Deja vu?

Back when the tapes of the anti-American, anti-Caucasian rants of Jeremiah Wright became widely circulated, Senator Barack Obama on March 14, 2008 condemned the statements of his pastor of twenty+ years. He declared

I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue.

Then Rev. Wright went before the National Press Club. Big mistake- at least for Obama. The Senator knew that he had to distance himself not only from the statements but also from the individual himself. He appeared to most observers to do this by asserting at a press conference, in a statement and in response to subsequent questions:

The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago....Well, as I said before, the person I saw yesterday was not the person that I have come to know over 20 years....Now, to some degree, I know that one thing that he said was true, that he was never my, quote/quote, “spiritual advisor.” He was never my spiritual mentor. He was my pastor. And to some extent how the press characterized in the past that relationship, I think, was inaccurate.

Now to the present:

In his new song, "Politics: Obama Is Here," Ludacris- the Artist Formerly Known As Christopher Bridges- condemns George W. Bush, John McCain, and Hillary Clinton while heralding Barack Obama. Here are some (or perhaps all) of the offending lyrics:

Hillary hated on you, so that b^$&%* is irrelevant.... paint the White House black and I'm sure that's got 'em terrified
McCain don't belong in ANY chair unless he's paralyzed
Yeah I said it cause Bush is mentally handicapped.

The Obama camp reacted quickly as campaign spokesman Bill Burton told Politico:

As Barack Obama has said many, many times in the past, rap lyrics today too often perpetuate misogyny, materialism, and degrading images that he doesn’t want his daughters or any children exposed to," said spokesman Bill Burton. "This song is not only outrageously offensive to Senator Clinton, Reverend Jackson, Senator McCain, and President Bush, it is offensive to all of us who are trying to raise our children with the values we hold dear. While Ludacris is a talented individual he should be ashamed of these lyrics."

Note Burton's points: the song is "outrageously offensive" and Ludacris "should be ashamed of these lyrics." Nothing about Ludacris himself being shameful, that his lyrics (as those of this song indicate) frequently are offensive, and certainly nothing suggesting Obama is displeased that one of his favorite rappers heartily supports him. Shades of March 14.

On Obama's Playlist

Presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama gave an interview, published in the July 10, 2008 issue of Rolling Stone magazine. Jann S. Wenner asked the Illinois senator: "What do you think of rap? Has it been unfairly attacked for destroying family values?"

Understandably, Obama did not answer the question posed. But he did provide an entertaining and, I fear, revealing response. Here it is in its entirety (p.4):


By definition, rock & roll is rebel music, which means if it's not being criticized, it's probably not doing its job. I am troubled sometimes by the misogyny and materialism of a lot of rap lyrics, but I think the genius of the art form has shifted the culture and helped to desegregate music. Music was very segregated back in the Seventies and Eighties — you'll remember that when MTV first came on, it wasn't until Thriller that they played Michael.

I know Jay-Z. I know Ludacris. I know Russell Simmons. I know a bunch of these guys. They are great talents and great businessmen, which is something that doesn't get emphasized enough. It would be nice if I could have my daughters listen to their music without me worrying that they were getting bad images of themselves.

First, Senator, the question was not about "rock & roll music" but about "rap," though I do understand you would want to blur the distinction inasmuch as your target audience (especially, but not entirely, because it is Rolling Stone) is non-elderly whites. Second, rap music has not desegregated, but possibly segregated, music. Third, there is a reason the artistic and business skills of the more controversial performers is not emphasized. This is one reason (profanity partially excised by blogger, not Ludacris), excerpted from "Move B----- (which helpfully is available as a ringtone):


"Oh wazzzupp, get my d--- s-----, what are yoouu doin'?"
Sidelinin' my f------' bussiness
Tryin' to get my baby child support soon
Give me that truck and take that rental back
Who bought these f------' T.V.'s and jewelry b----, tell me that?
No, I ain't bitter, I don't give a f---
But i'ma tell you like this b----
You better not walk in front of my tour bus....

F--- the dress codes, it's street clothes, we all street n-----
We on the dance floor, throwin' bows, beatin' up n-----"
(note: The last word is not "negros.")

And finally, Senator, a literal, not rhetorical, question: Does "it would be nice if I could have my daughters listen to their music without me worrying that they were getting bad images of themselves" mean that you severely restrict the access of your daughters to music of "misogynistic and materialistic" (and profane and violence- provoking) lyrics- or do you and your wife allow them to listen anyway?