Skip to comments.New Team Obama Re-Election Gimmick: Is America a Post-Racial Society?
Posted on 01/20/2012 10:27:03 AM PST by Lloyd Marcus
Suddenly, there is a lot of discussion about whether or not we live in a "post-racial society." With the 2012 presidential election right around the corner, I can only conclude that, despicably, "race-baiting" will be a major component of the left's and the White House's Obama re-election campaign.
Recently, a black publication interviewed me for an article, the topic being "Is America a post-racial society?" Then, flipping through the TV channels, I caught a bit of two blacks on CNN discussing whether or not America is a post-racial society. It's coming up everywhere lately.
I am just giving you a heads-up, folks. All this talk about a post-racial society, which sounds like it came out of a marketing strategy meeting, is designed simply to accuse all who are against Obama's re-election of being non-post-racial. In other words, racist.
Only agenda-driven knuckleheads design new tactics to keep Americans apart, suspicious of one another, and at each other's throats along racial lines.
Now, do not get me wrong. I am not saying racism, on both sides, does not exist in America. Of course, it does, along with every other sin. Such will be the case until the Lord takes us home. But as a nation, the American people have proven themselves honorable, fair-minded, compassionate, and extremely generous.
The '60s TV series Star Trek was an excellent example of a "post-racial society." The crew was of various races and yet they related to each other as individuals. Race was irrelevant.
I love the way the left always accuses us, the American people, of the evils of which they are guilty. We do not sit around thinking of phony intellectual-sounding phrases such as "post-racial society." We simply live, work, and play together as Americans. The left and black Liberal Plantation overlords are the ones guilty of thinking "non"-post-racially for political purposes. Their exploitation of race continues to devastate blacks in terms of their attitudes and expectations. Black race profiteers are betraying their own people by convincing them that they are victims, despite being blessed to be born in the greatest land of opportunity on the planet. For crying out loud, I caught one of those Hollywood insider TV shows talking about some black rapper's ninety-million-dollar fragrance line. Black unemployment being at an unprecedented high has nothing to do with white America's views on race and everything to do with Obama's economy.
All of this absurd post-racial talk confirms that most-assuredly, the Obama administration and his minions plan to exploit race, along with class envy, in Obama's reelection campaign. This is why the left has been relentless in their attempts to brand the Tea Party racist. Tea partiers oppose Socialism and ignoring the Constitution, not Obama's skin color.
As a post-racial-thinking American, I am doing everything in my power to make Barack Hussein Obama a one-term president, and not because he is black. Obama must go because his vision for our future is an anathema to all we hold dear and the vision of our Founding Fathers.
If I can offer one bit of heartfelt advice to my fellow black Americans who may be caught up in all of this post-racial vs. non post-racial nonsense, please, forget about race and simply go for your dreams.
Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American Chairman of The Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama.
Lloyd is singer/songwriter of the American Tea Party Anthem and author of Confessions of a Black Conservative, foreword by Michele Malkin. Spokesperson for Tea Party Express Please help me spread my message by joining my Liberty Network. LloydMarcus.com
Here's my post. It's racial. So I guess that makes me post-racial.
Given: Apparent racial tension has increased since 0bama’s election.
Is this because 0bama has played the race issue so much that it has actually increased the tension,
or, was the antipathy ALWAYS there in the black culture and they just feel comfortable letting it surface now with 0bama in power,
or is it a combination of these,
or is it something else?
Now, cable might qualify. Those ESPN/Disney channels are the most expensive and those costs hit the poor disproportionately.
That assumption became true shortly after his election and it has been steadily ratcheting up from simple race card to 24/7 race baiting ever since.
This election campaign will be about race at every opportunity. We saw it with Juan Williams lying about all the emails he gets during the Monday debate.
Race has been and will be the most important issue facing the European and American peoples. Racial issues reflect the invasion of Western Societies by the third world populations. So far the Westerner has not successfully resisted the demands of third world peoples for Western loot and the “right to govern” WEstern nations.
