HLN Contributor Jason Johnson discusses the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action in Michigan on Headline News Weekend Express.
Michigan
Detroit Free Press Gives John Conyers the Worst Endorsement Ever
Has anyone ever said the following things to you: “You’re Special; Just like everyone else”…… “I’ve got nothing better to do Friday….I guess so.” And my personal favorite “We had to go with the best of what was available; and that was you.”
These are all wonderful ways of someone telling you that they don’t really want you, they just don’t have any better options, in life, business or any other area. Usually such phrases are reserved for personal interactions but in the case of the Detroit Free Press’s “slam-dorsement” of long term Congressman John Conyers such dispirited ambivalence has now made its way into newspaper political endorsements. Not only was the “Freep’s” endorsement lack-luster, unenthusiastic and downright melancholy, it contained three of the worse concepts that you could ever have in a recommendation letter, or job reference let alone a political endorsement. Below all three of the worst parts of the Detroit Free Press’s words are on display.
Any reference to “Best Chance to Win”
If you put all three of them together — minus their drawbacks — they might make a strong enough candidate to replace Conyers. But the congressman has powerful seniority (he’d presumably chair the Judiciary Committee if Democrats take back the House) and can still deliver when he’s up to it and wants to.
After explain the strengths and weaknesses of the three major challengers to Conyers the paper’s editorial stiffly resigns itself to tepidly endorsing Conyers. Any time an endorsement has a reference to who has the best chance of winning, it’s not really an endorsement, it’s more like sports betting advice. In other words, the newspaper is not really telling you who can do the best job representing the people; only who is most likely to end winning so you might as well not waste your vote on the other person. Not good.
Any list or discussion of your flaws.
That alone should not be enough to recommend Conyers for yet another term; his energy has slowed and he is not delivering for his district the way he used to, or the way he should be. Then there is the matter of his wife, Monica, who’s serving a federal prison sentence for shaking down vendors when she was a member of the Detroit City Council;
Ouch! It’s one thing to point out challenges that a candidate may face, when in fact, they probably shouldn’t be mentioned at all in an endorsement, but to lay out a litany of the candidate’s mistakes and issues? To be fair, everything the Detroit Free Press mentions is true, but then again, if you’re going to talk about why a candidate is so flawed why go ahead and bother with an endorsement to begin with? That takes us to the third thing you never want in an endorsement.
Any reference to the end of your career
JOHN CONYERS gets our endorsement, but it is mostly with the hope that he will soon retire from Congress and the district will produce a more viable alternative.
Of course, when you’re endorsing someone purely for the purposes of asking them to retire I guess going through a list of their faults and failures makes more sense. The paper’s staff has decided that giving Conyers, who’s more steeped in corruption and graft over the last 5 years than Kwame Kilpatrick, is deserving of a final gold retirement watch at the public’s expense. As bad as that sounds, what does that say about the other candidates? Considering that his closest competitor was arrested for armed robbery as a kid, you see the fix that Detroit’s 13th district is in. Most research shows that newspaper endorsements no longer carry much weight in political campaigns. But you have to imagine that an endorsement as bad as this might swing the needle even to the downtrodden folks in Detroit’s 13th district. Besides, what else do they have to do on August 7th?
This article originally appeared online at Politic365.com.
From Debbie Spend-it-Now to Janice Hahn: When Racial Apologies Come too Late … or Not at All
No one would’ve ever heard or cared about Pete Hoekstra’s congressional challenge of incumbent Democrat Debbie Stabenow if it weren’t for one crazy ad run during the Super Bowl a couple of weeks ago. The ad, which garnered national attention, features a bike-riding, rice-patty hat wearing, broken English speaking Asian woman (who was supposed to be Chinese) thanking Debbie “Spend it Now” for her supposedly pro-Chinese and anti-American business votes in Congress.
Fortunately the good people of the state of Michigan and the press have summarily slammed Hoekstra – but, for me that was never the end of the story. Whenever this kind of racist nonsense occurs in movies, television and even commericials I’m always struck with the question:
“What was the MINORITY in this ad THINKING?”
It is one thing for one group of people to say racist things or create racist images of another group. That is common and likely won’t change in my lifetime. But, what compels a minority person to actively participate in the degradation of their own people? Is it money, ignorance or self-loathing … or a combination of all of the above?
