Remember when sports broadasters referred to minority athletes as "articulate?" Though no harm may have been meant, the sports broadcasting world learned over time that many in their audience thought this was offensive code for "Wow, isn't it amazing to see a black athlete who can actually express himself well."

Politicians could learn a lesson or two from ground already covered in the sports world. Take Senator Joe Biden's description of Democratic competitor Barack Obama as the "first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

I wonder how this made Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Shirley Chisholm, Alan Keyes and Carol Mosely Braun feel?

Naturally, regrets and "out of context" statements have already been made.

Did Biden's statement deflect any potential criticism of Bush, who said about Obama, "He's an attractive guy. He's articuate. I've been impressed with him when I've seen him in person...?"

Obama is articulate. But so are most serious contenders for the White House; verbal communication skills are a "must" for political candidates.

Are "clean" and "articulate" comments a subtle form of racism? And did you find Biden's comments to be inflammatory? Should the comments haunt his presidential aspirations?

A test would be, could these comments be made about a white man or woman? Let's see.

George W. Bush is clean.
Yeah, he sorta looks clean. But you'd expect any politician to look clean. So maybe that's a bit patronizing, to say it about Obama.

George Bush is articulate.

Well, okay, now I see that to say that Obama is articulate is not patronizing. Because you can't assume any candidate would be, minimally, articulate.

I think it's going to be interesting to watch people stick their foots deeply into their mouths.

Bush's comments seemed fine to me. I think Obama is not just articulate but he's super articulate and an incredible speaker. I don't think a comment calling him articulate and a nice guy is a racist slam - there are millions and millions of people of all colors that aren't as articulate as him - George Bush for one, Joe Biden as well. The reason why many seem to like him isn't because "he doesn't talk like a black man" but because he says things that a.) nobody else can say so eloquently b.) says things so that he gets right to the point of the matter. All in all I think eloquent is a better adjective to describe him. I can also understand using the word articulate though and think I've done it because he articulates things that are rather complicated with ease.

I would sooner compare Obama to Bill Clinton than to anyone else. Obama is an African American but I don't think he isolates himself as being a candidate just for African Americans.

So "He's an attractive guy. He's articuate. I've been impressed with him when I've seen him in person...?" isn't a comment "For a Black man, he's articulate." He's just plain articulate for anyone especially someone like Bush who stumbles so frequently over his ideas and words.

Biden's candidacy is pretty much over now. His comments were over the top bad news. The read as "Wow, we found a black man that's clean, has a brain, can talk and looks nice. Amazing!" Did anyone really think Biden had a chance in the first place? He might have saved himself a few million dollars.

I think it's interesting that a patronizing comment made about Hillary Clinton's candidacy probably wouldn't ruffle as many feathers. I always feel that way when the patronizing man describes a woman's "toughness" or suprising that she has a "great leadership potential"... gee wiz it's impossible to conceive such a thing. I think, "Ever heard of Margaret Thatcher?"

Joe Biden has suffered from 'foot-in-mouth' disease throughout his career. It never seemed to affect the election chances of either Bush pere, or Bush fils. Why would Joe be an exception?

I think what Biden meant by "the first African-American mainstream candidate" is that Obama is the first one that is being taken seriously as a possible nominee. I saw the clip, and his words didn't flow like they read; there were significant pauses between ideas, as if he were struggling to come up with the right words to compliment Obama without going so far as endorsing him, which makes sense since Biden sees himself as in the running. (He isn't, unless Obama and Hillary knock each other out.)

The campaign season will be a very long one this time, and I think that just about everyone trying for their party's nomination will produce a gaffe or two before it's over.

As Frank pointed out, men have been elected after saying really stupid things.


