Bio
Laina Dawes is a contributing editor for Blogher and is also a music journalist whose writings can be found at Exclaim! Canada and...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Obama on Letterman: "I Was Black Before the Election"

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 7
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

The was President Obama's weak-ass excuse to defend the charges of racist rhetoric (via President jimmy Carter's assertion last week) by "Birthers" Town-Hall crackpots and extreme-right wingers whom...yes, you guessed it, are using 'creative' ways to basically say that they have a problem - and some flat-out deny - that their President is an African-American. From Racialicious: (you can watch the interview here).

What are the chances that Obama actually DISAGREES with Carter? Sure “I was black before the election” is quintessential Obama (witty! charming! irreverent!) but it’s also, well, snarky. It’s just a wee bit dismissive of what Carter had to say, and what many of us believe.

Definitely the comment is meant to emphasize Obama’s continuing faith in Americans – a cornerstone of his presidency – but to me it also has the effect of essentially making fun of Carter’s very real claim.

From Racewire:

“It’s important to realize that I was actually black before the election,” Obama pointed out. “That tells you a lot, I think, about where the country is at.”

I think Barack Obama agrees with Jimmy Carter’s statement, but can’t say so because it would fuel even more animosity against him. If he were to say he agreed with Carter we’d probably see him forced to take his words back, just like he “could have calibrated” his words more carefully in the racially-charged controversy over the arrest of a Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates.

To be honest, I think that (and I've said this before on this site) that President Obama is in a conundrum. He cannot say what he personally thinks ( and I really do believe he is flat out lying here) for fear of starting a race war. Yeah, I said it - a RACE WAR. Or getting his ass shot. But in doing so, he is not only disrespecting President Carter's courage in standing up and stating how he feels; for becoming the spokesperson on racism and its effects ( because you need a white man to say it for assertions of racism to be seen as valid in the public eye), but he also has probably disenfranchised millions of black voters and supporters ( like me) by 'playing it safe.'

What Obama is saying with the above statement ( if you don't mind me paraphrasing) is that, 'hey, these crazy nuts weren't around during the election, so it doesn't make any sense that they are causing a ruckus now.' And he is, to a point, right. Where were these people? Hell, even Dan Savage thought something smelled funny:

So our first black president can't call clearly racist insults or acts or motives racist. He needs a crazy ol' cracker like Jimmy Carter to do that for him—and then he needs to go on TV and dismiss and downplay Carter's comments. And Americans are simultaneously upset with Carter because he's right and grateful to the president for letting them—and the country—off the hook.

Crazy.

The crazy nuts weren't voting for him, which is in their right. But perhaps these people were also hidden, not wanting to make a statement until after the elections were over. Or they could be like this guy, whom I was told about this weekend.

There is this man, who is very well-known and well-respected in certain circles, who armed his wife and his 7 year-old son with loaded AK-47's and 9mm's and told them to place them in the front of their house, and to shoot any black people that came on their property. He felt that there would be a race war if Obama was elected and felt that all the blacks would come gunning for innocent Americans like him. The person that told me this story was with him when he told his family this, and I believe this person. And yes, the guy taught his 7 year-old son how to load the rifles.

But let's look on the flip side - what does Obama's assertion on Letterman say about black people? Does it say that we should dismiss racial discrimination that we face, or that other's face? Should we just conveniently ignore it, stop fighting for equality and justice? Stop trying to publicize racial inequalities via social networking because mainstream media doesn't care?

Thembi Ford from What Would Thembi Do? doesn't believe it either:

You’d think that living with the knowledge that there are millions of people who’d love to

  • 7
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Nordette Adams 6 pts

Sometimes we miswrite, sometimes we misread. We're humans. :-) And that's why I like pencils on erasers and computers with backspace buttons.  Sorry to write such a long response to you. I get going sometimes and going and going.

Nordette Adams ( http://www.bookotopia.com ) is a BlogHer CE ( http://www.blogher.com/haystackprofile/viewprofile... ) & you can find her other stuff through Her 411 ( http://her411.com ).

