Skip to comments.The New Racial Mess
Posted on 07/22/2010 5:16:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
Click here to find out more!
Weren't we supposed to enter a new age of tolerance with the election of President Barack Obama?
His half-black, half-white ancestry and broad support across racial lines suggested that at last Americans judged each other on the content of our characters -- not the color of our skin or our tribal affiliations.
Instead, in just 18 months of the Obama administration, racial discord is growing and relations seem to have been set back a generation.
Black voters are galvanizing behind Obama at a time of rapidly falling support. White independents, in contrast, are leaving Obama in droves.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has claimed that the loosely organized Tea Party includes "racist elements." The National Council of La Raza has ripped the state of Arizona for its new anti-illegal alien legislation. Jesse Jackson characterized aspects of the multimillion-dollar bidding war to acquire basketball superstar LeBron James in terms of masters and slaves. Pundits are arguing whether the fringe racist New Black Panther Party is analogous to the Klan.
In turn, a number of Americans want to know why -- nearly a half-century after the Civil Rights Act, affirmative action and Great Society programs -- some national lobbying organizations still identify themselves by archaic tribal terms such as "colored people" or "La Raza" ("the race") when it would be taboo for other groups to adopt such racial nomenclature.
Indeed, race seems to be the subtext of almost every contemporary issue, from the soaring deficit and government spending to recent presidential appointments and the enforcement of existing immigration law. In times of growing deficits, white people are stereotyped as being angry over supposedly paying higher taxes to subsidize minorities, while minorities are stereotyped as being mostly on the receiving end of entitlements.
Why the escalation of racial tension in the supposed postracial age of Obama?
First, Obama's reputation as a racial healer was largely the creation of the media. In fact, Obama had a number of racially polarizing incidents that probably would have disqualified any other presidential candidate of the past 30 years.
His two-decade apprenticeship at Trinity Church under the racist and anti-Semitic Rev. Jeremiah Wright has never been adequately explained. Obama indulged in racial stereotyping himself when he wrote off the white lower-middle class of Pennsylvania as clueless zealots clinging to their guns, religion and xenophobia.
Obama also characterized his grandmother as a "typical white person" when he implied that her supposed fear of young black males symbolizes the prejudices of the entire white community. Michelle Obama did not help things when, in clumsy fashion, she indicted America as "just downright mean"-- a nation she had not been proud of in her adult life until it embraced the hope and change represented by her husband's candidacy.
Such campaign trash talk did not stop during the first 18 months of the Obama presidency. The race-baiting Van Jones -- the short-lived presidential advisor on "green jobs" -- should never have been appointed. Then, the president himself criticized Cambridge, Mass., police for acting "stupidly" when they arrested his friend, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates.
Then there was the outburst of Attorney General Eric Holder, who blasted America as "a nation of cowards" for not talking more about race on his terms. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was almost obsessive in self-referencing herself as a "Latina." She also suggested that her racial background and experiences made her "wise" in a way white male colleagues could never be.
Recently, Obama appealed to voters along exclusionary race and gender lines -- not traditional political allegiances -- when he called upon "the young people, African-Americans, Latinos and women, who powered our victory in 2008."
Yet the country passed the old white/black divide years ago. We are a racially diverse society of Asians, blacks, Hispanics, whites, and mixtures of all that and more. In a world of conservative Cubans and liberal whites, race is no longer necessarily a guide to politics.
Who now, exactly, is the racial "Other" deserving of special consideration in hiring and education? A half-Punjabi immigrant whose father owns 500 acres? A three-quarters Puerto Rican who just arrived in New York? A Korean-American son of an orthodontist? The African-American children of a Cabinet official?
The more the president appeals to his base in racial terms, the more his appointees identify themselves as members of a particular tribe, and the more political issues are framed by racial divisions, so all the more such racial obsession creates a backlash among the racially diverse American people.
America has largely moved beyond race. Tragically, our president and a host of his supportive special interests have not.
This is going to get worse before it gets better. Two more years of 0 and this country will lapse into a racial mess that will take decades to undo.
