Was Jesse Jackson right in your opinion?

I enjoy Rothschild's articles, but what Obama said in relation to families didn't justify anything for me, it just made sense. Dads should be front and center. Was he chastizing black families in saying that? Was he denouncing black dads? I never felt what Rothschild apparently does.

http://www.progressive.org/mag/wx071208

Jesse Jackson Has a Point

By Matthew Rothschild, July 12, 2008



In the Jesse Jackson controversy, one thing’s getting lost: Jackson’s got a solid point.

Obama has been going out of his way to publicly upbraid black audiences. And he knows—he has to know—that by doing so, he’s ingratiating himself with white audiences.

And not just those white working class audiences that the mainstream media loves to talk about.

White audiences, in general, for there is racism, let’s face it, up and down the class totem pole.

Obama has a bad habit of denouncing black people. He’s done this repeatedly on the campaign trail, not just with the "black fathers are MIA" line.

snip//

Obama is playing a very dangerous game.

It might help him win in November, just as the Rev. Jackson’s remarks might be a foil that Obama can use to his advantage.

But in the process, Obama is reinforcing negative attitudes toward blacks in the white community, he is undermining the case for governmental solutions to our urgent social problems, and he is lessening support for specific policies such as affirmative action that are geared toward dealing with the still lingering, real, and crippling effects of racism.

That would be an ironic outcome of the Obama campaign.

I'm white, bashing black people will not ingratiate you with me, rather the opposite. The sort of people that such things will ingratiate you with are racists who will not vote for Obama anyway. This piece is based on the same sort of "triangulation" thinking that Clinton used so effectively for a long time. It appears to me that Obama is trying to get beyond that, he wants to unify, not divide. So I think that it is a mistake to assume he is trying to imitate Clinton. He is also far from the first politician or black man to mention the importance of black fathers to their families, I believe Mr. Jackson himself has brought the subject up from time to time too, for example. So maybe Obama is just trying to lead, to be a leader.

into molehill politics, picking into stuff that isn't there. I'm disappointed in him.

Being a part of a child's life does not have to cost money, it simply involves time.

Unfortunately the statistics as they relate to black children, the percentage that live with a single parent, or grandparents and don't receive all or any child support are reprehensible.

Obama does care about the things Nader & Jackson assume he doesn't care about simply because they are not central to his stump speech. However running for POTUS means running to be the president of all Americans. Is pollution, lead paint & predatory lending in the ghetto a serious issue. Yes. Does it belong in a stump speech leading up to the GE? No.

If Obama is elected are these issues more likely to be addressed than if the Southern Strategy party the racists are affiliated with is in control of POTUS? Not likely.

I am white, my husband is black, we live in an urban midsized rust belt city & ghetto is all around us. Government can't fix much of what is wrong in the low income African American community. I have argued all along that our urban cities and are most vulnerable low income African American citizens need an Obama presidency more than white women need a female POTUS.

addressing this issue. Please enlighten me.

would criticize a white politician for speaking as a white man. Beyond that he has two young daughters who will perhaps as they age become engaged with black men. Here once again as a black man he can draw upon his own experiences, so that he represents a voice that should be listened to. Jesse Jackson is not the only way to black enlightenment.

A lot has changed since the sixties. He was right for those times but now we need new leadership to jump to the next level. Most blatant, de jure, racial discrimination has been swept aside and racial attitudes have dramatically improved, especially among young people. There is a strong black middle class working side by side whites at almost every level of government and business.

Yet the social pathology of our inner cities remains, mostly due to economic conditions and family breakdown (to a large extent due to missing fathers). Both factors are crucial to overcoming this enormous problem. JJ is seen as apologetic and defensive, which is no longer helpful because the old barriers have been broken, represented most strikingly by Obama's candidacy. Obama wants to take us past the old black vs. white mindset and go about tackling these issues.

