Today's Lesson: Undermining a Black Man's Authority in 2009

After President Obama's historic election win, the premature declaration of the day was that America was a post racial society. Both, the well meaning and impatient, were eager to put America's shameful history of discrimination and harassment against racial groups--particularly blacks -- behind them. How could America still see racial differences if it elected a black president? How could Corporate America still engage in and suffer from racial inequalities? After nine months of having a black president, we can see the head of a new movement crowning.

For the last 24 hours, the brouhaha over President Obama's back-to-school speech to schoolchildren has grown from silly to serious. At last check, school districts in Texas, Missouri, Wisconsin, Virginia, Illinois (President Obama's home state), and Minnesota will not air his speech to the schoolchildren. Unlike the Reagan speech I heard as a child, where he spoke of cutting taxes -- the same taxes that supported valued programs in my community--President Obama's speech has been sanitized for any trace of politics. Stay in school. Study hard. Why is this speech all of a sudden a problem?

The Birthers, the Deathers, and now the Schoolers all have one thing in common. They have found ways to undermine the president, creating an alternate universe where Obama is not the commander in chief. These anti-Obama groups know that they will not be taken seriously if they discredit President Obama merely because of his race. Instead, they mask their antagonism toward America's first Black President as partisan differences. They have not accepted that President Obama is our president.

Some have argued that President Obama's speech is propaganda and they don't want their children to be exposed to his socialist agenda. Originally, his speech was going to be followed by an assignment to have the school students write an essay about how they could help President Obama. (I completely disagree with the White House backing down and changing the assignment.)

Yet, we have always disagreed with presidents and their politics without completely discrediting their presidency. When have we ever questioned the citizenship of a president? When have we ever carried guns to town hall meetings -- especially meetings where the president would be in attendance? When have we ever preferred that our children opt for truancy than to hear a speech from the President? Not even Bill Clinton, who also pushed for overhauling the health care system and was impeached by the House, was delegitimized as our president. The one thing that makes Barack Obama different from every other U.S. president is that he is black.

Refusing to air the president's speech and pulling a child from school are brazen acts that, in essence, put the President Obama in his place. (Can you imagine how these people would respond to having a black manager?) These parents are teaching their children a powerfully dangerous lesson. A black man may have won the election, but they don't have to listen to him or respect him.

Follow Natalie Holder-Winfield on Twitter: www.twitter.com/nhwinfield

Comments

[Natalie Holder-Winfield - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for all the retweets!

[Elsongs]

As someone who is neither black nor white, I have a more unbiased view of this issue, and I think you're 100% right.

But it's not just a racial issue, it's also a mental age issue...as in SOME PEOPLE NEED TO FREAKING GROW UP!

[Mr Mexican American]

There is description for this particular character assassination:

Bamboozled.

May God have mercy on this country for the complete ignorance and utter disrespect to the presidency of the United States of America.

[SusanPF]

I can't say that it is all racism, what I see from where I sit, but I do think that a lot of white folks gave Obama the benefit of the doubt and voted for him, and then what would ordinarily become just issues that people disagree with the President on have become so much more in their minds, and that I think is the racism in it. I am appalled at the disrespect shown to the President of the US, and even more appalled at the way Republican leadership has turned a blind eye to it. Yes, we've seen disrespect before, from both the left and right, but this time opposition leaders want so badly for this president to fail that they actually encourage this disrespect. This I heard from the mouth of my own US Senator Jim DeMint, who wants Obama to meet his Waterloo.

I'd like to know the count of people who actually follow blogs and read all their news on the Internet. Not as many as the media makes it out to be - I do know plenty of people that think this school speech opposition is over the top and uncalled for, and that is what I'm banking on - that most people do see through what the Republicans are doing.

[MikeLicht]

After the President of the United States speaks to school children about the value of education, Republicans will make opposing comments extolling ignorance.

See:

http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/09/04/obamas-dangerous-message-to-our-children/

[anneli000]

AFTER he speaks? They've been prime examples of ignorance 24/7 since the election, since his inauguration, and every day thereafter.

