Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Russell Simmons to Presidential candidates: I have a question - 1.29.2008.1

So here is something you don’t hear about every day. In fact it’s something you probably have not heard about at all.

Many celebrities, entertainers and notable figures in America are involved with the Presidential candidates. Most are endorsing this candidate or that one. Famously so far in this nomination cycle there has been Ted Kennedy, Jon Voight, Viggo Mortensen, Chuck Norris, Barbara Streisand, and of course Oprah Winfrey. That is just to name a few of those involved at the moment.

The various Presidential candidates love the attention that famous figures bring to their campaigns. Most of the time. There are exceptions, one of those being when they are getting questioned by the famous. Then it’s not something they want to get into so publicly. Just as often, it’s something they won’t respond to either.

Case in point is the fact that Russell Simmons, the equally famous brother of Rev. Run, currently known for his Run’s House cable television show and previously for Run-DMC the rap group. Mr. Simmons is a respected businessman, a mogul that launched his career with rap hip hop and has expanded from there. None question his acumen, nor his dedication to improve the lives of African Americans. He has long been a symbol of success, without the need to degrade women and exploit stereotypes as say Bob Johnson – creator of Black Entertainment Television – did.

Recently Mr. Simmons joined with Dr. Benjamin Chavis, and health and spirituality author Deepak Chopra in sending an open letter to the Presidential candidates.

“The questions included asking the candidates to discuss their thoughts on being inclusive of people who might not be part of the political mainstream, the importance of diversity, issues related to the environment, poverty, the war in Iraq, and how to move towards, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. put it, a “beloved community” where all humans are treated with respect , justice and love.”


Considering the enormity of what the next President of the United States will be deciding, choosing paths that will determine the direction and presence of the nation for at least the next decade or longer, I commend their action.

I just hope they get a response.

Given the fame and success of these individuals, and the ability to influence and connect with the vast numbers of hip hop and rap fans of voting age, I would expect they will get a response. Except that this response has been pledged to be released, uneditied, to the public. Based on my own experience, that may not get a response.

Since 2006 I have been awaiting responses from several of the Presidential candidates. I have sent out letters and contacted the various campaign staffs, all to no avail. To date, not one candidate has responded to the letters I have sent out. I suspect that it is the fact that I will be releasing the answers, verbatim, for the public to view. While I reach Americans and international readers in over 60 nations besides virtually every state of the nation (including Alaska) and number my readers in the tens of thousands each month, the fear is that everyone will see their written responses, I suspect.

A written response is undeniable. It’s not like a speech or debate, where they are limited in the scope of their answer or can be misunderstood in the context of their answer. It does not provide the candidates wiggle room to say one thing and then flip that answer later. Plus in reaching the world, they will not be able to tailor the answer to a specific groups or local concern. Listen to how every candidate speaks about farming issues in Iowa; cars, unions, and industry in Michigan; religion and race relations in South Carolina; and you see that they often change the focus of how they sell themselves. And if you listen closely you will find that they at times contradict what they have said at different times in front of different groups. But a written answer does not allow for a forgetful mind or a short, overly simplified, ambiguous (non-)answer.

Thus I expect that while the fame and recognition of Russell Simmons far exceeds my own, he will receive the same response I have. None at all.

And that is an insult and shame.

The candidates hope to be the President of America. To be the leader of the nation. I understand that every question sent to them cannot be responded to. I understand that their staffers qualify who gets to be acknowledged based on their own biases. I can accept that my tens of thousands of readers may not be enough for the candidates’ radars (though it is more than enough to change the elections of 2004 and 2000 combined), or that the emphasis I have to Black and Hispanic/Latino issues is “too controversial”. But that is not true of entertainers.

Presidential candidates use entertainers and celebrities to buy votes. Their fame is the currency they use to convince voters of the worth of the candidate. But it is those same notable figures that have the ability to get answers individuals like myself are denied. And they should be able to have that reply and put it in the public view.

Barack may want my sister to vote for him, and will use Oprah to gain her attention and trust for that vote. But shouldn’t Oprah share, in writing if possible, the answers to questions of importance that Obama gave her to gain her trust and endorsement? Wouldn’t it be equally as compelling to know that the concerns of Oprah, or George Clooney, or Rick Schroder or whatever celebrity/entertainer are the same as ours and the answer that made them sure this was the right choice?

I think so. But to do so is to be honest and direct. 2 things that politicians are not known for, no matter who they are. But I hope to be proven wrong.

We will see if Russell Simmons gets his answer. I hope he does get one, and that it is shared with us all. It’s what should be done. But I won’t get my hopes up, no matter the fame, recognition and deserved success of the person asking the questions.

No comments: