Obama and Imus

Obama and Imus

Perhaps the reason that Barack "Obama did not address whether he thought
Imus should be taken off the air." is that he thinks more in terms of law than
Al Sharpton or corporate executives. (Rick Klein and Joseph Williams, "Obama's
silence on Imus alarms some blacks," Boston Globe, April 11, 2007) Sharpton sees
through the prism of race. Corporate executives see the world through the botton
line.
The reaction to Imus indicates how fragile the state of free speech is in
the US. Imus' comments are protected under the US Constitution. That should be
the only issue. Corporate executives don't focus on freedoms. Obama's silence on
protecting protected speech is a more important concern due to his prominent
history at Harvard Law School as President of the Law Review. If he does not
support free speech who does?
Saying his comments are racist is inaccurate. But even if they were racism
is a personal or political opinion. Intolerant censors promote the idea that a
person cannot have personal or political thoughts that they do not like. Again
the idea of racism is a constitutionally protected idea and opinion.
More importantly what is the offense to Al Sharpton? If he has any
connection with any law enforcement agency as he had historically he is
violating the First Amendment constitutional rights of Imus.
When police, prosecutors and journalists insult people with disabilities
every day there is loud silence from journalists, politicians and all of these
alleged compassionate liberal hypocrite censors. Speech critical of wealthy,
powerful and politically connected groups is not tolerated. The notion that
African Americans are weak in this country is nonsense. When a white
heterosexual male is brutalized there is no national spokesman who denounces the
abuse.
Collectivism has destroyed the freedoms formerly enjoyed by all citizens of this
nation. Now it is only members of the above groups who enjoy those rights.
The notion of free speech is for speech you hate. Everyone supports speech
that they like. The decreasing level of tolerance for unpopular speech is
dangerous.
In Cambridge, MA where Harvard and MIT reside there is almost total
opposition to critical speech. Criticizing politicians, the universities and
most of the sacred liberal cows is shunned. Only hated Republicans and mental
patients in the one-party state are acceptable targets for criticism.
Critics of global warming are threatened with job loss just as Imus is
threatened. A recent President of Harvard was forced to resign by the power of
women that he criticized. At Columbia a free speech expert, Lee Bollinger feared
punishing a group of thugs who disrupted a lecture. Presidents of NYU, Cornell,
Tufts, Pace and many other colleges in recent years showed they lack spines to
support free speech.

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

Obama's silence on Imus alarms some blacks
Candidate faces first test on handling issues of race
By Rick Klein and Joseph Williams,
Boston Globe Staff
April 11, 2007

WASHINGTON -- With the Rev. Al Sharpton leading calls Monday for radio host Don
Imus to be fired over racially insensitive remarks, Senator Barack Obama's
presidential campaign avoided the controversy throughout the day.

Not until Monday evening, five days after Imus's comments were uttered and hours
after CBS Radio and MSNBC announced a two-week suspension for the radio host,
did Obama weigh in, saying in a statement: "The comments of Don Imus were
divisive, hurtful, and offensive to Americans of all backgrounds." Obama did not
address whether he thought Imus should be taken off the air.

The episode is the first test of how Obama -- who is of mixed-race background --
is handling the contentious issue of race in his presidential campaign. Even as
polls have shown other Democrats attracting a large share of the black vote,
Obama has steered clear of the kind of activism symbolized by Sharpton and the
Rev. Jesse Jackson, who were both highly visible in the Imus episode but whose
aggressiveness on race issues has alienated some white voters in the past.

But with Obama battling other Democrats -- most notably Senator Hillary Rodham
Clinton of New York -- for the support of black voters, the candidate's
reticence on the Imus issue set off alarms yesterday among some black activists
who are anxious to see him more forcefully push for racial justice.

Melissa Harris Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at
Princeton University, said Obama missed an opportunity to prove himself to
blacks and white liberals who would have wanted Obama take the lead in
denouncing Imus.

