In a single word, yes. Earlier this week while speaking to audiences in Wisconsin, Michelle Obama, the wife of Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama, made two eyebrow-raising statements while campaigning for her husband in Milwaukee and Madison.
Earlier in the day while in Milwaukee, she said:
Let me tell you something: for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is making a comeback—I need to believe that we live in that kind of nation where hope, possibility and unity are still what drives us.
And later that day in Madison, she repeated:
For the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country, not because Barack has done well, but because I think people are really hungry for change.
Of course, by now we all know that Michelle Obama was implicitly referring to the political processes of our country, which even some of the most loyal Bush-backers have agreed has been disappointing at best. And, even a cursory look at American history suggests that America boasts many “un-proud” moments—in fact, although she hasn’t said as much, I imagine she was also referring to the historical narrative of slavery, racism, and hatred, which continues to plague everyday experiences of African Americans and others in our country. So, in this vein some might say Obama’s comments were both warranted and true. To be sure, I am one of those people—I too desire to believe in the possibility of real change towards a radically just society. However, in light of this particular historical moment and all that this moment represents, I have to say that Obama was “out of line,” for several reasons.
For one, she is out of step with a particular brand of political correctness, in effect for approximately seven and a half years now, which strategically dictates, and thus marks the boundaries of, American patriotism somewhere between everyday flag-bearing etiquette and pro-Bush rhetoric. That is, the concept of patriotism once symbolized in a myriad of ways, both deep and superficial, has come to signify a sort of “pro-Bush”-“onward Christian soldiers”-“take out the evildoers”-“John Wayne”-“God Bless America and nobody else”-“kiss our American ___ and to hell with the Constitution and any other rules and regulations that get in our way” rhetoric and protocol, which articulates what is “appropriate” and what is not. In this cultural moment, self-reflective social criticism is “not,” especially for one whose husband is running for the highest office in the country—an office that demands a particular brand of patriotism.
Obama is likewise out of line with respect to sociocultural representations and expectations. Let’s not overlook the obvious: Michelle Obama disturbs many previously held social and cultural ideas about black women. She represents neither the fun loving, asexual, selfless, nurturing “mammy” figure, nor its opposite: the hypersexual, unscrupulous “jezebel” type. She is nobody’s “hardcore ho” or “big mama,” as it were. Unable to place her in any prefabricated role, she is unsettling to much of the American electorate. She is an autonomous black woman as humanly complex as the rest of us (which is not to say that “she has issues,” but rather, that she cannot be reduced to any simplistic, dehumanizing “type”), who also happens to both physically and intellectually disrupt several cultural stereotypes.
Finally, Obama is grievously out of line for violating the tacit code of silence that plagues our country on issues of race, racism, and slavery. Many believe that it is politically incorrect to talk publicly about America’s perennial sins (both past and present) or to speak of America as anything but “the promised land,” or the fabled “City upon a Hill.” This includes bringing up any of America’s contradictions, such as the construction of the republic and the Constitution by slave owners, systemic and institutional racism, redlining, the implementation of racist drug laws, unequal educational and economic opportunities. To repeat: making mere mention of these pertinent issues is totally out of the question for one whose spouse is running for the presidency of the United States; and, even more so if one happens to be black.
So, Obama was out of line because, regardless of what she meant, the media only heard this:
For the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country.
Dissimilar to “mammy” and “jezebel” tropes, “sapphire” (angry black bitch) tropes do not work to comfort racist fears or desires. In fact, it does the opposite. It causes extreme discomfort because it disrupts previously held racial and gender guidelines and thus rules of engagement. And, because of this, both Obamas will now face the predictable wrath of the likes of Bill O’Reilly and others who have been just waiting for the “politically correct” opportunity to put them both in their “places”—that is, in the back of the social-cultural-political bus where fear, injustice, and powerlessness prevail, and where white supremacy legitimately rules.
In this right wing wish-fulfillment scenario oxymorons like “lynching party” signify historical everyday acts of hate and terror, both serving as warnings for blacks thinking about moving outside of their designated “places,” and reminders for whites that whiteness once conferred certain privileges (i.e. viewing, participating in, and on many occasions, finding pleasure in the “strange fruit” that once hung lifelessly on trees). To be sure, this is something the McCains certainly know about.
This signification works in many ways. For instance, it works to silence Obama. It suggests that she is just being unjustifiably emotional and thus has no right to speak, thus invalidating her experiences. In addition, it distinguishes her hostile and divisive. The “sapphire” trope is viewed as emasculating. So, recent depictions of Obama as “angry” or “sassy” speak not only to certain ideas about Michelle, but Barack as well. They suggest that we should be concerned about Barack, not for any political reason, but because he has an emasculating, very opinionated and militant black wife.
In the words of O’Reilly, “this is a big deal—this is not going away” and thus, “the Obama camp should take note.”
Read: You have been forewarned. The wrath of white supremacy is coming your way and will use every force possible against you. Get back in your places and do not let us catch you “misspeaking” again, or else we will “track” you down and legitimately murder and dismember you for acknowledging the historical and social conditions of yourselves and others. You should be happy we have allowed you to get this far. You are the epitome of “the American dream.” However, as you people say in the black vernacular, “do not get it twisted!” You are only in your current position because you have been allowed! Your role is to talk about hope, change and the future, not the polarizing past! So, get to the back of the bus and stick to the rules of the game: our rules and our game, that is.
