What About Our Daughters

As a supporter of Obama who has had to endure as many if not more barbs and arrows here for my support, now that my candidate of choice has been co-signed by the vast majority of the black women voters of South Carolina, will you continue to assert that Obama's campaign has nothing to offer black women? Now a huge number of black women in South Carolina, these thinking, issues concerned women whom you have championed against a media that wants to reduce them to body parts, have spoken, and they said Barack is our guy. Are all those sisters wrong for agreeing with me about the candidate to support? Or have they made a sophisticated choice based on a hard nosed analysis of what candidate is likely to operate in their interests?

Once again Aaron you come on to this blog grossly and I now believe intentionally mis characterizing what has been said by the contributors. I never said that anyone was wrong for anything. That is a lie. What we have championed is the right for Black women everywhere to be able to vote for whomever they want without their loyalty being questioned. That includes Black women. And to ask what each candidate brings tot he table for them. You have YET to answer how the lives of Black women will be better off under an Obama administration. Nor will you, because you cannot. If you could, you would have answered the questions asked months ago. People can vote for whomever they want to for whatever reason they want to. I will however defend their right to exercise their vote in whatever way they desire without recrimination from the likes of you.

Yet you return over and over again to launch barbs of your own. In the end you are exactly where you began, not citing a single policy reason to support your assertions.

In case you missed it your guy won. You however, are still insufferable and annoying.

You refuse to even consider the possibility that Black women ought to be able to engage in whatever analysis they choose to engage in. We ought to be able to engage in our own political pondering without being molested by people like you who do not apparently want Black people to engage in political ruminations aloud. You are welcome back anytime, however, I can't figure out your obsession with this blog with such a warped perception of what we have been saying.

If we are indeed the wretched souls you repeatedly return to pain us as, perhaps you should find more productive ways to spend your time.
Or is SC enough for you because last time I checked there were a whole lot more delegates to be won and anytime we want to, we can stop going out of our way to avoid endorsing any one particular candidate.

Sorry you find me to be so annoying. I think I've worked very hard to be reasoned and civil in making my case about Obama, quite unlike many others who have entered the fray. I'm willing to bet that a review of the flame wars would show I've never been the first to label people's views as thought police and such. You play it scorched earth a lot G.

If you REALLY think you have an honest case of intentional mischaracterization, then I would submit that we both have identical causes of action against one another on this score. I think the reality is that at best we simply misunderstand each other and at worst we're talking past one another, so intent are we on winning the argument.

You throw out to me repeatedly this question of how will black women be better off under an Obama administration, but Gina, hasn't your point been that black women have minds of their own to make that call? Don't make me responsible then for doing your intellectual work. His views and policy positions are available to you in a variety of forms. Make your judgment, for or against, as the women of South Carolina have done. I've made my judgment and I've attempted to persuade you and others to my viewpoint that Obama(credible, qualified & black)
should be supported because there is value for black america in doing so, whether he ultimately wins or not. There is value for us in having a qualified black candidate do what he is doing.

But actually, I'll give you an answer to your question, which I feel certain in advance you will ridicule (you could surprise me), because I'm not going to try to prove to you that Obama is going to fulfill all the policy requirements relative to black women that you have enumerated on many occasions.

How will the lives of black women be better under an Obama administration? I don't know. Obama says he wants to fix healthcare, end the war in Iraq, help families, make the economy work and variety of other things. You telling me black women don't have a stake in any of that? On the flip, he supported Genarlow, never said boo about Dunbar, and didn't call me back when I told him to come pander to the sisters. Is your judgment made?

As I said before, I think we talk past each other because we both just want to win this argument (I'll own my share cuz I like to win). You keep trying to paint me as somebody trying to control how you think, how black women think. Its a ludicrous argument that is not the least bit supportable based on any reasonable reading of any post I've ever put up. YOU ARE RIGHT GINA. Black women are allowed to think whatever they want and to support the candidate they choose, for whatever reasons seem relevant to them. My argument has never been that that was not true. I have only argued the reasons why I think Obama should be supported by black women and black men alike. And I have argued, based on the counterpoints folk have raised and the way in which they have been made (with a fair degree of vitriol and name calling like you just dished out), my take on their viewpoint. I don't want people to talk out loud about their point of view?!! What the heck has this back and forth been? I don't fear the marketplace of ideas, anybody's ideas. I endure the pretty constant name calling and labeling of opposing viewpoints here precisely to engage in that marketplace of ideas.