"This was so easy, and his unwillingness to touch it tells me this is going to
be his third rail, and race never goes away in politics," Harris Lacewell said.
"Black people want to love Barack. They're doing everything they can to love
Barack. We want to believe that Barack is better than this. But they will turn
on him."

The Obama campaign declined to comment yesterday on its handling of the issue.
One adviser pointed out, however, that Obama issued a public comment before the
other major Democratic candidates -- including Clinton and former senator John
Edwards of North Carolina.

Obama represents a break with the presidential candidacies of forebears such as
Sharpton, a Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, and Jackson, who ran in
1984 and 1988.

Obama is the son of a white mother and a black father from Kenya, and grew up in
Hawaii and Indonesia. He is part of a generation too young to be shaped directly
by the civil rights movement; he was 6 years old when Martin Luther King Jr. was
slain in 1968.

Obama told CBS's "60 Minutes" earlier this year that he is rooted in the
African-American community, but not defined by it.

In a closely watched speech last month in Selma, Ala., Obama declared that he
was part of the "Joshua generation" -- likening himself to the Biblical
successor to Moses who led the Jewish people into the promised land -- and thus
located himself in the post-liberation generation.

While acknowledging debts to civil rights pioneers, Obama has made clear that he
represents a different kind of politics, rooted deeply in coalition-building,
not anger and outrage.

"He's cut from a different cloth, and that doesn't make him less black," said
Joyce Ferriabough, a Boston-based Democratic consultant who is African-American.
"His way of doing things is a lot more measured, less fiery, but that doesn't
make him less effective. He needs to be the candidate of the people, and the
people aren't just black."

Ron Walters, a former top campaign aide to Jackson and now a politics professor
at the University of Maryland, said that if Obama took on a issue like Imus's
comments, he could undercut his appeal to the broad electorate.

"There are people that are just waiting for him to jump out there in the
crosshairs and be a race leader," Walters said. If Obama spoke out, "that would
put him in a different role: a race leader. And that would pull back the covers
for those who don't see race when they look at Barack Obama."

Yet Obama's promise to take up the mantle of past civil rights activists and his
showing in the polls have not assuaged the concerns of some black leaders,
including Sharpton, that Obama isn't sufficiently committed to the causes they
hold dear. With Clinton also earning significant black support and her husband,
the former president, still widely popular among black voters, those qualms
among prominent blacks could have electoral consequences for Obama.

Sharpton has repeatedly said that Obama did not learn the lessons of the civil
rights movement, including the value of bold stands and dramatic action.

"I agree with him that we are part of the Joshua generation, but Joshua came
from the ranks of Moses to continue the struggle and not to abandon the
struggle," Sharpton told the Washington Times last month. "Being a part of the
Joshua generation is based on your work and not your age."

Though Jackson lined up behind Obama two weeks ago, Sharpton has pointedly
refused to endorse Obama, sparking speculation that he will support Clinton --
his home-state senator -- instead. Sharpton has said he will not endorse any
candidate until hearing more about their views on civil rights and other issues
at his National Action Network convention next week in New York City.

Michael Eric Dyson, a University of Pennsylvania professor and author, said he
supports Obama's campaign but questions why he did not speak up more forcefully
about Imus. He added that the other presidential candidates had the same
responsibility.

"Here's the point: Paying attention to the issues of race is an American
concern," he said. "It looks as if he's being so careful and cautious not to
ruffle the feathers of the mainstream that he may inadvertently raise the
hackles of the black majority."

Harris Lacewell, the Princeton professor, said Obama's willingness to cede the
spotlight to Sharpton on the Imus issue could leave such veteran activists more
powerful in the black community -- and therefore tougher to win over.

Ferriabough, the Democratic consultant, said Obama's campaign is tied to the
candidate's personal energy and charisma, rather than those who are declaring
their support for him.

"Endorsements won't make or break this candidate," said Ferriabough, who said
she has not committed to supporting any candidate but is leaning toward Obama.

"Obama doesn't need to go on the soapbox," Ferriabough said. "Others are doing
it, led by Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. He's nipping at Hillary, so he's playing
for real."