"I want my America back"

By now we have all heard and possibly seen the widespread disruption that has been occurring in health care reform forums and town halls across the country. The nuttiness of it all makes me want to laugh and cry at the same time. The claims about death panels are so patently ridiculous that you can only wonder how many tin foil hats these folks have in their closets.

We all know by now too that these antics have been carefully and widely promoted by the conservative organizations FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity. The "best practices" memo distributed by these organizations gives its supporters the strategies for disrupting the meeting. Participants are supposed to "yell back" and have someone else follow up with a "shout out". I'm not sure how they are supposed to reconcile this with the very next instruction: "Don't carry on and make a scene - just short intermittent shout outs." Yell at people out of turn, but don't make a scene. If the descriptions of these events are any clue, it seems like people are having a hard time doing that.

Nevertheless, this woman, at an town hall meeting with Arkansas Representatives Mike Ross and Vic Snyder, followed this advice to the letter:

"At this point in my life, I have never seen my America turned into what it has turned into, and I want my America back. And I don't think the Representatives and Senators are gonna be able to do it. I'm scared!"
(click here for the video; this woman's comments start at 1:16)

Let us set aside the fact that these boisterous, "spontaneous" expressions of opposition have been carefully orchestrated by well funded astro-turfing organizations. I have no doubt that this woman is sincerely afraid. The question is, what has America turned into that she is so afraid of? An America where everyone has the option of obtaining health care? An America where insurance companies cannot deny necessary care? Or is she afraid of an America that elects black presidents? An America that, as the Daily Show "correspondent" put it, is becoming darker?

When I first saw this particular clip (admittedly on the Daily Show) I could not help but think about the crowds taunting and screaming the Little Rock Nine as they tried to go to high school.

Photo courtesy of the National Park Service

It seems to me that fears expressed by this woman in Arkansas (and others) are the same kind that prompted Hazel Bryan Massery (and others) to harass Elizabeth Eckford back in 1957. The kind of bigotry that has haunted Massery since this photo came to symbolize the challenges we faced as a nation in overcoming racism. Her apologies to Eckford later in life, and her apparent life long quest to make amends were, in the end, never totally accepted by anyone. She will likely always be remembered as the person in the picture above.

Hazel Bryan Massery's transformation was possible in large part because she was aware of her racism. Her actions captured in the photo above were clearly intended to maintain a position of racial supremacy. It is this conscious racism that has likely allowed her to rethink her views, change her attitudes, and attempt to make amends (however clumsy and self-serving).

I believe that the fear that the woman in Arkansas expressed at that town hall meeting has nothing to do with health care reform. We know that the misinformation and hysteria seen in the health care forums and town halls is orchestrated by conservative organizations fronting for lobbyists of the health care and pharmaceutical industry. We know that it is fomented by greedy media pundits like Glenn Beck, Britt Hume, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Newt Gingrich, and supported with the forehead slapping stupidity of weekday morning mainstream media TV shows. Unfortunately, the lies peddled by these info-tainment whores obscure the underlying bigotry on which they are based.

The fear expressed by many of these protesters has everything to do with racism and bigotry. Sadly, I doubt the woman in Arkansas is even aware of the racism inherent in her fear.

Reality check

I've spent the better part of the past year focused on writing a dissertation and buying a house. I cannot recommend doing these two things at the same time. It means that my capacity for thoughts, large and small, became narrowed to two domains: qualitative research method of regulatory activities and real estate law. I couldn't handle anything outside of this, which is a long way of explaining why my last blog entry was June of 2008.

And it seems that I am always inspired by someone writing about Obama and the election. I've been thinking about the election of Obama alot lately, at least when I am not thinking about my research or how to find the right contractor.

I am excited about the election of Barack Obama. I was excited to see the pictures my friend in Wilmington, DE posted of his stop there yesterday. I will probably watch the inauguration, which I have not done since Clinton was first elected.

At the same time, I am skeptical that Obama is going to meet the expectations that so many seem to have of him. He is not the liberal that my more liberal colleagues see and desire. Neither is he the liberal that so many of my mother's right-wing friends fear. And if you look at who he has picked for his team, all I see is caution.