Race has been and will be the most important issue facing the European and American peoples. Racial issues reflect the invasion of Western Societies by the third world populations. So far the Westerner has not successfully resisted the demands of third world peoples for Western loot and the “right to govern” Western nations.
As long as Rev Al & Rev Jesse can enrich themselves by race-baiting, we don’t live in a completely post-racial society. These two rabble-rousers still pop up in the news frequently and are still busy shaking down corporations in the name of racial equality.
IMHO, unfairly or not, Barack Obama has set back race relations by at least 50 years. Many voters thought by voting for Obama, our Nation would once and for all erase the last stains from slavery and Jim Crow. Barack Obama, with the Media in his pocket, did nothing to counter such noble aspirations. Instead, the Obamessiah gave us a peek at the ugly and blatant racism of his mentor, Rev Wright.
We’ve still got a ways to go before we reach the Promised Land.
It all means what, exactly, is meant by “race” and “black”.
For example, when Nobel Prize winning poet Tony Morrison, who is African-American, can write an October 1988 New Yorker article titled “Clinton as the first black president”, then what is “black”? When the NAACP calls the black conservative Kenneth Gladney, “not black enough”, and “not a brother” then what is “black”? When Time magazine’s Jack White calls Supreme Court Justice Thomas, “the scariest of all the hobgoblins”, saying “Washington seems to be filled with white men who make black people uneasy”, than what is “black”? And when Obama, a man whose mother is Caucasian, can tell us in a widely read autobiography that in his youth he struggled with his racial identity before *deciding* to be black, what is “black”?
When Bill Maher, during a panel discussion on HBO complains that Obama’s policies are “half-assed” “because hes only half black.” and that “if he was fully black, Im telling you, he would be a better president.”, and that “there’s a white man in him holding him back”, than what is “black”?
“Black” in all these contexts, as well as Juan Williams’s complaint on Fox News that the extraordinarily lopsided expression of Missouri voter sentiment in August of 2010 rejecting ObamaCare (in one county by 92%) was really about race, is not about “race” at all. It is about ideology, socialist ideology.
With respect to BHO being black: it is not about the racial characteristics he was born with, it is about the ideology he adopted. It is not what percent black he is, it is about how thoroughly red he is.
And if that is the case, what is “post-racial”? Where socialist-black has finally been outed and the public rejects its socialist orientation? I sincerely hope so.
Jimmy Carter calling newt subtle racist, is part of this.
The race card is a political tool, that the left uses to engender fear.
The fact is that the Statists will use anything divisive to get the votes to stay in power. All down to the local level. The liberals see the people of the US as “groups” to be categorized, labeled and separated. And THAT is the difference, essential to their tactic to divide one from the other. The goal is dictatorship that will NOT distinguish race— everybody will come under the gun. Like Stalin vs. Ukrainian kulak so called “rich” peasants.
Stalin being a psycopathic russian georgian.
The Statists are very scared of black conservatives. That is where Herman Cain (whom they pilloried with the old shibboleth of black man with white woman— by the way Castro used that Cuba to scare off the landowners and industrialists out of the country, so it is a Marxist tool as well) can and will be a clear voice to the conservative blacks-and whites- this is all a ruse to lure their vote.
What is missing in the discussion is that racism means something very different from bigotry. A bigot might be a racist, or might not. The idea that a race is inferior because of their birth is racism. The term is used too loosely applied to bigotted language. There is racism and bigotry all over the world and it is definitely NOT just black vs. white. Hispanics are racists to other hispanic origin people (the term Hispanic is simply idiotic- Spaniards are Hispanics, so then what are Latinos? Are they Italians, cause Romans spoke latin and still do). All grist to the political mill is divisive crap.
And,it is scary stuff when mixed with a financial disaster deliberate wrecker of the economy, in charge. Keep in mind that Cloward Piven and Alinsky uses this strategy and tactics all the time. It’s how you do it. Nail in the coffin of the republic.
After the past 3 years I'm not so sure. I suspect we've lost a couple of decades at least.
There is a common thread now about obama in certain far left, and also in the right. It is that he is a puppet for the banksters- internationalists. Now, this could be said to be a view held by reagan democrats (working people) and of a certain, trust fund baby elite.
