Message to the Hillary Haters: Get a Life

The latest accusation against Mrs. Clinton will be difficult to top. Her campaign spent an outrageous 1200 dollars on Dunkin' Donuts in one month.

This complaint has been leveled against her not just in internet chat rooms, not just over the dinner tables of Hillary haters across America. Two columnists of the most respected paper in the country, the New York Times, cited this campaign-damning piece of information.

It seems Mrs. Clinton can't manage money. The great minds of the New York Times, we are to believe, are looking out for the interests of Americans. The message is clear. Clinton can't manage money now, so how can we expect her to manage money in larger affairs if elected president?

Not so fast. Let's get out our scientific calculators and do the math. 1200 dollars divided by thirty days equals forty dollars per day.

Some more math: during the first Clinton administration, America created 22 million jobs.

In W's eight years in office, America created less than five million.

Would you like an independent inquiry into the donut spending?

In a second national newspaper, the Los Angeles Times, Joel Stein had the balls (yes, it was a male columnist) to write of Mrs. Clinton:

"You wanted cookies, and she whipped up an oatmeal chocolate chip recipe."

It seems Americans are obsessed with connecting Mrs.Clinton with food.

When was the last time a columnist metaphorically connected gangsta rap with Mr. Obama?

Clinton's latest move, her tirade against the mailers sent out by Mr. Obama's campaign, will almost certainly also be derided in sexist terms.

But, as much as sexists may want to believe it, this is not an example of what Mr. Obama called "the claws coming out" (sexist ass that he is).

Instead, Mrs. Clinton has finally found the female role we, and everyone in the world, can respect:

The role of mother.

I was not the only one who felt, while watching her tirade, that she might tell Barack Obama: "Go to your room".

Does America need yet another masculine hero throwing his weight around on the world stage? Do we need a cool guy on our side, who, through raw charisma, can move people across the world to say together 'Yes We Can' (er, at least the ones with low self-esteem)?

A mother, in contrast, can tell the warring boys to finally lay down their toys. Yes, she can tell the misogynist culture of gangsta rap, even, to take a time out.

To the Hillary haters across the nation and in other countries, I have a simpler, more masculine message (does it suit my gender?):

Shut.

Up.

It is My Belief That a Time for Global Reconciliation Has Come!

The posts on this page lately are focused around one theme:

Barack Obama's candidacy for President of the United States has shown us that the time for cultural reconciliation in America has come.

In these texts, I discuss my agreement with Mr. Obama on some things and some disagreement with Mr. Obama on other things. I also try to push some hot-topic buttons, in order to process the deep emotions of America's many cultural communities.

After initially starting this project, I had some fear of anger or backlash, and I removed it from this blog. I have in the meantime gotten some very positive comments from African American readers, so I have decided to continue to post these texts, with my real name attached. It is my hope that the texts will be taken as constructive.

I hope that you enjoy the texts. I would very much like to continue to engage in this discussion with people from all over the world, as I have had the great fortune to do lately. I look forward to realizing the New American Dream: a post-racial society in which all are afforded basic human rights including health care.

Sincere thanks for reading,

Charles Lang

Hillary vs. Obama: a Cultural Tiff

Many of the issues being discussed surrounding the Clinton and Obama candidacies are secondary to the real issues driving the 'movements' which are happening on both sides. The platforms of Hillary and Obama are nearly identical, so the platforms can't be the reasons for all the energy (and anger) we see on both sides.

The real issue? There's a cultural tiff happening in America.

The cultural clash is _not_ racial; it is a clash between a sub-culture of African America and the cultures of mainstream America. It isn't a clash of races, but a tiff of cultures.

Some African American sub-cultures have long held resentment toward mainstream cultures because mainstream cultures in America have some deep roots in white cultures, and African American cultures formed many attitudes in response to white racism.

The Obamas have been extremely disrespectful of the Clintons. Michelle publicly questioned whether she would support Clinton if she gets the nomination: that is highly unusual and, frankly, rude and mean. There is a good deal of evidence for their rudeness. The Clintons gave help to the Obamas earlier in their careers, and have repeatedly praised the Obamas. Remarks made by Barack, though, have often been outright disdainful toward the Clintons.

Obama represents a kind of black anger which is historically justified -- blacks have, after all, been brutally abused by whites. However, the justification for the anger is, for the most part, in the past. Mainstream America has become a culture that is no longer White America, but is rather full of people of latino heritage, asian heritage, indian heritage, and yes, African American heritage. They speak with a common accent, share many of the same foods and interests in music, etc.

If it is possible to get past all that, then the choice between Clinton and Obama is pretty clear. Obama has a racial chip on his shoulder, in a way Whoopi Goldberg, Maxine Waters, 50 Cent and Quincy Jones do not. It is not that Whoopi Goldberg is 'white', it is just that Whoopi Goldberg could be my best friend (I'm white), and neither she nor I would care about the color of our skin (yes, that cliche can be realized). We wouldn't be white or black (or anything): we are the New American Dream. We are Hillary Clinton's vision for America.