CNN Touts Obama at the NAACP: Bush Didn't 'Have the Same Kind of Credibility' as the Black President

CNN Touts Obama at the NAACP: Bush Didn't 'Have the Same Kind of Credibility' as the Black President

By Tim Graham (Bio | Archive)
July 17, 2009 - 16:39 ET

The vision of the first black president speaking before the NAACP clearly mesmerized liberal reporters. But their ardor began to sound racially touchy when they suggested Obama has more "credibility" than pale presidents. On Thursday Night’s Anderson Cooper 360, Cooper oozed over the president: "He had a lot more to say in a way that no other president has ever been able to before." But the message itself hardly seemed any different than what President Bush would say, as Cooper summarized it: "tremendous advances have been made in race relations in America, but there's still a lot of work to do."

Cooper passed the baton to CNN reporter Suzanne Malveaux, who sounded the same touchy note: "When we saw President Bush go before this group in 2006, a lot of tension, he ignored this group for five years or so. But his message was similar. He talked about the need for accountability, responsibility. He did not have the same kind of credibility that President Obama does."

Turn that around. Can you imagine anyone at CNN suggesting last year that Hillary Clinton or John McCain had "more credibility" with white audiences than Obama because of their skin color?

Malveaux left out that perhaps Bush didn't appear at an NAACP convention for years because they viciously accused him of murdering James Byrd all over again in a very nasty campaign ad in the last weeks of the 2000 campaign.

Malveaux sounded like a White House aide in describing the address. She didn’t say he dropped g’s and employed black slang like "ballers" for basketball players and described the "flow" of rappers. Some might think he's putting on this speaking style like a suit of clothes. But Malveaux lauded his loose style and energy as a return to their leg thrills on the campaign trail:

You know, Anderson, we saw that different kind of Obama -- you had mentioned that before -- the cadence, the rhythm, the style, the -- the energy from this president that we saw in the campaign for two years, but, essentially, really kind of turned the corner in that tone when he became the president, that things were a lot more serious.

But he has a familiarity with this audience. A couple of things that he wanted to do. First and foremost is acknowledge that yes, discrimination still exists. That a lot of people have tough times. But that most African Americans have it tougher, have it worse.

Having said that, he wanted to put that into context and say, look, you have control over your future. It is time for accountability and responsibility. He does this because he feels that he has the familiarity, but he also has the credibility to deliver this kind of message more so than you had with President Bush before. for five years or so. But his message was similar. He talked about the need for accountability, responsibility. He did not have the same kind of credibility that President Obama does.

Malveaux has been clear before about her low opinion of George Bush’s credibility. From December 8, 2006: "Critics calling Mr. Bush ‘the cowboy’ for stubbornly leading the charge, and Mr. Blair ‘the poodle’ for obediently following. But three years since the U.S. invasion, the two are still adamant their Iraq mission is sound. President Bush didn’t just drink the Kool-Aid, he made it. But perhaps now it’s a little less sweet."

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

So. . .

July 17, 2009 - 16:46 ET by JustAl

I guess that means His "O"lliness does not have credibility when addressing audiances that are not for the most part black. The left has never learned that you can not have it both ways (at least in a non-sexual context).

It sure does!

July 17, 2009 - 17:07 ET by CobraMan

"First and foremost is acknowledge that yes, discrimination still exists."

It sure does, and Cooper displays it when he insinuates that a Black man has more credibility with a black audience than a White man.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Shouldn't he be entitled to

July 17, 2009 - 16:57 ET by SickofLibs

Shouldn't he be entitled to only 50% credibility, seeing as he's only half back?

Or is having a white hippie mother counted the same as a black these days?

advances in race relations... Rev. Wright/Obama

July 17, 2009 - 17:05 ET by Gary Hall

Cooper summarized it: "tremendous advances have been made in race relations in America, but there's still a lot of work to do."

How's that? Because Obama walked out on on his church and the Rev. Wright?

(;~/ gary

Obama could have stayed with his church and asked Wright to resign. Then he could have been a leader for the congregation by working with them to find a new pastor. But no -- he quit on his church - he walked out on his people. He cared only about the risks to his chances, if he stayed behind.

Gary, I know you are just

July 17, 2009 - 18:09 ET by motherbelt

Gary, I know you are just kidding, but Cooper isn't. The point he and all his liberal friends, in harmony with the NAACP and other "victim" groups, try to make is that the fact that America has elected a black President doesn't mean a damn thing, as far as ending prejudice and discrimination go.

Black "leaders" even insist that reparations would only be a "down payment."

Nothing will ever satisfy them.

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson

motherbelt ..

