It was the 1988 Presidential Debate between Michael Dukakis and George H.W. Bush when Peter Jennings asked Gov. Dukakis a question about childhood poverty in America. Jennings premised raising this issue at a presidential debate on a statistic he quoted. He said that 33% of children in this country live in poverty. Were that true it surely would merit attention at a 90 minute debate of this magnitude. Childhood poverty I am sure deserves discussion any time. What struck me then watching that was the statistic was so patently false. There was simply no possible way that one third of all children in this country lived in poverty. It was absurd on its face to suggest that. I waited for the governor to challenge in some fashion the purported fact. But he did not. He accepted it and droned on some liberal answer. Dukakis was blasted by the media - and rightfully so - following the debate for not challenging the question since, naturally, the statistic was false. Jennings too was criticized for it.
Last night I was listening to the president's press conference in my car when a reporter for BET named Andre Showell asked him about unemployment, specifically minority unemployment. Here's the question:
"Thank you, Mr. President. As the entire nation tries to climb out of this deep recession, in communities of color the circumstances are far worse. The black unemployment rate, as you know, is in the double digits, and in New York City, for example, the black unemployment rate for men is near 50 percent."
I was stunned. I have no idea what the unemployment rate for black men is in New York City. I suppose I could do some research today and find out. What I know, as I know my own name, is that it is nowhere near 50%. It is nowhere near 25%. How do I know this? Because I am a fairly intelligent person who can reason. Can you imagine what NYC would be like if the unemployment rate for black males was 50%??? There would be demonstrations on a daily basis. There would probably be riots. I am not singling NYC out; the same would be true in any major city in this country if that premise were true.
I waited for the president's response. I was sure he would not fall into the Dukakis trap. I hoped he would give some compassionate answer but say he wasn't quite sure that figure was correct although whatever the figure is, it's much higher than it should be and is causing a lot of pain. Something along those lines. But I really wanted someone as logical as this man to say "whoa, 50%? That can't be right." I was severely disappointed.
I won't reprint his answer because it's what you would expect, a lot of liberal spending proposals along with the compassion. But what he did not say is, "here's my answer, but I'm not sure I agree with your figures." It is so disappointing that a President of the United States this smart isn't comfortable enough to answer the substance of a question without buying into the premise. A white politician might not do it for fear of looking out of touch with the plight of minorities. But what exactly is Obama's excuse?
My father always used to say: if something doesn't sound right it probably isn't. The danger of not challenging that statistic in this incredibly lazy society runs the risk of it being accepted as fact and quoted. I wonder how many people today, especially minority politicians, are quoting that statistic? It was said in a presidential press conference, I'd believe it if I were dumber or had mischievous intent. I also have to assume that this Andre Showell must not be a total idiot to have gotten himself a press pass to the White House. He had to have known, just on its face, that number could not have been true. Someone should be taking him to task today as well.
The danger of the big lie left unchallenged is its propensity to spread. This recession - or whatever we're calling it - is historic and causing terrible pain throughout the country. I believe that wholeheartedly. But problems, decisions and the national discussion that surround them must always be had honestly. Or as honest as is possible in Washington. By cooking the books in a venue as rarefied as a presidential prime time news conference Mr. Showell didn't help any cause yesterday, he only set it back. Worse, he now has engendered comparisons between Obama and Dukakis. The Obama people can't possibly find that a good thing.
I mean you spent all that space to discuss allegedly false statistic and how an intelligent person can reason and find it incredible, but where is your research and a quote of factual numbers? as long as wellfare checks arrive on time and NYPD numbers are no less than 30,000 there 'll be no riots no matter whaaat number you come up with, what was the number in New Orleans before Katrina, during and after? like mccain said it on many diffrent occasions, "please"
Posted by: get real | May 09, 2009 at 09:47 PM