Posted on 09/17/2009 7:19:04 AM PDT by Kaslin
When Barack Obama was elected president of the United States, some suggested that race played a factor in his success. People "wanted" to elect a black man president because of our history of slavery and the denial of civil rights for so many years to African-Americans. It is never "racism" to vote for someone because he is black. It is only racism to oppose the policies of a black Democrat.
As the president's approval ratings fall and rise and fall again, some of his supporters in journalism and politics are returning to days of old when the label "racist" could end any discussion and force the accused either into stunned silence, or groveling repentance. I suspect the tactic won't work this time because Obama supporters will have difficulty explaining how a mostly white country could elect a black man president last November and ten months later become a racist majority.
Racism has always been a one-way street for the Left. When Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court, some liberals called him a "handkerchief head negro" and an "Uncle Tom." According to liberal doctrine, black people can never be racist because they are members of a victim class created by white liberals as a kind of modern plantation to keep blacks voting for liberal Democrats.
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, African-American like President Obama, grew up in Birmingham, Ala., at the time of the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing by members of the Ku Klux Klan, which killed some of her friends. She has more "street cred" than others who claim to have it, but she got no points from liberal Democrats when she ascended the ladder of power and influence. It was the same with Colin Powell. The Left strongly criticized Powell for adding credibility to the claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction thereby winning U.N. approval to use force, if necessary, against the Iraqi dictator. Were those who opposed Powell racist? Using the formulation now being applied to President Obama that opposition to any of his policies -- from health care, to record amounts of debt -- constitutes racism, they were.
The polar opposite case could be made that, despite his race, President Obama is being treated just like any other politician, which proves he's being treated equally. He is getting the same heat every president gets, sooner or later. The president's race would be a factor only if Americans shied away from criticizing him because of it. That they are not is a triumph of Martin Luther King Jr.'s hope that people be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Some opinion polls show that Obama's character is being judged and found wanting by a rapidly growing number of Americans, at least a small percentage of whom are black.
With Democrats controlling all three branches of government, including significantly wide margins in Congress, isn't there a better explanation than racism for why the president is having difficulty with some of his proposals? If racism is the cause of his difficulties, there must be many congressional Democrats who are racists, because they have the power to enact the president's agenda, but some are reluctant to do so.
The Pew Research Center has noted a 10 percent drop in Obama's approval ratings, which includes a 3 percent decline among blacks. As black conservative columnist Star Parker has written, "If we assume this reflects the 16 million blacks who voted for Obama last November, a three-point shift means there are about a half-million blacks who now have buyer's remorse." Are these black Obama voters racist?
There is a better explanation for the growing opposition to President Obama. It has less to do with his ethnicity than it does his credibility. Character, after all, is colorless.
If Hillary would have been elected first woman President and had the same foolhardy policies the press would be playing the “sexism” card.
Use the term “Racer” to ridicule and mock anyone playing the race card.
Let’s burn that overused piece of cardboard to a crisp.
Please don’t denigrate auto racing (racers), motor sport fans and NASCAR fans with racey terms!
Race Baiters is the proper term.
Excellent question
You’ve been the loan dissenting voice on the term.
Notice that we’re using the capital R.
It has to be a parallel to “truthers”, etc.
conservative african americans do not count.
Do these people not even consider the facts:
1. Obama WON the election against a white guy.
2. Obama isn’t actually black; he’s as white as he is black.
Just askin’.
Anyhow, I don’t care. They can call me anything they want, and I’ll show them a pick of me with my best buds — (1) black, (2) from Guam, (3) Hispanic, and (4) Japanese/Chinese mix. They’re PEOPLE.
So true - and the race card has been overplayed...no longer a valuable tool but an identifier of the user as the real racist.
This pernicious red herring should have absolutely no more relevance today than Russian slavery, Kenyan slavery, British slavery, Indian slavery, ad nauseum. This episode has zero bearing on the cultural perceptions of this country's white population, 6 times removed in generation or totally removed by ancestral immigration.
The fragments of racism left in this country are more aligned with tribal affiliations of white, black, brown, and yellow gangs that inhabit the lower quarters of our great metropolitan arenas.
Racers are people who drive fast cars in competition..
Millions of race fans would disagree with your derogatory description.
Racist or race baiter will always be the proper term regardless of what you describe as my lone dissenting voice.
I did NOT vote for Obama due to my personal views regarding everything he stood and stands for. By LIBERAL standards that makes me a racist.
That being said, I think we are seeing not only the first African American President, but sadly we are also seeing the absolute LAST president of that heritage.
When the Liberal casts the term “RACIST” on any person who expresses an opposing view of the President, another drop of poison is injected into a future decision. He who votes against a Black man is a racist, but he who votes FOR that BLACK man is also a racist if/when he disagrees with the man he voted for.
How do we avoid the epithet RACIST? It is simple...quietly vote AGAINST the Black Man. Thus there is no person in the White House that we are not allowed to criticize.
What is being said against Obama, pales to nothing compared to the invective hurled at Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, Reagen, Bush (both), yet even a scowl receives the Racist tag.
What I say to the Liberal is, “When I vote against your man, you call me a racist. But only ONCE.” If he wins office, you have the privilage of hurling that label a dozen times per day. Next time.....ONCE.
A racist is someone who feels that because 0bama is a black, he is therefore terribly inept, and anyone who says anything against him must be called a racist to defend his incompetence.
A guy I took the bus to work with in the morning called me a racist because I was not voting for Obama. I said, I don’t have a problem with black people just liberals. I wonder how all this “change” is working out for him?
only 45% of white vote went to Bro
last night Sean insinuated he got a majority of peckerwood vote..wrong Sean
Excellent point
Ping for later viewing...
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.