LucindaA 5 pts

I see that now and even mentioned I might have in my original post.  I looked at what I quoted and even though I read it and reread it as I was writing my response, I didn't see what you had actually written.  Tired?  Long day?  Temporary stupidity?  Perhaps.

Nonetheless, I appreciate your thoughtful response and apologize for my misreading what you had actually written.

Nordette Adams 6 pts

There are people, however, who object to Obama's policies based on ideology alone and are not influenced as much by subconscious racial fears as others.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with or what you want me to say other than what I've said, which is some people object to Obama's policies based on ideology alone, which is what you say is your reason for not voting for him. I say that these people who voted against Obama based on ideology alone are not influenced by subconscious racial as much as some others are.

If your quibble is that you don't believe you have subconscious racial fears, then you may wish to take that argument to the psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists who assert that "fear of the other" is a survival instinct and humans with "normal" survival instincts have varying degrees of this fear. 

Can anyone of any race honestly say they have no subconscious racial fears ( https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/feature... ) or bias? The word "subconscious" modifies the fear to mean a fear of which you are not aware.

To state that everyone who didn't vote for him has racial fears, conscious or subconscious, is inaccurate. 

Um, you seem to think this is the statement that was made. You are incorrect because I would say without reservation that there are also people who voted for Obama who have both subconscious and conscious racial fears. 

To have voted against Obama is not proof that you are a racist anymore than to have voted for Obama proves you are not a racist. Why do you assume that either statement has been made?

Nevertheless, if you don't feel any sense of white guilt, then so be it. There are plenty of white people who do not feel any sense of guilt regarding white privilege and there's nothing abnormal about this lack of guilt. Guilt or not, however, I'm seeing a lot of people defensive at the mention of the word "racist" who seem to think voting for Obama is some kind of litmus test for them.

Thank you for respecting my point of view, but I do believe you think I am saying something that I am not saying. The word "racist" is also an adjective. If you don't think it applies to you, so be it. Since I don't know you, and I specifically said some people voted against Obama based on ideology alone, I made allowances for the type of person you say that you are ... what more do you want from me?

In fact, I only mentioned one person in that paragraph by name, Rush Limbaugh. If you would like to argue that Rush Limbaugh only objects to Barack Obama based on ideology, then yes, we disagree.

Nordette Adams ( http://www.bookotopia.com ) is a BlogHer CE ( http://www.blogher.com/haystackprofile/viewprofile... ) & you can find her other stuff through Her 411 ( http://her411.com ).

LucindaA 5 pts

Also, Obama's right on one level. He was black before the election, and I suspect the same people who take racist aim at him now, didn't vote for him. Limbaugh didn't vote for Obama.  There are people, however, who object to Obama's policies based on ideology alone and are not influenced as much by subconscious racial fears as others.  If he hopes to sway those people, he cannot be heard saying that anyone is against him because of his skin color because the guilt will kick in and those people will think he's lumping them in with the die-hard racists.

I think you are right except for one point.  I didn't vote for Obama because of his ideology, not because of his race.  He's as much white as he is black and even if he wasn't mixed race, I really wouldn't care.  He could be purple for all I care.  I didn't like his platform. 

Guilt isn't the factor when feeling like I'm being lumped in with everyone else.  Annoyance, irritation, anger.  Yes.  Guilt? No.  Because I would actually have to have considered his race to feel guilt and I didn't and don't.  But everything I read of late about our president certainly does focus on race it seems.  I did wonder how long it would take.

To state that everyone who didn't vote for him has racial fears, conscious or subconscious, is inaccurate.  I don't usually jump on and say "I'm not racist."  But when someone says everyone who didn't vote for him is racist at some level, I feel compelled to say something.

Perhaps I'm misreading what you are saying.  I hope I am because even though I don't always agree with your POV, I definitely respect it.

