politics.

and religion.



2 things that should never come up in conversation...yet it seems like they do more often than not.



i don't watch a lot of news, or listen to a lot of talk radio. I don't have a lot of time to listen to someone else's opinion about who I should vote for and why. i get really concerned about the intense negativity that I see directed towards people running for office.... be it McCain, Obama, Clinton or Romney.



I found it interesting that Romney's "mormon identity" became the driving wedge for Republicans... and I talked to students in my classes about how Romney all of a sudden wasn't just the governor from massachussets. He was "the Mormon" and no matter what he said or did, it always came back to him being Mormon. Hillary was always 'the woman', McCain - the "war veteran", Obama "the black man," -Huckabee "the baptist preacher"... Ron Paul, "the Ralph Nader of 2008," Guiliani "the 9-11 hero"... etc...



all of these social identifiers became what people used to define whether they liked or didn't like the candidate. Sure, they could say it was about their foreign policy or stance on the war or healthcare plan, but in the end... the underlying markings clearly existed and, in my opinion, influenced like and dislike, support and the lack thereof.



Currently, there's discussion about some dude in Georgia selling a shirt with a picture of Curious George on it that says "Obama '08" and Michael mentioned to me that black people are "always making it about race" because there are folks protesting the shirt.

The controversy started in May, so I'm not sure why it's just being reported on a month later... but I'll keep my wit to myself.

Here's the shirt.



I'll admit that when I heard about the shirt and found out that the guy wasn't an Obama supporter, I knew that it wasn't something positive, nor was it "innocent" just because it was curious george. Reminded me of a talk show radio host's "Campaign about Nothing" shirts that he sells related to Obama.


It bothered me at first because, to me, the shirt is clearly attempting to make some connection of Obama and a monkey... not a far stretch from the ignorance and hate behind historically depicting black people as monkeys.


And then Michael said that George Bush was caricatured as a monkey too... so the shirt really wasn't a big deal..


Okay, so then let's say it's really innocent and not about race (because George Bush isn't black) then what is it about?


Intelligence level or the lack thereof. Monkey = stupid.


(Nevermind that monkeys are the only animals that I can think of who communicate with humans with simple sign language...)


If anyone can say that they've read a political cartoon depicting George Bush as a monkey and said "oh it's just because he looks like a monkey, not because people think he's stupid" then I'd say they're lying to themselves. We may not think it out loud or automatically when we see the picture... but I think if we take time to be honest and deconstruct what the underlying meaning is... we'll see a few different things.


And then I thought to myself, well - if he wants to make a shirt that calls Obama a monkey, fine. It's his right to do something stupid and it's a free country. I don't like the shirt, so I won't buy it... and I'll figure that folks who do buy it, agree with the guy who doesn't support Obama and wants to equate him with a monkey. Plain and simple. (they buy the shirt, but won't wear it... if it's so innocent... why not wear the shirt?)


I'd rather know that they don't like Obama and think he looks like a monkey - whether it's because he's black or because he just looks like a monkey, whatever the case - than have folks speak nicely about him in public and call him names in private. It's something I grew to understand about living in the South, so far as race... usually if folks don't like you - they will let you know.




Michael said that political correctness keeps "people" from being honest about how they really feel... and that black people were making a big deal out of the shirt for nothing. I think it would be interesting that instead of protesting the shirts, black people came out in droves to buy the shirt and wear it in support of Obama. It would be completely the opposite of what Mulligan or the person that made the shirt, probably wanted. it would have dual meaning depending on who was wearing the shirt. Would it defeat the purpose of making fun of Obama? Possibly... it wouldn't be the first time black people have taken something negative and turned it into something positive...


An editorial in the local paper after the incident mirrored my thoughts - so I figured I'd post some of it here.


The author had a photographer for the paper buy and wear the shirt in public... then he visited the bar (Mulligan's in Marietta, GA) to talk with the owner.


...The t-shirt served as a prop for yesterday's Badie tour. I wnted to see the reaction if someone actually wore the shirt. Getz agreed to be the guinea pig, though he may now resent it. He didn't like the attention, the stares and gestures.

"It's not me," Getz said.


Soon, he shed it.

Dwight Bramlett, a white man from Newnan who was eating breakfast, could see why.

"I don't see it as a racial thing, but it's a touchy subject, ya know?," the electrician said. "If I was black, I think I'd be a little insulted. It's just more trouble. More stuff to fuss about."


All because of a T-shirt.

But is it just a T-shirt?


Norman has the right to erect any kind of mean-spirited message he wants on the marquee outside his hole-in-the-wall. He can sell racist T-shirts, too, if that's his thing. If you don't see anything wrong with it, you can eat and drink there. Take friends. We can't tell Norman what to think or what to express.

Likewise, you can't tell any black person how to feel or how to react to a T-shirt that compares a monkey with a black man. Black people deal with it in different ways —- by ignoring the Normans of the world, through anger, pain, protests, counter racism and humor.

It's not about holding a grudge; it's about not forgetting the past, the legacy.

It's easy to say just get over it, move on, knock the chip off your shoulder, when you're not the one whose history, whose ancestors, bore the scars. But do you tell a woman who's been raped to just "get over it?" Or relatives who lost a family member to murder to just "move on?"

[LaShawn's note... would you make a shirt with a Swastika and tell Jews to just "get over it"?]

The historical context in which blacks have been derogatorily compared to monkeys, apes and chimps is too defined, too recent. It's rooted in Jim Crow America. The South. And if you can't see that, can't acknowledge it or didn't know, then perhaps Norman's Obama spoof has served one good purpose: enlightenment.

I've read some comments by AJC readers who wonder why the characterization and depiction of President George Bush as a monkey hasn't garnered the same visceral reaction. While such a depiction may offend some, it carries absolutely no racial, racist or bigoted innuendo. Zilch.


The rest of the article is here.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/2008/05/15/badie.html?cxntlid=inform_artr


In the end of it all, besides just venting about an issue, here's my solution to it.


Let's all take some time to realize that no politician has all of the answers all of the time. If you disagree with someone as a political candidate, do so in a civilized fashion by simply supporting the candidate you DO agree with. Ignore the one you don't. If you don't like Obama, wonderful. Don't vote for him. If you're going to compare him and McCain, do it above the belt and with some intelligence. Compare the two on their issues and show why your guy is the candidate YOU like.


I think the name-calling at such a historic time in our history (an African American male & a white female taken seriously as Presidential candidates) has been utterly wasted and disrespected because of all the immature and asinine crap that our politics has been reduced to.

I respect McCain as a candidate and wouldn't say anything bad about him. I'm researching him just as I'm researching Obama. Neither of them have a clear answer to the many issues that the next President will have to oversee and I don't expect anyone to come up with a magic wand. I vote based on who I think will do the best job for our country at this time.