By Patricia Wilson-Smith 

I recently called a friend of mine who is a seasoned Washington dweller to tell her of my excitement over my decision to actively campaign for Barack Obama. Somehow, I was sure she would immediately share my excitement, maybe even jump on the bandwagon. The first words out of her mouth, once I’d ended my breathess tirade was:

“America’s not ready for a black president.” 

“What do you mean?”, I asked. I wondered inwardly how it could be that she hadn’t seen all of the footage, all of the people all over America, standing shoulder to shoulder, blacks, whites, Latinos, gays, straights, old, young, all waving Obama ’08 signs, and gleefully and very publically showing their support for the Senator. I have to admit, so disappointed was I with her knee-jerk response, that I tuned out as she launched into her reasoning. I was dumb-struck.

And so I, in my simplicity of thought and naive political way (my friend called me an idealist) set out to disprove her. I read as many polls as I could stomach. I watched more election coverage. Unfortunately, the proof I sought is still forthcoming.

On the surface, what I found seems to support her view. Let’s start with the results of a recent poll in Iowa, where likely Democratic voters were asked which candidate had the superior “strategic vision”:

Source: USElectionPolls.com
6/23/2007

As you can see here, Senator John Edwards fares much better than does  both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama – the voters polled here have a strong opinion of his vision, and seem to be divided on Hillary versus Obama. But the interesting thing here to me, is that Hillary and Obama (in this poll) are in virtually a statistical dead heat.

But strangely, in a recent Fox News poll of likely Democratic voters who were asked who they were most likely to vote for, Senator Obama is pretty much eclipsed by Senator Clinton, as are all the other candidates:

Now as I’m fond of saying, I’m no political pundit, and far from a professional poll-reader, but something seems amiss here, and it’s pretty hard to ignore. How is it that a man who can go toe-to-toe with a political power house like Hillary Clinton when it comes to public opinion regarding his vision, appeal so little to similar voters when it comes to their choice for president?

Well – sorry old friend (and you know who you are), I simply don’t believe it’s because America’s not ready for a black president. I think that what we see in the polls above is a result of Sentor Obama’s perceived lack of experience, and an overall hesitance towards change, which is one of the reasons I started BlackWomenforObama.org in the first place. I am of the opinion that change is exactly what we need, and not just any kind of change. We need real vision, real purpose, from someone who is eager to not only cross party lines to unite the Congress, and the nation, but who has the depth of character to begin to help us re-unite with our friends around the world. As far as lack of experience goes – without the right vision, experience or even having a father who used to have the job, means nothing. Just ask our buddy George W.

It’s obvious that many feel that Hillary Clinton is a shoe-in. It almost seems to me as if she’s somehow managed to stake a claim on the office by her sheer will to do so, and that’s fine. But in my heart of hearts, I believe that this nation cannot continue to do politics the way we always have. I believe that we’ve been on a slippery slope for decades, and now someone has poured chicken grease on it, and we’re sliding completely out of control. I think that part of the reason is that we’ve lost our ability to deal with issues in any meaningful way, because we’re too busy deciphering sound bites and delving into the personal lives of people who are after all human beings. It’s time to turn a corner.

So IS America ready for a black president? I of course have no answer for that question, but I do believe that America is ready for the kind of change that an Obama presidency will bring. A change that feels like we’ve shaken off the shackles of the administrations of the recent past, and headed towards a future filled with hope and promise.  If you feel like I do, then spread the word. Resist the fedders of doubt and tell everyone you know to read about Senator Obama, his views, his vision, and judge for themselves. I guess the truth is, we’ll only be ready for a black president, when whether or not we’re really ready at all ceases to be the most important question.

One more thing….would it make a difference if we were talking about a black woman?:

We’ll explore THAT question another time.

Patricia Wilson-Smith is a columnist, and the author of “Duped By Love”.

By Patricia Wilson-Smith 

Recently, on the ground-breaking “You Tube Debate” broadcast on CNN, America got the opportunity to see what those of us at BlackWomenForObama.org have seen all along – Senator Barack Obama as the strong, defiant, and principled leader, standing up with humor and grace against a field of Democratic nominee wanna-be’s, and showing without breaking a sweat why he is our best choice for a Commander-In-Chief who can bring about change in America.