There are a lot of people who see Jackson as a glory hound, still riding on the prestige of Dr. King. I have come to expect that, when Jackson appears, it'll be as much an ego trip as when a right-wing evangelist appears on a talk show.

the black dads are MIA are related to the huge inequities in our criminal justice system and educational system? I think when those are addressed and black dads are given fair opportunities to succeed, we will see a lot of them raising families and being positive forces in their communities.

I would think a lot more of Obama if he would address THAT.

service? He's aware of the problems and why, but he doesn't want his campaigning to come down a black vs. white issue. That doesn't mean he won't try to do something about it after January 09.
I agree with you that there are some root problems having to do with poverty and inequality.

and have always been proud that he is my senator. I have very rarely disagreed with him. He is in a difficult and at the same time ideal situation to straddle both worlds - I think he knows this too. I just didn't like his chastising the black community. Made me feel very uncomfortable as I think it is just not that simple.

Because it is all a matter of perspective. Obama called for a frank and compassionate discussion of race, he tried that, and we are back to the same old thing, people defending the same wedge issues they always have. The poor have been divided by this white vs. black idea and thrown political unity out of the window. It is why the conservatives gained the power they have, they aren't conflicted as to how they feel about the poor.

The real issue here is rich vs. poor. The dispute over race has only served to maintain the divide between the haves and have-nots.

MIA dads are only a symptom of a much larger problem, Poor kid + poor nutrition + poor education = more poor people.

We need to stop hearing the word poor and thinking black.

what Obama said to publicly upbraiding blacks for my benefit (I'm white) just doesn't wash with me. And going out of his way to do so? How about he was stating a fact that could apply to white and black? It's more about economics than color.

admired Obama speaking out on. I wish someone would speak out to the white guys abandoning their children. And on the angle of sexism, somebody needs to speak to young women of all colors about trying to chose responsible fathers (or at least make sure they have a strong father figure in reserve) before bring kids into the world. I did kind of feel sorry for Jesse Jackson, however, because I'm sure he'd cut his OWN essential parts off if he thought it would help get the first black president elected. I don't think Obama was trying to pander to whites but probably addressing an issue that was painful in his own life, having no present father.

As DH says, when he was in scouts, they were always taught to handle any gun as a loaded one, well people should always treat mikes as if they are turned on.

about Obama's impact and popularity - something he himself could never muster.

And I'm sure his whispered comments were exactly what he meant.

pandering to the whites or looking down his elitist nose at them according to those who are watching him hoping for something to attack.

There are poor people in small towns who have lost all hope of finding employment and are becoming "disenfranchised". They are turning to other issues in an attempt to find a way to control some part of the society in which they play such a small part, some ot them becoming obsessed with pro-life movements and gun control laws. I understand this because I live in small towns, am poor and have been for quite a while, and I have a high education that allowed me to learn the theories concernng social interactions and it effects on the individual's psychology. Which of these facts causes me to agree the most with what Obama said about the small town poor? The fact that I am one of those people he spoke of and have seen the way people have changed in their political activism over the years.

Again, Obama spoke the truth when he spoke of the responsibility of fathers for their children. He spoke as one who did not have that father figure in his life but was lucky enough to have a grandfather to partly fill it. He spoke as someone who has seen, through his community services, the effect it has on children and society in a whole when fathers are not being responsible for their children. The problem is present in all cultures, it is not isolated to only one, but it may be over represented in the black community. There are quite a few reasons that can be sited for this over representation.

The first goes back to slavery culture, where families were torn apart and where slave men were sometimes used for mere breeding purposes to produce strong off spring. When you look at the effects slavery had on the mentality of those who were victims of it, you have to stop and wonder how in the world anyone (white) could stand by and let it happen and how anyone (it's victims) could survive it without deep emotional scars.

