Showing posts with label Kane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kane. Show all posts
Monday, April 7, 2008
Credit for Eugene Kane Where Credit is Due (Sort Of)
Eugene Kane wrote a rather poignant article today in which he notes that the failure of Wisconsin black students is not just a failure of the kids, but also of the parents and teachers of those kids. He is right, although I am a bit more forgiving of the teachers. There are good teachers, but they are operating in a bloated system with many students who don't want to be there and parents who, unlike Kane's own parents, do not insist on achievement. But there is no doubt that the biggest influence in any child's life is her or her parents and, if they insist on success, the odds of success are much higher.
Kane, of course, couldn't write an entire column without taking a swipe at white conservatives (stating that the failure is a "self-fulfilling prophecy that confirms their prejudice"). Too bad, because it was otherwise a darn good column. Kane needs to recognize that many or most of us on the Right hope and pray that people of all ethnic backgrounds succeed. A rising tide raises all ships - Wisconsin as a whole has had a pretty low tide for a while. Moreover, a more educated citizenry results in safer cities, better elections, prosperity, more taxes generated, and better lives for all of us. We also do not believe that black kids are preordained for failure. Instead, we truly believe that most of the black kids who do not succeed fail because most of the adults in their lives have failed them.
Otherwise, Kane makes a good point.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Eugene Kane: Yes, the Scrutiny of Obama Will Intensify (But It Is Because He Is the Front Runner, Not Because He Is Black)
Frankly, I thought it would happen much sooner.
Eugene Kane wrote on Sunday that the attacks on Barack Obama will intensify now that Obama is a front runner. In a sense, Kane is right. Of course, one person's attacks are another person's scrutiny. But, in any event, it will intensify.
Kane did not specify that Obama will be attacked because he is black, but he sure implied it.
Oh, I almost forgot. Kane did not mention the abuse John McCain took last week in the New York Times. Such a story is inconvenient.
Second choices have always fallen mostly under the radar, but front runners are targets. They are attacked, or scrutinized, because they have the audacity to believe they just might become the leader of the free world.
Truth be told, Obama has received more of a pass than he deserves. Clinton has feared alienating black voters, and the press has feared being labelled racist.
Sure, our politics can be somewhat uncivil. But it is not new (William Henry Harrison called Martin Van Buren a "little squirt wirt wirt," and Van Buren responded that Harrison and his supporters were drunks), and it is not based on race.
Kane, cry foul all you want, but don't try to tie it to race. Doing so simply diminishes your candidate by suggesting the rules should be different for him than they were for those who came before him.
Obama might very well be our next president. He should not get there simply because he has received a kid gloves treatment that no one else has received.
Eugene Kane wrote on Sunday that the attacks on Barack Obama will intensify now that Obama is a front runner. In a sense, Kane is right. Of course, one person's attacks are another person's scrutiny. But, in any event, it will intensify.
Kane did not specify that Obama will be attacked because he is black, but he sure implied it.
Kane seems to think that the treatment Obama is starting to receive is unique. He seems to forget the beating Bush took for his alleged drug use or the debate over Kerry's war service. He ignores all of the comments about Reagan's age. He overlooks the accusations that Al Gore used his sister's smoking-related death for political gains (even though Gore owned lots of tobacco stock). He doesn't seem to know that Bob Dole was accused of a sweetheart deal on his condo or that Clinton was pilloried for doing favors for, and accepting contributions from, chicken magnate Tyson. And Kane seems not to know that Kennedy was accused of being beholden to the Vatican.
Like many black voters, Murphy is concerned about possible pitfalls for Obama, in particular negative media attention that will attempt to derail his momentum. That attention will almost certainly come in the form of scandalous allegations and innuendo, some of which is already making its presence felt in the blogosphere.
Murphy has seen some of it already. He said it's an indication that Obama is making people nervous.
"He's willing to take on the status quo," said Murphy. "That means they will try to attack him at every turn."
Oh, I almost forgot. Kane did not mention the abuse John McCain took last week in the New York Times. Such a story is inconvenient.
Second choices have always fallen mostly under the radar, but front runners are targets. They are attacked, or scrutinized, because they have the audacity to believe they just might become the leader of the free world.
Truth be told, Obama has received more of a pass than he deserves. Clinton has feared alienating black voters, and the press has feared being labelled racist.
Sure, our politics can be somewhat uncivil. But it is not new (William Henry Harrison called Martin Van Buren a "little squirt wirt wirt," and Van Buren responded that Harrison and his supporters were drunks), and it is not based on race.
Kane, cry foul all you want, but don't try to tie it to race. Doing so simply diminishes your candidate by suggesting the rules should be different for him than they were for those who came before him.
Obama might very well be our next president. He should not get there simply because he has received a kid gloves treatment that no one else has received.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


