RNC Recap for Thursday, September 4

This past Monday, we provided a preview of the themes we expected to see this week during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN. Here is a recap of Thursday’s events.

The theme for the night was “Peace: A Safer and More Secure America,” and the discourse was raised to a more sophisticated and positive level from that of Wednesday night. While there were a few references to Obama being “not like us” (U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham said “I’m not saying Barack Obama doesn’t care; he doesn’t get it”; McCain suggested that Obama believes he is anointed by God to save the country), Theme 1 from Monday was generally not reflected, for the most part, in the language from the last night’s speakers. Overall, there were few messages that would be more successful because of racist predispositions. Theme 3 (McCain is conservative) was similarly minimal on Thursday night, though McCain had a number of lines such as “. . . the party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan is going to get back to basics.” While there were some other mentions of Ronald Reagan, low taxes and keeping government out of people’s lives, these messages gave way to stronger themes of change and reform. Theme 4 (Republicans are inclusive) more closely resembled that of Tuesday night than Wednesday night, with nearly all of the speakers being white and male (notable exceptions were U.S. Senator Mel Martinez and Cindy McCain), and the few people of color in the audience getting predictable camera time.

Theme 2: McCain and Palin are Change
The most prominent theme from those that we predicted on Monday was Theme 2. In the film designed to introduce Governor Sarah Palin (which was supposed to air last night, but was bumped due to time constraints), the word “maverick” was mentioned three times in the first 15 seconds and was used at least three more times in the brief clip.



In short, it was a very strong final night to a strong convention. McCain did exactly what he needed to do: he placated the Evangelical right with his choice of VP, but maintained his ability to appear to be “independent” with the messages that came out of the convention hall. In particular, McCain’s “ask not what your country can do for you” speech Thursday night will clearly resonate with a large number of Americans. In contrast to the fear mongering that took place earlier in the convention (there was a particularly offensive graphic film about 9/11 victims shown earlier in the evening) and the vitriol that was so much a part of most of the convention’s speakers, McCain’s call for civility, bipartisanship, and putting country above self was a breath of fresh air. After an unfortunate start due to Hurricane Gustav, the GOP put on an energetic and moving event that will clearly result in a solid bounce in support in the coming days.

Walking the High Wire
McCain and Palin are going to have a difficult time maintaining the momentum that they built this week, though. It will be tough to continue to walk the very thin line between change and appeasing the conservative base of the Party. Particularly in Thursday night’s speech, McCain did an admirable job of simultaneously running against Obama and the Bush Administration. But that was a scripted speech in front of a supportive crowd; he will have difficulty keeping aloft on the high wire when things are being thrown at him from multiple sides. Here are a few examples:

• During the Palin film, the narrator noted that “she managed to increase funding for infrastructure by cutting property taxes” when she was mayor of Wasilla. How did she manage that? Early reports suggest that she hired a lobbying firm and received nearly $27 million worth of federal earmarks, something that McCain has vowed to eliminate if elected president. Conservatives will like that she didn’t raise property taxes, but will be upset to learn that she was part of the spending that they find so “wasteful” coming out of Washington.
• McCain used an example of a Michigan couple who lost their real estate investments in the housing crash, saying that he’d “fight” for them. That will be appealing to the populist wing of the party, but fiscal conservatives will be more likely to side with the statements McCain made in March: “it is not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers."
• Sarah Palin said that she’d advocate for children with special needs, but what did she mean? Parents of special needs children need a lot of help, not the least of which is financial. While it is compassionate to “advocate” for children with special needs, she will have to explain to the far right how this type of governmental spending is warranted, while others is not, or she’ll have to explain to these families why securing funding for treatment and education for these kids is not what she meant by “advocate.”
• McCain mentioned that the daughter of a Latina worker is one of “God’s children” who deserves to be fought for. If the worker is undocumented, he’s right that the child is “American,” but many on the far right would like that child to be sent out of the country. Will he fight for that child or deport him or her?
• McCain promised to provide assistance to the unemployed worker (through Community College training), but was not clear if he was going to spend federal money to make the transition. The working class supporters will favor such a program, but if it costs money, McCain will run into problems with others in the Party.