You certainly have said people were wrong. You are saying I'm wrong when you call me out as BTP because I have a viewpoint that you disagree with. Some people make their points in a pretty foul way, so I think they deserve to get a little foulness back, but I'm not one of those, in fact, I hate it when the non thinking chime in and I get lumped in with clumsy oratory.

I'll own this much, that I couldn't quite resist crowing some this morning after Obama's win. You're right, my guy won and he did it with a heaping whole lot of support from your fellow sisters. As much as you guys curse me out around here, you can't blame me for gloating just a little. I feel some justified vindication for my position that we should support the guy.

I've never said you were wretched, I don't call you or the contributors names cuz I'm not trying to disrespect anybody (I believe I am the most passionately civil poster you have). I'm not obsessed either. I've said more than once that I think the fundamental motivation behind your blog is very relevant and its why I read you, though we have some real points of departure. I respect your work, the pressure you've brought to bear, hope my little blog grows up to be as impactful as the WAOD crew has been in my own way one day. But just like you G, I don't back up off of convictions honestly held.

As to your parting shot regarding endorsements and your studied neutrality to date, thats a whole new argument and I'll stick with this one for the moment. But hey, thats been your point all along, that black women will make their own judgments. Fine, do so. Your SC sistren certainly did.

Yes, you came to crow as if somehow you won something when we never were in the fight.

What we have always wanted was for black women to vote in whatever way they felt was in their best interest.

Yet,clearly you seem to think, as we have repeatedly rebuffed that we were anti Obama. That never was the case. Hence our point. ANyone who was not effusive in their Obama praise was labeled anti.

Which I think is stupid on your part as an Obama supporter because instead of trying to place a scarlett O on those who do not walk in lockstep with you, you could be making persuasive arguments. In fact I might add, since we are all gloating. I called that the Clintons would run Obama against Bill three months ago. I also called that one of his weaknesses would be that people would portray him , rightfully at the time as all biography and no policy. A stigma he still bears and must shed.

Again, you have yet to superficially address the questions. Yet you keep returning to tell us that you are not going to answer. I don't need anyone to do analysis for me. But as a campaign supporter who is running around the net, you ought to at least attempt to persuade and you can start by answering the questions we asked back in Novemebr.

Precisely. I spent time talking to as many black women as I could in South Carolina, and most of them didn't have any policy questions answered by ANY of the candidates, including Obama.

SC was an extremely racially charged climate, with the press covering the 'racial temperature' non-stop, 24/7 -- and that definitely worked in Obama's favor.

To be honest I was glad that Obama won, but for the wrong reasons. My reasons had absolutely nothing to do with the policy recommendations that he has on his agenda.

None of candidates spent time talking about a crime bill. And the economic package that all of them are offering is ludicrous.

However, Obama's win keeps the presidency up for grabs, which still puts the power in the voters hands. From what I could see, many black women voted for Barack for nebulous concept of 'hope' , and also out of outrage of the Clinton's antics -- but not out of some huge endorsement of his policy for black women.

If you read my blog, you will see the issues that disproportionately affect black women: the media war against us, the exceptional crime rate, the AIDS situation, and economic disparities based on race and gender.

Excellent post Gina, I am glad that I can put my passport back in the drawer and my official status as a loyal black person remains secure.

@Aaron

You missed the point man, but that's cool. We get it, Obama's your man. I'll keep challenging all the candidates including Obama to address my issues.

@Everyone

Ah! Isn't wonderful to have the chance and the right to address your political rights BY YOURSELF! Isn't great to be an American? LOL!

Gina, I don't think I ever labeled any of you anti-Obama, but if I did, would that be any more or less fair than calling me the black thought police and other sundry witticisms? And I did answer your question regarding whether life will be better for black women under Obama. I honestly don't know.

I would have to go find your questions from back in November, but as I recall, many of the issues you raised have not been specifically answered by anyone, so I don't know the answer. Why castigate me because no one has answered these specific policy points you have? As with any candidate, you have to draw conclusions based on what you know of their other positions if you don't have a direct answer.

