Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Meanwhile in black America...

Since I live in Sydney, I am not listening to the Michael Baisden show anymore, though when I was back in Virginia for December and January, I listened faithfully. Baisden is a major national black radio host.  While in Virginia, I witnessed Michael Baisden's gradual conversion to an Obama supporter, though he still makes an effort to appear neutral. To Baisden's credit, he demands of his listeners that they educate themselves on the candidates. He challenges Clinton loyalists to explain what Bill Clinton did that they admire, and he admonishes any black or female voter for voting their race or gender.

He also encouraged his listeners to send in tough questions to ask all three candidates before their appearances on his show, and heaped great praise on Edwards in particular for his performance in debates, his position on the issues, and his compelling appearance on the radio show. Some of the questions posed to them were exceedingly more interesting than those posed at the 18 debates thus far.

Meanwhile, Tom Joyner, the most popular national black radio host, has long been a fan of the Clintons and was not too impressed with Obama initially. I am told now, he has been very slowly giving Obama more credit, and may even be leaning his way, though I am not at all sure of this.

And then there is Tavis Smiley...

Rumor is Smiley is unhappy. Tavis Smiley invited Barack Obama to speak at the annual State of the Black Union, to be held in New Orleans on February 23. Obama very respectfully declined, and Smiley is none too pleased.

Hillary Clinton accepted.


Here is Obama's response to the invitation:

    Dear Tavis,

    Thank you for the invitation to participate in the 2008 State of the Black Union forum in New Orleans, Louisiana February 21-23. The exchange of ideas raised at this annual symposium are invaluable as our nation strives to address the critical issues facing not just African Americans, but Americans of every race, background and political party.

    I especially commend you for hosting this dialogue in New Orleans. On the eve of the Louisiana primary, I visited this great city for the fifth time since declaring my candidacy to share policy proposals for rebuilding the Gulf Coast so that we never experience another Hurricane Katrina. On February 9, I was deeply humbled to win the Louisiana primary with 86 percent of the African American vote and a 14 point lead among all voters who said they were adversely affected by Hurricane Katrina.

    Uniting our country and creating a national constituency for fundamental change is why I am running for President of the United States. We have come a long way in this race, but we still have a long road ahead. In the final stretch, I will be on the campaign trail everyday in states like Ohio, Texas and Wisconsin talking directly with voters about the causes that are at the heart of my campaign and the State of the Black Union forum such as affordable healthcare, housing, economic opportunity, civil rights and foreign policy. I am committed to touching every voter, and working to earn their vote.

    That is why with regret, I am not able to attend the forum. I understand that you have declined the campaign’s request to have Michelle Obama speak on my behalf. I ask that you reconsider. Michelle is a powerful voice for the type of real change America is hungry for. No one knows my record or my passion for leading America in a new direction more than Michelle Obama.

    Tavis, this is our movement and our time. I look forward to working closely with you throughout this election. Thank you for your continued support.

    Sincerely,
    Barack Obama


This issue has started an animated discussion on the Baisden show and its message boards and I am hard pressed to understand Smiley's anger over Obama's declining his offer at this most crucial time in the election. It is also puzzling that Smiley should think his anger/offense(?) would be shared by the average black voter who understands that when you are running for President of the United States, and are in a delegate tie with the nomination in the balance, you don't leave the campaign trail to go to a state you've already won to attend an event such as this - especially when your opponents would be overjoyed to have you successfully pigeonholed as the black man's candidate.

Elsewhere: Roland Martin addresses the issue on Anderson Cooper 360.

It will be interesting to see if anything is made of this when the media covers Hillary Clinton's appearance at the event.


Comments (25)

avatar

Ms. Jane, you are correct in your assessment of Tavis Smiley and I agree with Roland Martin that Smiley's timing is bad. Michelle Obama would be a great surrogate for her husband.

So let Tavis keep tripping and lose even more influence by his egotistical behavior. Most Black Americans know that Barack keeping his eye on the prize by concentrating on the states with pending primaries is more important it this time than attending Smiley's summit.

By a read of the comments on Roland Martin's article, there are some disturbing takes on the issue that differ from ours.

As important as this may be, this concerns only a marginal segment of "Black America."

Don't forget, Edwards showed up in NOLA when neither Clinton nor Obama would. I don't blame Tavis Smiley: The State of the Black Union Summit is always a MAJOR event and covered in its entirety on C-SPAN. By choosing not to attend the summit, Obama sends a clear message that no amount of spin will negate. It sends the message that he is studiously avoiding issues specific to the African-American community while courting the Latino vote in Texas and elsewhere. Not attending the summit also gives credence to Clinton supporters that he is also avoiding contact with her in an unscripted forum setting. If he intends to win my very populous southern home state, he needs to reconsider his actions.

Unfortunately, he's in a bit of a damned if he does/damned if he doesn't predicament. If he did attend, he'd be sending the very clear message (to some) that he's only interested in black issues and not in Latinos (or whites). When he doesn't attend, he's sending the very clear message (to some) "that he is studiously avoiding issues specific to the African-American community while courting the Latino vote in Texas and elsewhere."

Fortunately, he's got enough credibility that most people won't be interpreting his actions in this way. Most people realize that he's got a job to do, and he's going to do it the best he can. He's the president of blacks, whites, Latinos, Indians, Asians, etc. He has spent a lot of time listening to black concerns. He has spent a lot of time listening to white concerns. His campaign feels (or so it seems to me) that he needs to spend some time listening to Latino concerns. It's not us or them. It's us and them. Hay una sola América

AdAdsurdum,

Expergiscere et coffeam olface.

Yes, I suppose smelling the coffee will convince me that blacks are monolithic and are all tuned to the same radio show and agreeing with it.

Ben,

He's not president yet. If he purports to be a black candidate only when it's convenient for him to identify as such, he's not someone that I'd trust as a political leader representing my community's issues.

As far as I know, he never purports to be a black candidate—he purports to be a candidate who happens to be "black" (scare quotes added to emphasize that it's a pretty nebulous concept in the first place). He transcends race. To many people, that's his appeal. He does not ignore the needs of the black community, but neither does he pander to them. He has a white mother from Kansas that he does not pretend does not exist. He has a black father from Kenya that he does not pretend does not exist. He had an Indonesian stepfather that he does not pretend does not exist. He speaks for all of us.

Obama has never purported to be a "black candidate." This has always been Clinton campaign spin. His campaign is representing "your" community's issues by representing those of all Americans.

avatar

Goldspinner, quit with your heretical comments & amend your ways. As for you AJM, you have thought the thought that must not be spoken or written of. You must not continue to think these things.

That was either sarcasm or it wasn't.

If it was sarcasm, it was without substance, because it's not clear exactly what you were making fun of. The tone you adopted did not even come close to matching the tone that anyone used here in responding to them.

If it wasn't sarcasm (and I strongly suspect it was), then you're also off base. It's good to get the discourse out here, but it should be backed up with specific examples instead of vague innuendos.

avatar

The" thought that may not be thought" is that it was the Obama campaign that interjected race into the SC primary in order to paint the Clintons as closet racists.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html

A good read, and the kind of specifics I was asking for. Interestingly enough, Bill Clinton then followed that up with his Jesse Jackson comparison. If that wasn't injecting race into the conversation, then why did he choose Jackson as the comparison and not Edwards, who carried the state in 2004?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying either Clinton is a racist. I'm just saying that it seems to me they've been guilty of injecting race in this campaign where it didn't need to be injected. Did Obama's campaign shamelessly capitalize on this? You betcha. (I'm not applauding that, I'm recognizing it. Obama is a politician—I'm not blind to that fact.)

avatar

Thank God. I was ready for a serious beat down. So reasonable people disagree on the meaning of that memo & if the clintons are closet racists, etc. But, I mean who benefits? How can HRC benefit by "playing the race card" in SC??? Whatever, but just imagine for one second that the Obama campaign did that. On purpose. With malice aforethought in order portray the Clinton's as closet racists. Does that conflict on the most basic level with everything you think his campaign is really all about?

Veering off topic somewhat, but at some level, we all have racial prejudices. It's good to acknowledge that so we can fight it.

That said, I think there are two reasons the Clinton's are injecting race into this contest: (1) It's accidental. They're tired and not thinking about what they're saying. Just like Obama's team, they know that race is relevant, and they've been spending a lot of time talking about it amongst themselves. (2) They think they can get away with it. They think that they can either "blow a dog whistle" that will get the message across without actually being caught (Jesse Jackson reference), but then they get caught and try to play innocent, or they have their surrogates do something similar.

I don't think that Obama's perfect in this regard, but from my perspective, he and his campaign are a lot better about it.

I can't believe I wrote "the Clinton's" instead of "the Clintons". It's official: I've been playing the internets too long today.

Things could be worse for black America than a presidential candidate having to decide whether to attend State of the Black Union.

Watching (and participating in) history here.

avatar

Obama transcends race only when it is to his convenience.

He is perfectly willing to appear on national white forums and tell us how he is willing to represent all the people on all the issues.

He is not willing to go to a national black forum and tell us how he is willing to represent all the people on all the issues.

As far as leaving the campaign trail, I'm sure that it could be arranged for both candidates to appear from other studios.

It has been very much to Obama's advantage to convince blacks and liberals that his oppoenents are racists. Since I think Obama deliberately invoked the idea that race-baiting had occurred when it had not I cannot support him.

Can you provide an example of when you think "Obama deliberately invoked the idea that race-baiting had occurred when it had not"?

I believe he has been completely forthright with black audiences that he is the candidate of all people.

I think Goldspinner's comments are as reductionist, childish and as petty as Tavis Smiley's. Looks to me that Tavis is throwing a hissy fit -- that's the only thing that could explain turning down the offer to send Michelle Obama in Barack's place. In case we have forgotten, Barack Obama is in a close fight to be the nominee from a leading party for the President of the United States of America. In case we have forgotten, his name is Barack Hussein Obama. He needs to focus on Texas and Ohio and it has been proven that it makes a difference when he shows up in person. And even if it didn't make a difference, Tavis isn't his father. Tavis Smiley isn't BLACK AMERICA.

It warmed my heart to read the hundreds of comments on Michael Baisden's website in support of Barack and telling Tavis to grow up. Many of the posts there understand the job ahead of Obama and also the fact that he is running for President of the entire country...not just whoever Tavis presumes to be representing. A part of what is amazing about Obama's campaign is that he has shown attention and respect to ALL 50 states, to ALL demographics, not writing any group off, not taking any group for granted.

Barack doesn't have to prove his blackness to anyone and he's never run from it either.

Well I think Ben Hockin and yossarianbrown have nicely buttressed my and Roland Martin's opinion.

AJM is being willfully ignorant and maximally cynical about who Obama is.

Goldspinner, you either fail to appreciate how daunting is the task of Obama to reach as many Americans as possible and fast to compete against the most powerful couple in the party for the nomination, or don't care. And I think Rolan Martin has already said it best:

The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, the nation’s most prestigious think tank devoted to African American issues, released a survey showing that the top issues to blacks are the war in Iraq; healthcare; jobs and the economy; and education.

Sounds to me like the candidates have spent a lot of time on those issues, although they could always do more.

Demanding he leave the campaign trail and return to a state that has already voted to speak more to one constituency's issues to the detriment of his campaign, is the very kind of selfishness that flies in the face of the communitarianism his campaign espouses.

avatar

Tavis doesn't speak for Black America. Tavis speaks for Tavis and he uses his forum on the Tom Joyner Show to self promote his selfish agenda. A fair question to ask him is "who is he backing in this election year". Hillary Clinton maybe? Barack is smart enough to know that he can't run as the "black candidate". Any Black person with a lick of sense knows this. So all the Clinton surrogates need to stop with the campaign of distortion. Hillary had her chance, but chose to bank on White and Latino voters to put her over the top. With the level of Black support that she and Bill had enjoyed, to race bait was a major insult. And apparently nothing has changed. Now we have Clinton supporter, Ed Rendell "innocently" talking about race again in Pennsylvania. Wake up Tavis!

"Barack is smart enough to know that he can't run as the "black candidate". Any Black person with a lick of sense knows this. So all the Clinton surrogates need to stop with the campaign of distortion."


Puh-leeze, I've never been a Clintonista. Obama doesn't have the moral courage to run as "the black candidate". Why bother when it's so much easier to "pass"?

I agree completely with you on this one, msjane. you make good points.

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address