After reading several accounts regarding the recent arrest of prominent black historian Henry Louis Gates, I’m undecided whether police acted inappropriately or engaged in racial profiling. According to multiple reports, the black officer on the scene, Sgt. Leon Lashley, claims that his fellow officer Sgt. James Crowley reacted appropriately and that Gates’ behaved strangely and was unnecessarily belligerent. In addition, a multiracial group of police officers from Crowley’s department have come out in support of Crowley and decried comments made by President Barrack Obama and Mass governor Deval Patrick. Obama said the arresting officer ‘acted stupidly’ and Patrick said that the arrest was ‘every black man’s worst nightmare.’ It seems there may be a legitimate argument to be made on both sides.
We still have a lot of work to do in this country regarding race relations and this incident serves as a reminder. That fact comes as no real surprise though and neither does the amount of media coverage this episode has received (though, admittedly, the oversaturation likely owes as much to the 24-hour news cycle as to any other factors; cable TV has created an insatiable monster that’s perpetually sucking at the bones of its last meal while desperately searching for its next feeding). What did come as a surprise though--at least to me--was President Obama’s reaction to this incident. As noted above, when asked for a reaction at a news conference last week, Obama said the arresting officer ‘acted stupidly’.
Though I’m an unwavering Obama supporter, this response seemed, at best, misguided and, at worst, dangerously irresponsible. Or as Jon Stewart put it on a recent episode of The Daily Show: that statement was….what’s the word I’m looking for? Stupid?
Indeed. Race relations are from perfect in this country; there’s no denying that. But they’ve also been steadily improving for the past few decades; there’s also no denying that. Obama himself is a profound example of just how much progress has been made. Elected less than a year ago, he’s the first black president in a country where blacks started out as slaves. And that was just a little over 200 years ago, not much time in a historical sense. The significance of Obama’s election has been hashed over so many times that it barely deserves further analysis. And that makes Obama’s knee-jerk, uninformed response to a question regarding this incident all the more perplexing.
This man is, after all, the face of the free world. He’s a reminder that we’ve come far enough in this country (or that a majority of us have) to disregard a person’s color or ethnicity when deciding whether to elect him (now if we could just learn to reasonably do the same regarding a person’s religion and sexual orientation). But Obama’s words from that presidential pulpit made him sound far from objective on one of the most critical issues of his presidency: race relations. It’s been written that Obama’s friendship with Gates, in part, led to his seeming bias on the matter as much as any racial issue. And that’s a fair enough possibility. Who wouldn’t come to the defense of a close friend?
Like most politicians, Obama is not above foot-in-the-mouth syndrome. His late-night comment regarding special Olympic bowling a few months ago is a reminder of that--though he comes nowhere close to the levels of word hackery achieved by our last president. But on an issue as sensitive as race relations, on an issue so fundamental to his presidency, one would expect Obama to be at his reasoned, introspective, articulate best. One would expect him to say something along the lines of: “I don’t have all the facts at this time, but I can say that, though race relations in this country still have a long way to go, we have made a lot of progress. There is still plenty of racism and bigotry out there; but together we will continue working to erode their place in our society and in so doing build a more perfect union for generations to come. Our response to this incident, after a reasonable, objective assessment of what transpired, will serve as a reflection of our deep commitment to strengthening race relations and creating that more perfect society."
To blindly jump into the fray with a statement about the arresting officer’s ‘stupidity’ only serves to further inflame racial tensions brought to the surface by the incident. Worse, it raises doubts about Obama’s own objectivity on the issue. And that’s not what America needs from its first black president--especially not if other minorities hope to be elected president in the near future, especially not if we intend to continue improving race relations in this country. We need to know that he’s as objective on the issue of race as the majority of Americans strive to be. We need his reassurance that he can rise above color, above blame, above history itself in many ways and be the reasoned, articulate, objective face of America’s future.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Changing Majors: A Meditation on Sarah Palin's Best Career Move Ever
Sarah Palin's recent resignation as governor of Alaska was perplexing to say the least. Fox News has gone crazy of course, as have much of the media. Reading through internet reaction, I've seen everything from "It was a bold political move," to "It was political suicide." Speculation on the governor's reasons have included: "motivated by continuous political losses since the end of last year's presidential race," to "tired of dealing with multiple ethics probes," and "wanting to concentrate on a 2010 senate or 2012 presidential run."
In her most recent round of interviews, Palin stated that she understands she might not have staying power to sustain a run for higher office in 2010 or 2012. She's quoted as saying, "So be it. If I die [politically speaking], I die." This is a surprisingly blaze' attitude for a woman who aspired to be vice president of the United States just 8 months ago. I don't know enough about politics to say this move is truly 'political suicide', but my gut tells me it can't be good. I can't ever remember--neither in my own lifetime nor in the history books--reading of a national political figure who's rising through the ranks and suddenly decides that resigning his/her current office is a wise career choice. In my experience, this is not what successful politicians do. Furthermore, this is not what successful professionals in ANY field do--not that I'm aware of anyway.
But more, this move reveals something of Palin's character. She's been quoted in various interviews that this move is done for the people of Alaska; she has less than 2 years left on her term and doesn't want to waste taxpayer money as a lame duck who squanders time on expensive trips and worthless legislation. She's no quitter she contends, but a fighter and a...'maverick'...who's taking the unconventional path here, the unexpected one.