The date is:
September 16, 2009
RUSH: “How can it be that I am racist when I say that about Obama but not racist when I say it about Carter?
The disagreement that people have with Barack Obama is sub-stan-tive, Lorraine. It is based on real things that he is doing and destroying in the private sector. Race has nothing to do with this.
People love their country! I predicted all of this. [long before the election] I predicted everything that’s happening. I said, “It’s going to get to the point...”
Because people called me and said, “Rush, Rush, Rush? Don’t you think electing a black president will end racism, get over the hump there?”
I said, “No, no, no. You don’t understand the race business. It’s going to get worse. The race hustlers, the race industry is going to grow.
Any criticism of Obama will eventually be said to be racist.” It’s happening right before our very eyes. It’s not a racist country, Lorraine. It’s not 1864; it’s not 1964.”
I predicted this two years ago. It was obvious just like Obomacare will have death panels. Thats bad enough but now the death panels,the feds, the state, the cities, etc, will be staffed by people who hate each other.
Just frikking wonderful.
Many times I have, sadly, posted a personal belief that the ever increasing racial turmoil in the USA is based on the desperate need of the people in the groups you mentioned to preserve, protect and grow their personal revenue streams. In other words, their $$$$$$.00 DEPENDS on and REQUIRES racial turmoil.
One does what one needs to do to survive financially.
Each of these groups, a number of whom, such as the NAACP, have long achieved the goals of the “Civil Rights Drives”, would be out of business in a climate of mutual acceptance between the races.
Sharpton, Jackson, La Raza, look closely. You see not the casually dressed civil rights warriors who sat in on segregated lunch counters. You see very well dressed individuals, flying first class, large cars, well appointed and high cost offices, all the trappings of $ucce$$.
The tragedy is that these “leaders” CANNOT allow the country to quiet down.
American Thinker July 22, 2010
The bottom line excerpted:
"...The NAACP/tea party conflict would vanish if the NAACP and its allies suddenly abandoned their infatuation with federal coercion and instead embraced a strategy more in tune with the non-political approach of Booker T. Washington or Father Devine -- working one's way up the economic ladder via self-help. So, instead of piling on yet more made-in-Washington rules and regulation to exorcise the demons racism and discrimination in education, civil rights groups would, for example, create after- schools cram academies to help struggling students earn a legitimate high school diploma. And I'd guess that they would have no problem recruiting tea party sympathizers to help teach these courses.
The NAACP/tea party conflict over limited government cannot be resolved, though it is all too easy to paper it over. Tea party fans are not anti-black or anti-civil rights; they certainly do not favor repealing civil rights legislation or enfeebling the Justice Department. They just prefer limited government versus pursuing an aim -- racial equality -- that appears unreachable. It is one thing to expand government during wartime when national survival is at stake or to achieve a worthy and reachable goal; but to empower Big Brother and accomplish nothing other than bigger government is hardly an acceptable sacrifice.
When confronted with the inevitable charge of racism, tea party folk should resist the urge to fight the battle on these acrimonious grounds. Battling a civil rights group over "racism" is an unwinnable, pointless battle. Blacks will always claim the high ground moral authority to define "racism." The debate should be about sustaining a bedrock principle of our Republic -- limited government -- versus some egalitarian dream. This is a classic clash of principles and transcends who said what when. It is, moreover, about time that the virtues of limited government enter the public debate next time the NAACP or its sympathizers demands yet more government intrusion into private life.
Of the utmost importance, African Americans should be reminded that, after all, they are a minority and the purpose of limited government is to prevent tyranny, especially the tyranny of the majority over the minority. In the long run, African Americans -- like all Americans -- should dread an out-of-control government no matter how seductive government's mission. The NAACP has, sad to say, forgotten perhaps one of the most basic lessons of American governance. Doubters should just observe what happens elsewhere in today's world when government power is unchecked.
There is an oft-repeated Jefferson quote that captures this dilemma exactly: A Government Big Enough to Give You Everything You Want is Strong Enough to Take Everything You Have.
The dust-up is about power and tyranny, not insults."
Robert Weissberg is Professor of Political Science-Emeritus, University of Illinois-Urbana.