July 17, 2009 - 18:23 ET by Gary Hall

A bit of sarcasim perhaps, but no kidding intended. In fact, I'm calling Obama a quitter - he walked out on his church. He should have stayed in the church and addressed the serious problem they had. As it is, the congregation will continue to hear the racist message they've become used to. I'll bet you that in 4 years, the country will end up much more racially divided than it was when Obama became president. (;~> gary

Of course Obama had more credibility.

July 17, 2009 - 17:11 ET by supercon

He's half black.

Hey Janet Napolitano...I'm proud to be a Right-winger.

Media BHO

July 17, 2009 - 17:14 ET by LuciCat

I get sick of the constant fawning over this clown

Don't we all

July 17, 2009 - 19:49 ET by Rukus

Don't we all Cat, don't we all. Sigh. : (

Gary

Hey, Jimmah Che Obama! I want my country back!

NAACP

July 17, 2009 - 17:15 ET by kong

NAACP= National Association of Always Crying People

Once again

July 17, 2009 - 17:15 ET by KC Mulville

The people who trumpet Obama's election as a major milestone on the journey against racism ... use racism to understand and explain events.

If I said that Obama is more comfortable among fellow black people, that would only be natural. But if I said that Obama has more credibility delivering the exact same racial message as Bush did, because he's black, that's different. That's the same racism they (the media and liberals) claim to oppose!

To be clear, the NAACP's stated purpose is to advance the welfare of people of color. Nothing wrong with that. (I hope they succeed.) And if the reporters said that Obama had more credibility in promoting the welfare of people of color, you'd have to agree. Being president is about as advanced as you can get, and in that respect, he'd be speaking with credibility.

But Obama wasn't speaking narrowly about advancing black people. Instead, he was speaking about racial harmony. The whole idea of racial harmony implies that both white and black people have an equal stake in the issue. So why would Obama have more credibility than Bush?

And why do we go to a single-race conference to talk about racial harmony? Isn't that self-contradictory?

Not about racial harmony

July 17, 2009 - 18:59 ET by motherbelt

KC, I disagree with you on two points.

I admire your thoughtful analysis of these issues, but, to me it's not complicated at all:

NAACP conventions are not about racial harmony.

They are about racial grievances.

And the reason Obama has more credibility that Bush is because those black people will believe a black President, no matter what he says, but not a white one.

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson

Just a bunch of racist BS.

July 17, 2009 - 18:00 ET by snaggletoothie

Just a bunch of racist BS.

What about Bill?

July 17, 2009 - 18:16 ET by slickwillie2001

I feel so sorry for President Clinton; he had the title of 'the first black President' and now it appears that has been taken away from him. Can they do that?

Wow

July 17, 2009 - 18:39 ET by BondPlainBond

Hey! CNN! Got racism?

LOL!

July 17, 2009 - 19:58 ET by Rukus

I gotta admit, the first thing I thought reading your post was: "Got racism? Yeah, in spades!" Then I thought, that would be considered racist in today's uber-PC society. I understand that the term "in spades" means "without a doubt, absolutely. "

Geez, we can't even use everyday phrases without being bombarded with racist, sexist, homophobe, blah blah blah!

What has become of us? : (

Gary

Hey, Jimmah Che Obama! I want my country back!

There is a very strong rumor floating around the internet that

July 17, 2009 - 19:06 ET by Rush Fan

Anderson Cooper and Suzanne Malveaux were caught vigorously arguing over which one of them had the strongest feelings for President Barack Hussein Obama. Anderson Cooper supposedly was overheard saying: "He [Obama] likes me more!"

I happened to watch that CNN broadcast, and I swear that there appeared to be glimmers of lust in the eyes of Cooper and Malveaux when they talked about The One.

P.S. I probably shouldn't tell, but the person who started this rumor goes by the name Rush Fan.

------------------------------------------------------------

“They have plunged to such depths of incompetence and unprofessionalism and ignorance, it's actually hard for me to come up with accurate words to describe what has happened to them,…” ~ Rush Limbaugh on the media

Jesus Christ, you can't get

July 17, 2009 - 19:07 ET by ckc1227

Jesus Christ, you can't get away from this guy anywhere. I was just watching Jeopardy, and the final answer was "This is the only president since 1900 to have more vowels in his last name than consonants". The question: Who is Obama.

Really, Jeopardy? I mean, seriously, do these folks just sit around in a room dreaming up reasons to throw Obama into the mix or what?

Fake Accent

July 17, 2009 - 19:25 ET by slickwillie2001

Laura Ingraham is doing BOR tonight. She was ridiculing the Bamster's adoption of some kind of black preacher accent speaking style only for this speech. She showed clips of the Bamster and he was in full Jeremiah Wright mode. It reminds many of the fake accent Hillary adopted when she was on the campaign trail last year when she said "ahh don't feel no ways tired" among other things.

The Bamster would be laughed at by the old media if he were a Republican.