[Sharon Stewart]

WOW. IT IS EASIER FOR AN ELEPHANT TO GO THROUGH THE EYE OF A NEEDLE THAN FOR ONE TO TO CHANGE HOW ONE HAS BEEN SOCIALIZED­...... B&L. THIS DISRESPECT FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA SPEAKS TO THIS. It is so easy for a few people to preach hate, fear and racism and convince those people. Especially those who are socialized to believe that an intelligent black man is still the boogie man trying to get them and their children. It was ok for President Bush, Clinton, Reagan and others but not President Obama. AND THIS IS NOT RACISM?

[WhatMatters]

Natalie speaks the truth. There's no other way to rationalize the nonsense and illogical "noise" and tactics we've seen over the last few months. It's insanity that in the long-run hurts the country. These idiots would rather try every effort to sabotage the man rather than unite to solve the major problems facing this country. Not only are they showing their true ugly selves, they're now passing on an awful and harmful message to their kids. THIS circle of life has to be broken.

Political terrorism is right up there with foreign terrorists; perhaps worse. All those elected officials who are exploiting this "movement" are shameful. Where are the "grown ups?" The vitriol spewed 24/7 on FOX "News", Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh and others, is contemptuous and they keep feeding crap to their like-minded followers. Yeah, the choice to listen is theirs, but when their actions seep into the national discourse, then it's dangerous and unacceptable.

[mavisdarling]

Natalie is right. I'm white and live in a predominantly white state, and even I can see she's 100% right. I'm from Montana, but I've been to the Bible Belt where people don't hide their racism... and people expect you to think the same way they do. It was like visiting a foreign country when I went to Texas, Oklahoma and Tennessee. Man, I don't EVER want to go back there, thank you very much. Such incredible vitriol and ignorance spewing from people down there! I am ashamed to say those people live in my country. So, yeah. Natalie IS right, although some of you idealists would think otherwise.

The people who are freaking out about this speech are the same ones who think we should have Bible Studies in public schools, because Christianity is our national religion. Same type of reasoning.­..
That's why they lost the election and lose more ground every time they freak out like this. They wear their ignorance and their hate on their sleeves, there's no way to disguise it. And they are TERRIFIED that their children may actually CONNECT with what Obama has to say. Therefore, he must be censored. Good luck with THAT in the age of You Tube.

[tjp1121]

I am against this speech in schools, and I am not a racist, nor do I believe that religion belongs in schools. I believe that both religion and politics should be taught and discussed by parents, not by school officials.
I have no problem with my child watching this address with me in a setting of our choice, I just think it is inappropriate in schools. Especially since it is accompanied by a Lesson Plan in which the Federal government tries to direct the curriculum in regards to the address. This is a violation of US code Title 20 in which federal government is specifically prohibited in interfering that way, as it is the responsibility of the state to determine curriculum.
Not everyone who disagrees is coming from the point of view you assume.

[tashekor]

"Politics should be taught and discussed by parents." Here, Johnny, listen to Hannity and Beck for the rest of your life and you'll be knowing about politics real good.

[tjp1121]

How is it that any person who does not support Obama must be a racist? And how was it not racism when a large majority of people voted for him because he is black? That is just as racist as voting against him because he is black. How about all of you so obsessed with his race realize you are the racists here, not the people who disagree with his policies.

[Derrick Mathis]

Oh please. You're kidding. You have white people here who've said even a blind man can see that the actions of these people objecting to Obama's speech to students are racist. Did you hear about any objections from parents when George Bush did it? What about when he was in a classroom with a bunch of kids the morning of 9/11?

Gimme a break.

[tsobserver]

A green man disagrees with a blue man's political views. A blue woman says the green man disagrees only because the blue man is blue, presenting no other evidence to support her claim. Who is the racist? You be the judge.

Ms. Holder-Winfield provides no evidence for her assertions that the country's negative reactions to the President's views and policies and legislative initiatives are based on race. She fails to mention that the person carrying the AR-15 to the rally in Arizona was black.

She uses the term Commander in Chief as if the term applies to all citizens and that any disagreement or disrespect for the President is in some way disloyal or unpatriotic. Hogwash. The term applies to the military, not to the citizens of the nation.

I understand her frustration. I had great hope that Obama would be a great President despite the fact that I'm generally more conservative than liberal. But the fact is that his leadership is failing to produce results except for extreme division between the left and far left as well as complete alienation of the middle and slightly right.

To blame such failings on the color of his skin is to embrace the very stereotypes Ms. Holder-Winfield seems to eschew. To accuse the President's detractors of disagreeing with the President on the basis of race without generally applicable evidence, speaks for itself.