The second came about in the time following slavery, the 'jim crow' days. A Black man's life was seen as a cheap commodity. One that could be taken by a white man without reason or rhyme. Whether it was with a rope, a club or a gun; many families lost their husbands, fathers and sons to this uncalled for violence that surrounded them. We complain today about the violence in the black communities, but when you look at it through a sociologist eye, you come to the realization that this culture was taught through years of 'jim crow' attitudes and its racist violence against those that were not white. These people were told that they were now somewhat human, just not as human as a white person. They were legally responsible for their actions but no one was legally responsible for the actions done to them. How could one not understand that during these times a man might feel like he couldn't care for/protect his family when he could not even protect himself from the threat of violence that hung over him. And this is not even touching on all the things that went on.

Thirdly, the civil rights movement came about and everything was suppose to change. We were all suppose to be equal, but are we really? There has to be laws to insure that some Black men have the same rights to employment as their white counterparts. Legally, Black men receive much harsher sentences than white men accused of the same crimes. (This does not include exceptions such as athletes and celebreties) More are given the death sentence and more are given life sentences. A Black man's life still is not seen as important as a white mans. Unemployment and prison sentences can be seen as a reason why now there are more absent fathers but is there more?

Sure, many more. There has been a change in the way our society looks at the role of the man and woman. It has effected all of the cultures, and it has effected the way men take care of/or do not take of their children. I am not going to go on with what these changes are, or how other cultures have been effected by things, I have been enough of a Know-it-all for now. This is all JMHO.

he was vilified.

but only if you are Black in America.

No one has a problem with Obama's "personal responsibility" speeches, least of all folks in the Black community. If you are a member of the Black community, you would understand/recognize that what Obama is saying is nothing new. We have heard it all our lives from our mothers and fathers, our preachers and business leaders.

We are even used to hearing it from White folks who tell us that "the American social contract is work hard and do the right thing and government will fill in the gaps; but for you, the American social contract is work hard, do the right thing, but don't remind us that you are Black , or of our past , and the government will fill in the gaps, except those that we deem are self-created." That is the reality of Black folks in America ... we get that.

However, where there is an Obama disconnect is the fact that Obama seems to reserve these type of speeches for predominately Black audiences ... as if the Black community has a lock on social irresponsibility and socially dysfunctional behavior.

As an example, here is what Obama said when he addressed LULAC: "I will make it a top priority in my first year as President - not only because we have an obligation to secure our borders and get control of who comes in and out of our country. And not only because we have to crack down on employers who are abusing undocumented immigrants instead of hiring citizens. But because we have to finally bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows. Yes, they broke the law. And they should have to pay a fine, and learn English, and go to the back of the line. That's how we'll put them on a pathway to citizenship. That's how we'll finally fix our broken immigration system and avoid creating a servant class in our midst. It's time to reconcile our values and principles as a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. That's what this election is all about.

It's about the couple I met in North Las Vegas who saved up for decades, only to be tricked into buying a home they couldn't afford, and are now struggling to raise their four daughters; it's about all the Latino families who are the first ones hurt by an economic downturn and the last ones helped by an economic upturn. They can't afford another four years of the Bush economic policies that Senator McCain is offering - policies that give tax breaks to big corporations and the wealthiest Americans, while doing little for the struggling families who need help most.

... That's what this election is about.

It's about the one in three Latinas who don't have health care...

It's about the Latino students who are dropping out of school faster than nearly anybody else; the mother in L.A. who said she felt like the education system wasn't designed for people like her; and the children from West Chicago to the South Bronx who go to overflowing classes in underfunded schools taught by teachers who aren't getting the support they need. They cannot afford another four years of false promises and neglect.

They need us to invest in early childhood education, stop leaving the money behind for No Child Left Behind, recruit an army of new teachers to your communities and make college affordable for anyone who wants to go - because that's how we'll give every American the skills to compete in our global economy. And that's what this election is all about."

Good stuff, but notice the emphasis on "this is the problem" and "here's what I plan to do", but unlike Obama's speeches to predominately Black audiences, there's no "Here's what you need to do."

From where we sit, Obama speaks FOR every audience, except his Black audiences, which he speaks TO. I hope you can begin to understand our trepidation. If not, maybe the 1960s/70s adage of "It's a Black Thing ... Don't try and Understand" just may apply.

I apologize for my length.