4 posts from September 2008

I'm sure there will be people who support John McCain that say that he did a fine job representing himself in tonight's presidential debate in Oxford, Mississippi, against Barack Obama. The same thing will also be said by those who support Obama.

I think what tonight's debate did was firmly establish the distinct contrast in the two of them: McCain has a very narrow and near-sighted approach to dealing with this nation's problems both domestically and abroad; Obama is willing to have a much wider perspective on dealing with the same problems that confront us, making emphasis that the problems of this world requires a 21st century solution to 21st century problems.

For that reason, Obama may have kept his challenge from his Democratic Party convention speech that if McCain wants to talk about who has the disposition and judgment to serve as commander in chief of this country, that would be a debate he's ready to have.

Point well taken, point well served. The question is whether the rest of the country saw the same thing that I did?

I will not get into many specifics on the topics that were discussed, but one thing that I did notice throughout the debate was that McCain never looked in Obama's direction when making any points or rebuttals the entire 90 minutes.

By his actions, Obama did take the debate as he needed to by not only making eye contact with the moderator, Jim Lehrer, but also looking in McCain's direction when articulating his points. The fact that McCain would not look his rival's direction was an obvious sign to me that he's intimidated by Obama. If this country is to elect a new leader, it needs somebody who is willing to confront his rivals and enemies.

It was clearly obvious that McCain tried to paint Obama by being inexperienced and naïve when it comes to all facets of being a leader, particularly on foreign policy. He advocated experience meant something. He freely dropped names of political leaders abroad and the cities. He reached back into his vast knowledge of history of specific world affairs.

The one thing, however, that bothered me was the fact he held fast that Iraq is linchpin to dealing with many of the problems in the Middle East, this country's fight against Osama bin Laden and his Al-Queda operatives in Afghanistan, even when it has long since been proven that the Iraq was never the place that harbored weapons of mass destruction, and it never should have been the focal point of this country's military efforts for much of this decade.

Obama managed to hold ground by making assertions about judgment and proper strategy for entering into the military situations the United States is now fighting. He noted this country's spent $600 billion over in Iraq and what has it produced? That more than 4,000 Americans are dead. That more than 30,000 soldiers have been wounded. A world standing that is not the same as it was a decade ago. Bin Laden's yet caught. Al-Queda has re-tooled itself. And this country is now dealing with its own economic issues. The only thing that he didn't mention was this country operating in a $500 billion deficit; he did mention that this country is probably indebted to China by borrowing at least $600 billion and soon approaching $1 trillion.

I think because of the immediacy of media news cycles we'll probably forget about this debate in a matter of days. I think what remains on the minds of people across this country is the economy.

--
Posted By Sam B. Redd to Straight From The Maverick at 9/26/2008 11:10:00 PM

 

 

 

It's too bad that Sen. Barack Obama, when he is elected as this country's next president, cannot remove Clarence Thomas from the Supreme Court bench. But Obama's election as president will serve as an effective counterargument why affirmative action remains necessary.

Affirmative action, if used correctly by the intended beneficiary, justifies the spirit of its intent: when given the opportunity to enter into an arena, a person can author his or her own destiny and not allow someone else to dictate what that destiny may behold.

Whether Thomas, or any of those who espouse his ideology, is willing to acknowledge it or not, is a man scorned by his failure to successfully launch his legal aspirations following his graduation from Yale University. His own arguments and legal opinions are nothing more than vitriol against the very legal landmark that made possible for him to pursue higher education more than three decades ago.

Thomas has articulated in speaking engagements and in his published memoir that he felt belittled and inferior when he went on job interviews. It's apparent to me that Thomas' assumption was that his degree from Yale was all that was needed to get him a job a many of the law firms that he applied to. I suspect that Thomas simply did not convince his interviewers that he was worthy of employment; that's a problem that still haunts him to this day as a sitting Justice.

Conversely, while Obama's admission to Harvard's law school may be construed as being a beneficiary of affirmative action, his success is marked by being elected as president of the school's prestigious Law Review. His academic success merited internship opportunities at prestigious law firms. And upon graduation, he had his choice to work at any law firm that he applied for, but he turned them down in favor of pursuing community organizer work in Chicago.

My life experience has taught me that no matter what the preconceived opinion might have been against me, it's my responsibility as a black man to prove that I am more superior to those opinions. There may be those who may who have reacted to my exuding confidence as arrogant, and thereby they did not hire me. But there were those who embraced it as an attribute and appreciated it. Hence, in my own small way, I also believe the successes that I've attained in my professional endeavors only confirm Martin Luther King's hope that I've ultimately been judged by the content of my character and not by the color of my skin.

Obama's election as president would be an argument that also confirms King's dream. It also would confirm the legal victories achieved by Thurgood Marshall and the legislative victory of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that signed into law by Lyndon Johnson. It also is a reminder that affirmative action still serves a necessary instrument to keep in check those individuals who hold fast to discrimination on the basis or race and gender.

It is clearly obvious that Thomas has proven to be a man void of character and content. His career is an example for those who decry why affirmative action should not exist. Thomas has rejected affirmative action out of his own failure to prove his superiority when given the opportunity; and when given the opportunity, he's sought every legal argument possible to reverse it.

In turn, Thomas' actions imply that he rejects being black, the dreams and struggles of King, Marshall, and those before him, just as every other black person who shares in his opinion.

--
Posted By Sam B. Redd to Straight From The Maverick at 9/28/2008 04:06:00 PM