Unfortunately, an answer to this question was not forthcoming when Lisa Chan the actress who played “Rice Paddy Girl” eventually apologized for her role in the on her Facebook page stating:
“I am deeply sorry for any pain that the character I portrayed brought to my communities. I feel horrible about my participation and I am determined to resolve my actions. As a recent college grad who has spent time working to improve communities and empower those without a voice, this role is not in any way representative of who I am. It was absolutely a mistake on my part and one that, over time, I hope can be forgiven.”
The sad irony in all of this is that Chan runs an organization called “The Strive” in the Bay area that is dedicated to youth empowerment, education and leadership amongst the diverse community in San Francisco. How is it that someone who is clearly as dedicated to progress could willingly participate in something like the Hoekstra ad? While that answer may not be coming, she does deserve some credit for actually apologizing and taking some responsibility. If only all minorities were as self aware …
If you remember last summer Tea Partier Craig Huey ran this insanely racist and sexist ad against his opponent Democrat Janice Hahn during a special Congressional election to fill a seat vacated by Rep. Janice Hahn (D-CA):
The ad was so over the top you would’ve thought it was a sketch from CB4 and not an actual political advertisement. Of course, the producers of the ad never apologized but what made it worse was that Kue Dog and Uncle Head, rappers from the group SPLACK PACK that starred in the ad, didn’t apologize either, insisting it was just business, not at all racist and that performing a song with the chorus “Give me Yo Cash B***h” and all the language within it was fine in politics.
In an interview with Slate magazine’s Stephen Spencer Davis the rappers justified their actions repeatedly with the typical contradictory logic of the self-loathing and foolish:
I spoke to Kue Dog and Uncle Head separately by phone yesterday, and each defended the commercial. When asked if he thought the ad was racist, Kue Dog said, “It’s not racist.” He did concede, though, “It might be sexist.”
Uncle Head, clearly wanting to make sure that he was not confused for a thoughtful or reflective man went even further stating….
But Uncle Head says he’s fine with people using the word “b***h” all they want—with one exception: “As long as nobody calls my daughter a b***h, I’m cool.”
So as bad as Lisa Chan’s offense may be, at least she had the decency and dignity to apologize and take some responsibility (even if she can’t explain why she did this to begin with). But, this clearly won’t be the end of these types of ads. As long as money grubbing shuck and jivers like Splack Pack exist to be exploited in political ads we’ll be right back on this story in no time.
This article originally appeared online at Politic365.com.
Debbie Spend-it-Now? Been There Done That. A History of China-bashing Political Ads
A lot of hand wringing and clothes rending has occurred thanks to the racist ad run by Michigan Republican Senatorial Candidate Pete Hoekstra as unsuspecting Super Bowl fans watched on. Hoekstra is running against Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow and is making it a point to frame her as a tax and spend liberal who is giving away the U.S. economy to the evil yellow overlords in China. Sound racist?
A bit over the top?
No more so than his ad which featured an obviously American born Asian actress trying her best to speak in broken english, and play the role of a Chinese country girl thanking Debbie “Spend-it-Now” for shipping U.S. jobs over to China. Hoekstra fought tooth and nail, of course, all week defending the ad, claiming that the broken English was an indicator of China’s improving education system compared to ours, and that he was being satirical. All of which are perfectly reasonable explanations for the ad if you are a race-baiting bigot.
The larger issue here is that there is a line between legitimate criticism of a U.S. politician’s policies towards China, and race baiting for the sake of skirting up in the polls. The ugly truth is that China owns a tremendous amount of U.S. debt and that by some estimates every American owes China about 2 grand … give or take a few hundred.
Therefore when Citizens Against Government Waste ran this ad in 2010 implying that foolish American spending and poor financial policy will have us waking up and speaking Mandarin within a generation despite complaints, I didn’t consider it racist – it was nationalist, and factually accurate
There are ways to run ads about China policy that are perfectly reasonable, this ad run against Democratic incumbent Nick Rahall (D-WV) in 2010 by his GOP challenger was right on the money.
Rahall still won re-election but his GOP opponent kept it clean and on the policy level.
And lest we think that China-baiting is a purely Republican tactic, the DNC ran this ad against Republican challenger Bobby Schilling in 2010 and it wasn’t enough to stop him from flipping Illinois’ district 17 from blue to red but again, no one waved a yellow flag.