And there were some questions that remain unanswered. Specifically, who is the “me-first, country-second crowd” to which McCain referred in his speech Thursday night? The handful of politicians who have been caught in scandals are obvious and common enemies of the people, but beyond that, is he referring to Democrats? It was a common call of previous speakers that “liberals” in Washington “want your money for themselves.” But those who favor government spending on social issues (or foreign policy, for that matter) don’t get to keep that money for themselves. Who is in this “crowd?” The call all week was for “country first,” but who were they suggesting puts themselves ahead of country? There was some implication that Obama is out for himself (a political opportunist), but the vague attack on an ambiguous target is parallel to the attacks against “the media.” During the debates, there should be some push to be specific about what is meant by such claims.




Racial Equality Through Education
Our concern, of course, is the move toward racial equality. There is very little that came out of this convention that suggests that McCain/Palin will be committed to bringing about more racial equality in America. After noting Obama’s historic nomination, McCain made a general reference to “defending the rights of the oppressed” and making sure that all Americans have opportunities. But we were quite impressed that he said that “education is the civil rights issue of this century.” There is more to racial inequality than education, but for the most part, McCain is exactly correct. The problem, though, is that his plan to fix the education system is pointed in the wrong direction.

Educational opportunities are unequal in America largely due to the way schools are funded. While some federal and state money is given to schools by way of grants, much (usually most) funding of schools is reliant on property taxes in the district. So if a neighborhood is wealthy, the schools are wealthy; if it is poor, the schools are poor. Poor districts are understaffed, do not have materials and resources necessary to educate in the 21st century, and do not attract the most talented teachers. Further, poor districts are likely to have students whose parents have to work long hours and consequently may not be home to help with schoolwork. After-school programs are not possible because of funding issues. McCain promised Thursday night to “shake up failed school bureaucracy,” a vague phrase that directs attention away from the real problem. Bureaucracy does not create discrepancies in school funding, economic inequality (which is closely tied to racial inequality) does. McCain promises to make schools compete with one another and then allow parents to have the “choice” to move their students to a better school. But what does this really mean?

Without equality in funding, the “competition” is not fair. Particularly since No Child Left Behind financially punishes schools whose students do not meet standardized benchmarks, the “competition” is not likely to become fairer without a major change in funding structure. But that change will not happen if the far right continues to dictate policy. McCain promised folks that they should be able to keep the fruits of their hard labor. That is precisely what does not need to happen.

To make schools more equal, wealthy people will have to give money to poor schools through taxes and redistribution of finances. So long as wealthy (mostly white) folks move to the suburbs and keep their wealth in their own schools, leaving poorer families behind (or, as Obama said last Thursday, “on their own”), there will be inequality in schools. A voucher that gives a family a $4,000 credit to put toward tuition at a private school will help families that are $4,000 short for private school tuition of, say, $12,000 per year, but for those who can’t get the remaining $8,000, that’s simply an additional $4,000 that will not be in the pool for the local public school.

Further, while it is popular in conservative circles to run against unions, his promise to take education out of the hands of “bureaucrats and unions” and give it to parents and children is wrongheaded. Letting students decide what should happen in schools is like having physicians permit patients to make their own medical diagnoses. Until teachers are treated like professionals and not merely government employees (i.e., better pay, greater respect and autonomy), great leaps in education will not be possible. In short, without a major redistribution of wealth for school funding, McCain’s vision of civil rights being achieved through education will not be realized.

