The Oprah Obama Show
Every once in a while, politicians and celebrities slip their handlers’ leashes, let their guards down, and reveal how really stupid they are. Case in point: the recent and extraordinary performance of Oprah Winfrey and her hero Barack Obama.
John McCain and George Bush, to ay nothing of Dan Rather, Alec Baldwin, and Tom Cruise, do this nearly every time they speak off the cuff. Others are more careful. Bill Clinton was good at deflecting embarrassing questions, and Hilary stays on course by following the script and keeping anyone but supporters from asking questions, and some celebrities—Johnny Carson and Raymond Burr, for example—mostly kept their bizarre private lives private. The cleverest are those who turned their little problems into opportunities—Clinton’s sexual peccadillos actually won him respect in some quarters, and Oprah Winfrey’s highly publicized struggles with obesity and unreliable boyfriends gained her sympathy from her mostly white middle-aged female fans.
(Aside: If you catch your wife, mother, sister, daughter, girl friend, daughter-in law or female second cousin twice removed watching Oprah, destroy the TV set.)
Watching the presidential campaign casually, as a disinterested spectator—like William Godwin’s liberal angel looking down impartially on poor deluded humanity—I have been impressed by Barack Obama’s ability to mask himself in campaign rhetoric. In general, Obama contents himself with promising change without ever entering into such messy details as policies or programs, and as for his private life, he reads the same script—co-written by Horatio Alger and Booker T. Washington, occasionally throwing in little humanizing details that may arouse the ire of Mitt Romney’s handlers but endear him to voters under 60.
This past week, however, Oprah and Romney seemed to have solidified some kind of suicide pact. When Oprah merely endorsed Obama, there was little risk involved, and the pundits may have been correct in claiming that Oprah’s vast, largely non-political following of bored and ignorant housewives could represent a new factor in American politics, but the Oprah-Barack show in Columbia, South Carolina, is, as they would say, sump’n else. The Charlotte Observer’s Mary C. Curtis was thrilled by the stars’ performances and the enthusiasm they generated among the 30,000 fans, but even Ms Curtis (a middle-aged black female) could not help noticing that the audience was “predominantly black.”
Unfortunately, the cameras were also there, and non-black voters have been able to watch the spectacle of Oprah and Obama trying to outdo each other in their imitation of Al Sharpton. I thought immediately of the old song from the all-Negro version of Annie Get Your Gun. “Anything you can do, I can do blacker, I can do anything blacker than you.”
What did they think they were doing? Neither Oprah nor Obama have ever been convincing putting on the ghetto, and their performances reminded me of nothing so much as of Steve Martin as The Jerk. At this point in Obama’s campaign, his only hope is to appeal to non-black voters of the lower-middle and blue-collar classes, who feel that business as usual, as conducted by the traditional leadership of both parties, is lowering their expectations for the future. Now that Oprah and Obama have put forward Obama as the black candidate, the real Obama, the Obama who just happens to be black, is going to be a hard sell.
Perhaps Obama’s race-pandering to half his own people explains why the Greatest Show in the history of politics has so far given him no bounce in the national polls that still show Hilary leading by 30 percentage points. Worse news for Obama is that a poll taken after the show indicates that while 1% of respondents thought Ms Winfrey's endorsement made them more likely to vote for him, 14% said it made them less likely.
This PR is no great matter, perhaps, since the most Obama can practically hope for at this point is a cabinet position. He cannot be the candidate, unless the Democratic Party leadership completely loses what passes for their minds, and, if the front-runner receives the nomination, he cannot even expect to be the vice presidential candidate: A Hilary-Obama ticket is the Republican Party's dream. It is Oprah Winfrey, who may turn out to be the bigger loser. She, too, may have transformed herself from a wise long-suffering celebrity woman who appeals at least as much to white as to black women. She runs the risk of becoming the black version of Rose O'Donnell: a leftist crank with a narrow following and, worse than that, a "controversial" character. Up until now, Oprah has been an institution something like the Smithsonian Museum, but unless she draws back from the black power abyss into which she seems determined to leap, she may turn out to be more like Dick Gregory. Remember him?
The Oprah-Obama show, like all good variety specials, was introduced by a musical act, the hip hop band “Arrested Development.” The musical style told white voters over 30 what to think of Obama, and their name encapsulates his campaign aspirations and his political maturity.
115 Responses »
Trackbacks
- Decline and Fall of Common Sense: Oprah, Allow Us Voters to Form Our Own Opinions
- gratis poker ohne anmeldung
Entries(RSS)
Hmm...looks to me like the beginning of the conquest of the Planet of the Apes...
#101
George, thank you, you said it!
Let's see, who's the Big Ape ... TJF me thinks ...
100 Chance Gardner
Was it ye'r maternal or paternall granny a Jew? Makes all the difference in the woild (in former case you are a Jew, in the latter you are not).
Okay, so I did read this Chance Gardner's #100, contrary to my stated intention.
Allow me to apologize. None of us lead the easiest of lives. You derive some joy and sense of fulfillment from posting here. I ruin that with an irrelevant comment that offends you.
But you need to understand, please, what my point was. I admit that what you said about Shabbetai Zevi was historically true, and in some other conversation his history would be significant. I did not "bristle" because you related something about that false messiah. I bristled at the fact that you brought it up when it was not relevant. Nothing I said had to do with the history of Jews or Judaism. My own comment was not all that relevant; I merely assumed that Mr. Kyser thought all the musicians in question were Moslem when only one was. It was a simple fact check.
