RANGER AGAINST WAR: Not a Horse of a Different Color <

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Not a Horse of a Different Color

You've got to find a way
Say what you want to say

Breakout

--Breakout
, Swing Out Sister

The Ku Klux Klan, who saw Zelig as a Jew,

that could turn himself into a Negro and an Indian,

saw him as a triple threat

--Zelig
(1983)


Woody Allen executed few brilliant ideas, but the character of Leonard Zelig was one of them. He was the human chameleon who could morph into any identity in order to be liked. Barack Obama is our Zelig. He is actually the perfect candidate -- he can be black, white, Christian or Muslim.

"Sen. Barack Obama, bidding to become the nation's
first black president, captured the Iowa caucuses Thursday night. . ." Ranger tires of this focus; actually Obama is one-half black. If Obama is so black, why did Clinton, and not he, get the endorsement of the NAACP?

Using the one-half rule, why doesn't the press refer to Obama as the first Muslim candidate? If being one-half black makes him black, then being one-half Muslim should make him Muslim. One wonders why the press doesn't consistently report that Guiliani would be the first Italian elected president.


Why is it important to play the race card with Obama, but not Guiliani? Are we now looking to old designations like
octoroon or quadroon as designations of a capacity for inclusivity, or progressivity or ability? No doubt Obama is a smart man, but looking to his skin color as some sort of qualifier indicative of breaking the prevailing political mindset is foolhardy.

Jonah Goldberg (
Oh no! They're reading that idiot?) said Democrats want a president who "will magically change the world. Unfortunately for [Hillary Clinton], neither 'Democrat' nor 'Clinton' nor 'Hillary' is an abracadabra word anymore. But 'Obama' is." And he is right. We live in an age of magical thinking.

The Democratic Senate may be disappointing, but is Democratic by the slimmest of margins. Nothing substantive will be achieved until the majority grows larger. That is politics as usual.

This is Ken Mehlman's age of hyperpartisanship. In his book, The Second Civil War, political writer Ronald Brownstein discusses the divisive rubble left in the wake of Karl Rove's partisan politics.
“This is not designed to be a 55 percent presidency,” one of Bush's senior advisers said. “This is designed to be a presidency that moves as much as possible of what we believe into law while holding 50 plus one of the country and the Congress.”

Naturally, half the country is mad as hell, and Obama's "Politics of Hope" rings so purely. But Obama's platform is not revolutionary. Not on the war, not on health care. He may want the best for the U.S. -- all of us who care, do -- but the proof is in the pudding, not the rhetoric, not the skin color.

Brownstein argues for more inclusivity in the democratic process, things like allowing independents to vote in primaries, and the participation of viable third party candidates. Europe has managed this, but somehow, we have lost the idea of diversity. You can't look at one-shot latte skin and say you have diversity. That is the callowest form of bigotry.

While a student, I (Lisa), also wanting something different, campaigned for Ross Perot. Perot did something amazing, which was to garner as a third party candidate nearly 20% of the vote. But something else stood out while canvassing neighborhoods on his behalf.

The overwhelming majority of folks, spanning all age groups, genders and races, expressed a variant of, "I am unhappy with things. I'd like to vote for him , but I can't take a chance. We have to get Bush pere out." Or, the alternative. I don't know what kind of president he would have made, but if all those people who wanted to vote for him had, he might have won the election.


People are upset again because every time they go to the store, their tab is higher. Maybe it is no longer a fun game to share news of which gas station at the edge of town is selling for a few pennies less on the gallon.


A change is necessary, and it will occur. The question is, who can mitigate the current fiasco in the most expeditious manner. Skin color doesn't mean that much to us.

--Jim and Lisa

Labels: ,

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I had the very same 'conversation' with a soldier currently in the Diyala valley re: Obama being 'black'. If Obama is half black, why isn't he referred to as a white man half the time?" I suggested the media do it as an even/odd day thing, ya know, even days=black, odd days=white. However, isn't there an old law on the books somewhere stating if there is one ounce of black blood in your genetics, you're considered 'black'?
Don't wish to go deep into politics this early on a Sunday morn, but briefly:
Hillary is a communist. No one came close to calling her out on her continued reference to 35yrs experience during the debate last night. We almost did an 'Elvis' to the TV the last time she spewed that one out. Obama doesn't have a whole lot of experience, and he sounds very socialistic, but who knows. Edwards obviously thinks he knows which side to kiss up to and since he is unemployed, the VP spot may be looking pretty good. Hopefully this is a sign the Clinton era can go away and RIP.
Cathy B

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 8:48:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Magical thinking. Whoooo boy, that IS the thing, isn't it? being nonorthodox religiously and slightly crazy running between scepticism and mysticism as I do, the risks of magical thinking on ANY level are constantly on my mind. Doing it politically is particularly difficult for someone who half "got" the whole 'realpolitic' concept. Politically, I think we are always better with a pragmatic attack plan instead of Disneyesque mental tracts playing pink and blue mists before our eyes. It is a weird year...both sides look like strange cobbled up stuff and everyone is getting splashed with stuff of dreams instead of reality.