Shecodes, I guess my response to you is that like I said, we talk past each other cuz we like to fight. You're not anti-Obama, I'll take you at your word. You're not pro-Obama either and I am, for my own oft stated reasons.

Lets agree that there is not a dime's worth of difference in the policy prescriptions of the democratic candidates and if we are being real, we can stipulate that that is the case. They all want to do largely the same stuff with largely the same strategies. On the issues, there is little substantive difference and thats the reason your SC voter contacts were not voting for a candidate based on how their policy was going to affect them, because the differences are simply too small for real contrast. This boils down to personal qualities, style, race, gender, baggage and other intangibles in my view. We are not having a debate about whether or not black women are allowed to make up their own minds without black card revocation. I've argued that Obama's run helps us, whether he wins or loses. But a bunch of women in SC seem to have bet the same way if as you say they didn't go on the issues. Maybe like me, they figured Obama in the mix is better than Obama out of the mix, which has been my main point.

Another thing. Perhaps its not your intent, but you guys "seem" to keep decrying the idea of "hope". You said black women were allowed to make their decisions based on whatever criterion they want, but you sound a little judgmental about the "hopeful" women, that they are not using this hard policy litmus test. That sister on the blogcast last night got a little eaten up on that point too I thought.

Ladies, I'm trying to persuade, but I'm also real about this. Obama is not the savior. Win or lose, he should be in because his run is a net plus for black folks. No downside on his candidacy that
is energizing blacks, the party and turnout. But if we are being real about it, O is a liberal democrat like the other two, and lives in roughly the same box. On balance, I prefer the O man. And thats how this thing is going to lay folks. You are not going to be able to differentiate these candidates on policy in any way that matters. You may get the opportunity to make the call from a policy perspective if one of them figure out how to pander precisely to your perspective, but in the same way that few battle plans survive contact with the enemy, pandering promises on the campaign trail will be subject to fade like vapor when it comes time to govern.

It's amazing to me that women who want economic equality and freedom from violence are accused as 'asking for pandering'. SMH.

- Sounds like Obama had a at least one other Black woman and a couple of little Black girls behind him as well.

and he was sure to Thank them :-)

From the Speech:

Thank you, South Carolina.

Thank you to the rock of my life, Michelle Obama.

Thank you to Malia and Sasha Obama, who haven't seen their daddy in a week.

- I am not weighing in on the argument about whether black woman can and should be able to make up there own minds with out the treat of loosing there “black card”.

I think your guy’s card is as safe and secure as it always has been.

I will say this, it certainly does feels good to see so many of my sista’s make a sound judgement and come out in support for this brotha.

I myself think that this time, with this particular politician, and in this particular movement, this particular black man will be well worth the support.

From the Speech:

This election is about the past vs. the future. It's about whether we settle for the same divisions and distractions and drama that passes for politics today or whether we reach for a politics of common sense and innovation, a politics of shared sacrifice and shared prosperity.

There are those who will continue to tell us that we can't do this, that we can't have what we're looking for, that we can't have what we want, that we're peddling false hopes. But here is what I know. I know that when people say we can't overcome all the big money and influence in Washington, I think of that elderly woman who sent me a contribution the other day, an envelope that had a money order for $3.01 along with a verse of scripture tucked inside the envelope. So don't tell us change isn't possible. That woman knows change is possible.

When I hear the cynical talk that blacks and whites and Latinos can't join together and work together, I'm reminded of the Latino brothers and sisters I organized with and stood with and fought with side by side for jobs and justice on the streets of Chicago. So don't tell us change can't happen.

When I hear that we'll never overcome the racial divide in our politics, I think about that Republican woman who used to work for Strom Thurmond, who is now devoted to educating inner city-children and who went out into the streets of South Carolina and knocked on doors for this campaign. Don't tell me we can't change.

Yes, we can. Yes, we can change. Yes, we can.

@Professor Tracey

IF I missed the point, no more so than any of you to be sure.

@JustATest,

Thats a very broad misinterpretation of what I've said, a rhetorical point that is more heat than light. Even the prime contributors have bluntly said they want some of the same pandering the candidates do with other interest groups and used that very word.