Nordette Adams 6 pts

The only type of blackness accepted and embraced by middle America is one that denies its hardships and absolves whites of any wrongdoing.  Black individuals have historically gotten ahead more quickly by dissembling when asked about their true feelings regarding race, by cloaking that part of themselves that acknowledges the political nature of being black in America ( http://bigsole.blogspot.com/2009/09/political-poet... ). The art of mollifying white Americans lest they be consumed by guilt is a survival skill.

Look at what happened when the Attorney General Holder told the truth ( http://urbanpsalms.blogspot.com/2009/02/holder-sai... ) that we have not overcome racism. All hell broke loose and Obama had to distance himself.

Look at what happened when Obama acknowledged that racial profiling is a problem. He ended up having to host a beer summit with a Cambridge cop and Henry Louis Gates.

For the sake of getting work done in Washington, he's taken the route of the dissembler because it's politically prudent and like white politicians, he knows that if he has to offend a group, it might as well be people of color who still have less clout than whites. In Obama's case, he hopes we will cut him some slack, seeing his hard task. Some, of course, will not.

If he'd acknowledged race is a factor in how some protesters relate to his presidency, then over the next 60 days we wouldn't talk about health care, the economy, or Afghanistan.  All we'd do is snipe at each other, each drawing a line in the sand. Yeah, we do that already, but it could be worse.

The Limbaugh-Beck-Dobbs-Coulter-Drudge types are waiting for him to acknowledge race is still an issue so they can again misrepresent him and Michelle as come kind of angry black folk who aren't grateful for their place in America.  These types already coo to fearful whites who are ready to believe black people, less than 15 percent of the population who hold even less of the wealth and power, will take over the U.S.A. 

Also, Obama's right on one level. He was black before the election, and I suspect the same people who take racist aim at him now, didn't vote for him. Limbaugh didn't vote for Obama.  There are people, however, who object to Obama's policies based on ideology alone and are not influenced as much by subconscious racial fears as others.  If he hopes to sway those people, he cannot be heard saying that anyone is against him because of his skin color because the guilt will kick in and those people will think he's lumping them in with the die-hard racists.

Neither would be it good for Obama to let black youth, who have been inspired by his win, to hear him say that because he's black he's hindered from doing his job as the president because that gives those who oppose him based on race too much power, more power than they actually have. Our youth will be better off if they cling to the fact that he won the race for the Oval Office than if they focus on the fact that some people out there are hardcore racists who want them and him to fail.  It's better that they believe they can achieve whatever they must achieve in spite of race.  

There's an art to being aware of racism toward your group while not allowing yourself, the individual, to be painted as victim. Obama cannot be seen as a victim of anything because his opponents will see the blood in the water. He has to be seen as the man who weathers the storm with insults rolling off him like water on a duck's back.

As for the rest of us, we've got eyes. As for him ever telling the truth about being the first African-American president, let's wait to see what his memoirs say. 

Nordette Adams ( http://www.bookotopia.com ) is a BlogHer CE ( http://www.blogher.com/haystackprofile/viewprofile... ) & you can find her other stuff through Her 411 ( http://her411.com ).

oilfieldwife 5 pts

Like the above poster stated, it's a lose/lose situation. No matter what he says he will anger someone, so he took the safe route. If he made it a race issue, he would just be playing in the crazy right winger's hands, so why give them the pleasure? He said something witty that they probably didn't even understand. Do I think it's about a race? Definitely. Do I think he thinks that? Definitely. But there are bigger issues to deal with right now, and I commend his "cool" behavior through this.

An Unlikely Oilfield Wife!

http://www.unlikelyoilfieldwife.com

raisedqueer 5 pts

Even though the interview with Letterman probably wasn't scripted, Obama surely anticipated being asked about his opinion on Jimmy Carter's remarks to Brian Williams. He was probably advised to give a response that was ambiguous. It's a lose/lose situation.

I don't know how he could have handled it any differently. All I know is he has one job I would never want, but am thankful that he is there doing it.

http://raisedqueer.squarespace.com ( http://raisedqueer.squarespace.com/ )