Obama Nomination Gives Goosebumps

[iamjoy]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/04/jakes/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Bishop T.D. Jakes is founder and senior pastor of The Potter's House of Dallas, Texas, a multiracial, nondenominational church with more than 50 outreach ministries.

I congratulate Sen. Obama on this historic accomplishment. I thank him for accepting the torch that was lit by our forefathers and proudly carrying it through the darkness of our struggles, trials and tribulations, bringing light and hope to a new generation, and for facing all those who said "No" and "You can't win," or "It will never happen," and firmly, proudly, defiantly saying, "Yes I can!"

I congratulate not just Sen. Obama on his victory, but the country on this landmark event that has shattered a past all too often filled with reasons to separate us as opposed to a voice of reason to unite us.

However, what I really hope people take away from that night is that this is not just a victory for African Americans, it is a victory for democracy that proves that our country provides possibilities for all people.


For me it was almost déjà vu as I sat with my son. I remembered a little over 40 years ago watching the famous King speech with my dad. Similarly, I watched with my youngest son last night as a historical moment unfolded. He and I saw the dreams of slaves come true as the sons of slaves and the slave owners clapped their hands in one progressive sweep. As I drifted into sleep, all I could see was the twinkle in my son's eyes. His eyes were illuminated with possibilities, and his heart was filled with the potential of what is attainable for qualified, competent people of all types who prepare themselves intellectually and are well vested with a divine sensitivity to the "fierce urgency of now!"

Is that not awesome?
He also acknowledges Hillary Clinton showing femininity is not a liability. I don't totally agree - Clinton showed being female is not necessarily a liability. But she was not really feminine in the traditional sense of the word. Of course, maybe that's the point.

[meow2u3]

1. MLK can now rest in peace

It came true with Obama's nomination.

[Captain Hilts]

2. How do you define "traditionally feminine"?

Really, what is that? Being submissive? Deferring to men?

Is there such a thing as being traditionally 'black'?

What's traditionally 'masculine'?

[iamjoy]

3. Not Exactly

Traditionally, women were expected to be subservient to men. Some still do think that (they usually vote Republican). But it goes beyond that.

Women tend to have a different communication style and approach to problem solving than men. The way women use language (verbal and body) is not the same as men. Women tend to use more qualifiers, men speak with certainty.

Hillary wears pantsuits and has a very direct communication style. It's why so many people don't like her - they can't stand seeing these traits in a woman. It's so unfair. What's more unfair is that anytime she tried to show her softer side, she got criticized for that too.

What is considered "feminine" is still in a state of flux. Why is a direct communication style and confidence seen as masculine? I don't necessarily agree that this is right, that's just my observation of how things are. We still have a ways to go on gender equality.

The comparison of how we view race and how we view gender is false. The biological differences between "blacks" and "whites" is mostly, if not completely skin deep. The distinctions between the genders are far more significant.