The implication is that I am dismissing those very serious issues and nothing could be farther from the truth. I suspect we all have a lot more common ground than the discussion would indicate.

Great post.

Just came to your post from the field negro blog.

Of course i'm happy that black women came out in record numbers to give Obama the victory in South Carolina. But this may be off the subject, but I noticed something that bothered me. Maybe it was just me, but, whereas other women and men were interviewed in various places (on the street, in bars, cafes, in churches), black women I saw were only interviewed in salons, usually with their hair in curlors! If I didn't know any better, I would have thought that the only place black women congregate is in a salon.

I don't know if it was lazy reporting or what, But that's what I say three successive times.

hey mac, you are right. I even threatened to hang out at a salon with a hot comb to chase the reporters away, lol.

I know why they did it. There is a horrific fascination with what goes on with black women's hair. Our hair is politicized in a manner that no one else on the planet experiences. We are judged by our hair, by everyone including ourselves. It bothers me tremendously.

@Aaron

I'm not the one challenging folks on a non-existent issue. You have repeatedly done this despite requests to stop. And you are not debating by your own admission, you are bullying folks because you think that helps you win a discussion.

I find it very interesting that whenever you comment, it turns in personal attack instead of a discussion of the original post. You really ought to consider how you are interpreting people's words and views, because you are very off the mark.

No one has ever stated being against Obama, but you keep insisting we are because we ask questions. No one has said anything about pandering but you. I know that we have discussed we individuals stand on the issues and that is our right to ask. The right to ask questions is the American democratic ideal, how about you let us practice it?

We all know where you stand and that's great. You clearly don't care about the same issues we do and that's fine too. You do not have the right to question us because you already made up your mind. You go vote for Obama and I'll make up my mind when my primary comes around.

Can it be that Obama just is the BETTER candidate? Damn...

The Sista's support just keep on comming:

Dear Senator Obama,

This letter represents a first for me--a public endorsement of a Presidential candidate. I feel driven to let you know why I am writing it. One reason is it may help gather other supporters; another is that this is one of those singular moments that nations ignore at their peril. I will not rehearse the multiple crises facing us, but of one thing I am certain: this opportunity for a national evolution (even revolution) will not come again soon, and I am convinced you are the person to capture it.

May I describe to you my thoughts?

I have admired Senator Clinton for years. Her knowledge always seemed to me exhaustive; her negotiation of politics expert. However I am more compelled by the quality of mind (as far as I can measure it) of a candidate. I cared little for her gender as a source of my admiration, and the little I did care was based on the fact that no liberal woman has ever ruled in America. Only conservative or "new-centrist" ones are allowed into that realm. Nor do I care very much for your race[s]. I would not support you if that was all you had to offer or because it might make me "proud."

In thinking carefully about the strengths of the candidates, I stunned myself when I came to the following conclusion: that in addition to keen intelligence, integrity and a rare authenticity, you exhibit something that has nothing to do with age, experience, race or gender and something I don't see in other candidates. That something is a creative imagination which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom. It is too bad if we associate it only with gray hair and old age. Or if we call searing vision naivete. Or if we believe cunning is insight. Or if we settle for finessing cures tailored for each ravaged tree in the forest while ignoring the poisonous landscape that feeds and surrounds it. Wisdom is a gift; you can't train for it, inherit it, learn it in a class, or earn it in the workplace--that access can foster the acquisition of knowledge, but not wisdom.

When, I wondered, was the last time this country was guided by such a leader? Someone whose moral center was un-embargoed? Someone with courage instead of mere ambition? Someone who truly thinks of his country's citizens as "we," not "they"? Someone who understands what it will take to help America realize the virtues it fancies about itself, what it desperately needs to become in the world?

Our future is ripe, outrageously rich in its possibilities. Yet unleashing the glory of that future will require a difficult labor, and some may be so frightened of its birth they will refuse to abandon their nostalgia for the womb.

There have been a few prescient leaders in our past, but you are the man for this time.

Good luck to you and to us.