The unique debate was for me, a marriage of two of my greatest loves – politics and the Internet. For the first time ever, a viral-video website was used to solicit questions from a hand-selected group of regular, everyday Americans. I sat and watched the debate in awe as citizen after citizen from every walk of life appeared on screen; some nervously gazing into sub-standard web cameras, some having very creatively crafted humorous messages using professionally produced video and audio, and others bravely and quietly being videotaped as they delivered questions to the candidates about issues important to them, like the state of healthcare in America and the war in Iraq.

I love the fact that people who otherwise may have had no chance whatsoever of ever speaking directly to a presidential candidate, actually got the chance to do so, even if it was only a one-way conversation.When CNN put out the call for ordinary Americans to submit their questions to the candidates, they created a global, digital lottery of sorts, one in which the winners got a great deal more than just money – they got the opportunity to air their personal grievances before a captive audience made up of some of the nation’s greatest leaders and the millions who watched it all from their livingroom couches. Way cool.  

Watching the faces of all those men and women flicker across that huge LCD screen as some of the most powerful political minds in the nation stood at the ready to answer their questions felt historic to say the least. However, the real wonder of it for me was not in the novelty of the technology, but in watching how for a night the Internet seemed to level the playing field for common folk who normally would have to go to great lengths to get such an audience with the politically elite. It’s quite something when you think about it – suddenly, as long as you had a high-speed internet connection and a decent web cam, you too had as good a chance as anyone of having your words broadcast around the world, and your questions answered by the group of men and women who over the coming months will spend millions of dollars in an effort to gain our attention, garner our vote, and become the next leader of the free world. Absolutely incredible.

In a blink of an eye, it seems, we’ve found ourselves living in an age where it is possible for anyone to kick their way on to the global stage and voice their opinion about anything at all. These days, any Joe-blow with a half decent computer can erect a website, and start spewing their rhetoric about any subject under the sun to the masses, and without much effort at all. Even more incredibly, because of technology, their message, good, bad or indifferent can make its way around the country or around the globe in an instant. We are no longer tied to the limits of proximity when it comes to exchanging ideas, and it’s all made possible by a technology that is as readily available to inner city youths as it is to powerful heads of state.

But is there a downside to all this? What about the CNN/YouTube debate itself? Even with the controlled, professional way inwhich the debate was conducted, there was for me, a feeling of lawlessness to it all. A gun-waving NRA psycho, melting snowmen, guitar-playing hippies – is that really what we want from our Presidential debates?  Can the viral nature of a vehicle like You Tube really easily be integrated into the political process in a meaningful way? Should it be?

We probably have no choice in the matter at this point, because we’re headed warp speed towards a truly digital age, and there’s no turning back. Twenty-four hour news channels, virtual work, online, well,  everything – the Information Age is upon us, and if you’re like me, you can’t help but wonder what it means for society. Think about as an example, (if you’re old enough to) how different  the process of electing a President is today than it was even 30 short years ago, when the news was broadcast once a day, and  televisions only had 5 channels. We learned what we learned about candidates by reading the paper, and through the very important debates that were broadcast live, and through stump speeches, and public appearances. And always, always, the little guy was largely outside the process watching it all from the side lines.

So, what does all this technological mumbo-jumbo mean for the future of presidential elections, politics, or society in general? What have we done to long-standing political traditions, by making possible the casual swapping of videos between ordinary citizens and political powerbrokers? And what of those questioners from the CNN/YouTube debate who were, uh, let’s just say, a bit odd? Has the Internet, the great leveler, ushered in an era where meaningful political discourse will be forced to exist along side the lunatic ramblings of a gun enthusiast babbling on about “his baby”? Will our new technological capabilities create some sort of swirling, digital vortex of informational nothingness, where political candidates will only be heard or noticed if they have the coolest MySpace page? Will a torrent of misinformed bloggers, or huge multi-national media giants one day control the substance of what we read and understand? Now that the dams have broken, should we worry about containing the flood?

In his article, Five Things We Need to Know about Technological Change, the late Neil Postman, (speaking before a group of theologians in Denver in 1998) remarked on the things we should all endeavor to understand about how society is impacted by technological innovation. In it, he said that “technological change is not additive, it’s ecological”, and that in essence, in order for us to comprehend, manage, and embrace the rapid changes brought on by the technological advancement happening all around us, we need to understand that technology doesn’t just add to society – it transforms it. 

