Tolu Olorunda
Staff Writer - YourBlackWorld.com
Watching Senator Obama, on Sunday, answer questions from the audience of no-nonsense journalists of culture, was like being subjected - against one's will - to the drivel of FOX News’s pundits and staffers: A certain level of frustration and aggravation was built up. On Senator Obama's YouTube page, the video from his appearance at the UNITY Convention was uploaded -- with the exception of one segment: That which featured him being interrogated by veteran journalists and unsolicited reporters. At the Q&A session, he was asked poignant questions of grave concern to Black, Brown, Red and Yellow folks. His responses could only be described by the Friends of Distinction hit, "Going in circles."
Watching the Senator Play politics with the lives of innocent folks was deeply disturbing and disheartening. At times, he even lied through his teeth and contradicted his previous held positions and declarations. I was disappointed, despondent and depressed. I admit that I have never really been an Obama supporter, but as the saying goes; "To whom much is giving, much is expected." Having been surrendered over 90% of the Black vote, much more is required from the dark-skinned candidate. His performance was not surprising, for it was indeed Senator Obama who, on the 40 yr. commemoration of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King's legacy, chose to speak 400 miles away in Indiana, as opposed to Memphis, Tenn. I will now attempt to decode certain questions tossed to the Chicagoan Senator, his responses, and what the ideal reply from a former community-organizer should have been.
Question #1: Brian Bull, Wisconsin Public Radio and the Native American Journalists Association. "Last February, the Australian prime minister apologized for the past treatment of its indigenous people. Last month, the Canadian prime minister also issued an apology for its treatment of its indigenous population. Would your administration issue an apology to Native Americans for the atrocities they've endured for the past 500 years"?
Analysis: Brian Bull, being the crafty Journalist that he is, layed the foundation for Barack Obama to take an "either or" stance on such a dire issue as the genocidal maltreatment of "Native Americans" in the past, and present. With the recollection of the set precedents by Australia and Canada, the candidate who hopes to restore the moral rank of America should have hit this ball out of the Park.
Obama's response: "You know, I personally would want to see our tragic history or the tragic elements of our history acknowledged. And I think that there's no doubt that, when it comes to our treatment of Native Americans, as well as other persons of color in this country, that we've got some -- some very sad and difficult things to account for. You know, what an official apology would look like, how it would be shaped, that's something that I would want to consult with Native American tribes and councils to talk about, and -- because, obviously, as sovereign nations, they also have a whole host of other issues that they're concerned about and that they've prioritized... But I've consistently believed, when it comes -- whether it's Native American issues, whether it's African-American issues and reparations, that the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just to offer words, but offer deeds."
Analysis: Clearly, the Senator is confused and misguided; for to any candidate with a High School education, an official apology to "Native Americans" is not only timely but long past due. Shamefully, political posturing has bitten the head of judgment, integrity and character in the Obama campaign.
Question #2: Suzanne Malveaux, CNN White House correspondent. "When it comes to reparations, would you take it a step further, in terms of apologizing for slavery or offering reparations to various groups"?
Analysis: Malveaux was driving to extrapolate a direct answer from the Senator, who at that moment was losing his ever-present cool.
Obama's response: "You know, I have said in the past -- and I'll repeat again -- that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed... You know, the fact is, is that dealing with some of the -- some of the legacy of discrimination is going to cost billions of dollars. And we're not going to be able to have that kind of resource allocation unless all Americans feel that they are invested in making this stuff happen."
Analysis: For those who are too strung-out over their inebriation of the Obama kool-aid, what the once-perceived statesman was attempting to say is this: "Until white folks decide that reparations is a legitimate response to the cruel, demonic and irreparable establishment of slavery, you niggas ain't getting sh--!!! Now move on to the next question before I make it plain!"
Question #3: Leonard Pitts, Miami Herald/National Association of Black Journalists: "You have repeatedly denounced false rumors that you are a Muslim. My question and what I'm wondering is whether or not you feel that you have gone too far, whether or not, in answering these questions without challenging the implicit assumption that there's something wrong with being a Muslim, you have actually done harm to the cause of Muslims. You have visited churches and synagogues. When will you -- or is it in the plans for you to visit a mosque"?
Analysis: GOD BLESS LEONARD PITTS! GOD BLESS LEONARD PITTS! GOD BLESS LEONARD PITTS! For the first time, a journalist has the testicular fortitude to confront the silent bigotry against Muslims and Islam, which Obama has, consciously or unconsciously, endorsed with his trademark denial, "I am NOT a Muslim; I have never been a Muslim; I don't know why anyone would think that." If Mr. Obama has any moral conscience at all, he would have seized the opportunity to make a bold proclamation in defense of Islamic Rights and, at the very least, hinted at an apology for the reflexive reactions he has, in the past, solicited to strengthen his vehement refutation of the lies and falsehoods used by FOX News and other bigoted networks to "smear" him.
