a Black First Lady Thought Merchant looks at the prevailing stereotype that exists about African-American’s inherent unpatriotism:

An objective person might ask, “What is the big deal about that statement?” The “big deal” is only recognized if one understands America’s racist history of attempting to portray African Americans as “unpatriotic.” This constant onslaught on the sensibilities of Black people and their American identity is a direct result of the true ignorance most Americans have about the history of Black people in the United States.I

....In other words, Michelle Obama projects the aura of an intelligent Harvard trained, Princeton educated attorney with the confident strength, poise, and razor sharp honesty of a Black women who has navigated through the mean streets of Chicago’s South Side unscathed. This is not the biography of the recent Stepford wives that have occupied the roll of First Lady.

Furthermore, one can contend that Michelle Obama even trumps the Yale Law school educated First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, who though was perhaps the first “professional” to be First Lady, never dealt with the reality of being a Black women growing up in the Chicago streets while still academically excelling beyond the expectations of many from her origins.”

The worse response came from Mr. Passive-Aggressive, Bill O’Reilly, who said:

That's wrong. And I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels - that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down.

And if your investigation reveals that she is unpatriotic, then you will lynch her?

If you are confused about the voracity of O’Reilly’s statement, read Strange Fruit Hanging from the Poplar Trees.

Yes, I’m saying it again, it is good that the subject of race is being discussed – okay, so in this case, it’s pretty screwed up. But it gives us an indication of the problems that still exist in society – in particular, the blowback over a Black woman’s opinion that went against the status quo belief of what an ‘American’ should be – in deep denial, I guess. Let’s take it a bit further: her rather innocuous struck at the fact that the legacy of African-American’s struggles in the country, making her husband’s ‘color blind’ campaign the farce that a lot of us cynics always believed it was. People want to vote for Obama because of his JFK-ishness, maybe to alleviate their liberal guilt…or maybe so angry Blacks will shut up about racism and inequalities. She touched a nerve yet did so unwittingly, but her remarks, which if a white man said the same thing would have never garnered such media attention, were exacerbated because of her gender and her ethnicity.

Just remember though – Michelle did not bring up the race card – the rest of us did.