The illustration he gave in the article was that of what happens when you place a drop of red dye into a clear glass of water; what we end up with, according to Postman, is not a clear glass of water with a red drop of dye floating around in it, but a new “coloration to every molecule of water”. He contends that technological change is no different – as the invention of electrification,  new modes of transportation, the telephone, radio, television and the Internet have altered the very fabric of our society, so will other amazing technological innovations. And there’ll always be something new on the horizon.

His point is well taken with me - the transformative power that Internet technologies in particular have had and will continue to have on our society is endlessly fascinating to me, and the CNN/You Tube debate is proof positive that the Internet hasn’t just added some peripheral dimension to the way we live, work, play or even choose our leaders for that matter - it has changed the way we do it all, and changed it forever.

I say again, we no longer have real choice in the matter. We have been changed irrepairably as a society by the myriad inventions of the human mind, and it’s never-ending need to make everything easier, faster, smaller, more convenient, and more powerful. And though we must do as Postman says and embrace these technologies, we must also be ever aware that when we allow technology to invade our most honored and time-tested of traditions, there is often no going back.

And so, we can reflect on the technological marvel of the debate and worry about what’s next, or we can choose to focus on what was important that night.  As I think back on it now, I am reminded that Joe Biden may have made me think, Mike Grivell may have made me cringe, and for sure Senator Obama made me proud, but what was really important that night were the quiet citizens and the questions they posed. I’m reminded of the woman fighting breast cancer, who removed her hat to give power and meaning to her question about being unable to afford her treatments; and of the two young black women, Cecelia Smith and Ashanti Jenkins, staring happily into the camera and asking the candidates if they would be willing to be President if they had only the promise of a minimum wage to sustain them. And of Charity Woods, the woman sitting sadly next to her ailing mother, asking boldly of the candidates how they would deal with preventative medicine in their various healthcare plans.

It was equal opportunity democracy, and it was all made possible by technology. So in the end, as with all things, we can decide that innovations will change us for the better, or worry about them changing us for the worse. The CNN/YouTube debate proved to me at least, that it is better to cringe, get over the fear, and embrace the possibilities.

By Patricia Wilson-Smith 

In a move representative of the “more of the same” politics we’ve come to expect from the fledgling 2008 Presidential race,  the Governor of Massachussetts and Republican candidate Mitt Romney took aim at Senator Obama this weekend over remarks he made regarding sex education for young children while speaking to a Planned Parenthood Action Fundraiser .

Senator Obama, who is as you know pro-choice, told the crowd that he supports the idea of providing “age-appropriate sex education to kindergartners”, and called it “the right thing to do”. In typical right-wing fashion, and in an attempt to tongue kiss the conservative right to bolster his standing in South Carolina, Governor Romney upon learning of Senator Obama’s remarks immediately lept to the most lascivious of extremes, characterizing his stance as lewd, and attacking him with such fervor that you would think  Senator Obama had tried to sell us on the idea of handing out condoms in Happy Meals.

It would be easy to see this as just early election season rhetoric, and dismiss Governor Romney’s attempt to demonize Senator Obama by intentionally taking his comments out of context for his own political gain if it weren’t for one thing; there is an important issue buried in this seemingly innocuous debate that a hurried dismissal might overlook; an issue that Senator Obama was brave enough to bring to the fore, and one that I believe as President he would also be brave enough to tackle in earnest.

We know that in these treacherous days, small children are too often the weak and innocent victims of pedophiles, and in increasingly alarming numbers. Even worse, we know that we only have to turn on the news to hear story after story about the brutal abduction, sexual assault and murder of young, innocent children. These incidences both terrify and sicken us; but they unfortunately only shine a light on the problem in one extreme. There exists a much quieter, more insidious form of this problem, and it has been played out for years in homes and communities all over America – hidden acts of molestation being perpetrated against young children by people that they know, and who way too often are related to them.  People who get away with it.