The goal of all this division is to break up the financial stability. Marxists require this, since they have never worked a day in their lives except to seek power. Take a good look at Bill Ayers,and you will see the trust fund baby son of the CEO of Con Ed—who bailed his son out repeatedly and it would be nice to know if Ayers lives off independent wealth.
Harvard is full of these people— neo socialists who both want to keep what they have and cause dissension to not allow anyone opportunity to work their way up in the class.
These are people imitating Britain, with it’s rigid structure— they want it- they have to have it. But it is as Un-American as you can get. This country is about freedom, and the Constitution. So, the article makes that point very well.
Right on target. They will never talk about SOCIALISM.
Socialism is simply THEFT by force in it’s ultimate state.
Do any of these hollyweird libs understand that they only speak because they say what their masters let them say?
I learned something the other day. Hollywood movie lobbyists (incidentally Chris Dodd now is the head of the Motion Picture Assoc. lobby group) prevented the establishment of a “movie product” futures trading market. Why? because they are protected in their agenda by not having to answer to human nature— that is, human nature is the reason socialism fails. Movies that spout the crap would fail too if they would be affected by finance markets that relied on true human nature to reject their movies.
That whole idea that hollywood would do this, speaks volumes.
Well, half of us are.
Democrats continue to be race obsessed.
Normal people were over it years ago.
The Statists of the right and the left use race against the right to keep and bear arms.
The goal of removal of 2nd Amendment rights is served by different methods. The RINO’s meet the libs in the middle, that “little people” or “the poor (code word: black or poor white or whatever) should not legally have firearms. The Statists cannot allow this and they manipulate in this way.
Had an interesting discussion once with a black liberal who was against all firearm ownership. Told him that conservatives believe black people should have 2nd Amendment rights too, just like freedom of speech. The look of amazement on his face was priceless. Then I said- obama wants us ALL on the government plantation, controlled, protected, and totally servile. Total confusion on his face, and maybe he went and read the Constitution. Herman Cain was all over this topic— so he HAD to be eliminated- but he will not be silent.
I think obama is about the State- a mindless, colorless (but not really, look at Holder on voting rights, and selective prosecution) monolith of totalitarianism. We must defeat these people or there will be no last great hope for freedom.
I doubt we will ever be in a post-racial society. If anything, things will get a lot more divisive once Whites lose their majority status.
Is America post racial? Yes, we’ve had our obligatory black president; now it’s time to MOVE ON!
Maybe America is, but I’m not.
This marxist punk has me questioning whether EVERY black in a position of authority as little more than a quota boy???
Socialism is the ungoldy ideology that we can (and must) live at the expense of others. Christians and Jews should easily see how this institutionalizes the violation of the Commandments that forbid coveting and theft. Since the socialist tells us that he is doing this to create a better society, he is telling a grand lie, for socialism is not “sustainable”, a concept the left loves to scold each of us about.
Do they really think this will make whites vote for them again? Calling us racists at every opportunity has made white America sick of the whole “first black president” gimmick.
Matt Patterson - AMERICAN THINKER (this is brilliant writing)
"Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages. How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?
Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present"); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions. He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.
And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?
Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal:
'To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass.'
Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass -- held to a lower standard -- because of the color of his skin. Podhoretz continues:
'And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?'
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon -- affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin -- that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is. And that is what America did to Obama.
True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary. What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?
In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people -- conservatives included -- ought now to be deeply embarrassed. The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of clichés, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all. Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth -- it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.
And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence. But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?
In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job. When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.
But hey, at least we got to feel good about ourselves for a little while. And really, isn't that all that matters these days?
That sums it up nicely. He was so pleased with himself when he sang at the Apollo. The arrogance of this man is astounding. He will have a great fall from his perch one of these days.
What the **** does race have to do with the duties of the President??
What does race have to do with the problem that the FedGov is borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar it spends? Or that excessive regulations and uncertainty about the tax code are strangling job growth?
Race is just a magician’s prop — focusing the audience attention on the left hand while the real destructive work gets done by the hidden right hand.
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.