"Caper, respectfully you jews and/or ex-jews have a history, and tear everything else apart, but never discuss yourselves? Or deconstruct or tear yourselves apart much, publically - there’s just the rumor via the/(your) media that you’re somehow ’self-hating’ and that’s just another reason to pity you and elevate you simultaneously"
But all I said was that Paula Abdul and, I guess, Neil Sedaka are Jewish. Why would you think I'm a Jew or "ex-Jew"? I wasn't tearing apart or deconstructing anything, just correcting what I thought might have been a misperception on Mr. Kyser's part. If anything, my original comment exonerated the Moslems of making music I don't like. So your aside on Shabbetai Zevi becoming a Moslem is not relevant, as I was discussing musicians.
As for Cat Stevens, he was half Greek-Cypriot, so yes he's Middle Eastern in a sense. Most of his famous music came out before he turned Moslem. Now that he is Moslem, I don't think he makes any music that has any great popularity.
So it's not what you say, but the context you choose to bring it up in. Often your points, whatever their accuracy, are not on topic. I should have stated this objection respectfully and charitably, which I did not. I am guilty of irrelevancy, too, for I made a trivial correction to a tangential point someone else made a long time ago. So none of us are perfect, and I shouldn't have attacked you like that. I apologize, and wish you a Merry Christmas.
If anything, I thought that Mr. Kyser was faulting the Middle Eastern Moslems for lousy musicians of little value. Turns out only one of the less-than-stellar musical figures he listed was Moslem. Those are the facts. For how to interpret that, argue with Mr. Kyser, not with me, please.
#93 "...Paul Anka, Neil Sedaka, Ahmet Ertegun, Frank Zappa and Paula Abdul.” Did you intentionally pick non-Moslems when you wrote this?
Um, no, Mr Caper... I intentionally picked every notable American musician with any connection at all to Araby or Asia Minor. (Paul & Paula have roots in Syria; Neil & Ahmet in Turkey; Dweezil's dad is Arab-Sicilian.) Danny Thomas and Tiny Tim slipped my mind, and you can add Tiffany to the list. Of course they're not Moslem. Ertegun, an executive, wrote a hit for Ray Charles, which appears to consitute the extent of the Islamic-American musical contribution.
Cat Stevens/Steven Georgiou/Yusuf Islam was born in London to a Cypriot father and a Swedish mother. So file him under Greco-Sueco-Anglo-Islamic music, not American.
Fats Waller's lyricist, Andy Razaf, belonged to the royal house of Madagascar. That's a bit out of the Middle East, but today's his birthday, as it is Beethoven's, so let's give him a nod.
Heck, now that this tangent has progressed, Shakira is part Lebanese.
to finish this point if caper's a roman catholic except in so far as his lips form and enunciate those syllables then a bear does his or her poo-poo in a potty each day. as for who is a 'j' and who isn't i'll leave that to those brought up that way like gilad atzmon or isreal shamir now according them no longer jews to say. they can tell me, i'll listen. as for TJF he's a human being. he's not trying to be top chimp. but i knew touching that nerve ending of discussing jews and history in public (gosh forbid) would bring jews out to attack (at least at first) those being honest. while of course they reserve for themselves the right to tear everyone else apart and deconstruct all but themselves... which is swinish if not simian. my sword is double-edged and so it cuts every way it should when it should...and at least according to me admittedly, that's THE point. others disagree understandably. and i'm imperfect in this world. imperfect's perfect. or you wouldn't exist at all. ... in my opinion.
I guess race matters to Oprah Winfrey after all. This should come as no surprise when many of her shows are dedicated to black racial issues of some sort such as who is allowed to use the dreaded "N" word. Obama had made pro-reparations remarks to black audiences in the recent past although the major media has done their usual cover up, so for whites and other non-black voters he would be hard to trust especially given the fact that he is (or was) a member of a black supremacist church which exalts Africa, Africans and the black race in general. How could such a racial ideologue serve the needs of an increasingly pluralistic and multiracial nation?
What I find amusing is that blacks and mexicans demand that presidential candidates serve their respective racial agendas while the front runners in each party rush to pay obeisance to their largest organizations like NAACP and La Raza. Whites, on the other hand, don't get any respect nor to we demand any and content ourselves with low tax rates, abortion, and gun rights.
I don't really see a problem with Obama/Oprah addressing a majority black audience-Obama still needs to nail down the black vote (a lot of black leaders are endorsing Hillary). And while he is a vacuous candidate he is no worse than the rest of the Democrats and not that much worse than Mitt Romney/ Guiliani republicans.
In conclusion, let me say that my point in addressing this performance was to point out its stupidity. If to nail down the black vote, Obama loses the white vote, he has destroyed whatever chances he might have had.
Dr Fleming has illuminated a key point I had overlooked: the Mormons claim that the true church vanished in, what, 150 AD? (Certainly before the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds). The whole edifice is built on this lying foundation. Mr Mitt apparently buys into this stupendous lie as one of his life principles. And he wants to rule a country with millions of real Christians, Protestant and Catholic and Orthodox. I was impressed by his business success but I need to rethink this.
I find it hard to believe that so many people are critical of Oprah helping the children of South Africa. Does anyone even know about the level of human suffering going on in Africa and the need for help, any help?? I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to those who selflessly help reduce human suffering so I checked her web site. Here's what she says under "ChristmasKindness":
"My life was dramatically changed last Christmas when I went to South Africa on a mission to bring Christmas joy to 50,000 children. I realized in those moments why I was born, why I am not married and do not have children of my own. These are my children. I made a decision to be a voice for those children, to empower them, to help educate them, so the spirit that burns alive inside each of them does not die." — Oprah
I find it hard to see her actions as anything but a truly Christian act of kindness to help those children she met. I personally belive her when she says she was moved to action by her visit. Can anyone judge this as a bad thing?