Spring Break
Obama wins in S.C., but America is losing
Issue date: 1/29/08 Section: Opinion
I am writing tonight out of pure frustration, not because I am a Hillary Clinton supporter and Barack Obama just won a primary that he was expected to win, but because of the exhaustive media attention that's been given to race. Not the presidential race, which is what we should really be focusing on, but the ethnicity of the candidates. I watched over two hours of election coverage in one day, and 80 percent or more of what was discussed revolved around which racial segments of the population are supporting which candidate and how much of that support is contingent upon the ethnicity of their chosen candidate. It left me asking one question: Seriously?
Now, I fully realize that it would be irresponsible to ignore the aspects of race and gender, especially when discussing a party whose base is rooted in support of minorities. However, there is a point at which the way the media is framing this discussion actually pushes us backward, and we have gone far beyond this point. This is an extraordinary time in American history. Not just African-American history or the history of the feminist movement. It is increasingly likely that the first African-American or the first woman will be taking the village idiot's place as president of the United States in 2008.
So why is the media insisting upon using this unprecedented step toward full equality as a source of division? I can't figure it out. Both during a recent debate and out on the campaign trail, Obama and Clinton agreed to leave the topic of race behind completely, since it is the Democratic party that has consistently stood up for minority rights, the fight to end poverty, and focused their efforts on improving the middle class and giving those who want to achieve that status the opportunity to do so. Yet for some reason the media can't seem to understand the American public is tired of the press holding a magnifying glass over something that does not address any of the major problems facing the United States. For several primaries now, the economy has been the issue that Democratic voters have cited as the most important in exit polls, with health care and the war in Iraq coming in second and third. Race is not even on the list, so why is it being given so much attention?
Now, I fully realize that it would be irresponsible to ignore the aspects of race and gender, especially when discussing a party whose base is rooted in support of minorities. However, there is a point at which the way the media is framing this discussion actually pushes us backward, and we have gone far beyond this point. This is an extraordinary time in American history. Not just African-American history or the history of the feminist movement. It is increasingly likely that the first African-American or the first woman will be taking the village idiot's place as president of the United States in 2008.
So why is the media insisting upon using this unprecedented step toward full equality as a source of division? I can't figure it out. Both during a recent debate and out on the campaign trail, Obama and Clinton agreed to leave the topic of race behind completely, since it is the Democratic party that has consistently stood up for minority rights, the fight to end poverty, and focused their efforts on improving the middle class and giving those who want to achieve that status the opportunity to do so. Yet for some reason the media can't seem to understand the American public is tired of the press holding a magnifying glass over something that does not address any of the major problems facing the United States. For several primaries now, the economy has been the issue that Democratic voters have cited as the most important in exit polls, with health care and the war in Iraq coming in second and third. Race is not even on the list, so why is it being given so much attention?
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
KISSman
posted 1/28/08 @ 11:33 PM CST
The Clintons did their best to paint Obama as 'the black candidate' which is why race was such a big deal.
Even on the morning of the primary, it was Bill Clinton when asked about the double-team tactics of the Clinton campaign oddly evoked Jesse Jackson's win in '84 and '88 and tied it to the inevitable win by Obama by the end of the night. (Continued…)
See it - Believe it
posted 1/29/08 @ 1:24 AM CST
I will absolutely vote for THE Democrat in November 2008. Like you, I hope it is Clinton. Why? Because, she is A) most electable and B) most qualified. (Continued…)
prantha
posted 1/29/08 @ 3:27 AM CST
I will explain why race has been introduced into this. BILL CLINTON wanted to get white people to think that Obama is only for the black man. People in S. (Continued…)
Curtis Hill
posted 1/29/08 @ 2:09 PM CST
The idea that Bill Clinton was trying to "paint Obama as the black candidate" is so funny to me. Obama IS the black candidate. I think America has known that for some time. (Continued…)
Post a Comment