Obama and the Transformation of Youth

While it was thrilling for millions of Americans to have an African American sworn-in as president, there were probably hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people out there who were thoroughly disgusted at the thought of having a Black man in the White House. While most of us never dreamed that an African American (at least someone who is half African American) would ever be elected in our lifetime, we were excited and delighted by the thought. Some racists were not.

It seems that despite the urgent plight of our economy, there are some people out there who are hoping that President Obama will fail. Rush Limbaugh, who was fired from his job as a television sports commentator for making racist remarks about the Philadelphia Eagles’ quarterback, Donovan McNabb, said of Barack Obama: “I know what his politics are. I know what his plans are, as he has stated them. I don't want them to succeed….I hope he fails.” I’m sure Limbaugh spoke for many of his listeners. I wonder whether the motivation for such people is something more than anti-liberal ideology. I wonder whether it is a deep-seated bigotry that drives their spiteful feelings.

I realize that millions of dedicated Republicans voted against Obama on purely non-racial political grounds, but there are some white people who voted against him because they are mired in antipathy for the black race. I would be willing to bet, however, that the vast majority of those people are over 40 years of age. I would also bet that their children and grandchildren are far more enthusiastic about the new president than they are. That is what gives me hope.

The next generation does not understand racial hatred the way my generation did. It used to be a sign of racial insensitivity when people would say, “some of my best friends are Black.” But today, many young white people can honestly say it. When you look at the huge crowds that came out for Obama on election night and at the inauguration, you see tens of thousands of young white faces, smiling, cheering, and even crying.

This is the best thing that has happened to the Democratic Party since the election of John F. Kennedy. When Kennedy was elected, I was a Republican. My parents were conservative Republicans. Before Kennedy, it seemed to me that the Republican Party was the party of civil rights. The Democratic Party had too many southern segregationists like James O. Eastland and John Stennis of Mississippi, Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, and Richard Russell of Virginia. Kennedy changed all that. He and his brother Robert stood-up to the racist George Wallace of Alabama and transformed the Democratic Party into a party that supported integration. I became a Democrat.

When Richard Nixon inaugurated the “Southern strategy,” the Republican Party, which had once proudly proclaimed the ideas of Nelson Rockefeller, Jacob Javits, and John Lindsay, now pandered to the racists of the unreconstructed South. Southern Democratic politicians began switching to the Republican Party. Many Republicans switched to the Democratic Party.

I believe that Barack Obama will do the same thing today as JFK did half a century ago. Many thousands of white youths whose parents are still encumbered by racism will see what a difference a brilliant, charismatic African American can make in America, and will become Obama’s living legacy to liberal Democratic policies.

I have another hope. I realize that it is not easy to cure the disease of racial bias. When Barack Obama is out of office there will probably still be many people who hate him for his race. But my hope is that during his administration, he will transform the hearts and minds of many that now hate him so that they come to appreciate what he means to America and the world. My hope is that he will so change this nation, restore its economy, improve healthcare, halt global warming, and promote peace, that those people who hate him will come to admire and respect him and his ideas.

Two Women, Hillary and Sarah

Hillary Clinton was just as qualified to be Governor of Arkansas and President of the United States as Bill Clinton, but we live in a somewhat misogynistic society, and Bill had first dibs on those honors. While Bill had high educational accomplishments, Hillary’s were even better. In high school, Hillary was a student leader and a member of the National Honor Society. After high school she attended Wellesley and graduated magna cum laude. She was president of the student government at Wellesley and was the first student to give a commencement address there (she received a seven-minute standing ovation). She was considered by her fellow students likely to be the first woman President of the United States. After collage, she graduated cum laude from Yale Law School.

Sarah Palin’s educational record is…well… you know.

There is good reason to believe that Hillary is the smarter of the two Clintons. As evidence, one has only to look at the transcript of her January 13, 2009, confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on her nomination to be Secretary of State. At the hearing she gave a dazzling display of her knowledge of foreign affairs. It can be found at www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/politics/13text-clinton.html.