McCain spoke of the sort of selflessness that wealthy persons like to applaud, but only occasionally advocate in practice. The truth is that there is economic inequality in this country, and those who have wealth do not usually support policies to help those who do not. So while it is probably soothing for wealthy folks to cheer calls to serve a cause greater than oneself and put service first, the policies that are advocated by the Republican Party in 2008 are not a change from those of the past forty years. Tax-deductible contributions to get one’s family into a lower bracket are welcome, but they are no substitute for the greater good that can come from working together as a national community to solve our great problems of homelessness, hunger, poverty, and inequality. The market cannot solve those problems, and when the confetti clears in St. Paul, it will be obvious that the real empty rhetoric is not coming from Obama, whose policies are designed to address inequality, but from the GOP, whose presidential candidate we believe is personally committed to making the world a fairer, better place for all (at least Americans), but whose power is still centered in the far right, which have already pulled the “maverick” from his comfort zone and into a policy world with nothing but continued and increased inequality on the horizon.

RNC Recap for Wednesday, September 3

Monday, we provided a preview of the themes we expect to see this week during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN. Below is a recap of Wednesday’s events, organized by our predicted themes.

We very much appreciate Karla’s thoughtful comments on yesterday’s blog. If you have not read them, we urge you to do so. Since we know that we may be picking up new readers this week, we want to be clear about the way we use the words “racist” and “racial.” We reserve the former for the often-subconscious beliefs that pervade our culture and that tacitly promote and perpetuate white supremacy. Most racist appeals are not explicit, and their intentionality is not of our concern. Rather, we focus on potential effects of the interaction between messages that tap into latent racist sentiments and the way that individuals may process such messages, which, accordingly, can affect attitudes and, ultimately, behavior. Claims of “racism” below are not attacks on speakers or on the Republican Party; they are not claims that there was intent to play on racist predispositions. They may or may not be. That's not our concern. Rather, we aim to point out that certain claims that might be made against an opponent of any race work exponentially well when the candidate is African American because they trigger and amplify existing racial resentment and stereotypes.

Sexism and Governor Palin
The focus tonight, of course, was on Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, John McCain’s nominee for vice president. In short, she gave a very good speech. It was well delivered, hard-hitting, and very effective on a number of levels. When she was first chosen, Stephen called the pick “brilliant political strategy” because it took most of the focus off Obama’s speech from the night before and because it allowed the market on “history” in this election to no longer be cornered by the Democrats. Many commentators have referred to her as a “Hail Mary” choice, using the American football analogy of throwing a pass high and far into a crowd in desperation at the end of a game (or half). The more appropriate analogy would be a team that has very little chance of winning starting the game with an onside kick; if it works, it can generate quick points, a morale boost, and some momentum. If not, the underdog is likely to go down early, with little chance of recovering. To extend the analogy beyond comfort, tonight was about seeing if the ball got the coveted “second bounce” and whether the “hands team” can come up with possession. As we noted previously, her far-right ideology is unlikely to translate into disgruntled Hillary Clinton voters’ support, but it is unclear how the choice will affect voters to the right and center of McCain. Tonight was a good start.



What is clear, however, is that the scrutiny of Palin’s nomination has become an important teaching lesson for all Americans. The party that has been first to unfairly demonize teenage pregnancy and single parenthood in poor communities and communities of color is in the position of having to defend it as a natural occurrence that can happen in any family now that Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. The party that perennially failed to consider how systemic sexism acts as a barrier to women’s professional progress is forced to not only acknowledge it, but to put forth forceful arguments about how questions of Palin’s ability to care for her children reflect a double-standard in American culture. Rather than point fingers and say “ah-ha!” to those who have chastised others for generations, we urge unification on these issues from this point forward so that we can remove those barriers that still disproportionately disadvantage women. (Although, to be honest, seeing a delegate with a button that read “Hoosiers for the hot chick” is not exactly moving us beyond sexist stereotypes and misogyny.) Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani made an unfair inference about Barack Obama Wednesday night when he used an ambiguous pronoun (“they”) to refer to media questions about how much time Palin would have for her children, right after he talked about Obama’s campaign. To our knowledge, Obama has never raised such a question, and allowing the audience to infer that he has is disappointing.

