What can Oprah tell us about the election?

It wasn’t Sen. Ed Kennedy. Nor was it California’s first lady, Maria Shriver. Nope, it wasn’t former Fed Chairman Paul Volker either. And while he may be America’s most eligible bachelor, it wasn’t George Clooney.

So who, then, in the long list of Sen. Barack Obama’s endorsers will prove to be the most important- and most telling- of all?

The answer, in just one word: Oprah.

Don’t get me wrong, every endorser brings voters, and is, therefore important.
In fact, currently, all the candidates seem to be waiting anxiously in the wind, vying for Gov. Bill Richardson’s endorsement, which the Obama camp preemptively, and wrongfully claimed access to this past weekend.

But there is one problem with calling Richardson the Big Kahuna endorser in this election: He is neither a woman, nor black, and therefore can’t speak the loudest for
either group.

Oprah is both, and not only that, but a virtual “champion” of both persuasions. She had to make a choice that necessarily left part of her identity unrepresented. I can’t imagine a louder voice.



As the head of a media empire dominated entirely by female consumers, Oprah went with Obama. So what does tell us about the candidates and how race and gender will play into the election?

Will other black women, or women in general be inclined to abandon their gender roots to vote for Obama?

Studying the list of endorsers for a candidate is a really helpful way to see what direction our nation is heading in, while not entirely indicative of America’s stance on our presidential candidates. So I have provided a list of both candidates’ endorsements, thus far, at the end of this column.

As actress Tina Fey said on Saturday Night Live a few weeks ago,“…Women have come so far as feminists that they don't feel obligated to vote for a candidate just because she's a woman. Women today feel perfectly free to make whatever choice Oprah tells them to.”

When this election process began, I was initially concerned about the effect racial and gender pride would have on the democratic process. Will the old adage “blood is thicker than water” prove true in America’s political context, where blood signifies race and gender and water signifies political views?

Will, for instance black republican voters abandon their political loyalty at the polls to further their racial cause and progression of African Americans in America? We obviously don’t know just yet.

But it seems Oprah’s decision is somewhat telling, because she has never before endorsed a candidate. The question here is not necessarily who she endorsed, but why. Why did she choose this election to sway her masses toward a politician, and not before? Why didn’t she just abstain as she has every other year?

Her decision to stand up for the African American candidate and never a candidate before him may indicate how other blacks will vote if it comes down to issues versus race. Oprah said herself, “I have not one negative thing to say about Hillary Clinton.”

Either of these candidates would further her cause for civil rights justice in America.

Perhaps in choosing, and endorsing a candidate for the first time, she is sending a message to the 47 percent of Blacks who did not vote in the last election, that because she is stepping up for the first time, they should too.

If she had been an avid political endorser in every other election, it would be different. It would be more conceivable that he choice was based on politics. But she chose this election, which has been so centered on race and gender, each of which she represents, it seems questionable that her motives are truly issue-based.



It will be very interesting to see how the additional diversity plays into vote counts in November. Whether racial and gender blood is thicker than political water, we soon shall see.

Certainly in the case of Oprah Winfrey, it seems to be.

Spitzer sputters, Limbaugh stutters and...a tub of butter?

So Gov. Spitzer couldn’t keep his hands out of the honey pot could he?

Why is it that the most overzealous politicos always seem to have a closeted habit for the very thing they so publicly scorn? Richard Nixon hated the hell out of the “authoritarian” regime in red China, but was so green on the inside he jimmied his way into DNC headquarters. And he was in the lead by double digits at the time! I don’t know if that makes him more insecure or a hypocrite. Maybe he’s just an insecure hippo.

And do you remember Rush Limbaugh? Whenever that bumpkin-bigot wasn’t railing against minorities or gays or Harry Potter, it seemed like he was focusing his self-important wrath on people who take drugs. Here’s a gem:

"There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. Drug use destroys societies. And the laws [against drug use] are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.” (The Rush Limbaugh Show, Oct. 5, 1995)

Of course, it turns out ol’ Limbo was addicted to Oxycontin. Some reports had his habit at upwards of 30 pills a day. 30 pills? Was he in perpetual labor? That’s enough hillbilly heroin to make Liza Minelli scoff. Cool it, honey baby. Save some for the cabaret!

Then it’s no surprise that Spitzer—for years a staunch enemy of prostitution—had been busy spending over $40,000 of tax payer’s money getting busy with high-end (no pun intended) professionals. You see that stuff smeared all over the former governor’s face? That’s called egg. (No comment on what might be on Kristen’s face.)

The high-rising Spitzer (I got to stop with all the innuendo) had been touted as one of the top Democrats in the country before Client 9 decided to rent out room 871, choking his career limp (now I’m just forcing it).

So that means his resignation Wednesday probably affected the 2016 presidential election more than the upcoming one. But tremors from hooker-Gate might be felt this year. If prospective balloteers needed a reason to be turned off by politics, this could definitely keep some skittish voters away from the polls.

The youth vote should be unaffected by all this. Most of the buzz around campus has been about how much more attractive (if not more trashy by association) 3-Diamond Kristen is compared to Monica Lewinsky. Others have debated what they would feel entitled to for $1,500 an hour (My favorite scenario involved Sock-em Boppers, the back of a Volkswagen and Abraham Lincoln.)

Nobody under the age of 30 has felt disillusioned by the political process. We’re pretty much used to this stuff by now.

But with Bulldog Clinton quickly catching up with O-bama-slama, who knows how much this will affect the delicate balance of the democratic race.

Speaking of delicate balance, did you hear the one with Gov. Spitzer, a prostitute, a tub of butter, a showerhead, and a tea cozy? Neither have I.

She said WHAT?

With wins in Wyoming this weekend and Mississippi last night, Obama made up all the delegates Hillary gained on him in Ohio and Rhode Island on March 4th. He is also set to add more delegates when the Texas caucus results are finalized.

According to Bloomburg News: “With the win in Mississippi, Obama has now won 29 contests compared with 15 for Clinton. In overall votes Obama has about 13.3 million to 12.6 million for Clinton, based on unofficial returns.”

AP exit polls suggest Obama won 90 percent of the black vote in Mississippi.

Meantime Geraldine Ferraro, former vice-presidential candidate and “unpaid Clinton fundraiser,” as I guess we’re referring to her now, is defending the statement she made to a newspaper in California Tuesday that “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign manager, went after her hard, calling her remarks racist divisionary politics. Obama told the Today Show that it was another example of “slice and dice politics … which are about race and about gender and about this and that, and that’s what Americans are tired of because they recognize that when we divide ourselves in that way we can’t solve problems.”

Ferraro is standing by the comment but Hillary has begged off. Referencing the “She’s a monster” comments made by Obama adviser Samantha Power earlier in the week, Clinton said: “On both sides, some of our supporters have crossed the line and gotten personal. We have to keep this contest about the issues.”

Ferraro’s comments aren’t racist. They’re just stupid. They are meant to belittle Obama’s accomplishments. The idea that Obama is enjoying special privileges as a black man in this race is to miss the point entirely. The attention he has received because of his race is merely an acknowledgment of the daunting odds against a black man becoming president. For him even somehow to have surmounted the million obstacles, large and small, and make his way as a black man into the arena is one thing. To shine there as he has done is another, gaining support across demographics and leading the race for the nomination. Ferraro is no racist. She’s just another damn fool Democratic leader caught up in the destructive silliness that has taken over this primary race.