Granted, Obama is inheriting problems that we have not seen in two generations. A severe economic recession (if we are lucky), two wars, and a quickly changing world. These challenges alone make the kinds of structural changes that progressives like myself would like to see difficult to come by. More importantly, as much as I believe that Obama will be a good president, looking at his history and his choices, I just don't see him heralding in the next Pax Americana.

Obama's election has great symbolic value. As one woman in the Boston Globe Magazine wrote today, his election may pave the way for non-white Americans to see embrace both their ethnic identity and their American identity, a privilege previously held only by the Irish, Italians, some Jews, and perhaps Poles.

At the same time, there are material changes that we would like to see happen and want to believe that Obama will bring. Equitable access to health, improved school systems, wider and equitable access to college, a refocus on public transportation and away from highway building, stronger environmental protection laws, stronger civil rights laws, a more equitable tax system, etc. A tall order indeed.

Maybe it's because I don't want to be disappointed. More likely its because I know the structure of government and know that Obama will have split Senate governed by timid Democrats, few of whom can be said to really be innovative, much less progressive, thinkers. I will maintain hope but I'm not holding my breath.

Gender, civil rights and hope

In this presidential election, the mass media (mainstream and blogosphere alike) are focusing on the race versus gender card in the Democratic contest. May I start out by stating that this discussion is nothing but a days worth of manure from an industrial hog farm. Black men and women are voting for Clinton and white men and women are voting for Obama and vice versa. Have we not yet learned that people cannot always be reduced to their demographics?

I would also like to make it clear that feminism, or the effort to secure equal and equitable rights and opportunities for women to live and work in society free from discrimination and fear, is a civil rights concern. I do not claim to be a "feminist", at least not in the burn-your-bra, all-men-are-oppressors form. But the overall goals of feminism to allow women to choose to go to school, to play sports, to work in any field they choose, to choose whether or not to get married and to whom, or whether or not to have children and how, to vote, to travel and even check into a hotel without a husband are exactly the same goals that non-whites and other marginalized groups have sought. The feminism versus civil rights discussion is another truckload of chicken litter that serves no one but people who profit from divisiveness.

For me, this also isn't about substance versus charisma. I am a policy wonk. There's nothing I appreciate more than a well crafted policy. The books on my Amazon wishlist are policy books. I regularly seek out critical evaluations of policies in areas that I don't even work in just out of curiousity (guess what - Amber Alerts don't work).

The reason why Clinton is losing favor with people is not because she's all steak and Obama is all sizzle, as some have implied. This assertion is simply offensive. Obama has substantive policy proposals as well, some of which I don't entirely agree with and some of Clinton's proposals need either more work or a reality check. Also, Clinton does have her own charm. She's a powerful person who has survived personal and political attacks for most of her public life. There's a steadiness, steeliness, and a level-headedness that I might otherwise find attractive in a presidential candidate in these times. And despite everything I say below, if she is the nominee, I will vote for her.

With that said, Clinton's problems are in part related to her messaging. Obama's message about hope is attractive right now because people in this country are suffering or they are in a position to legitimately fear suffering in the very near future. Clinton has summarily dismissed this message as worthy of public discussion. That very dismissal is what makes her unattractive to me. I read somewhere that if you take away people's hope, you may be taking away the only thing they have. By dismissing the importance of hope in this day of economic insecurity and war you are dismissing the nature of humanity.

Even as someone who believes very strongly in the role of policy wonks and the technocracy in politics, I believe even more strongly that policy decisions should be made based on values that recognize people's essential humanity. We can't get decent immigration laws passed because our leadership has failed to see immigrants has human beings who deserve the same opportunities to work, go to school, play sports, live in a safe community, and do all of those other things that civil rights activists have fought for. We can't seem to put enough money in our urban schools for the same reason. We can't even get the president or the CIA to say that torture is wrong (not just illegal) because "terrorists" are apparently not human beings. Clinton's failure to see the importance of hope in society tells me that she does not necessarily see the humanity in the policies that she fights so hard for.