According to TheAwarenessCenter.org, about four of ten sexual assaults on children take place at the victim’s own home. Two in ten take place at the home of a friend, neighbor or relative. Only one in ten take place outside away from home. In making the remarks that he did, Senator Obama attempted to broach a very serious and sensitive subject with the American people – the subject of children and abuse at the hands of others. His remarks were about teaching the very young the bare minimum that they need to know to protect themselves, and perhaps prevent themselves from becoming victims of inappropriate touching or worse. For some unknown reason, Governor Romney has irresponsibly chosen to take pot shots at the Senator by harping on the notion of teaching “sex education to kindergartners” (just as Alan Keyes, failed presidential and senate candidate tried to do during Obama’s senate bid), rather than dealing with the issue and the remarks in the context in which Senator Obama made them. 

I wish I could completely agree with Governor Romney’s assessment, but I just don’t. It is, of course incumbent on us to do all we can to rid ourselves of the scourge of sexual predators of all kinds, no one would disagree with that. But to think that it is enough to make a meaningless stump speech, or even to think that by going after abusers we could protect every child is just plain naive. The sad truth is, many young children who are sexually abused never tell anyone. I know, because I was one of those children.

I was sexually abused as a five year old, by a teenager in my neighborhood. I remember the incident like it was yesterday, and I always have. Back in the early seventies when I was a kindergartner, it was a normal practice for five and six year old girls to walk themselves to and from school, and in my neighborhood, it was common practice for kids to “stay with a neighbor” until a working parent came home. My abuse came at the hands of a teenage neighbor who I was very familiar with. I can remember the shame and confusion as if it happened just this morning, and yet never having been told about what was appropriate and what was not when it came to touching caused me to stay silent about it almost my entire life.

The ugly reality is, many young black women have fallen victim to abuse at the hands of friends, family and neighbors as children. More often than not, they grow up with the shame, and if they’re lucky, it just tarnishes their ability to have healthy, meaningful relationships, and plagues their self esteem. For those of us that are lucky, with help and a great deal of self-introspection, we can  go on to live happy, productive lives.

But many are not so lucky. Children that are abused are far more likely to turn to drugs and prostitution; women who are abused as children are more likely to commit crimes, and of course people who are abused may often go on to become abusers themselves. Governor Romney, how do you propose we “clean up the cess pool of filth in which our kids are swimming” if we don’t deal with the issue as early as possible? It is infantile to say the least to think that we can moralize from a pulpit and change what has proven to be a deeply rooted societal problem like child molestation with words and little action. And though I agree wholeheartedly that in the end it is the parent’s duty to protect their children and make the appropriate decisions about what they learn and when, is it really asking too much to expect that as many of the people who spend time with our children as possible should get involved in educating them about something so important, something that could mean the difference in a life of painful shame, and a life of freedom from abuse?

I say no, Governor Romney. Play politics if that’s what you feel you must do to get elected, sir, but please don’t do it with the future of our children. The children of this country will one day be the working men and women who will shape the 21st century and set the pace for the continued greatness of this nation. Protecting them should be our first priority, not winning elections. Senator Obama understands that, and is brave enough to make the tough speeches, even knowing that men like Romney and others will take his words and use them against him. Only an uninformed and ignorant electorate would let him get away with it though, and the people of the United States of America are neither.

To teach a five year old what is appropriate and what is not, or to teach them how to understand their personal boundaries and keep people out of them is just good sense in a world where there is no way to control the sick and twisted. Call it “sex education”. Call it a really strange episode of “Barney and Friends” - who gives a crap. If it prevents one single child from being abused, then it is just as Senator Obama said - “the right thing to do”.

Senator Obama, Michelle, and the kids took an RV trip through Iowa on July 4th. Here they are playing every kid’s favorite card game, Uno. Accusations of foul play abound.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vd0hCriAnc]

(Source: www.barackobama.com)

This video was beautiful, simply beautiful. What it shows is two very lucky little girls who obviously love their Daddy, and a man that is as comfortable playing Uno with his daughters as he is discussing his political philosophies with Senators, Congressmen and heads of State.

I’m reading “The Audacity of Hope” – I’m about half-way through it, and if it were required reading we would have no problem getting this man elected. His vision for bringing our country together, the realism with which he discusses the tough issues that we face as a nation is nothing less than deeply inspirational. Barack Obama will restore dignity and a sense of honor and compassion to the White House the likes of which hasn’t been seen since JFK. I am SO excited to throw my support behind he and his wonderful family!