Is Obama Sending Mixed Messages?

Malena Amusa

Is Obama Sending Mixed Messages?

I was shocked this morning when I read a small article in the New York Times about an interview Sen. Barack Obama had on ABC’s “This Week.”

On affirmative action, the story quoted Obama as saying: affirmative action programs should ultimately become “a diminishing tool for us to achieve racial equality in this society.”

Diminishing?! Were these words taken out of context or is Obama reneging on comments he made during his successful 2004 bid for Senate when he said: “I want to make sure that today’s decision upholding affirmative action remains in force, and that the doors of opportunity remain open to all those who make up our nation,” according to a US Senate Race website.

Later, I looked up the Washington Post story on the interview and learned that Obama’s full stance was: “if we have done what needs to be done to ensure that kids who are qualified to go to college can afford it, that affirmative action becomes a diminishing tool for us to achieve racial equality in this society.”

Ok, this sounds better. But to say that if and when all children have equal access to education then affirmative action will cease importance, is not a strong enough vote for affirmative action. It fails to address a real-time solution for a real-time crisis.

And it reminds me of how President Bush deflected the affirmative action question at the 2004 UNITY Journalists of Color conference in Washington D.C. I was there. And he said something like, I affirmly support action toward good education. The massive crowd booed and hissed.

Now, Obama’s showing some signs of diddling up language around affirmative action so as not to outright say he supports it.

If not Obama…

Posted at 9:53 AM, May 14, 2007 in News | Permalink | View Comments

Comments

Obama is intelligent and a skilled rhetorician. We must remember that rhetoric is a part of the political game. Sadly but true, you must choose your language wisely. Often we want people of color to come out hard and fast against racism, but there are ways to do it without compromising the larger agenda and still get votes. First, he has to get into office.

With that said, we need to start thinking more critically about affirmative action and whether or not is provides temporary relief from a long-term, possibly even incurable illness. As critical race theorists are starting to re-evaluate school desegregation arguments of the 50s, we also must evaluate our own arguments about AA. I don't want us, 30 yrs from now, to look back at it like we are doing Brown, only to realize that school integration wasn't the great equalizer it was thought to be.

Totally incorrect .... read a complete transcript of the conversation with George at CBS website - OBAMA AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.

Research .... Research .... Research, prior to commenting.

Posted by: Carolyn K. Sterns | May 14, 2007 9:17 PM

And, let's not forget that affirmative action extends far beyond college admissions into the areas of employment and government contracting... both areas where qualified "minorities" and women still are significantly under-represented and under-utilized.

Wow. Do I smell a little elitism here? Racial liberalism has always been afraid of critique. The affirmative action debate will continue as is, going around in circles. Let's talk about white privilege. Maybe then we will make some progress. Until then, my research and my experience tells me the machine is already plotting ways around affirmative action as they found ways around Brown. Can Obama change this? . . . When the framers of the debate (CBS, for the person who trusts it so much) begin to interrogate their own racial interests in the affirmative action/white privilege dynamic, then we will be getting somewhere. Let's start asking different questions and re-framing the debate. Until then, we will continue to get played . . . .

But my point is that Obama has to send a clearer, more unflinching message on affirmative action, especially during these type of national news broadcasts. Because he's making an intricate argument that came off understated.

In essence, Obama said that he supports affirmative action for poor whites and poor blacks, and that we should treat middle-, upper-class blacks like his daughters as advantaged.

But the fact of the matter is that affirmative action must be seen as a counter to the de factor and de jure policy of white privilege that even poor whites have as an advantage over well-off people of color.

So what I want to hear from someone like Obama is that race and class not only work in tandem, but that race continues to be the main filter through which vital resources, including freedom from race-baiting like we see in the Obama campaign, are distributed in this country.

Blogger Too Sense makes some sense of all this: He says:

"In any case, the most Obama seems to be suggesting is that he's OK with income-based affirmative action and — maybe — also OK with a modest reduction in race-based affirmative action for well-off blacks. Sometime in the indefinite future, that is. But it's hard to tell. Obama doesn't like being nailed down on specifics much, and this is a topic where nobody likes being nailed down anyway. I suspect we'd need some detailed followup to see if there's really anything here."

I agree. Obama must bring it hard. Which I'm afraid he didn't do in the interview Sunday.

Hey Malena,

That was actually Kevin Drum. I was quoting him because I had made a similar point over at DailyKos and got hammered for it. I reiterated my point today in a similar post. I felt that, at best, Obama is cleverly allowing himself to support affirmative action while in office, all the time saying how he can't wait for it to end, which may be what it takes to keep it alive as a black president.

At worst, he seems to be suggesting that race is only a problem where it intersects with class, and especially with hiring, this is false. Anyway, in case anyone's interested, my response to this is here.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/16/650/94930