Obama's response: "Well, Leonard, I have to say, this is a classic example of a no-win situation, right? So I try to correct something that is false and then people say, "Well, why are you correcting this thing in a way that isn't sufficiently" -- well, let me put it this way. First of all, I have repeatedly on various occasions said I am not a Muslim, but this whole strategy of suggesting that I am is indicative of anti-Muslim sentiment that we have to -- that we have to fight against. So maybe you haven't seen those quotes, but they're out there. And I've said them on more than one occasion... I just don't like the idea of somebody falsely identifying my religion. I suspect that you wouldn't appreciate that, either... Keep in mind; I'm the person who talked about discrimination against Arab-Americans in my convention speech in 2004, something that I hadn't heard too many other politicians talk about in the height of the scare after 9/11. I have visited mosques here in my community, repeatedly, on -- and met with Muslim leaders on a wide range of occasions."
Analysis: Shame on you Senator Obama, for diverting attention from the pertinent question asked by Mr. Pitts, and flipping it into a 'credentials game.' When the question was raised - “You have visited churches and synagogues. When will you -- or is it in the plans for you to visit a mosque?" - the appropriate response would have been to provide a date and time, in which you would shame the devil and his comrades by visiting a registered mosque and ripping the superficial mask off those republicans and conservatives, who have used their political pulpit to remonstrate against - and vilify - Muslims and Islam. It is saddening to watch this spectacle go on, but with a candidate, who - as the veteran left historian, Paul Street has continuously noted - has eight of his top twenty campaign investors representing securities and investment firms, not much progressivism should be expected.
Question #4: John Yang, NBC News/Asian American Journalists Association: "I'd like to ask you about affirmative action. Just this morning, Senator McCain endorsed an Arizona ballot initiative that would end preferences based on race and gender in that state. The author of that initiative, Ward Connerly, says your very success undercuts the argument for affirmative action. If the United States were to have a president of color, would there still be a need for affirmative action"?
Analysis: With a mission to offer redemption at a low price, Yang obviously tried to help Obama out with a softball, in the hope that the good Senator might redeem himself to those who were beginning to witness a different side of him. For a Black man who admitted to have 'blown away' a substantial amount of his high-school academical life with the absorption of illegal drugs and mindless entertainment, one would expect something more sympathetic and empathetic from the Harvard graduated and one-term Senator.
Obama's response: "Well, look, I am a strong supporter of affirmative action when properly structured so that it is not just a quota, but it is acknowledging and taking into account some of the hardships and difficulties that communities of color may have experienced, continue to experience, and it also speaks to the value of diversity in all walks of American life. We are becoming a more diverse culture, and it's something that has to be acknowledged. I've also said that affirmative action is not going to be the long-term solution to the problems of race in America, because, frankly, if you've got 50 percent of African-American or Latino kids dropping out of high school, it doesn't really matter what you do in terms of affirmative action. Those kids are not getting into college. And, you know, there have been times where I think affirmative action has been viewed as a shortcut to solving some of these broader, long-term structural problems... They -- I think a university or a college should be able to take into account race, but they should also be able to take into account class, and hardship, and difficulty in making assessments about whether or not a young person is deserving of -- of opportunity. I am disappointed, though, that John McCain flipped and changed his position. I think in the past he had been opposed to these kinds of Ward Connerly referenda or initiatives as divisive. And I think he's right. You know, the truth of the matter is, these are not designed to solve a big problem, but they're all too often designed to drive a wedge between people."
Analysis: Barack Obama is, at the very least, making one thing clear: He is a closet-conservative who has been deemed a liberal on the basis of skin-coloration (just as Rev. Jesse Jackson before him). He obviously detests this reality, but understands that he has to play along to win this election. To Obama, whether Black people realize this or not, the reality remains constant, and he could care less. He is aware that the only viable option to his candidacy is John McCain, and by nature, 99.3% of the Negro population would vote for a Blue-Dog Democrat before they wink at a Progressive Republican.
Conclusion: If Black people don't get this by now, nothing will shatter their slumber and unbelievable gullibility. Barack Obama - in the words of Dr. Boyce Watkins - must be intensely examined and held to the highest form of accountability because, "The same degree of accountability that Senator Obama is requesting from Black males should also be expected from the most powerful Black male in America." In my assessment, Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party Nominee, is the only candidate in this historic election, who is willing to put integrity before income, sincerity before success and verity before victory. In this day and age, Black folks better wake up fast, before Clarence Thomas is sitting in the White House!
Click for full transcript of event
No comments:
Post a Comment