"For 7 1/2 years I've worked alongside him, and I'm proud to be his partner. We've had triumphs, we've made mistakes, we've had sex." - Vice President George H.W. Bush, describing his close relationship with President Reagan, May, 1988

I don't know about "out of context," but the transcription was certainly mispunctuated. listening to it, it seems to me that the transcription should have read something more like:

Biden: I mean, you got the first, sorta, mainstream African-American.
Reporter: Yeah.
Biden: Who is articulate and bright and ... and and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean it's, that's a storybook man"



It seemed clear that the "first" referred to "mainstream African-American [candidate]" and not the rest of it. With all due respect to Jackson, Sharpton, Chisholm, Keyes, and Mosley Braun, I think it's perfectly fair to characterize Obama as the first mainstream African-American candidate. It seems to me that more than a few people have done just that without any criticism. I also don't see a problem with Biden describing Obam as articulate. Again, he's hardly the first to do so. I'd say that that's about all most people know about Obama, and I'd disagree with Fuse's suggestion that his articulateness isn't noteworthy. "Nice-looking"? Well, yes, that's significant. Biden was discussing his view that Obama is a formidable candidate. As much as I'd like it to be different, physical appearance affects who we elect.

"Clean"? I don't know what to make of that.

On the other hand Biden's comments on Indians and 7-11 a while back were insensitive, at the least.

When I hear the word "clean" in this context, I would assume the person means "politically clean" meaning no scandals associated with this person to make them a political liability.

It is a shame a person can't even say something nice about a person without it being misconstrued as something negative.

DD

quote:

It is a shame a person can't even say something nice about a person without it being misconstrued as something negative.

You are so right here. We live in a society today where you have to watch every word that comes out of your mouth, because there is somebody listening that just wants to make a big deal out of something that may be perfectly innocent. Sad.

I don't think the fuss is entirely to do with "political correctness". What's condemned as being "politically correct" is often just respect for good old-fashioned politeness.

We've always had to be careful with compliments; saying that Obama is clean could be compared to telling someone, "You look nice... today." Too much emphasis on 'today' and you've created an insult.

Did anyone say of Clinton that he was the first mainstream contender out of Arkansas? That he had charisma, intelligence... and shoes?

One of my students, who uses a wheelchair, handed in an angry essay just this week, inspired by someone calling her 'brave'. She was writing about what 'brave' might actually mean there - something like, "You must be brave because, if I were in your pitiful condition, I'd be a suicidal wreck." She seriously objects to being told she's 'cheerful', too.

How could anyone object to the compliments 'brave' and 'cheerful'? Because of the context. It's maybe the same - although methos has a good point about the flow of the actual conversation - with 'clean' and Obama.

This need for care with compliments is not a modern phenomenon; it's always been possible to patronise or subtly insult with a compliment - the idiom "back-handed compliment" is an old one, and the concept even older.

It's not political correctness... the tone of the comments are patronizing.

Let's try this:

Donadiana is one of the most devout Christians on the boards here. I mean it's amazing because she is intelligent, can rationally express and opinion and is educated.

Scotty is a serious Bush supporter. On some issues he can actually make sense though.

How do those compliments play with you guys?

It's called a backhanded compliment and it isn't a compliment at all.

I think people should avoid getting upset by such things when it happens to you. I try to avoid letting such things get under my skin when they are directed at me, but when I see someone do this and they are a Presidential candidate... well, come on.

Hi Gang:

Political correctness has only one goal ...to silence us all.

Thank God for the standup comedians in this country...they represent the last bastion of free speech in this country.

They are the only ones left in this coutry who still have the courage to speak their mind.

When Big Brother shuts them down we've all had it.

How long do you think it will take for Big Brother to shut down the Internet???

So speak up now...while you still can ...if you have the courage.

Just remember this ...anytime a government is big enough to give you everything...it's also big enough to take away everything...including the right to speak your mind.

hippolips

Yes, tone is important. Having actually listened to the quoted portion of the interview, the tone doesn't indicate a backhanded compliment to me.

A study was done in which people were asked to judge the tone of emails, and despite thinking they understood the tone 90% of the time, they were actually correct only 56% of the time. And that's when the people trying to convey something had written the emails themselves. Here, we have the added complication of a reporter punctuating the quote and omitting what he judges to be extraneous words.

quote:

Political correctness has only one goal ...to silence us all.

Nonsense. "Political correctness" is a glib dismissal used by some right wing commentators to excuse their boorishness - which they'd like to have us believe is courage.