I can't help but pull this apart and write at length today.

I don't plan ahead what I'm going to write here every day.  Usually I just wait for something to inspire me.  Sometimes I have one idea in mind (like yesterday I was going to write more about how people talk about their jobs too much) but then something happens or appears that demands my attention (yesterday's fat woman on stripper pole video). Today's inspiration?  This MSNBC article, "Disconnected from Obama's America", about how the rural South is still wary of the impending Obama presidency.  Rather than offer a cohesive five paragraph essay with cogent thesis statement, I am going to just respond to the snippets I find impossible to ignore or gloss over (snippets are in italics). In short, the article talks mainly about how some people in the South don't trust Obama and don't feel he can relate to their lives.

Loewer wonders about his place in Obama's America. "I'm worried that he's not gonna understand the rural way of life," he says.

If only it hadn't been perceived as too risky to talk too much about his childhood in Indonesia or his pre-Harvard visit to Kenya.  Obama was a child who saw animals being killed for his dinner and who saw produce move from dirt to plate.  He understands the rural way of life probably more than any president we've had since plantation owners (and even then, he probably understands it in a much more "everyman" kind of way).  I hate this misperception of him - that he's all city.  And, even if he was, he's smart.  You don't need to live something to know it (although it helps).  But that's besides the point for now because he did live it; I wish more people knew that.

"That comment he made about guns and religion, it's frightening, you have to admit," says the secretary at his accountant's office.  Loewer agrees. "I don't believe in going around with a gun strapped to your hip, Wild West-style," he says. "But you ought to be able to protect yourself."

And then later in the article:  Guns define Loewer's life. He grew up walking the woods with a rifle. He worked as a guide during duck season for extra income. His deep freezer is full of game that he grills with Cajun seasoning or portobello mushrooms for family dinners. There are few better feelings than the one he gets taking his 14-year-old son hunting and teaching him about white-tailed deer. "We depend on our guns in the South," he says. One of his favorite bumper stickers reads, "If you want more gun control, use two hands."

Here we have a common lack of interpretation and understanding.  Protecting yourself and clinging to your guns and religion are two different concepts.  I happen to agree with Obama about the clinging part; I wish he hadn't had to retract it.  I believe his intended meaning was that people cling to these items/ideas because they symbolize the world they live in as well as the world they oppose.  They cling to them as a means of self-identification, like certain people wear fashion labels. Robert Serio, chairman of the local Democratic Party for 30 years, says Obama was viewed as too liberal in Monroe County. "We don't look at national Democrats as being family-oriented," says Serio, a lawyer. "The multicultural thing would be something we are opposed to. The homosexual question would have an impact." Democrats aren't family oriented?  Ever hear of FMLA?  Or do you believe your women-folk shouldn't be at work in the first place and therefore don't need family leave?  And only wussy men would want leave for a newborn?  And what is this "multicultural thing" you are opposed to?  Guess what - it's going to be like trying to fight a tsunami because multicultural is how the world is going.  And "the homosexual question"?  What question?  I hate euphemisms.  Just say what you mean - you don't like African-Americans and you don't like gay people.  If it's so wrong to say that outright, maybe that tells you something.

Son Casey proudly shows off three sets of antlers mounted on his bedroom wall. On his dresser: a drill, hunting gloves and an off-brand MP3 player that holds a meager 320 songs but suits him just fine.  "IPods are too complicated," Casey says.

Clearly this is open to a comment about Southern intelligence, but that's the cheap and easy shot.  What this is actually indicative of is a lack of effort and education.  iPods are not difficult to master.  I have one and while I can't do anything fancy with it, I figured out how to get music and podcasts on it, which is all I really need.  Saying an iPod is too complicated indicates either 1 - a total lack of drive to try and master something that takes more than two minutes or 2 - a response crafted to shade the fact that they're maybe too expensive (a lot of the article talks about the family's relatively low income).  Either way, there is a sadness.

Batchelor offers his philosophy on why Obama lost Monroe County. He says people feared that he would expand social welfare programs. "You earn your wealth," Batchelor says. "We've had enough handouts from the government. We have second- and third-generation blacks who are living in the projects; they'll never get out of it. They are taught to live in it."

This demonstrates the widespread lack of understanding people have about poverty and how hard it is to escape the cycle.  I also take issue with his use of the word "it".  I believe "it=poverty" in the quotation, but it's not entirely clear.  If that is the case, though, apparently poverty is a bad word, something you don't directly refer to (like people who whisper, "Oh, she's got cancer").  Standard high school history and sociology classes (sociology should be required in h.s.) should be teaching Americans about the poverty structure in this country - how it came to be, how it continues, how hard the cycle is to break, what current theories are on breaking the cycle, why welfare doesn't equal socialism, why socialism isn't terrible, and so on - things that normal, everyday, voting Americans should have to know and understand (or at least vaguely grasp).

Part of my job includes helping students with their essays/papers.  The one I was just working on opened with this sentence: Michael Bloomberg is one of the most influential business, political, and philanthropy in World Street. Education is not a rural or urban issue.  It's a global issue and I'm glad we have a global, multicultural president-elect.  With better education, perhaps we can decrease these misunderstandings.  People question the necessity of English and literature courses for people pursuing non-humanities degrees.  What they don't seem to realize is that teaching the exegesis of texts helps people better interpret the world, including other people's words and actions.  It also teaches people to look at things deeply and critically.  Perhaps the era of "soundbite campaigning" would cease if people were no longer satisfied by such small bits of information.  Perhaps we would have debates that no longer kowtowed to the lowest common denominator, even though the lowest common denominator is probably not watching.  Maybe we wouldn't have plumbers reporting in Iraq and declaring that Obama means "the death of Israel".  Or maybe people with journalistic aspirations would have the means to chase their goals from the get-go and wouldn't first have a career as a plumber and could have the proper education that a reporter should have (although Ann Coulter was educated at Cornell, so maybe that idea doesn't fly).  Regardless, I think "fixing" our education system is the key to "fixing" the nation and getting us on a stronger path for the future.

Comments

[smellytourist]

I don't think Obama can relate to the south well because he grew up in an affluent, urban household
www.smellytourist.wordpress.com

[bookishpenguin]

I think being able to "relate" is a little overrated. I'd rather have someone understand, which I believe he does. In all fairness, time will tell.

I also wouldn't count Kansas, Indonesia, and Hawaii as urban, but I suppose people have different definitions for that, based on population and access to business, etc.