Ingraham's Angle

July 17, 2009 - 20:37 ET by Tim Graham

Exactly. I heard that, too. What the media will never entertain is the notion that Obama is pandering or insincere.

I happened across his

July 17, 2009 - 21:41 ET by Pewah

I happened across his address to the NAACP while channel surfing and thought the exact same thing. It was both embarrassing and disheartening to hear him reaching so far in his vocal inflexions and cadence to sound like a black minister, or even MLK. He's only half black and normally that side of him doesn't come across as being very "black". In fact, when he talks he often reminds me of a character from the original Beverly Hills Cop movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flIGAP-x2YY

Say, I wonder if he'd try and do an Amos or Andy if he were addressing a group of black actors or let out with some "ho's" and "b*****s" if invited to speak at a gathering of rap artists? How wonderful that we have an empathetic and patronizing leader in the W.H.

"It's a Black thing-you

July 17, 2009 - 19:47 ET by RR GOP

"It's a Black thing-you wouldn't understand...except us White Liberals of course."

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).

Yeah, and he didn't have

July 18, 2009 - 00:00 ET by fitzfong

Yeah, and he didn't have the same kind of "credibility" that the community organizer has with CAIR, La Raza, NOW, ELF, the Sierra Club, NARAL, ACORN and any of the other criminal enterprises disguised as "Civil Rights" organizations, either. I'm more than comfortable with that.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Media Moment

July 18, 2009 - 09:30 ET by AMR1960

Let's not get too carried away by this "showboat" moment. This is just chest-thumping and posturing by "DearLeader"...A crafted media moment, for Mr. "O's" servile "Obamedia" to propagandize to the rest of us all.

When the rubber hits the road, the Community Activist "Inner Barry" always reasserts itself and proceeds to blame "Whitey...

___________________________

Long Live...THE REPUBLIC !

July 18, 2009 - 11:11 ET by jessieH

I think I'll start an all white org. that panders to just white people. We can bad mouth the "other" races behind closed doors. WHAT? You say I can't because it is racist? But, that's not fair. How come the NAACP can? How come the black panthers can? See how one sided this sounds? Yet the MSM (belch) thinks this is way it should be.

Bill Cosby said basically

July 18, 2009 - 13:07 ET by eaglewingz08

Bill Cosby said basically the same things a dozen years ago and was pilloried by the liberal african american community and the liberal media with vicious names and slurs used against him. Obama says the same thing and the media is mesmerized. Don't get me wrong, most of what Obama told the NAACP on personal responsibility is conservative mainstream values, but he and his liberal hordes don't apply them in everyday life and in fact do everything they can to undermine these time tested principles.

The NAACP formed in 1905.

July 18, 2009 - 13:19 ET by JasonC

The NAACP formed in 1905. In case you aren't aware, at that point in history, black people weren't exactly treated well in this country. The grievances of the black community were legitimate and an organized body with burgeoning mainstream clout was an ideal way to approach the problem.

What would you suggest? That once Thurgood Marshall was confirmed in the Supreme Court they should have just said "Oh look, racism is over" and disbanded?

All-white organizations are looked down upon because there is no history of white people being summarily subjugated by other races; there is nothing legitimate to resist or fight back against.

Until now Jason

July 18, 2009 - 14:24 ET by Rukus

White heterosexual males, especially Christians are pilloried daily. Yes blacks were treated badly early on but not now. Are whites not allowed to have a culture (based from Europe or wherever)? White = racist, Male = sexist, Straight = homophobe, Christian = anti-any other religion. I have no bias against anyone. As is stands now, the majority = the minority nowadays. JMHO.

Gary

Hey, Jimmah Che Obama! I want my country back!

Their might be jabs and

July 18, 2009 - 14:33 ET by JasonC

Their might be jabs and satires directed against white heterosexual christian males in popular culture. But this prejudice, even if I carefully concede that it exists in some quarters, is far from being institutionalized.

Who told you you can't have pride in your European background? What exactly makes you feel as though you'll be pilloried if you do? As long as it doesn't involve the notion that it makes you inherently superior and favored by god, I really can't imagine anyone caring.

Pride?

July 18, 2009 - 14:55 ET by Rukus

What would happen if someone started a "White Miss America"?

Or a million straight man march?

Or a Christian only body? (Black Caucas) ?

My European background is Parish (English) and Wallace (Scottish) BTW.

There is black, latino, asian, muslim etc. groups all over. I'm proud of my heritage but cannot say so without being tagged as a racist because I'm white. I disagree with homosexuality so I am tagged as a homophobe or a Bible thumper. I know you see this in today's society Jason. I respect everyone until they give me a reason not to. That doesn't happen too often, thankfully. Anyway, I gotta go take the new pooch for a walk.

Gary

Hey, Jimmah Che Obama! I want my country back!