To be honest, Hoekstra is not considered a good bet to beat Stabenow anyway, but he only made matters worse for himself and the GOP in general by putting up an ad that only serves to reinforce the stereotype that the GOP is full of bigots. They aren’t all bigots, some of them are just nationalist who aren’t smart enough to explain their feelings. But it’s pretty clear that Hoekstra falls into the first category.
This article originally appeared online at Politic365.com.
Barack Obama Fares Okay in Post-Christmas Focus Group
As I have pointed out in many previous posts, the holiday season is the perfect time to get a read on the political feelings of the country. Thanksgiving and Christmas are America’s focus groups, where we sit back, talk and discuss what is going on in disparate regions of the country that relatives come from, and get a pretty good idea as to what the economy is doing.
In my case I know my focus group is a little biased: I have a Black family and a Black family means that most folks are voting Democratic, at least on the presidential level, so there aren’t many independents and leaners in my household. However, between friends and family I did get two very interesting assessments that paint a not too unrealistic picture for Obama heading into his re-election bid.
My two focus group participants were:
Bob (Fake names to protect and better harass my friends and family): My best friend from college, a 30 something year old doctor in New York City with a wife and toddler. Far left Democrat from Democratic leaning family.
Uncle Carl: (Another fake name, although doesn’t everyone have an Uncle Carl? I’ve met a few) Late 50’s black male business executive with 30 plus years at Ford Motor company living in Detroit. Married father of two.
What did I learn from my unofficial, completely unbeknownst to them focus groups that I conducted while eating Christmas dinner and snacks? Obama has both huge problems and no problems with his base. My friend from college is so thoroughly disappointed with Obama you’d think the president borrowed Bob’s favorite shirt then lost it at the laundromat. He said:
“He hasn’t been a leader, at all. On anything. I know he’s done some good things, but, I don’t know, maybe I expected more, his people certainly played into people’s high expectations and didn’t try to downplay them at all.”
And then the kicker….
“I honestly think that Hillary Clinton would have made a better president. I think she would’ve been a better negotiator.”
Yep, that sounds about right. While disappointment with the presidency of Barack Obama is pretty universal his Generation X liberal White base is significantly more disappointed than any of the other core constituencies that the formed his winning coalition in 2008. The president is going to get these voters again, my friend and his ilk are too educated and politically committed to either not vote or vote for a Republican. But, they’re not going to volunteer, give any money and certainly won’t be enthusiastically telling their friends the vote the way they were in 2008. You know – broken hearts and all. Now, Obama’s other constituency is represented by my Uncle Carl, who had the following to say about the Commander in Chief:
“I don’t think people understand, maybe outside of Michigan. That if the president hadn’t done what he did, like take over the auto-industry, the loss of jobs would be much, much worse. This country needs a middle class because they take on the brunt of the taxes. Rich people they aren’t going to pay it all. There aren’t that many of them. ”
When I asked him if the president had saved the auto industry from total annihilation, Carl wouldn’t go that far. But, he did say:
“Well … look. What a lotta people don’t understand is that every job in the plant, all those workers, for every union worker that people think is lazy and is making so much more money than them – and they aren’t – those people have about 50 other jobs depending on them.”
We went on to talk about how the loss of auto-factory workers would affect how many supplies are sent to a plant, which affects truckers, suppliers, maintenance staff and on down the economic food chain, not to mention the families and small businesses that are affected by auto workers losing their jobs. Obama’s got Uncle Carl’s vote, and he would have his volunteer time too if his job didn’t prevent him from getting all political in the workplace.
So what did my little American Focus groups teach me? Well, first: of course I have a biased sample. All of my friends and relatives are employed and are professionals so they don’t reflect some of the real pain and frustration out there.
However, what I did hear was that Obama is not going to win this election by getting people excited about him anymore. I think that ship has passed. I’m not even talking about bringing things back to where they were in 2008 (which is almost impossible). I’m talking about he will have to fight hard to bring his core constituents back to the phones and computers to push him over the top in key states across the country. Even people who acknowledge his success are disappointed that he hasn’t done more, and that he’s appeared so darn weak in the process. His saving grace just might be that he’s likely running against someone who’s even worse off. Mitt Romney barely has any supporters to disappoint, so I can only imagine that his focus groups are even more depressing than mine.
This article originally appeared online at Politic365.com.