Contrast this with the pathetic performances of Sarah Palin in interviews with Katie Couric and Charles Gibson. When Couric asked Sarah about her claim that the proximity of Alaska to Russia enhanced her foreign policy credentials (the subject of a Tina Fey spoof), Palin did not deny it. Republican sources have averred that Palin did not know the names of the three partners in NAFTA, and may or may not have thought that Africa is just a country and not a whole continent full of countries!

In her confirmation hearing, Hillary was questioned in depth about foreign affairs by some very smart senators. Richard Lugar, Republican senator from Indiana, is one of the most knowledgeable and respected experts in Washington on foreign affairs. He delved into Hillary Clinton’s positions on international matters. She showed a full grasp of complicated issues such as the recent Russian cut-off of natural gas to the Ukraine as well as WMD proliferation prevention assistance.

In case anybody thinks that all female politicians in Alaska are intellectually challenged, there is Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, a graduate of Georgetown University and Willamette College of Law. One has to wonder why, if he wanted a female Alaskan politician as running mate, John McCain didn’t choose bright Lisa rather than dim Sarah (knowing his predilection for pretty women, perhaps it had something to do with Sarah’s beauty-pageant good looks).

An example of the colloquy between Senator Murkowski and Hillary Clinton can be found in the following: “MURKOWSKI: Will ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty be a priority for you? CLINTON: Yes, it will be, and it will be because it is long overdue, Senator. The Law of the Sea Treaty is supported by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, environmental, energy, and business interests. I have spoken with some of our -- our naval leaders, and they consider themselves to be somewhat disadvantaged by our not having become a party to the Law of the Sea.” I wonder if Sarah Palin even knows what the Law of the Sea Treaty is.

I highly recommend reading all 63 pages of the transcript of Clinton’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (You’ve got nothing better to do, do you?).

Some people may be annoyed that I make this comparison between the brilliant and accomplished Hillary Clinton and the intellectually dwarfed Sarah Palin. The reason is that there is still much talk of Sarah Palin being nominated as Republican candidate for president in 2012. Such a nomination would put into question the intelligence of the Republican Party leaders and voters. There are plenty of exceptional Republican women who could be considered for such a nomination. The Republicans don’t need Sarah Palin and neither does the country.

The Courage to be America

When Winston Churchill first heard about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor during World War II, he sent his condolences to President Franklin Roosevelt and then sat back and pondered what the attack would mean. England had been facing the Nazi war machine virtually alone for two long years. It had withstood the bombing blitz and the Battle of Britain without American help. Now, America would be in the war as an ally of Britain. Churchill admitted that that night he slept the soundest sleep of anytime since the war had begun. He knew now that Hitler was finished, Mussolini was finished, Tojo and the Japanese warlords were finished. England, the British Empire, France, and the free world would be saved. Some said that America would not fight, but Churchill had American blood in his veins and he knew that America was like a giant boiler. Once it was lit, the energy and power it would generate would grind the enemies of democracy to dust.

If I were newly-elected President Barack Obama giving an inaugural address, I would remind Americans of the great power that is latent in the American spirit. I would call forth the thing that has carried America through so many travails—courage. Now is the time for Americans to reach down for the courage that is a part of our spirit as a people. Instead of going into a mass psychological and economic depression, we can stand up and face our problems, individually and collectively as a mighty nation.

This means that we need the courage to stop complaining and start working. We should be willing to work harder than we ever have. Churchill said to the English people: “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.” Now is the time for our leaders to call forth the same sacrifices as Churchill asked of the English people. Now is the time for us to have pride in our work no matter what kind, no matter how hard, no matter the compensation.

How can we show the kind of courage that will lift America? This year, like every year, millions of Americans have made New Year’s resolutions. Millions of people have vowed to stop drinking, stop smoking, stop taking drugs, stop gambling, lose weight, get a job, get out of debt, become better fathers, better mothers, better husbands, better wives, better employees, or better employers. Millions have vowed to become better people, to help others, to contribute more to the community. Many have already fallen off. Many have decided not to bother. This year, as if your life and the life of our nation depended on it, get back on. Pursue your vow with persistence, strength, and courage. No matter how many times you fail, there is nobility in your quest. Keep fighting to accomplish your goal.