The vast majority of Whites are not racist. The true racists are the race hucksters, some of which are in the White House.
I watched MSMBC Rachael Maddow yesterday and she did a long segment comparing todays conservatives: Rush, Beck to racial segregationists in the 1950s and 1960s scaring up votes with “The scary black man is coming to get you if you vote Democrat.”. She was blaming the whole Sherrod episode on FNC and right wing media leaving the NAACP completely off the hook. MSNBC was saying that the Obama WH is scared of FNC and Glenn Beck.
It was very entertaining and silly (as usual) but I thought of black voters that are rallying about the president as things get even worse for them personally(black unemployment.) Some were watching last night as MSNBC tried to scare the hell out of them to get them to vote.
American Thinker July 22, 2010
I wish these writers would stop asking this question. It shows they are afraid to state the obvious.
"Barack Obama is a racist using race to gain power and control."
Anything less than that statement to start an essay is simply more equivocation and trying not to offend.
How can you watch her. Five seconds of her show and I would have to change the channel
I think Obama and his party have overtly decided to attack the white majority, expropriate, disinherit, and subjugate it beneath a minoritarian (and therefore inherently repressive) political machine.
Just what you need, to start a real race war.
“Unfortunately, the same blacks that mindlessly voted for and support Obama are the same ones that mindlessly cheered when O. J. Simpson was found not guilty by an almost all black-and-minority jury even though it was and is obvious he murdered Nicole Brown. Unfortunately, these people support the Obama’s and O. J. Simpsons of the world solely because they are black regardless of the content of their character.”
And the real lesson to draw from this Sherrod episode is not that she may have gotten over her racism (assuming she has). From what I’ve heard (I haven’t watched/heard the clip from her speech to the NAALCP), when she said she purposely did not help white farmers, there was no condemnation or signs of disapproval at all from the NAALCP crowd. As though what she had been doing was not only normal but expected: this is the way blacks should treat whites. It’s like the Obummers listening to “Rev.” Jeremiah Wright’s racist sermon rants for 20 years and not walking out. They apparently didn’t have a problem with the sermon content and were on-board with the racism he was espousing.
But the double-standard (that only whites can be racist) is now over. Whites aren’t falling for it anymore, despite the best efforts of the lame stream media.
I am usually on FR at 9pm EST when I have her on so it's not 100% dedication.
There is something very cult-like about MSNBC :Shultz, Maddow, Olbermann, Matthews. Especially with this racial theme but also their economic theories of redistribution=stimulus. It is like Jim Jones telling the poor blacks the government wants to kill them. It is fascinating (to me) to listen to the outrageous stuff 9as with Jim Jones) and it is missed by many Republicans for the same reason you mentioned. They are trying to polarize the country to create a new more progressive civil rights movement.
Obama as the OJ of politics.
Glad somebody other than I sees the Jim Jones parallels. Most people have probably forgotten about him, but I lived in SF during his rise and saw all the fools who flocked to him. Sadly, this latest Jim Jones iteration will probably have a similar tragic ending...
“Black voters are galvanizing behind Obama at a time of rapidly falling support.”
Many, far too many, of America’s blacks are racist.
A black friend, from the days of integration in the 1960’s, told me he was not concerned about Obama’s socialism, that communism was not on his list of concerns’ and then explained that the reason many blacks did not oppose illegals (what Eeisenhower called “wetbacks”) because said illegals from Messico “were not white”.
Needless to say, I have not talked with him since. Why? Because I don’t like racists, and my friend turned out to be, in his heart, a racist.
America’s blacks listened to too many of the Elija Muhhammeds, and other black racists. Mix in some cosialism, and lot os Democrapic party supported “entitlement mentality” and the Rev. Wright types - not surprisingly, many of America’s blacks either support or don’t speak out against the Black Nation ideology.
Those talking about racial confrontation while members of an easily identified small minority are on a path which history indicates leads to a very bad place.
Whether Mexican or black, advocating race conflict is foolish in the extreme.
Race based claims of entitlement are antithetical to America, as well as irreconcilable with America.
So did Hitler, Mussilini, Pol Pot and the list goes on........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.