Tonight was the big night for the RNC. The audience for McCain’s speech on Thursday night will not come anywhere close to the size of the audience for Obama’s speech last week. First, what more is there to know about John McCain? Second, the NFL kicks off its season with a prime-time game between the Super Bowl champion New York Giants and division rival Washington Redskins. Palin is the wild card for this ticket. Tonight was her night, and she nailed it.

The theme Wednesday night was “reform,” and all of the speakers sought to highlight this ticket’s ability to bring about reform. It’s tricky for conservatives generally to argue for change (unless it is change back to traditional values), but it’s more tricky for Republicans to argue for change on the heels of a Republican administration.

With that in mind, here are how our predictions from Monday panned out Wednesday night.

Theme 1: He (Obama) is Not Like Us
In speeches Wednesday night, Obama was painted as a skillful orator, with no substance, who is a political opportunist, an elitist and is out of touch with “normal” Americans. While an effective strategy in general, these ideas fit nicely with stereotypes of African Americans that they are shifty, slick, always scamming, and looking to help themselves to that which they do not deserve. Black athletes and celebrities (Giuliani called Obama a “celebrity senator,” suggesting that he is all flash and no substance or hard work) are stereotyped to be self-promoting and arrogant. In short, the various images of the black male in the American imagination are combined and ascribed to Barack Obama. Here is a list of quotes from Wednesday night that support this idea.

• “We need a leader who will work in the public’s interest, not clamor for the public’s applause.” (Michael Steele)
• “Mere words about change are not enough to transform this nation . . .” (Michael Steele)
• “There has never been a day when I was not proud to be an American.” (Mitt Romney, referring to Michelle Obama’s statement that for the first time in her adult life, she’s really proud of her country)
• Mike Huckabee expressed concern over the “European ideas” that Obama brought back from his trip overseas. The explicit claim he made is that these are not American ideas.
• “[He] couldn’t make a decision . . . it was too tough.” (Giuliani, suggesting that Obama has no firm principles upon which to base a decision)
• “Substance over style” (Giuliani)
• "[He] broke his promise” (Giuliani, referring to Obama’s pledge to accept public financing – feeds into stereotypes of lack of trustworthiness and willing to say anything to get what he wants)
• Giuliani noted that Obama changed his mind on wire tapping and on a united Jerusalem, which goes to an inability to trust his word.
• Giuliani made a joke that Obama didn’t think Palin’s hometown was “cosmopolitan enough” or “flashy enough,” which plays into the stereotype of the slick talking and arrogant black man – an attack we saw used against Harold Ford, Jr. in his 2006 senatorial bid in Tennessee.
• Referring to Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Michael Steele said that “associations – who you hang out with – does matter . . . America should never be damned for creating a place so many people want to call home.”
• Governor Palin noted that there is “a time to campaign and a time to put our country first,” which plays into the stereotype that black folks put themselves and their needs above all else.
• Like Huckabee, Palin appealed to small town values – connection to hard workers and soldiers in small-town America. She said, “they’re always proud of America,” which contrasts with Obama’s alleged elitism.
• Palin said that Obama was two-faced when it comes to working people.
• Palin said that being a leader is “Not just mingl[ing] with the right people.”
• Palin talked about Obama making “dramatic speeches before devoted followers.” She said that he never uses the word “victory” unless he’s talking about his own campaign.
• Palin said: “There are some candidates, who use change to promote their careers, and then there are other candidates like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.”
• Palin referred to “high-flung speechmaking in which crowds are stirringly summoned to promote great things.”
• Palin said that we needed leaders who were “Good for more than talk.”
• Of McCain, Palin said that he is a leader “we can count on,” presumably in contrast to Obama.
• “There is only one man in this election who has really fought for you—” At this point, Palin was interrupted by applause at this point (mid-sentence), but we wonder who the “you” is meant to address. Recall that McCain has no record on advocating for civil rights specifically, and he openly opposed the Martin Luther King holiday. McCain is no enemy of people of color, but “you” is ambiguous, and arguing that he has fought for them is curious. In fairness, Palin was trying to make the point that he fought in Vietnam for “you,” but the interruption at her pause reflects the attitudes of the audience members.
• Palin called McCain “upright and honorable,” presumably in contrast with Obama.
• “For a season, a gifted speaker can inspire with his words, but for a lifetime, John McCain has inspired through his deeds.”

