I said, "You know, they refused Jesus, too."
He said, "You're not him."
--Dylan, "115th Dream"
by Jerome du Bois
Last week we received a short email from a man who signed with his real name; that was unusual. In fact, even though I won't reveal his name, I wouldn't be writing this piece if he hadn't done that. His message:
I recently moved to downtown Phoenix, and thought I would do a little online research into the going-ons of the area, and I came across your blog.
Frankly, I don't know what to say. You disgust me.
Cheers,
[his first name]
My first reaction was, What would Barack Obama do?
I'm kidding, reader. You know that. So why bring up Barack Obama? Because this post is about him, that Jack of Spades. You'll see.
My first reaction was, Cheers, eh? I'll give you cheers, you bastard. And Catherine called attention to the jaunty tone. "He's having fun," she said. "For him it's fun to hate."
As long-time bloggers we're used to such contextless drive-bys; most of the time, though, they're sent by Anonymous or Pseudonymous. This guy not only had a name, he had a website. I would describe him as a global-music musician. So I read about him for awhile, and then wrote back. Here's some of it:
We disgust you, do we? Undoubtedly because we stand for human dignity and mutual respect. But it's okay for you to come along and, without any context or justification or example or even introduction, to say that you find us disgusting, and we're supposed to just take it? Just sit there and accept it?
And you are . . . ? We've never heard of you. So your message is really empty, isn't it? Why write to us in the first place when you must know that we couldn't care less about your opinion, since you are a complete stranger, with no weight, no reputation, no credibility to carry before you, no people we respect behind you; no credentials? Why write to us when you must know that you mean nothing, nothing, nothing to us?
And I mentioned how he was probably fronting points for Kimber Lanning and Kevin Vaughan-Brubaker and that crowd. But Catherine told me that he was just poking us with a sharp stick, solely for the sake of provocation. She was right, and that's why I won't give him the satisfaction of using his name. His reply:
Wow, you are hilarious.
I've never heard of any of the names you mentioned so I have no idea why you want to associate me with them.
Have fun blogging about me. Anyone worth anything wouldn't bother putting any credence into what you say anyways [sic] considering your blog is full of racist, xenophobic, fear-mongering bullshit.
Ah, now we get down to it, don't we? But not really. In the time-honored fashion of liberal fascism--you know, "the progressive community"-- the guy provides a list of adjectives --boilerplate liberal labels-- with absolutely no supporting arguments, and expects to be taken seriously. Just like, for example, a black preacher who says the USA is run by rich white guys; guys who invented AIDS to infect innocent black victims. Anyone worth anything wouldn't bother putting any credence into what that old fool says, right? He's got chickens roosting where his brain ought to be, yeah? Oh . . .
But let's back up before the jump. This world-music musician, who grew up in Phoenix, who worked on the music part of an art project for Gregory Sale when he was in high school downtown, and who just moved back to Phoenix and took up residence downtown, claims not to know Kimber Lanning, the foremost promoter and go-to person for all alt-world-local music in downtown Phoenix for ten years.
It reminds me of Barack Obama vainly trying to sashay between the lightning bolts of his pastor Jeremiah Wright's anti-American, anti-white sermons for twenty years. Just didn't hear that stuff. (Wait: maybe a little bit, according to yesterday's speech.)
I find neither person believeable. Of course it's possible that the musician had never heard of those people I mentioned; it's just highly unlikely, and I'm going to bet on the odds about this. And on the links of the global musician's website, at the very top, as a banner, what do I see? A full-color endorsement of Barack Obama.
Others created the image of the race card, so I'll play the metaphors I'm dealt. Barack Obama is neither an Ace nor a King; not yet, anyway. He's not the Jack of Diamonds because Rezko clouds his transparency; he's not the Jack of Clubs because he's against the war; he can't be the Jack of Hearts because, though superficially charming, he isn't warm. He's the Jack of Spades because he's only showing one side to us: the black side. As far as I know, he never rhapsodizes about his white mother's heritage, though yesterday he coldly brought his white grandmother's private life into the public eye, violated her confidence and insulted her dignity.
As he gazes off to the left, not looking us in the eye, the Jack of Spades pretends he's a black man while pretending that his campaign has outraced race. But's he's neither black nor white. Like millions of people for hundreds of years, he's part one ethnic group and part another ethnic group. Humans have been creating blended progency for a long time now. Obama has to project the black side to obscure the fact that, racially speaking, he's nothing special; flip over the Jack of Spades and he looks like every other card in the deck.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that Barack Obama came to Chicago as a kind of multiculti blur, and decided to sharpen his political profile by developing relationships in Chicago's black community; and given his progressive background (radical anthropologist atheist mother), he selected Trinity United, whose pastor was steeped in radical politics and black liberation theology.
And for twenty years, apparently, he never once challenged Jeremiah Wright, much less challenged him over and over again until he either changed the guy's mind or gave up and left the church. But he didn't do anything like that. He has been satisfied, as he tells us, to "strongly disagree," to "denounce," some of Wright's positions. But he's disagreeing and denouncing to us, not the offender in question. Unless Obama wasn't offended until millions of potential voters became offended. That's my view. Politically, Obama and Wright are two of a kind.
Tellingly, at least to me, nobody in Obama's camp got ahead of this story before it broke wide. It cannot be that they thought it wouldn't come out; they must have believed that it wouldn't be that incendiary. Or maybe they thought saying "He's not the pastor anymore" would settle the issue. Given the strong negative popular reactions to both Wright's awful statements and Obama's lame explications, these handlers sorely misunderstood the American public. That doesn't bode well for his Presidential chances, which is good news to me, because he's bad news for America, freedom, and truth. His character is as thin as a playing card.
As for our erstwhile musician, I think he came back to town, hooked up with some old friends, met some new ones, and in the course of conversation heard about The Tears Of Things. Since we have absolutely nothing in common with this guy, he had no reason to contact us except to provoke us. Which he did, but the only reason I'm responding is because of the Obama connection.
As for the spade reference --that's just a sharp stick to poke fools with.
UPDATE:
I deleted a comment from a persistent paleface local yokel, but on second thought I'm going to use it, without attribution, as an example of the humorless frown behind the masks of these pomo correctos who are supposed to have mastered irony. First he quotes my last sentence--
As for the spade reference --that's just a sharp stick to poke fools with.
then adds:
Ha-ha-ha! Nothing's funnier than racial slurs!
That's it. End of message. The guy is thicker than lead. Typical white fool comes out running right into the sharp stick. I'm just amazed that anyone rose to such obvious bait.
I should have known this piece would be a tar baby.
Posted by Jerome at March 19, 2008 07:25 PM | TrackBack