A few months ago, during the Obama-at-Notre Dame controversy, I had a conversation with a journalist at another magazine, and opined that the whole issue of life vs. death was -and has been since the time of Moses- a contest between light and dark, and would continue to be so. The journalist said, \u201cyou just said \u2018black and white,'\u201d and teased me for being a racist.<\/p>\n
But I\u2019d said \u201clight and dark,\u201d and he admitted, when he stopped laughing, that he had heard \u201clight and dark,\u201d but had immediately extrapolated it to \u201cblack and white\u201d and then thought of Obama, hence the tease.<\/p>\n
This fellow is no one\u2019s idea of a racist (including mine) and he was a vocal supporter of President Obama. But it was his mind, not mine, that went there.<\/p>\n
Blogger and Law Professor Ann Althouse recently invited her readers to speculate on whether<\/a> the white people shouting \u201cYou lie, boy\u201d in Maureen Dowd\u2019s mind meant that Dowd is, in fact, a racist projecting her own racism on Rep. Joe Wilson<\/a> and presumably, the tea partiers who marched on Washington DC and, basically, anyone who disagrees with Obama on policy.<\/p>\n Because Barack Obama -being a Democrat president- cannot be anything but brilliant and correct. Therefore dissent -which last year was the highest form of patriotism- is now only \u201cracist.\u201d And -as conservative blogger Ace O\u2019 Spades notes here<\/a>\u2013 \u201cConservatives cannot oppose anything on legitimate grounds. We only can oppose out of fear, anger, hatred and ignorance\/confusion.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n So you see, there can be nothing credible in people protesting a president spending more in his first six months than every president before him, combined, ever spent.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people protesting the government sticking by a failed \u201cstimulus\u201d plan that is creating zero jobs in the private sector, as the unemployment number crests 10%.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people protesting a government that will send taxpayer money to Brazil<\/a> -for oil exploration and drilling- but will not allow drilling, or the building of new oil refineries, or the tapping of natural gas resources, or the promotion of oil shale refining<\/a>, in its own country.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in pointing out that all of those things would create the \u201cjobs, jobs, jobs, jobs\u201d that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claims she wants to find<\/a>, and they would increase tax revenues a-plenty; they would help make the country more energy independent, too. But this government is not interested in doing any of that, because America -an environmentally responsible country<\/a> might -gasp- responsibly use energy made from stuff that might not even be fossil fuels<\/a>, when what it really needs is a ruinous energy policy guaranteed by this president, in his own words, to \u201cskyrocket\u201d the costs<\/a> of powering our homes, our schools and our industries.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people objecting to a straw-man loving president<\/a> claiming, in essence \u201cI\u2019m not going to listen to anyone who won\u2019t work to make this better\u201d (apparently while defining \u201cbetter\u201d as \u201ceverything I want\u201d) after ignoring every line of the opposition\u2019s suggestions<\/a>, and then adding, \u201cthey can\u2019t stop us,\u201d<\/a> \u2013 all while mouthing platitudes on civility and \u201cworking together.\u201d<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people objecting to an entire congress full of elitist, over-lobbied fatcats who can\u2019t be bothered listening to their constituents because they\u2019ve decided that their privileges translate, roughly, into \u201cwe really do know what\u2019s better for everyone else.\u201d<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people objecting strenuously to a president naming over 45 \u201cpolicy czars\u201d<\/a> who each wield enormous power (and enormous taxpayer-funded budgets) while being unaccountable to congress or the American people \u2013 unaccountable to anyone but this president. Cronyism? That\u2019s not a bad thing, anymore.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people distrusting and mocking a so-called \u201cmainstream media\u201d full of \u201cprofessional gatekeepers\u201d<\/a> and \u201cmediating intelligences\u201d<\/a> who decide that no, the American people don\u2019t need to hear about the Communist\/9-11 Truther<\/a> who Obama appointed his \u201cGreen Jobs Czar\u201d or the other czar who planned to give money from the National Endowment to the Arts to those artists who would use their gifts<\/a> for the propagation of Obamian propaganda. And no one else should be allowed<\/a> to report those stories<\/a>, either.