Some of Palin’s speech was quite acerbic. She mocked Obama on a number of occasions, at one point predicting what change he’d make “after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet.” A few moments later, she made a joke about accused terrorists having rights. From our perspective, this is a relatively easy joke since very few white folks are getting accused of terrorism. Civil liberties protect the most vulnerable among us (a decidedly Christian concept, ironically enough), and many right-wing conservatives are very concerned about “big brother” taking away those liberties. This will be a difficult line to walk, and presenting it sarcastically might make it that much more difficult.

Theme 2: McCain [and Palin are] Change
Like Tuesday night, there was a lot of talk about McCain as “maverick.” Of course, since it was Palin’s night, a lot of the attribution of potential change was placed on her, as well. Choosing her was about being a maverick, and her existence on the ticket is partly because she has a reputation for being a maverick. The most memorable direct quote was when Palin urged voters to “take the maverick out of the Senate [and] put him in the White House.” At one point in her speech, Palin noted that she is “not a member of the permanent political establishment.” This is certainly true, but to the extent that she wishes to contrast with Obama, it is going to be a tough sell to convince voters that he is at once inexperienced and at the same time part of the establishment.

Theme 3: McCain is Conservative
Reagan mentions were limited, but both Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani invoked his legacy (both linking him with the current ticket). Beyond that, there were a lot of references to early 1990s conservatism. We heard arguments that we haven’t heard in a long time. Romney talked about runaway government spending since 1980 (ignoring defense spending by Reagan and G.W. Bush as the largest contributions to the national debt), and several speakers used the term “political correctness” (Rudy Giuliani said, “Democrats think it is politically incorrect to use the words ‘Islamic terrorist.’”; Mitt Romney said that folks “. . . prefer straight talk to politically correct talk.”). That term was used in the 1980s and early 1990s as a way to discredit efforts to promote cultural sensitivity and tolerance as “thought crimes.” Giuliani referred to “big brother,” and several speakers tied the current Democratic ticket with the tax-and-spend liberalism that helped usher Republicans into power in 1994.

Mitt Romney said, "liberals would replace opportunity with dependency on government largess. They grow government and raise taxes to put more people on Medicaid, to work requirements out of welfare, and to grow the ranks of those who pay no taxes at all. Dependency is death to initiative, to risk-taking and opportunity. It's time to stop the spread of government dependency and fight it like the poison it is! It’s time for the party of big ideas, not the party of Big Brother!"

Further, the speakers invoked a strategy that has been very effective since the Reagan administration: running against the “elite media.” Because “media” is an abstract entity, candidates can set themselves up as underdogs by claiming that the media is against them. This works best for conservatives who want to play into populist sentiment, which the speakers tonight did very well.

Mike Huckabee helped to deliver a populist message, trying to wrestle the support of the working class from the Democrats. He made reference to single moms (not a group that Republicans have historically spent a lot of time trying to attract) and (union) flight attendants and airline baggage handlers. He told a story of his father who was poor, which is a very common response when conservatives feel defensive about being insensitive to the poor. The fact is that just about everyone who is rich can tell a story about someone in his or her family who was broke at some point. (Cindy McCain told a story about her father on Monday night.) The message is that America is fair, and those who aren’t making it are failing because of their own poor choices and lack of hard work. In fact, Huckabee said at one point, “I’m a Republican because I didn’t want to spend the rest of my life poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.” This is a picture of America’s poor (which is disproporationately of color) that allows folks to feel comfortable not addressing systemic barriers to success.