[dorkenergy]

Articulate, but distorting.

Ms. Holder is not saying that all negative reactions to Obama are racist.

She is saying the attempt to de-legitimize his presidency is racist.

Criticism, for example, of Bush or of Clinton, while it did rise to high levels, did not (except in relatively isolated instances) encourage ignoring their authority or leadership as president.

[tsobserver]

I guess you ignored the impeachment trial and the conservatives cry for resignation and declarations of Clinton as a disgrace in order to derail his liberal agenda and the equal if not more intense calls of illigitimacy from the left regarding Bush and his election win over Gore. All of these oppositions undermined their authority, thier ability to lead and get their agenda implemented. Welcome to America! If you want to live in a place where the authority of the head of state cannot be challenged, there are plenty of places you can go in the world.

I reject your assertion. Ms. Holder-Winfield does in fact imply that all who reject Obama's agenda are motivated by race. Read the text again. She then concludes that this opposition is an attempt to undermine a black man's authority. She wrongly assumes that his authority comes from his race. It does not. And to assume such a thing can only be characterized as racism in and of itself.

[Pantleg]

Obama will show his birth certificate when Palin shows her high school diploma

[Pantleg]

At the risk of being trite, I have to say , many conservative Republicans holler wolf at every Democratic decision; hoping from the bottom of their being that the president fails. Can they believe in the greatness of our country and still want it to fail? Is it because they don’t want history to
Apotheosize a black Democrat? It seems that their ideological understandings are nothing more than prejudicial thought, disguised as a political movement. Finding it necessary to pander to the peckerwood south because they embody the same prolonged deep seated racial prejudices allowing for vicious indignation leading to naysayer convictions. Succumbing to their lowest instincts Incapable of reasoning through prejudicial Maize choosing to be a clog in government rather than a participant. Self beguiled radical conservatives would choose Anarchy over the present government. Republicans should discard these proponents of no and take their party back. Rodney King once famously said “can’t we all get along”. Surely, a Country as great as America requires equanimity of it’s people. Instead they choose derision ; hoping our president will fail so they can be the Phoenix rising from the ashes to form a new government that embodies their narrow proclivities . “Prejudice is an adverse opinion before hand without knowledge and examination of the facts“. Total disregard for facts Is precisely the problem in conservative thinking. If the radical conservative Republican prophets of doom would look out for their best interests, rather than follow their prejudices, we could accomplish good governance.

[tomboisurfer]

Certainly, I agree that more people are being vocal in their disapproval of Pres. Obama. But is it really because he's black?

In the past decade more and more people are striking out at leaders that they do not agree with. I seem to remember shoes being thrown at Pres. Bush. And let us not forget that Michael Moore's film helped the conspiracy theory that Pres. Bush was not truly elected by the people.

Due to blogging, cell phones and other social media we are able to not only track the President's moves instantly, we can also instantly criticize them. With technology people are able to spread conspiracy theories rapidly. (Just look at 'The Da Vinci Code' and the numerous conspiracy web sites devoted to the film and book, and the sites listed in the book have become tourist havens.)

To state that any disagreement with the President is based on his race (of which he is partially white also) is racist. Let's move beyond using the Race Card. Pres. Obama never let race defeat him, so let's use that as inspiration.

[MegWe]

You didn't read the article or completely missed the point. This is not about policy disagreements! And yes----it IS because he is black. The problem is that the mainstream media and people like you are enabling this insanity. You seem to be looking through your rose colored mainstream conservative glasses. This is your party. Take ownership of it. Stop it if you feel it is wrong.
Disclaimer: I am a middle aged white lady.

[ladyelect08]

Way to go MegWe. They don't like to be called out.

[MegWe]

This paragraph says it all:
The Birthers, the Deathers, and now the Schoolers all have one thing in common. They have found ways to undermine the President, creating an alternate universe where Obama is not the Commander in Chief. These anti-Obama groups know that they will not be taken seriously if they discredit President Obama merely because of his race. Instead, they mask their antagonism toward America's first Black President as partisan differences. They have not accepted that President Obama is our President.­"

How do we get this to go mainstream?

[MegWe]

Bravo!! Every word of this post is wise and true. Thank you for saying what so many have been thinking. This should be required reading for everyone objecting to this speech for "political" reasons.