<\/p>\n There can, finally, be nothing credible -nothing at all- in people protesting a president<\/strong> who wishes to take over at least 15% of the national economy to \u201creform\u201d healthcare into something that even the NY Times admits will necessitate rationing<\/a>, will necessitate bureaucratic oversight into what people and their doctors are discussing, will necessitate tremendous governmental intrusion into private lives; healthcare from which the congress has already exempted itself<\/a><\/em> and the president seems less-than-eager to personally embrace<\/a>.<\/p>\n There can be nothing credible in people protesting the fact that their government \u201cleadership\u201d seems intent on licking the cream from the bowl of American prosperity and ingenuity while telling the taxpayers to content themselves with the skimmed leftovers. Nothing credible in people who want to dream, to invent and to explore their potentials protesting the fact that this<\/em> government is seriously unfriendly to private enterprise<\/a> and entrepreneurship<\/a>.<\/p>\n Nope. It\u2019s all racism<\/em>, as they say, \u201cstraight up.\u201d<\/p>\n Because no one who voted for Obama is the least bit unhappy with his policies. No way. They wouldn\u2019t dare be unhappy, or they\u2019ll be called racists or, if they happen to be black, risk being called \u201cUncle Toms.\u201d The name-calling and labeling is a rule of the left\u2019s own creation.<\/p>\n I\u2019ve written before (and been called a \u201cracist\u201d for daring to say it, or for even trying to discuss race in an up-front manner<\/a>) that the race-fixated people of the world may well be the very definition of racist.<\/p>\n Recall Barbara \u201cCall me Senator\u201d Boxer lecturing an African-American businessman<\/a> who was testifying before congress (and refusing to be boxed in by her citing black liberal groups to him, as though he were on a plantation and supposed to get back in line) \u201c[this other black man] would be PROUD to be here<\/a>\u201d [testifying before her majesty] said she.<\/p>\n Recall Joe Biden calling then-candidate Obama \u201cclean\u201d and \u201carticulate<\/a>.<\/p>\n Recall Howard Dean pandering by saying that in a GOP meeting the only people of color allowed in the room<\/a> would be the waitstaff.<\/p>\n Recall Hillary Clinton making a joke about Ghandi being a gas-station owner<\/a>. Or was that Vice-President Biden, again<\/a>?<\/p>\n Recall Hillary Clinton talking about \u201chard-working Americans, white Americans.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n Maureen Down writes that President Obama is \u201cat the center of a period of racial turbulence sparked by his ascension.\u201d<\/p>\n Well, if there is \u201cracial turbulence,\u201d -and that is the dubious narrative the press<\/a> and the Democrats<\/a> are trying hard to install (see the Newsweek cover story, \u201cIs Your Baby Racist?\u201d<\/a>)- it is not due to Obama\u2019s ascendancy (which did not exactly occur in a vacuum) but to the willingness of so many of his friends and associates to quickly deal the race card, and Obama\u2019s clumsy validations. Consider Gatesgate: while admitting he did not know all the facts about the brief arrest of his friend, Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, the president still opined that Cambridge, Massachusetts police acted \u201cstupidly,\u201d during an altercation where perhaps neither the police nor the professor covered themselves in glory. We\u2019re still reading about the incident in the papers, thanks to the president\u2019s over-eagerness to jump into that fray: In Cambridge, there is a 12 person council being convened<\/a> to investigate Gatesgate.<\/p>\n At this writing, there is not a single investigation being ordered anywhere, however, by any Democrat, into ACORN and its connection to voter registration fraud. There is not a single investigation being ordered, by any Democrat, into ACORN\u2019s willingness to assist others in defrauding the government, evading taxes and engaging in the sex-trafficking of minors<\/a>.<\/p>\n Perhaps even more importantly, the mainstream press is trying not to report on these stories; on the rare occasion when they do, they edit like mad<\/a>.<\/p>\n How can that be? Why is that? It is easy to speculate that it is because ACORN is an organization closely linked<\/a> to President Obama, whom the press adores, but if one wanted to be Maureen Dowd, one could just as easily suggest that the Democrats are so afraid, so paralyzingly afraid<\/em>, of anyone calling them \u201cracist\u201d that they will not call for investigations of that organization. Rep. John Conyers, (D-CA) to his credit, did call for one last year, but later backed off<\/a>, saying \u201cthe powers that be\u201d got in the way.