Sarah Palin argued that she and McCain would give government back to the people. This is a an important point to be made from a party that is often accused of favoring the wealthy. Tapping into the Pat Buchanan (now Mike Huckabee) wing of the Republican Party will be important to their success in many key states, particularly those in the Rust Belt. Palin made reference to “the compassion of one who once was powerless,” which is an important point because of the heat McCain has generated by not knowing how many houses he owns. As the black candidate, Obama will be presumed to know more about oppression, but matching his experience as a black man in America with McCain’s five years of torture may be effective to offset that advantage in the minds of undecided voters.

Theme 4: Republicans are Inclusive
There seemed to be somewhere near three times the number of African Americans in the hall Wednesday night compared to Tuesday. As we predicted on Monday, it seemed as if each of them got close-up time on television (some more than once).

Early in the evening, there was barely a white man to be found on the podium, though a lot of this was due to the prominence of women Republicans on the night that Sarah Palin was to introduce herself. We heard the lovely singing voice of Ruby Brown, an African American woman and friend of the McCains, in a duet of “America the Beautiful” to open the session. Several people of color were shown in the audience as she sang. When Elena Rios, President and CEO of the National Hispanic Medical Association, was speaking, no one was paying attention. She talked about minority children not getting immunizations and the discrepancy between white and of-color persons with respect to access to health care. Camera pans of the crowd showed private conversations and distracted delegates, reading, laughing and daydreaming. Ruth Lopez Novodor, a small business owner, commanded much more attention with her discussion of business and the amount of money small businesses contribute to the economy. Michael Williams, Texas Railroad Commission Chairman and an African American, noted that he was at the Republican Convention because he found little value in the “politics of demography.” He also noted that “Americans will not fall for identity politics over good ideas.” Before hearing from two wealthy businesswomen (Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina), Delegate Luis Fortuno of Puerto Rico addressed the crowd.

Then, Michael Steele, who is perhaps the most well known black Republican on the current political landscape, gave a stirring speech that greatly energized the crowd. He addressed race directly by saying that “the ideal of a color blind society is worth fighting for, because each man, woman and child is an individual, not a member of some hyphenated. . .group.” Mike Huckabee personalized his intolerance of racism: “. . . I witnessed firsthand the shameful evil of racism.” He said that he had respect for Obama’s securing of the nomination: “We celebrate this milestone because it elevates our country, but the presidency is not a symbolic job.” With this point, we recall Geraldine Ferraro’s claim that Obama’s nomination was an affirmative action hire. Huckabee is noting that we need more than the mere symbolism that a black president can offer.



And to close out the night, Cowboy Troy, a black country singer, spoke the Pledge of Allegiance as two other (white) singers sang the Star Spangled Banner.

Insensitivity and Callousness
The most disturbing note Wednesday night came during Rudy Giuliani’s speech. People laughed when he noted that Obama was a “community organizer” (though it didn't appear to be planned as a joke in and of itself) and held up zeros, chanting "ZEE-RO" as if such work is of no importance whatsoever. Governor Palin piled on with even more vitriol as she said that “a small town mayor is like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities.” Later, referring to the presidency, Palin said “It’s not just a community and it doesn’t need an organizer. This sort of devaluation of the work that is done in inner cities by leaders – many of whom (like Barack Obama) eschew personal wealth and fame to make the lives of disadvantaged folks better – will not be well received in a large section of America. Further, Giuliani said that “[Obama] never had to lead people in crisis.” This discounts the crisis poor folks faced in the communities in which Obama worked and the crisis in which America’s poor face on a daily basis. When you are poor and cannot take care of your family, you don’t need a terrorist attack or a hurricane to create a crisis; you live in a constant state of crisis. Perhaps McCain and Palin are writing off the inner cities altogether, but the danger of such dismissiveness is that suburban independents will take offense to such a flip attitude toward folks who are suffering (in this case, due to steel mills closing when jobs moved overseas).



