Sorry, no punchline to that title.
Jan. 29th, 1999, Milwaukee, Wis. - It was so cold outside that morning that I could see my breath. How do I remember, you ask? 'Cause it was Wisconsin in January. You can always see your breath.
As soon as I arrived at work, the police scanners on my desk started going crazy. At the time I was the "cops" reporter, a coverage beat that encompasses fire and medical emergencies too.
All the scanner activity was about an explosion that had occured earlier that morning at an industrial plant on the city's south side. A crane operator had lowered a large piece of metal into a 10-foot high vat full of a corrosion treatment chemical. The chemical was water reactive though, and aparently the metal had gathered condensation as it sat overnight. So when the crane operator lowered the damp metal into the vat, the 1,200 degree chemical exploded, burning the crane operator over most of his body.
The city editor on duty, having heard the same explosion news I'd heard on the scanners, stood and began to look around the room to see who was available to send to the accident scene. I left to work on another story. When I got back to the newsroom an hour later, another writer was working on the explosion, but he was having a hard time with some of the fine details. I offered to take a crack at it, but the editor said the other writer had it under control.
The other writer did not have it under control. So again, I offered to help. The editor grew exasperated and gave me a mini-lecture on how every reporter worth a damn should be able to give himself a crash course on a topic and go and cover it intelligently. Then he asked something to the effect of "What do you bring to this story that he doesn't?"
So I told him. Less than two years earlier, I had closed out a six year career as a machinist on the U.S. Naval Air Station in Norfolk, Va. While working at the (now defunct) Naval Aviation Depot, one of my responsibilities in my machine shop was to maintain and monitor the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) book that contained a list of all the chemicals - hazardous and theoretically harmless - that we used. The MSDS book also contained details of the types of injuries each chemical could cause, the types of accidents that could happen when the chemicals came in contact with certain materials, how they should all be stored and handled, and what should be done in the event of an accident.
So yes, any good reporter should be able to cover everything. But in the case of a story about a chemical explosion, a reporter with personal experience using dangerous chemicals, monitoring their use, and even working with the Occupational Safety and Health Adminstration to make sure our monitoring books (MSDS) were up to date, is much better suited to report on things than a reporter whose work-related education is limited to the usual college classes.
What does this have to do with Sotomayor? Much has been made over this quote from a speech she gave in 2001: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”
Without any context, that comment was out of order and Sotomayor was wrong for making such a broad generalization.
BUT, her sentiment was correct. And before anyone blusters and shakes a fist at their computer screen think for a moment. This post is not about Sotomayor's personal politics, or partisanship. It is about reaction to that quote. This does not have to be about race. You can make it about race if you want. But when I say the sentiment is correct, I mean about broad experiences vs. narrow experiences.
In the analogy of the chemical explosion story, I made that point. My colleague and I were both able reporters. But I was better suited for that particular assignment because my professional experiences were broader and more relevant than his.
If you and I are both computer programmers, and you've programmed for Company A, and I've programmed for companies A, B, and C, then my experiences are broader than yours. And my insights to the world of professional programming may be deeper than yours.
I'll be in your corner until the second you become a "black columnist" instead of a "colunist."
If you decide to be the champion of black causes or Obama or the race card, I'm out. If you decide to be the champion of all people, including whites, Hispanics and conservatives, I'm for you.
Truth knows no race or political leaning. Truth is deserving of a champion. Be that.
Hmmm, so let me get this straight, Al Charteer, in order to exhort me to not be a racist, and to not be a "black colunist (sic)," and to not play "the race card," you write me a note that assumes from its start that I fit any or all of your stereotypes.
Well, I hate to disappoint you, my friend, but you might want to get out of my corner now, 'cause I'm going to be a "black columnist."
I have no choice. Like my grandfather told me when I was a kid, there are only two things that I will always be 100% certain of at all times: that I am black, and that one day I'll die. Those are the two elements of my life that will never change, unless that machine Walt Disney supposedly slept in really does exist. And no amount of scrubbing is going to alter the color of my skin. Turning white didn't do Michael Jackson any good.
Get used to it.
Yes, I'm being coy. I know by "black colu(m)nist," you mean a stereotypical liberal who fits your description of a soldier in a vast leftwing media conspiracy, a colu(m)nist who uses his pulpit to preach that the world revolves around African Americans and African American "issues." I know that's what you meant, because your entire comment in context proved it. But what I'm trying to demonstrate to you and your ilk is that your arguments - whether baseless or legit - are indictments of culture, not color. Sadly, you don't get that because you assume that people who look a certain way are all but guaranteed to think, act, and opine a certain way.
You can't have read my prior opinions on anything. If you had, you'd know that my opinions run the gamut from right to left, and most often rest firmly in the middle. And you would know that trying to tell me that truth knows no race or political leaning is like trying to tell a golfer that his goal is to hit the little white ball into the cup: unnecessary. It's like me feeling the need to tell you that "white ball" isn't a display of my racist feelings toward white balls. It's just a common sense analogy about golf.
So, I am a black columnist, and as I've always done with my opinions, I'll cover a wide range of social issues - sometimes issues of specific interest to black people, or Latino people, or white people, or Albino people, or men, or women, or children, or porn stars with one leg, or roosters who only crow on a lunar equinox, or politicians, or people who make assumptions about writers whose work they're not familiar.
Did I say get used to it, already?
PS. Follow me at http://twitter.com/jamesburnett.