Privilege and Fear

Thanks for the shout out!

I also posted this on my blog: http://reachblack.blogspot.com/2008/02/double-standard-facing-barack-oba...

P.S. Sorry if this is a double post.

Oh, please.

Hillary said "Shame on you, Barack Obama" because his campaign sent out a misleading mailing saying that Clinton had said that NAFTA had been a "boon" for the country. That's something she never said.

Also, you're stating that you agree with the idea that this country reacts to protect "white women". A few points.

You're correct, but I'd often expand that to women in general Not always, but often.

That means that men, in situations like this are at a disadvantage, an underrated point.

His persona is that he's a class act and he doesn't need to act harshly. If he did fight back, he'd have the potential to look bad regardless of his race. That's because he's a man and she's a woman.

Through the years, Hillary's personality has given many people a bad feeling about her, and she's won't have much support from defenders.

And I think by now people of all races and incomes - through their votes and support - don't necessarily "fear" black men.

Wow. You've twisted my words around. Pehaps you should be in politics.

For the record, I proudly voted for Barack Obama in the Democratic primary here in Virginia. And regarding my understanding (or lack thereof) of the fundamentals of pyschodemographics of marketing, perhaps this will make you think differently.

http://marketingconversation.com/2007/12/20/a-coming-problem-of-diversit...

Now, regarding what you wrote:

YOU: NAFTA : As someone who has been riding of the "I was co-president" ruse, it's not enough to say that behind closed doors you were against it when publicly you did not. She did say numerous times, including in her book, that NAFTA was good.

ME: True. Agree with you. She's trying to have it both ways. That's politics. But in this instance, she was reacting to a specific mailing to economically suffering Ohioans that he sent out that explicitly quoted her as saying that NAFTA had been a "boon" – something that she had never explicitly said. That's politics. So she fought back. Which, by the way, she has a right to do. And she responded that way not only because didn't say "boon" but also because she's losing and desperate and is looking to latch onto anything. Just like the State of the Union handshake issue. Again, that's politics. She would have said "Shame on you, (fill in the blank)" to any opponent in that situation. And the media reported on that sound bite.

You: I completely disagree on the idea that white women are always at a disadvantage vis a vis black men. It's such an incredibly ridiculous statement I don't know where to begin smacking it down.

Me: Where on Earth did you get the idea that I think white women are always at a disadvantage vis a vis black men? I didn't write that. Not at all. Didn't come close. Nor would I agree with that statement. In fact I AGREED with you. I only expanded it to women and men in general...meaning when it comes to public debates and arguments, men will often have to be careful of coming across as being too aggressive towards women. And yes, I agree that many people often feel protective of white women...or women in general. Against men, or in many instances, black men. For the record, though, the only state that people seem to rally to protect her was New Hampshire after Hillary choked up. That helped her tremendously with the women's vote in the Granite State. But you've somehow gotten upset here and have decided to smack down a statement that I didn’t make.

You: No that's because he's a BLACK man and in this country there's quite a number of us who do remember that little historical blip involving lynchings.

Me: Well...yes. And Rosewood and Tulsa, etc. But you seem to be very upset about something that hasn't happened yet, only the potential of happening. Blowback from Obama fighting back. And I'm not so sure the blowback will be bad if and when it happens. With that, I'll repeat what I wrote "His persona is that he's a class act and he doesn't need to act harshly." Like the way he said, OK, then I'll disavow AND reject Farrakhan. End of story. His strategy – which, to me, is more sincere than political – is working. He is a class act. And people – regardless of their color – are responding.

You: Hillary Clinton made her own bed with an incredibly bad campaign. But those of us who voted for her twice in NYS and did not want her to run we knew from the beginning that NATIONALLY she was never going to be a viable candidate. She knew that but something called arrogance and hubris got in the way.

Me: Agree. And it's that same arrogance and hubris that's getting in the way of her now exiting. Now she can't believe that this lifelong dream is about to end because of a guy who got to DC a dozen years after she did. Since you used the words arrogance and hubris first. That IS Hillary, isn’t it? Those qualities make it unnecessary for someone like Obama to fight back. Most candidates in her place WOULD have exited by now. I actually thought it was arrogant to run for that seat in New York in the first place. Wasn’t her state, but it's a huge important state, has NYC, so it fit...talk about hubris. She could have run in Arkansas, but NOOOO.

You: but to convert everybody else you have to run on more than charisma.

Me: Well, I hope so. That goes for every candidate. I hope that that's what we're shooting for when it comes to putting someone in the oval office. To protect our country. To help direct the economy. Charisma alone won't do it. And Obama is winning over more and more people with his substance...and charisma. So I'm proud of the fact that millions of people of all races and incomes and regions are voting for him. Im proud of our country for that.

Regarding b's post. I'll take this cut and paste on paragraph:

Why doesn't the media focus its attention on how disrespectful she has been towards him? She won’t acknowledge his victories; she mocks his message; she scolds his supporters; she calls him an empty suit; she calls his words, "cheap," and his hope, "false." The list goes on and on.

Me: The media pointed out – continually – that she wasn't publicly congratulating him for his victories. And the media used it to explain/justifying his pre-empting Hillary's post primary speeches. And when Hillary began saying it was time to "get real", the media wrote that she was directly telling Obama's supporters to "get real", showing her arrogance to the voters and showing her inflated opinion of herself.

The media had been no friend of Hillary. The media can't force Hillary to eat humble pie, concede, and drop out of the race. She's still in because of her ego, not because of the press.