Miscellaneous
Two more quick points that we’d like to make before we get some sleep:

1. We really liked Giuliani’s assertion Democrats are in a state of denial about national security. He said, “If you deny it, and you don’t deal with it, then you can’t face it.” This is precisely the argument critical race theorists have been making about systemic racism.
2. Finally, during one break, there was a country music song called “If You’re Going Through Hell” by Rodney Atkins. The chorus, in part, advises “If you’re going through hell, just keep moving.” This is typical of American individualistic sentiment. If things are bad, they’re bad because you’re not trying hard enough. There are no systemic barriers to your progress. Just work harder. If you fail, that’s your problem. Maybe someone will come by to help, but no one is going to remove the things that are keeping you from getting the same chance as others. It’s consistent with conservative philosophy, but it’s the type of conservatism that has widespread support because it appears to be a feel-good message about hard work and optimism. At its root, there is danger, though, because it fails to acknowledge the reasons why some folks are in “hell,” why some have a better chance of getting out of (or keeping out of) “hell” in the first place, and what all of us might do to make sure our neighbors get a little piece of heaven.

As we did yesterday, we very much want to encourage readers to post their own observations and comments below to provide a more full and vigorous dialogue about the Republican National Convention, its themes, and the potential for priming of racist stereotypes about African Americans.

RNC Recap for Tuesday, September 2

Yesterday, we provided a preview of the themes we expect to see this week during the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, MN. Here is a recap of Tuesday’s events, organized by our predicted themes.

For readers who are new to TWIR, we want to be clear about the way we use the words “racist” and “racial.” We reserve the former for the often-subconscious beliefs that pervade our culture and that tacitly promote and perpetuate the white power structure. Most racist appeals are not explicit, and their intentionality is not of our concern. Rather, we focus on potential effects of the interaction between messages that tap into latent racist sentiments and the way that individuals may process such messages, which, accordingly, can affect attitudes and, ultimately, behavior.

The overarching RNC themes last night were “Service Above Self” and “Country First,” both of which were reflected through signs handed out in the convention hall, as well as through the speeches that were given. Most of the evening’s speakers testified to John McCain’s character, particularly his love of country and the sacrifices he made as a prisoner of war during Vietnam. Those themes led nicely to the sentiment that John McCain deserves to be president – he has earned it through his experience. Barack Obama on the other hand, was presented as a shallow orator who has political ambitions, but no true love of country (or, at least he has yet to demonstrate it). Here are some examples of what we saw that matched our predictions from yesterday.

Theme 1: He’s Not Like Us
Former Tennessee Senator (and 2008 presidential hopeful) Fred Thompson’s speech was centered on vivid descriptors of McCain’s torture in Vietnam, as well as contrasting McCain’s action and experience with Obama’s “talk.” Playing on Obama’s theme “A change you can believe in,” Thompson said that McCain has “character you can believe in.” The remarks with the greatest potential to play into racist predispositions came when Thompson said that Washington has had its share of “smooth talkers and big talkers.” He added, “Obviously it still has.” The stereotype of African Americans – particularly African American men – as shifty, fast-talking and untrustworthy is primed by suggestions that Obama talks a good game, but is really trying to fool everyone for his own benefit. He, unlike McCain, will not put country first. Thompson referred to Obama making a “teleprompter speech designed to appeal to America’s critics abroad,” and tried to turn Obama’s historical run on its side by noting that it is, indeed, history making because he is “the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee ever to run for president.” Finally, Thompson said that we need a president who feels no need to apologize for the United States of America. Senator Joe Lieberman said the following of Obama: He’s “gifted and eloquent”; “eloquence is no substitute for a record.”

