Rambling Rhodes

The key here is the word opinion.

Okay, Amelia, following that line of logic, it would be perfectly acceptable for a Star-Tribune opinion columnist to open that essay with:

"Now that the token black boy has been freed from the cotton fields of the Bush Administration. . . "

And that would be fine, because that's just his "opinion?"

Jeez.

You didn't read Powell's blog entries about getting out from under Shrubya's thumb did you?

"Free at last, free at last, thank god I don't have to listen to that moronic droning anymore. Time to get me a 40 of St. Ides and throwdown on some Madden 2005 with my posse. PS Dick Cheney is really, really scary up close."

Take your pick of the definitions:
Emancipated:
1. To fr. ee from bondage, oppression, or restraint; liberate.
2. Law. To release (a child) from the control of parents or a guardian.

They both work for me.

By the way, Haloscan is now having issues with comments that include the word F R E E. Bit of a pain in assle, eh?

Like my new word? Assle? Another Rhodes inspired word!

Uh huh, Johnny, and do you think they would have used the word "emancipated" if Colin Powell were, say, white? Hmmmmm. I tend to doubt it.

"...why open the piece with such a racially-inflaming literary device?"

Well, that *is* Syl Jones' default writing mode. As such, I think you were right to pin the failure at the editor level, but when the editorial pages are edited in part by a guy like Jim Boyd, I'm not sure we can expect ethical oversight.

Ryan--

Do you think race was a factor in Colin Powell's appointment? Because everyone knows that Edwards was Kerry's running mate because he was from the South. There's nothing offensive in that suggestion. What's less often talked about is why Bush chose a Secretary of State who disagreed with him about many of his most important foreign policy goals and strategies. It's perfectly true to say that Powell was the most qualified candidate for the job and I for one am genuinely sorry to see him go. But if you honestly think tokenism never entered Bush's mind when he appointed Powell to the post, I think you're dead wrong.

The word is appropriate for other reasons. There is, as I'm sure you're aware, strong evidence indicating that, in their prosecution of "the war on terror" (TWOT), that Bush, along with Cheney and Rove, were pushing moderate Republicans to the right against their will. Colin Powell is one example; John McCain is another. Republicans with better sense—particularly combat veterans—were repeatedly forced to choose between their party and their own consciences.

That Bush's reelection has given some of them a chance to get clear of the situation without damaging the "united front" for the war may certainly be regarded as an emancipation.

Firstly, Joshua, no, I don't think Powell was chosen as a token black man. I DO think he was chosen for his considerable Diplomatic clout and his near-celebrity status in this country. To say he was a token selection totally ignores Condoleeza Rice as well as other minority appointments. And, like you, I'm sorry to see Powell stepping down. I wasn't surprised by it, but it's still a disappointment.

Secondly, you're trying to steer away from the point, which is that the Strib quite blatantly used a racially-loaded term, when they could just have easily said Powell had "been released from the Bush Admin," or simply said "following his resignation from the Bush Admin." And, really, since Powell's resignation had virtually NOTHING to do with the rest of the column, why mention it at all? As I posited to Johnny, had Powell happened to be white, do you think the word "emancipation" would have been used here? Be honest.

Ryan--

I asked: "Do you think race was a factor in Colin Powell's appointment?" and you answered, "no, I don't think Powell was chosen as a token black man."

In case it's not obvious, you're answering a different question than the one I asked.

Secondly, you're trying to steer away from the point, which is that the Strib quite blatantly used a racially-loaded term, when they could just have easily said...

I'm not trying to steer away from the point. I'm saying there are reasons-- mostly in the realm of artistic choice --for having used the word. There's nothing wrong with using a "racially loaded term" when you're talking about race issues. I don't see you giving Spike Lee shit for calling his production company 40 Acres and a Mule. The project in question is aimed at improving the academic performance of minority youths, particularly Black youths. I hope this isn't a new idea to you, but a lot of people, including a great many African Americans, believe that the reason Black kids have a hard time in school is partly because of the lingering social stigmatization of slavery. Whether one agrees with it or not, it's certainly a fairly mainstream idea. In which case, applying the concept of emancipation is perfectly relevant.

I mean fuck's sake, Powell wasn't chose as a namesake for the center discussed in the article just because he's the Secretary of State. He was chosen because he's the Black male Secretary of State. You're asking Johnny if the word would come up if Powell was white? Well, no. The article wouldn't have been written if Powell was white.

I think the thing you're actually attacking here, if I may be so bold, isn't the word-- it's the suggestion that Powell has been exploited and/or victimized by the Bush administration.

Children get emancipated from their parents all the time, even white kids. I don't see the term as racially loaded, I see it as a sly jab at Bush.

I'll answer your question, Joshua. Yes, race was a factor in Powell's appointment to the post. It wasn't the most important or even very important to his ability to do the job but it was very important for Bush to show that he could and would appoint whoever he thought was best for a particular cabinet position.

I'm sorry to see Powell go to because there's one less member of his cabinet that was at least honest enough to be ashamed of what the administration was doing. Not enough to quit midstream but I can only imagine what he was promised to keep the united front going. Same thing for McCain.

Don't be surprised if the 2008 ticket is McCain/Powell.

I think the thing you're actually attacking here. . .

That didn't even enter my mind, but thanks for the projection. That's always appreciated.

I'll write this again, and I'll write it slow, because apparently I wrote it so fast the last time, it whizzed by you, or maybe ricocheted off your melon.

Now that Colin Powell has been emancipated from the Bush administration

Hmmm. How about "Following Colin Powell's resignation as the Bush administration's secretary of state. . . "

Or, how about "With Colin Powell now leaving the Bush administration. . ."

And kind of take your pick along those lines. And, again, since Colin Powell leaving the Bush administration basically has no bearing whatsoever on the rest of the column content, why the hell even mention it? Unless, say, the author saw an opportunity to slide in a little bigotry mixed with a dash of political nay-saying?

And, for the record, I do, in retrospect, believe that Powell was victimized by the Bush Administration. I watched his testimony to the U.N. about WMDs, and I believed he made a solid case. I can't NOT say that I didn't. Hell, I wrote a parody about it:

http://ramblingrhodes.mu.nu/archives/019848.html

I still think, in this case, the use of the word "emancipated" is racially-demeaning, kinda like saying "The black man's been freed from the Masser!"

And you'd be hard-pressed to convince me otherwise.

Well, I wrote a whole big long thing but I didn't save it in Word before I posted it and your spam blocker ate it.

Not that it matters. I'd be hard pressed to convince you of anything anyway.

Awwwww, that doesn't mean you can't try. *pinching cheeks*

I truly am sorry for the inconvenience the filter bestows upon you, I am. And, I'm looking into why it's so stubborn.

What really bothers me is this other snippet from the article:

Bush is a master at appointing minorities...

I mean come on. Does Syl Jones have no shame? Apparently not, because he continues with the following:

Still, Powell should not have cottoned up to Bush and his cronies.

Now that is just uncalled for. And how on earth did this next line slip past the editors:

If Powell were three-fifths the man he thinks he is, he would turn his attention to the youth of America.

Kinda leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth.

You know, Jimmo, that "3/5ths" line was pretty damned funny, and I wouldn't put it past Syl to try sliding that in to one of his future columns.