If I could give a gift to President Obamaon his first anniversary as POTUS, I would give him a copy of Ken Burns' Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson. I would ask him to concentrate on the way that Johnson handled his opponents in the ring, and more importantly his detractors outside of it. The people against Johnson were united in their desire to see him fail (sound familiar?). His title was seen as illegitimate (sound familiar?). And it wasn't until the fight of July 4, 1910 with the ultimate "Great White Hope" Jim Jeffries that Johnson was able to shut up his detractors, if only for a little while. But those detractors finally conceded that they had a tough opponent who was not about to give them an inch, unless it was an inch of rope to hang themselves with.
I have no question that many of Obama's opponents are praying for "Great White Hopes" of their own to "save" them from the Obama menace. Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins made it plain back in the summer of '09, and Senator-elect Scott Brown has really burnished those hopes. There are hundreds of thousands of Americans who are still spooked about the notion of a self identified black man being POTUS. And with that in mind, Obama should take on his opponents directly and forcefully, like Jack Johnson took on his opponents. Obama should beat his detractors at their own game, expose their prejudices (all of them, not just racial) and their bankrupt rhetorical swings, and beat the shit out of them.
Jack Johnson did this beautifully throughout his reign. Obama still has an opportunity to do this during his first term. As a matter of fact, considering that this is the centennial year of the Johnson-Jeffries fight, I think that it would be a perfect way to honor the memory of Jack Johnson, his fistic legacy and his ability to look his detractors in the face and laugh at their silliness.
I hope that Obama can awaken his own inner Jack Johnson, face his opponents and detractors head on, and beat the shit out of them politically. He owes that to the millions of Americans who voted for him. He owes that to himself, because right now, I am not seeing the spirit of Jack Johnson anywhere. But there are all sorts of "Great White Hopes" out there jockeying for positions.
Obama, you better handle your business.
8 comments:
well put. i remember reading about Jack Johnson years ago. nice comparison. my only and I mean only concern is that although Obama has many of the traits that allows for one to excel in the "sweet science" as well as the political arena, but not what you are hoping for (a shit kickin' fighter of a POTUS). i remember obama back in illinois, he was the same there as he is here. its almost as if he and history have collided and he simply has ceded history the right of way instead of making history his.
Free, I agree with most of what you wrote here. But not this--
"There are hundreds of thousands of Americans who are still spooked about the notion of a self identified black man being POTUS. And with that in mind, Obama should take on his opponents directly and forcefully, like Jack Johnson took on his opponents. Obama should beat his detractors at their own game, expose their prejudices and their bankrupt rhetorical swings, and beat the shit out of them."
Your first sentence there is undeniably true. The racism of the "birthers" and some of the other right wingnuts is obvious.
But the LAST thing Obama should do is to suggest (or even to believe) that a significant part of the opposition to him is based on race.
Yeah I know...to some extent that sounds like a denial of reality, but any suggestion on Obama's part that "they" are out to get him cuz he's black (even if to some extent that may be true) would play right in to the hands of his opponents.
I think Obama knows this. Every time a reporter has asked him about the racist tone of some of the opposition he blows the question off or minimizes the racism. "What you need to remember is that I was black before I won the election too."
And it is a fact that much of the opposition to Obama and the Democrats really does have nothing to do with race. More than anything else Obama is presiding over, and getting blamed for, a lousy economy. It doesn't matter if that's fair, its just fact. It happens to Presidents of both parties. Remember that George H.W. Bush was riding at 80% approval right after the Gulf War, then within a year a recession hit and Bill Clinton beat him.
Ronald Reagan (who also inherited a crappy economy from his predecessor) was, at the end of his first year in office, right at about 50% approval--same as Obama is now.
I don't minimize the obvious racism I see in the whacko right, but I think for practical reasons, Obama has to. And I think that Obama and the Democrats need to remind themselves of the mantra of James Carville and Bill Clinton--it's the economy, stupid.
Scott: Well said!
As long as BHO continues to let people like Pelosi and Reid drive the DEM bus, we're in for a bad ride and BHO runs the risk of fading into the background.
I think Julius Ceaser and his own team of rivals could be instructive here.
Obama needs something substantive here ... something with which to use as a club to beat the hell out of the wingnut faction. And, to be honest, the cluster-frack (to use some BSG lingo) that is health care reform just ain't it.
And that's it. OBAMA needs to do it. Not Reid. Not Pelosi.
Nice comparison to Johnson, though. Very nice, Free.
Thanks for the comments folks.
@Scott: One thing I should have made clear in my post is that I don't want Obama to tackle this in the public sphere from the perspective of race. I agree fully that that would not be a genuine option for Obama to follow. I am thinking more of having a mindset akin to Johnson's, a fighting spirit. Johnson dealt specifically with racial onslaughts. Obama has a multiplicity of onslaughts, and race happens to be among them.
Note that I did not say racial prejudices (and I think I will re-do that portion of the sentence to be more clear). Though I can see where a casual reading of this would suggest that I want Obama to "expose their (racial) prejudices." I need to make that quite clear.
@The $3000 Dress: I like the last sentence of your statement, and it does feel that way sometimes.
@Mike: I agree that Obama needs to exercise genuine leadership. He has only shown it in flashes; that is not suffcient, and Reid and Pelosi seem out of their depth. He can't rely on them.
I agree with everything including one comment where Obama has to acknowledge a lot of his troubles are based on race and he has to face them head on and beat the snot out of them. The turn the other cheek thing is okay, not when you are President of the United States and your opponents are beating you with lies and unjustified innuendo. He has to expose them and open the can. I myself and SICK of his passiveness. I need a leader and one who isn't afraid to get angry.
Ok here's what I do agree with. I would LOVE to see more of the ANGRY Barack Obama. I would LOVE to see him channeling his inner Harry Truman.
Check this out. This is Harry Truman talking to a labor group. That is, this is Truman, just before the 1948 election, talking to his base!
Harry Truman
(not the same Scott who commented earlier)
One thing to remember: Jack Johnson was no slugger. Sure he beat the hell out of his opponents but he did so by using smart defense and saving the big punches for the exact right moment (much like Ali would do decades later). I sure do want to see Obama (figuratively) "beat the shit out of" his opponents, but I think he's gotta do it like Johnson did: never backing down from a fight, but also picking his battles and fighting them smartly.
The $3,000 Dress,
You have the moniker of the month!
I'm just sayin'...
Post a Comment