Toni Morrison

@Professor Tracey,

You will not find anywhere in my posts that I called any of you anti-Obama. Nowhere. Factually incorrect. I accept that you are not. Neither are you pro-Obama, and all I've done is argue what I think is a perfectly good case to be pro-Obama. You disagree. Thats fine. I thought the exchange of ideas is what its about.

As to making personal attacks and bullying people, all I can say is that you are an awesome comedian. Professor, I have NEVER rounded a personal comment on anybody that didn't round on me first. Its not my way. In contrast, I feel like some members of the team here have been QUICK to label an opposing viewpoint with a belittling tag like Black Thought Police or other terminology and right quick. At every turn I have advanced reasonable argument in a reasonable and respectful way and in return I got what I thought was hot lead filled commentary that often came with name calling and generalizations about where I'm coming from. And since this is your place, I got that from multiple directions. If anybody got bullied in this back and forth, it was me. I'm a big boy, so I took my lumps and made my arguments and it played how it played. But no reasonable person who read the back and forth of my posts could agree with you. I can say it with confidence cuz its all there in black and white, every word including your sides use of the word pandering.

Anyway, its become a sour debate with a funky tone that I didn't inject into it. I'd argue you've all missed my point as badly as you think I've missed yours and that you are hardly fair minded in much of your criticism of me, especially on the point of bullying,personal attacks and name calling. I'm passionate on my views, but rarely uncivil and I can't say thats been consistently true of the other side of the debate. I've often been complimentary, tried to be fair in my responses and be civil. I'll stand on my posting, its all there for anybody that reads it fairly.

In conclusion, I think we are witnessing a miracle - I am in total agreement with you! This has become a tiresome, annoying and sour discussion topic, which I'm sure you will all lay the blame for at my feet. So be it. I retire from the field, you may all claim victory and I'll talk about something else. That ought to at least marginally improve your day. Don't say I never did anything nice for you.

I was visiting someone over the weekend. On one of the alphabet news broadcasts had the nerve to interview bw in the beauty shops AND bm in the barber shops in the same news piece. I was pretty disgusted. I don't watch much of the news because you do not get a true feel for what is going on. At least those like SheCodes are able and willing to take the time to talk to real people, not charactitures.

I plan on asking a friend of mine (wm) why he likes Obama. I will probably get 'he wants change' as a reply. I will then ask for specifics and see if he can give me any. I have a feeling that I will get a similar response like SheCodes did when she spoke with bw.

I'm all about policies. What do they want to do and how do they plan to get them done? PERIOD.

"I'm all about policies. What do they want to do and how do they plan to get them done? PERIOD."

Policies are very important and those differences are much broader when comparing Republican's vs. Democrats.

But, the point is that there is not a vast chasm of policy differences between democrats and certainly not between Obama and Hillary.

What is more important to me and more profound to me is “character” and strength of character.

I always felt that Obama has shown his character to be much stronger and profound than that of the Clinton’s.

But, what I have been shocked about as well as many others’s I believe is just how deep the lack of character goes with the Clinton’s.

This is the very first time in my life where I do not feel that I am selecting the lesser of two evils but, that I am selecting the greater good for the country.

Issues are important; there is no denying that fact. But, when I hear on a regular basis about from young people and some older people who have never in there lives participated in the political process being so driven and motivated to come out and let there voices be heard in support of Obama.

I don’t for a second believe that the increased voter turnouts have anything to do with this generation who we have so long called and believed to be lost coming out to get behind anyone else but, Obama.

That alone speaks volumes to me far more so than whether Hillary believes in having mandated health care and Obama wanting to make healthcare affordable to all.

Character speaks more volumes to me than whether Obama wants to get out of Iraq a hair trigger faster or slower than Hillary.

I was thinking about the issue that bw or bp for that matter are voting for Obama are doing so purely because of his race.

Point well made. If you cannot trust that a person will stand and follow through, what they say it totally meaningless.

This is a hard election cycle for sure.

Well pamela I have admitted to it before what first drew me to Obama was him being a well qualified black man.

But, that was way back when he was running for his senate seat. What kept my interest was after reading his 1st book and after his 1st term his 2nd book.

That and watching how he has conducted himself on the campaign speaks to my believe that he is of strong character.

But hey that’s just my opinion and I am FL resident, so my vote today only gets him so far due to this whole delegate mess ;-)