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 2:27:00 PM EST  
Blogger Lisa said...

labrys,

Well-said. Realpolitik is the thing, with an emphasis on "real".

The European press is mystified by the choices of Obama and Huckabee.

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 2:42:00 PM EST  
Blogger BadTux said...

Europe has multiple parties because they have real democracy -- parliamentary democracy. Only strong man pseudo-democracies and third-world hellholes have the American "strong president" system, which by its very nature requires that what would be small parties in Europe get together into uneasy coalitions in order to get the 51% of the vote necessary to get someone from amongst them elected. In real democracies, where the Prime Minister is elected by a coalition of parties, it isn't necessary for the individual parties to glob together into the Christo-fascists + Redneck-fascists + Big-business-fascists in order to get their man elected, they stay as separate parties and form their coalition only once they need to choose their Prime Minister and his cabinet.

In short, the reason American politics has these two uneasy conglomerate parties is math and the winner-takes-all nature of a strong man presidential election. If you want 51% of the vote to guarantee election, you can't stay a separate party like, say, the Libertarian Party. You have to join one of the existing parties and work within that party as a separate interest group to push your agenda forward.

Now, note that parliamentary democracy does not mean sanity, necessarily. Just look at Israel. Their politics over the past decade has been pretty damned well deranged. But at least parliamentary democracy doesn't force everybody into a bipolar party arrangement and allows the various interest groups to remain separate as independent parties.

- Badtux the Math Penguin

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 4:58:00 PM EST  
Blogger Lisa said...

badtux,

Thank you, math penguin, for mentioning the nature of parliamentary democracy, which was missing from our piece.

It is a saner method to achieve inclusivity of voices, it would seem.

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 5:20:00 PM EST  
Blogger BadTux said...

If only our founding fathers hadn't wanted to make George Washington our King... George didn't want the job, which is why the job of "President" was created for him instead. Our two-party system is an artifact of the desire of one man not to be a hereditary ruler. Cool. Or not :-(.

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 5:58:00 PM EST  
Blogger Lisa said...

badtux,

Very cool.

Now, if we can only ditch this "unitary executive" foolishness, and get back to separation of powers, we could be back where we were, oh, 8 years and $2 trillion dollars ago. . .

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 8:03:00 PM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Parlimentary democracy also has things like votes of nonconfidence where governments can fall and you're not stuck with the same bad regime for 4 yrs!

Sunday, January 6, 2008 at 9:21:00 PM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

CB, Hillary and Bill are the exact opposite of commies, they've played the capitalist system like a violin.//To BadTux, your cmts are incisive and cut to the core of the issue. Whether parliamentary or our present system is the point of discussion.The US will not become parlimentary so that leaves threer parties as a historically accepted form. This would force compromise and movement to the political center in the same fashion that you so ably described. jim

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 11:12:00 AM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 11:12:00 AM EST  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama will be this nation's next President. Ohpra will be the vice president. And you can take that to the bank. Whatever that means.

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 4:04:00 PM EST  
Blogger rangeragainstwar said...

al,

Thanks for your prognostication.
So, I guess I could then walk in and buy me a CD that might give me 2.00 return, somewhat taking the edge off our current inflation.

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 4:29:00 PM EST  
Blogger BadTux said...

Here is a tip for today: I-bonds, U.S. Savings Bonds that are inflation-indexed. Current rate is 1.2% over the rate of inflation -- not great, my credit union's current 4.45% will beat it handily, but if inflation starts ramping up, it'll beat credit union interest rates quite easily.

-- Badtux the Finance Penguin

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 4:46:00 PM EST  
Blogger BadTux said...

PS - Edwards isn't unemployed. He's a lawyer. Lawyers are never unemployed in the United States of America :-).

Monday, January 7, 2008 at 4:46:00 PM EST  

Post a Comment

<< Home