Unexpected indeed. Never mind that surely ANY lame duck politician--especially one of such national prominence--can find more productive ways to spend his/her time. If Palin isn't a quitter, then what? If one reads between the lines, what the [ex] governor seems to be saying is: "This job is getting to be too much, especially with the notoriety I've gained from the presidential race. There seems to be a giant target on my back and it's terribly unfair. I can't accomplish anything anymore; it's just gotten too hard. If I play the 'maverick' card just right, I can escape, use resignation to my advantage and still successfully run for the senate--maybe even the presidency. But if I can't, so be it. I'll still get a nice fat book deal and plenty of income as a paid speaker."
I ask you, is this the attitude we want running the highest offices of our political system? Someone who will take what she can if or when she can but really have no regrets either way? The lack of commitment, the poor judgment, the lackadaisical attitude--all are simply astounding. The governor is hedging, expecting one choice to branch into 2 possibilities and hoping for fate to sort out the right path. What?!!!!? Are you kidding? She sounds like some indecisive college student trying to decide a major.
This shows poor judgment at best; at worst, it suggests a lazy indifference toward and a dangerous misunderstanding of the serious responsibilities involved in holding the highest offices of the United States government. Aren't 8 disastrous years of lazy, unintelligent, indifferent executive government enough? If she should win the presidency, at what point will Palin decide to 'switch majors'?
Honestly, I welcome Palin's resignation. I believe this decision (fingers crossed) will leave her political career dead in the water and I couldn't be more relieved. This reminds me a little of John Edward's situation when he resigned the senate to run for the presidency. And we all know how that turned out. Ever since rising to national prominence, Palin hasn't been exactly highly regarded for her judgment (see last year's Thanksgiving turkey incident on youtube--it's as hysterical as it is horrifying) or political acumen (she can see Russia from her house). And this is just one more bumbling misstep. Or as Palin herself seems to suspect, maybe it isn't. She doesn't really seem to care either way. But even if she does manage a lucrative book deal and speaking career, her time in politics is likely drawing to a close. And that makes the people of the United States the real winner.
In her most recent round of interviews, Palin stated that she understands she might not have staying power to sustain a run for higher office in 2010 or 2012. She's quoted as saying, "So be it. If I die [politically speaking], I die." This is a surprisingly blaze' attitude for a woman who aspired to be vice president of the United States just 8 months ago. I don't know enough about politics to say this move is truly 'political suicide', but my gut tells me it can't be good. I can't ever remember--neither in my own lifetime nor in the history books--reading of a national political figure who's rising through the ranks and suddenly decides that resigning his/her current office is a wise career choice. In my experience, this is not what successful politicians do. Furthermore, this is not what successful professionals in ANY field do--not that I'm aware of anyway.
But more, this move reveals something of Palin's character. She's been quoted in various interviews that this move is done for the people of Alaska; she has less than 2 years left on her term and doesn't want to waste taxpayer money as a lame duck who squanders time on expensive trips and worthless legislation. She's no quitter she contends, but a fighter and a...'maverick'...who's taking the unconventional path here, the unexpected one.
Unexpected indeed. Never mind that surely ANY lame duck politician--especially one of such national prominence--can find more productive ways to spend his/her time. If Palin isn't a quitter, then what? If one reads between the lines, what the [ex] governor seems to be saying is: "This job is getting to be too much, especially with the notoriety I've gained from the presidential race. There seems to be a giant target on my back and it's terribly unfair. I can't accomplish anything anymore; it's just gotten too hard. If I play the 'maverick' card just right, I can escape, use resignation to my advantage and still successfully run for the senate--maybe even the presidency. But if I can't, so be it. I'll still get a nice fat book deal and plenty of income as a paid speaker."
I ask you, is this the attitude we want running the highest offices of our political system? Someone who will take what she can if or when she can but really have no regrets either way? The lack of commitment, the poor judgment, the lackadaisical attitude--all are simply astounding. The governor is hedging, expecting one choice to branch into 2 possibilities and hoping for fate to sort out the right path. What?!!!!? Are you kidding? She sounds like some indecisive college student trying to decide a major.
This shows poor judgment at best; at worst, it suggests a lazy indifference toward and a dangerous misunderstanding of the serious responsibilities involved in holding the highest offices of the United States government. Aren't 8 disastrous years of lazy, unintelligent, indifferent executive government enough? If she should win the presidency, at what point will Palin decide to 'switch majors'?
Honestly, I welcome Palin's resignation. I believe this decision (fingers crossed) will leave her political career dead in the water and I couldn't be more relieved. This reminds me a little of John Edward's situation when he resigned the senate to run for the presidency. And we all know how that turned out. Ever since rising to national prominence, Palin hasn't been exactly highly regarded for her judgment (see last year's Thanksgiving turkey incident on youtube--it's as hysterical as it is horrifying) or political acumen (she can see Russia from her house). And this is just one more bumbling misstep. Or as Palin herself seems to suspect, maybe it isn't. She doesn't really seem to care either way. But even if she does manage a lucrative book deal and speaking career, her time in politics is likely drawing to a close. And that makes the people of the United States the real winner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