<\/p>\n One can only imagine that it is fear, again, that keeps anyone in the press or in Congress from examining the Obama Justice Department\u2019s reluctance to investigate and prosecute<\/a> a clear case of voter intimidation that occurred in the last election. No other explanation makes sense, because both the ACORN issues and the voter intimidation issues are serious matters that demand serious investigation, yet neither are being treated as such.<\/p>\n No investigations are happening; none are so-far scheduled.<\/p>\n And if you and I ask why? Well, we\u2019re racists.<\/em> That\u2019s why.<\/p>\n Is there racism in America? Of course there is. Where there are human beings who do not take the time to get to know one another, there will always be racism. As cultures shift, as populations immigrate and neighborhoods evolve, there are sometimes flare-ups, too, because people do not trust each other. People trust what they \u201cknow\u201d and they assume that they \u201cknow\u201d someone who is like them. That may be why President Obama still enjoys disproportionately high approval rating<\/a> among African-American voters. It is possibly why some Hillary-loving PUMAS<\/a> still grind their teeth and hate-on Obama because the president is a he, and not a she.<\/p>\n But it is very difficult to cry \u201cracism\u201d when President Obama was elected by a true plurality of Americans, of all races, all classes, all backgrounds, and even all parties.<\/p>\n My registered-Republican Mother-in-Law voted for Obama, proudly. She\u2019s regretting it now. Does that mean she wasn\u2019t a racist when she voted for him, but she is one, now, because she objects to his policies and feels -with some reason, I think- that she and many in the nation had a bait-and-switch played upon them?<\/p>\n The people who loudly scream \u201cracist\u201d at those who dare to dissent from the policies of President Obama need to ask themselves a question: bearing in mind that President Obama has maintained so very many of President Bush\u2019s policies, which should already more than annoy the left and the press (but seems not to), what would they be doing, right now, if it was President Bush who was firing the CEO of the UAW, but not the head of the GM, if it was President Bush\u2019s Justice Department was ignoring a case of voter intimidation, if it were President Bush declaring that he didn\u2019t want to hear from people who disagreed with him, and who told his supporters to, \u201chit back hard.\u201d What if it was President Bush who was growing the deficit to 1.3 trillion dollars, and doing nothing to help create jobs in a time of record unemployment? What would the folks howling \u201cracism\u201d be doing, if President Bush was naming one unaccountable czar after another to his staff, without so much as a raised eyebrow from the press?<\/p>\n What would they be doing, if President Bush were the guy taking his wife out for a \u201cdate\u201d in New York City that costs in the tens-of-thousands of dollars, while people are out of work and facing \u201clongterm high unemployment?\u201d<\/p>\n They\u2019d be protesting in Washington, in huge numbers, that\u2019s what they\u2019d be doing. They\u2019d be demanding accountability, and decrying czars. They\u2019d be calling Bush \u201cBushhitler\u201d and hanging him in effigy, writing books and films about what it would be like to assassinate him<\/a>. They\u2019d be drawing pictures of him being decapitated. They\u2019d be calling him Stalin, or using gunfire sound-effects when mentioning him on the radio<\/a>. They\u2019d be yelling, \u201chey, hey, ho, ho, this president has got to go!\u201d <\/em> They\u2019d be demanding to see pictures of the coffins from Afghanistan and saying \u201cwe have lost; we are murdering innocent civilians; we love our troops, so bring them home<\/a>, miserable failure\u2026un-winnable situation.\u201d<\/p>\n But, because the president in the White House doing all of these things is a Democrat, these same people are silent. There are no problems. Everything is great.<\/p>\n Well, everything is not great, but they won\u2019t criticize harshly, or at all, and that is partly because there is a whole \u201cclose ranks; you needn\u2019t fall in love, just fall in line\u201d mentality at work, here. A great deal will be put up with in order to acquire and maintain power. Presidents may peacefully surrender their power, but bureaucrats never do.<\/p>\n But they should perhaps ask themselves, these \u201cracist\u201d criers, if they also do not criticize the president because -being utterly fixated on race- they are all-too conscious of the color of his skin; if they are not just a tad too concerned that criticism can only<\/em> be equated with racism. They\u2019ve used the race card to defame or shut up others so frequently that they cannot imagine a scenario where racism and criticism do not equate.