Nader: Barack Obama 'Talks White'

There's a new candidate for president chanting "Den-ver! Den-ver!" Independent presidential candidate and, some say, Al Gore spoiler Ralph Nader has a bone to pick with the DNC's heir apparent, Barack Obama, and plans to take them to task at August's Democratic National Convention. From The Rocky Mountain News:

"He wants to show that he is not a threatening . . . another politically threatening African-American politician," Nader said. "He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he's coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it's corporate or whether it's simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up."

Earlier in the interview, he asks why Obama isn't pressing certain issues, saying, "Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn't want to appear like Jesse Jackson?

The interviewer asked him to clarify that he was saying that Obama does try to "talk white," and Nader's reply was, "Of course."

The interweb is abuzz with headlines of the "gaffe" (is this really going to hurt Nader's chances?), so I thought I would give the Nader campaign a call and see what they had to say for themselves. A lot, it turns out.

Get the new
PD toolbar!

First, let me say that there was a lot of context in the rest of that interview that makes it clear Nader is referring to Obama's platform and rhetoric, rather than mannerisms of his speech. That doesn't make it OK, and it doesn't even mean that Nader didn't mean both, but it is a relevant fact.

Nader said he is not impressed with Obama and that he does not see him campaigning often enough in low-income, predominantly minority communities where there is a "shocking" amount of economic exploitation.

Nader seems to be leveling a criticism at Obama that some in the black community have, as well. Setting aside his clumsy phrasing, does he have a point?

A lot of bad things have happened in the name of "political reality" during this campaign, so I hate to even invoke the phrase, but a reasonable degree of it is a good thing. Nader seems to think that Barack Obama should voluntarily expend resources to get votes that he already has, at the expense of those he doesn't. The dynamics of this campaign have thrust working class white people into the middle of this year's electoral tug-o-war, and so Obama has campaigned in as broad a way as possible.

He also seems to be inviting Obama to be pigeonholed as "the black candidate," rather than one who will govern and work for all Americans. This is the box that many feel former President Clinton was trying to put him in with his comparison of Obama to Jesse Jackson in South Carolina.

The suggestion, too, that Obama wants to appeal to "white guilt" by not going around shouting "black is beautiful" and "black is powerful" is off the mark, too, and offensive. Obama hasn't shrunk from his black identity, but his campaign is predicated on inclusion, just as his party is.

The idea of "white guilt" also suggests that Obama's support derives, not from merit, but from a group's desire for absolution, while seemingly absolving white politicians, like John McCain, from caring at all about black issues. It also reduces the complexities of race relations, and those who would work to improve them, into a dismissive catchphrase.

I called the Nader campaign, and spoke with their Media Director, Chris Driscoll. Here are abridged portions of that exchange:

Tommy Christopher: Did you want to clarify the "talking white" statement?

Chris Driscoll:Obama has taken hundreds of millions of dollars from agents of corporations, and he has in turn represented corporate politics that we feel are the problem.

TC: But he said Obama "talks white." I'm white, I don't own any corporations, like 98% of white people. Do you think Ralph would say it differently if he had the chance?

CD: I don't think he would say it differently. He said what he meant. Who's pulling Obama's strings? Who's paying the piper, and what tune are they demanding?

TC: This quote has amplified your criticism of Obama. Are you equally critical of John McCain?

CD: We are openly critical of both parties. We don't think Americans should have to choose between the lesser of two evils. McCain has been a maverick in the past, on issues like campaign finance reform, but as he got closer to his party's nomination, he sure changed his tune.

TC: So, which of them is less worst?

CD: It's hard to figure who's the lesser of two evils, you have to go issue by issue.

(We talked about three major issues at length. On health care, he called it a "push," on the war in Iraq, Obama was "slightly better," and on the economy, another tie.)

TC: So, you don't see John McCain as having a responsibility to address issues like inner-city poverty?

CD: There is an expectation among the American people that the Democrats are more sensitive to the issues of poverty and working-class people.

TC: Finally, would Ralph accept some kind of cabinet position in an Obama administration?

CD: Who knows? We'd have to see what conditions were like. Right now, we're focused n running for President, not a cabinet position. And Obama has not offered.

I've stuck up for Ralph before, but the attitude that there is not much difference between Barack Obama and John McCain is the thing that the word "strident" was made for. And, despite attempts to soften the impact of these quotes, it looks to me like Nader is equating Obama with some kind of political Stepin Fetchit, or an Uncle Tom.

Note: To any readers who will be in striking distance of Philadelphia on Friday, June 27: Some Political Machine writers and readers are getting together (unofficially) to celebrate John from Philadelphia's birthday. Click here for details.

Follow PoliticsDaily On Facebook and Twitter,
and download the new Politics Daily toolbar!