The Definition of a Gaffe

It's been said that a political gaffe is when a politician accidentally tells the truth.  Never have we seen a clearer illustration of a classic gaffe than in Jesse Jackson's recent remarks on FOX News.  He intended his remarks to be private, but his words were picked up by an open microphone and distributed for all the world to hear.

We do not wish to repeat his exact statement; you can find it in this New York Post article if you're interested.  To paraphrase, Jackson said that Barack Obama's recent criticism of black males and his calls for black men to take some responsibility for the children they father were undercutting Jackson's leadership of the black community.  Jackson then made a vulgar comment regarding an unpleasant surgery he wished to perform on Mr. Obama.

No sooner did the transcript come to public attention than Jackson raced in front of the nearest cameras to apologize.  That, we'll quote, courtesy of CBS.

"Well, they were hurtful and wrong, that's the whole point," Jackson said of his words. "And when you make mistakes you should not equivocate. You should be quick to go into offensive and not try to be evasive. And if it was said to him personally or in some public forum it would be even more hurtful. In this case, my error was responding to a question before a live mic. And so when he does hear them they will not be helpful; they will be hurtful. We have a relationship that can survive this."  [emphasis added]

Now there's an apology for the ages!  His error was the live microphone and it would have been worse to have said this personally to Obama or in a public speech; but there's nothing wrong with saying it privately as long as nobody hears it but the intended listener.  The listener, by the way, was (fellow black) Dr. Reed V. Tuckson, executive vice president and chief of medical affairs for United Health Group.  Dr. Tuckson is recorded as responding "Mmmm-hmmm" to Jackson's vulgarities, but as he is not really a public figure we'll refrain from further criticism of him.

The funny thing is, Barack Obama himself would probably agree with the sentiment reflected in Jackson's "apology".  Remember his celebrated observation about rural Pennsylvanians, that:

...they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Of course, this statement was delivered to a private black-tie fundraiser of atheistic, humanistic, extreme-left San Francisco plutocrats; these remarks were never intended to reach the wider world.  As with Jackson, Obama's error was not his disdain for middle America - he went on to defend the truth of what he had said - but in his poor judgment in saying it where itching ears could hear.

Didn't Mr. Clinton say something to the effect that it wasn't wrong unless you got caught?  Maybe Obama and the Clintons have more in common than they let on.

Was It True?

Let's move on from the various hypocrisies illustrated here, diverting though they be, and consider Jackson's point on its merits.  No, not his medical advice; his observation that Barack Obama's candidacy and criticism of black misbehavior is destroying Jackson's career.

In this, one might almost think he has been reading Scragged, as we've repeatedly made exactly this point.  If a black person can be a plausible candidate for the Presidency - and, odds are, will be President - then the incessant accusations of pervasive institutional racism which are Jackson's stock in trade are laid bare as preposterous for all the world to see.

When Jackson was young, such concerns were not only reasonable, but were in fact true in some cases.  The Jim Crow era, however, ended a long, long time ago.  The country has moved on, but not brother Jesse.

He's carved out a profitable niche for himself, having become the master of the blackmailing shakedown.  Many large companies have paid him millions for "consulting" services to avoid an organized protest about the company's imagined "racist practices."  Alas, political correctness has pretty much prevented the appropriate government agencies from investigating his actions, though the IRS recently has been looking into the fiscal affairs of fellow race-baiter Al Sharpton.

Jackson sees his grip on the black community loosening.  It has now become a death-grip - he'll maintain his power by any means necessary, even by saying and doing things totally contrary to what he once stood for.

Can we imagine Jackson's old boss, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., supporting Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, as did Jackson?  Can we imagine Dr. King making such scurrilous statements about a black man who's running for President of the United States?

The most amazing aspect to this whole situation is that Obama's words doom Jackson's scam even though Jackson knows perfectly well that Obama doesn't mean a word of them.  It's true that big government programs like welfare hurt black families instead of helping them as even the Boston Globe admits.  Mr. Obama, no fool, must be well aware of this inconvenient fact, but changing affirmative action and/or welfare is not on his radar at all.

Sure, Obama throws out a brief criticism of absentee black fathers, mildly reminiscent of Bill Cosby, as a sop to whites who are angry about affirmative action and tired of paying for welfare, but then he goes right on to prescribe the solution as more of the same old big-government programs that have failed so consistently and so continually for the last half-century.  More big government programs just happens to be exactly what Jackson has wanted all this time.

Despite his mantra of "Change!", Obama in fact plans on doing just what Jackson wants him to do by increasing government spending.  Is Jackson's cause so weak as to be mortally wounded even by hypocritical and insincere criticism?  Apparently so!

Reverend or Racist?  Leader or Looter?

Jackson's problem is that he has gone so far out on the limb that he cannot get back, and the sound of its cracking is becoming deafening.  You'll notice that we haven't given him his preferred honorific of "Reverend."

It's oft overlooked, but "Reverend" does not just mean that someone is an ordained minister.  The dictionary shows that it also means "worthy to be revered; entitled to reverence" which in turn means "to regard with respect tinged with awe; venerate."  A shakedown artist, race-baiter, and (lest we forget) father of an illegitimate child from an extramarital relationship who masquerades as a man of God is hardly worthy of that noble title.  While his legitimate son still uses it, he didn't hesitate to throw his own father under the bus as Newsday reports:

In a statement released by his office, Jackson Jr. said he was "deeply outraged and disappointed in Rev. Jackson's reckless statements about Sen. Barack Obama.  His divisive and demeaning comments about the presumptive Democratic nominee -- and I believe the next president of the United States -- contradict his inspiring and courageous career," the congressman said.  "Rev. Jackson is my dad and I'll always love him," he said. "He should know how hard that I've worked for the last year and a half as a national co-chair of Barack Obama's presidential campaign. So I thoroughly reject and repudiate his ugly rhetoric. He should keep hope alive and any personal attacks and insults to himself." [emphasis added]

Actually, we can't help but wonder, why, exactly, is Jackson worthy of anyone's attention at all?  Here we are, wasting our time writing and your time reading about this profane and boorish charlatan.  If Barack Obama's victory consigns Jesse Jackson to the dustbin of history - well, that won't have been worth it, exactly, but it certainly would be satisfying.