<\/p>\n Whether subconsciously racist or not, Maureen Dowd does, in fact, betray a glaring bigotry in her piece, when she immediately declares that she heard a \u201cYou lie, boy,\u201d beneath Joe Wilson\u2019s inappropriate shout<\/a>. She betrays a mind prejudiced against white Southerners, content to know nothing about them beyond the stereotypes we have all explored with distaste for the last forty or so years, aided in our imaginings by the condescending white racist sheriff in \u201cIn the Heat of the Night\u201d and countless other films. Dowd does love her movies and pop-culture, after all. The popular culture is the wellspring from which<\/a> all of her deathless prose is watered.<\/p>\n I once wondered on my blog whether it is truly possible for any of us who came up during the Civil Rights era to be wholly color-blind<\/a>, because race was such a huge part of our social upbringing. It was in the news all the time. Bull Conner spraying non-violent marchers and setting the dogs on them. Lunch counters. Dr. Martin Luther King\u2019s soaring oratory which moved my parents to tears. There was Cecily Tyson\u2019s awesome performance in \u201cThe Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman.\u201d Roots. A Raisin in the Sun. Race-awareness is rather ingrained into us. But my experience in America is that most people are genuinely trying to develop \u201ccolor-blindness.\u201d Most Americans understand just how ugly and unjust the horrible racism and segregations of the past were, and they\u2019re sincerely working to move beyond it.<\/p>\n That\u2019s difficult to do when one half of the country refuses to acknowledge that there have been some changes made, that things are not as they were even 30 years ago, and that things might be even better -for the whole nation- if one half of the country did not want to hold on to a toxic playing card because it is just too valuable for them to give up or because -even worse- crying \u201cracism\u201d is easier than critically thinking, easier than honestly talking; easier than admitting that maybe, just maybe, Obama would have been a better president if he had first been a vice-president, if he had actually gained some political experience at hearing a passionate opposing viewpoint, and working out a compromise; if he had actually done something beyond voting \u201cpresent\u201d in his state and federal senate seats while tirelessly, endlessly campaigning.<\/p>\n Attorney General Eric Holder said America was a \u201cnation of cowards\u201d<\/a> on the issue of race. It is hard to disagree when we watch the press and the Democrats (and the mostly spineless GOP<\/a>) cringe and go silent, unwilling to criticize a president (or a negligent AG<\/a>), who could probably use some constructive criticism; when they cringe and go silent again<\/a> once that president\u2019s pet taxpayer-funded<\/a> \u201ccommunity organization\u201d is exposed as deserving investigation, all because someone might call them \u201cracist.\u201d<\/p>\n The Maureen Dowds of this world, the Newsweek editors of this world, should ask themselves how much exposure they have to those everyday Howard Deanesque \u201cpeople of color\u201d in their newsrooms and at their cocktail parties. They allow the Hispanic guys behind their ivied walls to build and stain their backyard decks, or to clean their yards. They very likely adore the African-American who delivers their mail, or opens their door, and they feel pretty good about that. They rub elbows with a few of the more privileged minority movers and shakers, and it makes them feel so very good about themselves, so certain about the purity of their minds and motives; they have no problem shouting \u201cracist\u201d at the drop of a hat, because, well, no one could ever believe they were racists. Look at who they are and where they live! Look at the minority people in their earnings strata that they let into their lives!<\/p>\n Which is why Obama -who is very smart- played them so very, very well. He understood precisely who he was dealing with, when he hitched his star to the liberal media-elites; the people who would attempt to silence all critics with a blanket cry of \u201cracism\u201d when the inevitable difficulties came, and who would be too afraid to ever, ever ask a hard question, for fear of having the scream echo back upon them.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A few months ago, during the Obama-at-Notre Dame controversy, I had a conversation with a journalist at another magazine, and opined that the whole issue of life vs. death was -and has been since the time of Moses- a contest between light and dark, and would continue to be so. The journalist said, \u201cyou just […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":112,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[171],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12673","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-misc"],"yoast_head":"\n