People may ask, what does it matter to the nation whether I give-up drinking, smoking, or taking drugs etc.? The answer is, you are the nation. America is made up of millions individuals who are struggling to get by, to make a better life, to make themselves better. Right now, as never before, America needs for each one of its people to be strong, healthy, proud, and brave. You can contribute toward a better America by making yourself stronger, more clear-headed, better.

Pursue your goal as if the future of America depended upon it—because it does. Reach down and summon the willpower that you have deep inside. We have to overcome the aura of gloom and cynicism that is engulfing the nation, and we can do it only one citizen at a time. For every individual triumph, America will be a little stronger. Your triumph, and collectively, the triumph of millions of others, will bring strength and power and optimism and hope back to America. It will take courage.

Adolescent Sex, Religion, Education, and Social Class

When Sarah Palin announced in September 2008 that her 17-year-old daughter Bristol was pregnant and was going to marry the father of the baby, it was no big deal to conservative and evangelical Christians. Those Christians are quite used to hearing about pregnancies among their unmarried and underage children. This ho-hum attitude contrasts sharply with the attitudes of better educated, more affluent liberals who would consider such pregnancy a disaster. The explanation is found in a series of surveys that show a major difference in adolescent sexual behavior between the children of conservative and evangelical Christians and the children of better educated social liberals.

In a governmental survey called “The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health” (Add Health), and in studies conducted by Mark Regnerus, a sociologist at the University of Texas, and Janet E. Rosenbaum of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, it was found that conservative and evangelical Christian teenagers are more sexually active than mainline Protestants, Jews, and even Mormons. On average, white evangelical Protestants begin having sex shortly after turning sixteen, which is sooner than most other groups. Moreover, because of the widespread conservative and evangelical Christian belief that contraception is morally wrong, those teenagers were more likely than the other groups to become pregnant and contract sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).

The surveys found that abstinence-only sex education is a total failure in stopping premarital sex, unwanted pregnancy, and STDs. Bush has made it governmental policy in the United States and around the world to support the teaching of abstinence-only sex education. According to a 2001 estimate, two-and-a-half million young people have taken a pledge to remain celibate until marriage. This has been done under the auspices of movements such as “True Love Waits” and “The Silver Ring Thing.” Sometimes the pledges are made at “purity balls” where girls in ball gowns exchange rings with their fathers who vow to help them remain virgins until they marry. The surveys show that 82% of those who take such pledges end up having sex before marriage. In addition, other surveys show that communities with high rates of pledging also have higher rates of pregnancy and STDs.

Bristol Palin gave birth to a boy on Sunday, December 28, 2008, but so far, Bristol has not married the father. The problem with teenage marriages is that they lead to higher rates of divorce by conservative and evangelical Christians than among other Christians, Jews, and Mormons. Social scientists have noted that the states with the lowest age of marriage have the highest rates of divorce.

In 2004 the states with the lowest median age of marriage were the (then) red states of Arkansas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Utah, and Idaho. The states with the highest age at marriage were New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. The highest rates of divorce were in the red states of Arkansas, Idaho, Wyoming, West Virginia, and Nevada. The lowest rates of divorce were in the blue states of Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New Jersey. The highest teen-pregnancy rates were in the red states of Mississippi, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada. The lowest were in Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Maine.

The surveys also showed that there is an important social class and educational aspect to adolescent sex. The more affluent, better educated blue state teenagers are more cautious about having premarital sex than conservative and evangelical youths. They are more likely to use contraception when having sex, and are less likely to get pregnant or infected with STDs. Blue state young people are more likely to postpone marriage and children until after they reach emotional and financial maturity.

According to Mark Regnerus: “They (blue state teens) are interested in remaining free from the burden of teenage pregnancy and the sorrows and embarrassments of sexually transmitted diseases. They perceive a bright future for themselves, one with college, advanced degrees, a career, and a family.”