The Race Debate: Albany Swears in an African-American Governor a Day before the Obama Speech
All of a sudden, the national conversation has returned to race. Barack Obama delivered a smart and strong speech this morning in Philadelphia, a city itself not immune to the racial divide that exists in our nation. If politicians' lives encapsulate the narrative they weave on the campaign trail, then Obama reminded us of his amazing story, how within his own family and his genes he embodies Black and White, and challenged many of us to join with the young people who are flocking to his candidacy, young voters who don't have memories of the racial divisions that framed so many earlier political fights on the streets and in the voting booths.
This speech will probably go down as the most important of his campaign; if he wins the primary and the general election it will be on the heels of this speech, and on what the promise of his campaign remains: a photograph of where we are as a nation today and where we want to be.
Just yesterday, with race almost as an afterthought, New York State inaugurated its first African-American governor, David Paterson. It was incredible for many reasons, the previous governor's scandal, the Obama/Clinton campaign and as a picture of how far we New Yorkers have come in removing our own blockade of ethnic and racial divides in our political life. New York historically was a jigsaw puzzle of a balancing act, fitting ethnic, religious and racial players in place to run on a 'balanced' ticket.
Yesterday was an incredible moment for our state--one that reminded me of an earlier time when Basil Paterson, the Governor's father, ran for Lt. Governor in New York.
Basil ran for Lt. Governor on a ticket with Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg in 1970 (they lost to Nelson Rockefeller). This was in the hey-dey of NY ethnic politics and long before blogging and 24 hour news cycles. Basil, who is Catholic, could even be passed off for White-Irish as long as he was kept out of the eye of the voters who would be worried about an African-American from Harlem. When I was working as press secretary for Carl McCall (Carl, also an African American leader from Harlem and Manhattan's West Side represented the same state senate seat as Basil and David Paterson) in his race for Lt. Governor a decade later with Mario Cuomo in Cuomo's gubernatorial race, I was told a story that seems especially poignant now, with the Obama controversy and the Paterson inauguration.
As the story goes--When a Democratic leader introduced Basil Paterson to Dan O'Connell, the party boss of Albany, the friend said, "You know Dan, Basil is Catholic." O'Connell replied, "Well, that must make you the only white guy on the ticket." The other Democrats --Arthur Goldberg, Arthur Levitt for Comptroller,Attorney General: Adam Walinsky and the U.S. Senate candidate Richard Ottinger were Jewish.
Also told were tales about how truly terrible Goldberg was on the stump. A learned lawyer, he wasn't made for politics; so much so that those upstate bosses who were worried about the pull on the ticket of a Black man and a Jew, told Goldberg to stay home and asked for Basil as a speaker since his charisma was much more endearing to the voters upstate, no matter the color of his skin.
Maybe--let's just hope--that those days are over and we can finally listen to the debate around the economy, the war, health care, etc. if, at the same time, we are able to have a serious discussion about race and ethnicity that moves far past symbolism.
Not so. I disagree. It looks to me like he has stuck his hand into a tar baby, and the more he speaks about it, the worse it gets.
He is a normal neophyte politician that has yet to come to terms with how the ball game is played. For most voters past history is all. One must earn his way up the ladder. Two years in the senate won by the other candidate disolving is not going to do it.
His words of hope and unity mean little unless translated into tangible policies. Few of which he has yet offered to convince me He is not the Messiah even though women faint at his rallies.
Words, words, words, Ms. Mort has them, and so does Obama. But he is going to need more than charisma.
I believe he will win the nomination, but it will be with minority Democratic Red State delegates. None of which will go blue. McCain will bury him.
March 18, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right: he's entitled to our vote because of who his mother married.
Oh, and a lot of younger people like him.
And I share the complaint that well-crafted words without well-crafted solutions to back them up are not persuasive.
Too often, Obama laundry lists the problems of this society without offering a clue as to how he intends to solve them.
March 18, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that Obama is short on specifics.
His proposals seem to be relatively close to Hillary's and many other Democrats'.
On the other hand, the presidency is MOSTLY about the bully pulpit; inspiring large numbers of people to go in a certain direction.
When we think of JFK, his oratory is what comes to mind first.
Sure, we might think about his pledge to go to the moon or his Peace Corps proposal (which was just an item in a speech before it caught fire with college kids), but mostly its his words that gave voice to the aspirations of a generation.
It's not his deeds we remember, except, often, critically--the missile crisis and the Bay of Pigs. It was the way he told us we could do better and inspired us to try.
And since he and Hillary have largely the same proposals, I see Obama's ability to inspire and move people as a big plus.
You don't "sell" people on proposals with details and policies-- you sell them on the "big picture" and that's what he has.