In short, Obama was presented last night as someone who is far out in left field, someone who is “not us,” and someone who just doesn’t get it (a claim the Democrats leveled against McCain last week). In the context of the approximately 99% white convention hall, there is a decidedly racist undertone (intentional or otherwise) to this line of rhetoric.

Theme 2: McCain is Change
As we predicted, there was a lot of talk of McCain as “maverick” and Palin as “reformer.” In his video speech to the convention, President George W. Bush provided the following quotes about McCain: “John is an independent man who thinks for himself” and “This man is honest and speaks straight from the heart.” He went on to suggest that Barack Obama is a political opportunist by noting that McCain would rather lose an election than see his country lose a war. Additionally, he called Sarah Palin “strong and principled,” suggesting that she, too, is not bound to party, but rather to principle – to country first. Fred Thompson spoke directly about how McCain is running against Washington, and about how he has been fighting Washington since he arrived (a point that President Bush made, as well, with effective humor). In fact, Thompson argued that what Obama is advocating is not change at all. He called it “ the same old stuff [Democrats have] been peddling for years.” Thompson claimed that he’d rather have Palin than someone who is part of the old beltway crowd (presumably referring to Obama or Biden, not McCain).

Senator Joe Lieberman’s very presence as a former Democrat (though he curiously referred to himself as a Democrat in the present tense on a number of occasions) was designed to show that McCain is a different kind of politician – one who can reach across the aisle or fight against members of his own party. He also noted that Governor Palin is a reformer who has reached across party lines; she is going to “help John shake up Washington.” Lieberman, like Thompson before him, noted that “the real ticket for change this year is the McCain/Palin ticket,” adding that the bureaucrats in Washington “will not be able to build a pen to hold in these two mavericks.”

Theme 3: McCain is Conservative
President Bush made reference to “the angry left,” which drew a huge applause from the crowd. As we noted in our preview yesterday, accusing Democrats of being “liberal” or “too liberal” is not unique to running against a black candidate, but the charge works differently when the candidate is black. In this case, the sentiment plays into the “angry black man” stereotype, as well as a “liberal as emotional and irrational political actor” motif.

As for our Reagan prediction: there was an entire video montage dedicated to Reagan. If you took our advice and played the drinking game, make sure to drink a lot of water today and take a couple of aspirin. In the video, Regan was equated with John McCain implicitly, as he was portrayed as a man who “never forgot who he was” and “a leader who would always put his country first.” The narrator noted that the media “despised” Reagan because he was an outsider, and that some even called him a “maverick” – a word most often used to describe John McCain since his 2000 election run. After noting that Reagan “replaced [President Jimmy] Carter’s indecision with conviction politics,” McCain was linked with Reagan through a photo of the two shortly after McCain arrived in Washington. Finally, discussion of Nancy Reagan as a supportive, loving, doting first lady was clearly designed to show a parallel with Cindy McCain (and a contrast with Michelle Obama).

Theme 4: Republicans are Inclusive
The limited diversity in the convention hall is striking when compared to last week’s convention in Denver. Wide camera pans shows an almost all-white delegation and audience. As we predicted, though, the camera was sure to find the few people of color in the crowd. Here’s what we noticed: one black woman during Thompson’s speech; one elderly black man cheering; a woman of color sitting behind Cindy McCain; and a black woman holding a sign that read “McCain Rules.” While we were not able to watch all of the speeches, we did note that Miles McPherson, who is African American, spoke as president of Miles Ahead Ministries.

Earlier in the evening, there was a video montage put together around a 500-word essay from a young woman who won a contest about what the American flag means. The pictures of the classroom of students pledging to the flag looked like a United Colors of Benetton advertisement, even though virtually no classrooms in the United States feature this type of ethnic diversity.


We want to urge readers to post their own observations and comments below to provide a more full and vigorous dialogue about the Republican National Convention, its themes, and the potential for priming of racist stereotypes about African Americans.