Afro-Netizen

The garrulous wonk, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE), has been quoted in a newly released article in The New York Observer as saying the following about his colleague and new rival, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL):

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

He has apologized (sorta) for his use of the word "clean". And seemingly much of the news generated around this apparent gaffe on the part of white mainstream journalists is on what Biden meant by "clean" and how those of us loud, super-sensitive Blackfolk will take it. And the disparity between the two is grist for the mill, chum in the water, and [insert your own cliché here].

The focus is on "clean" because white corporate journalism wants to skillfully intimate that Biden is making a not so subtle commentary on other "Black leaders'" integrity and motivations that they themselves (besides Fox News and the like) do not have the courage to admit to: that they think that Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson are hustlin' snake oil salesmen.

This is what many white (non-self-identified conservative) journalists in print and broadcast arenas would love to say explicitly, emphatically and relentlessly, but don't due to the veneer of objectivity they would like to project and the limited, but still significant influence of these two same objects of their scorn.

The reality is that many discerning people believe that while Biden's use of "clean" was questionable, at the very least, other elements of his statement -- and his statement as whole -- were far worse than the possible jab at the probity of non-Obama Black leaders.

To Senator Obama's credit, while seemingly letting Biden off the hook about his use of the word "clean", the senator quickly reminded Biden of other esteemed Black presidential candidates (i.e., Chisolm, Jackson, Moseley Braun &  Sharpton).

The real question that should be posed to not only Biden, the mainstream media, to the growing hordes of overwhelmingly white Obamamaniacs (and to Senator Obama himself) is: why is this Black politician really so different and perceived to be so different? That is an underlying and essential question that must be answered to expose the nature and impact of this multi-faceted Obama phenomenon.

He is not as yet the first potentially viable Black presidential contender. He is not the first or only articulate Black public servant, nor the first "nice looking" or intelligent Black politician, all of which traits are highly subjective determinations. So, now we come to Biden's use of the term "mainstream".

Mainstream is one of those funny words like love and racism, because everyone seems to have their own definitions. For me, my sense is that what Biden wanted to say was that Obama is an assimilitated negro. And the set of criteria for this assessment are Obama's image as non-ministerial Black politician who is smart, clean-cut, telegenic, broadly charismatic, light-skinned, well-educated and one who speaks standard English-speaking as well or better than most whitefolk (i.e., the all too familiar racist compliment: "he's sooo articulate!"). This, on top of the fact frequently noted fact that his mother was white (and from the heartland) and ostensibly may have a split racial allegiance or cultural identity that many hope transcends race entirely.

However, this is not an image or political identity that Obama has to verbalize, but is attributed out of the neurosis of racism that compells its victims to twist reality in such a way that conforms to their socio-political dementia.

Within seconds of ending his seminal public address at the Democratic Convention in Boston 3 years ago, a fellow (white) blogger standing next to me in the nose-bleed section there exaltingly sighed, "He's the Tiger Woods of politics!" A revealing comment meant as compliment and taken (by me) as an insult; code for: he's not really Black. He's just like one of us, only with a slightly darker complexion. He's an exception because he's exceptional.

Blackfolk, just like other oppressed people in this society, are expert in deciphering linguistic and non-verbal codes. And the simple fact remains that to many (but not all) of us, Biden's initial remarks, lengthy protestations and rote genuflection to the arbiters of racial correctness evince the most common strain of unintentional racism that make us question the motivations of the most stalwart white supporters of Obama.

This suspicion that I'm fairly certain many African Americans share about Obama's broad, if not shallow, popularity thus far centers on Obama's very own mantra around the idea of hope. However, much like love and racism, what hope means to me as a Black man is vastly different than what hope might mean to many white people in the context of modern American politics.

I have the hope, to quote Rev. King, "that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed." But for many of my white counterparts, much of their hope appears to be invested in the notion that enough racial progress has been made thus far as manifest in the media-produced iconography of Barack Obama (and Oprah Winfrey, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan and Colin Powell). And as a result, this new, young, meta-racial "rock star" can be emblematic of a new political environment in which white people can live in a guilt-free post-Civil Rights era simply by their conspicuous evangelizing around the myth of the 21st century American "melting pot" while neglecting the substance of working towards racial and economic justice for all.