March 18, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may be JKF's rhetoric that you remember, but, being twelve years old at the time, I remember his handling of the Cuban missile crisis, the way he didn't give in to the urgings of idiots like Curtis LeMay, and adverted what may well have been the start of WWIII. And not to put too fine a point on it, but JKF had been around politics all his life, on the international scene through his father's career, and on a local basis through his mother's family. He had been through the horrors on war and walked in the corridors of power as a House member, then as a Senator. All these things helped shaped the decisions he made during October, 1962. I heard a lot of comparison between JKF and Obama, but it's always about their rhetoric, never about the idea of experience. How does Obama's even begin to compare to JFK's?
And what does your use of the word "critically" mean?
March 20, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yesterday race was taboo in this campaign. Today Obama makes a speech about same, and now we are hearing calls for another debate, on what subject, race, of course.
Bill C. tries to give Obama a complement in SC and he is labeled a racist. Gerri F. makes a frank and honest statement, and she is demonised. By the way, she should also have said that a bi-racial man could not have gotten this far.
Obama was black until he locked up the black vote and suddendly today he becomes a "bi-racial" man.
Todate he has only talked about his paternal grandmother living in a mud hut in Kenya, but just today he mentions, his white grandparents(with photo), who raised him. Go figure..
March 18, 2008 8:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
You guys should get a grip. I am a 50 year old white guy, and Obama is by far the best politician I have ever seen. Best at politics, smartest, and potentially a great president. The speech he gave today was dynamite, an opening gambit for the conversation about race and class that the nation needs to have.
If you go to his website you'll find most of the specifics you pretend to yearn for.
March 18, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specifics on a web site rarely bind a candidate. Specifics in a campaign speech do.
Specifics on a campaign site are often the work of some wonk and may or may not even be understood or supported by the candidate. How the candidate handles them in a speech or even better in a debate does reveal that. I like to see a candidate think in public. Obama rarely does.
I saw one speech where Obama said basically, listen closely, I'm been challenged about specifics, I'm going to be specific. The mouse that emerged was that he was against lobbyists. ROFL.
Obama's claim to political greatness rests largely on his ability to unite: Done a great job for the Democratic Party, hasn't he?
It doesn't help that he twists his opponents remarks to make them look racist when they are not. Geraldine Ferraro is a case in point.
Obama is someone who majored in International Relations and failed to predict that his comments about Pakistan would touch off a firestorm in that country.
March 19, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
At my own risk i will repeat myself - he is very clever
Give him a little credit,though, he has more experience than the current Prez Bush did when he first ran,
but as to judgement and credability, at this point , even given today's speech, he is still a loser.
March 18, 2008 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
At my own risk i will repeat myself - he is very clever
Give him a little credit,though, he has more experience than the current Prez Bush did when he first ran,
but as to judgement and credability, at this point , even given today's speech, he is still a loser.
March 18, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you have to repeat yourself twice?
Try spell-check before you pronounce on the credibility of a figure like Obama. Doesn't do much for your own when you misspell common words.
Obama is a loser, huh? Maybe we're all losers.
March 19, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
well, i see the clinton trolls are truly attempting to take over tpm, now.
note to clinton supporters... remember that when god wants to punish you, he answers your prayers.
you just may be able to win the primary battle, (with your smear and fear dirty tricks) but i guarantee you that you WILL lose the war.
if hillary's elected, and that's a big "if", nothing will change. NOTHING!
she didn't get the reputation for being the most polarizing politician in america today for nothing...
as demonstrated in her (and her supporters') willingness to tear even her own party to shreads.
and she will NEVER be able to unite the country to accomplish a diddly damn thing, for precisely the same reasons. i guarantee you that if she's the nominee, not only will congress remain too evenly split to avoid gridlock and obstructionist politics, the democrats WILL LOSE THEIR MAJORITY in '10!
write it down, and remember who told you so.
March 19, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's a troll? Anybody who disagrees with you? Supports Hillary? Questions Obama's experience and policy?
Just curious.
March 20, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ever heard of fools gold?
Obama has been selling it to you by the bag full.
After yesterday's speech,it is by the buschel.
And no matter how you spell it, he still ain't got none.
March 19, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really, really resented Obama using his grandmother's comment about being afraid of black men without giving us any context about why she said so. I was surprised to read on dailyhowler.com that Rev. Jackson felt the same way:
"With these incomparable thoughts in mind, we chuckled mordantly at one part of Obama’s speech. (For the record: We thought Obama’s speech was brilliant—on the merits. Unfortunately, the merits don’t define how politics typically works.) Our thought? Obama can ease up on Grandma a bit. Are we the only ones who recall what Jackson said in 1993? Just to be completely perverse, we’ll let Bob Herbert relay it:
HERBERT (12/12/93): Jesse Jackson is traveling the country with a tough anti-crime message that he is delivering to inner-city youngsters. In Chicago he said, "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery—then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."
Jackson’s remark was widely discussed at the time. Understanding the tragedy of urban crime, Herbert reacted to it approvingly. “There is almost no way to overstate the problem,” he wrote. “In Washington, black youngsters are so aware of the danger of being murdered that some are selecting the outfits they want to be dressed in for their own funerals.”
March 20, 2008 3:47 AM | Reply | Permalink