An extremely disturbing trend has started to develop in the U.S. political landscape, which needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. It seems that the the left would like to start playing the “race card” every time someone disagrees with President Obama. Not only is this behavior irresponsible and childish, it only serves to breathe new life into the real race hatred that we would all hopefully like to see eliminated in this country.
Like most political rhetoric, this started out at the fringes of the left, but in recent weeks, it has made its way into popular media. Personally, I was offended when I read the following, which appeared in an early-August issue of the New York Times:
[T]he driving force behind the town hall mobs is probably the same cultural and racial anxiety that’s behind the “birther” movement, which denies Mr. Obama’s citizenship. (source)
Now I can’t say that I’m surprised that Paul Krugman would stoop to these kinds of distraction tactics, but I hoped that this was isolated. After all, Krugman is a second-rate political hack, who should stick to poorly reporting on economics. Whenever he starts pontificating about other subjects, most people know to ignore him. Unfortunately, his comments were just foreshadowing.
The most recent allegations of racially motivated dissent stem from Rep. Joe Wilson’s (R-SC) “outburst” during President Obama’s health care address last week. Again, the New York Times ran forward, pointing and shouting “RACIST!!!” rather than admitting that people may have legitimate reasons to disagree with the president’s proposed plan for reforming the health care system:
Wilson clearly did not like being lectured and even rebuked by the brainy black president presiding over the majestic chamber. (source)
The author of this piece of irresponsible journalism, Maureen Dowd, even suggested that Rep. Wilson’s behavior is clearly racist because no one has ever shouted at white presidents. Apparently, she didn’t cover
President Bush’s 2005 State of the Union Address or his appearance at Obama’s inauguration in January.
Now, I agree, yelling out “YOU LIE!!!” in the middle of Obama’s speech may not be the most constructive way of voicing Rep. Wilson’s opinion, but you have to admit that claiming we won’t be paying for medical coverage of illegal immigrants under the proposed plan is more than a little disingenuous. However, instead of debating the truth of the president’s claim, everyone’s clamoring about whether Rep. Wilson is a member of the KKK.
Now, the Congressional Black Caucus is getting on board, claiming that anyone who doesn’t support some kind of reprimand for Rep. Wilson must be a racist also:
And so I guess we’ll probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside intimidating people. … That’s the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude is not rebuked, and Congressman Wilson represents it. He’s the face of it. (source)
I could not disagree more. The “logical conclusion” that I see is an environment where everyone is loathe to voice any original thought on political issues, for fear of being branded a bigot. If you are the least bit paranoid, you would recognize that as thought control, and it should be called out as such whenever it rears its ugly head.
By Email
By RSS Feed
The Legal Satyricon 
Don’t sweat it. There’s nothing making the claim that opposition to Obama is racist that is worth listening to or worthy of the respect inherent in outrage.
Do you care if the sewer rats or the cockroaches living in the dumps like? I’m guess that you don’t. It the same with those things making these claims, except that the rats and roaches provide more value to America.
Get real. Take a look at Joe Wilson’s background, then re-assess what he did.
Brilliant piece. I happen to support the Big O, and I am generally okay with his policies. I think that his detractors in Congress are, for the most part, a bunch of dickwads.
But disagreeing with Obama doesn’t make you a racist any more than disagreeing with the shithead we had in office for 8 years makes you un-patriotic.
This is exactly why I agree with the proposition, but am completely unsympathetic to the right-wing assholes now being called racists who, for the last eight years, were calling people anti-American, objectively pro-Saddam, etc. Live by the sword, die by the sword, fuckstains.
I agree with your position that disagreeing with President Obama does not make you a racist. But, the signs and statements of many of the President’s protestors demonstrate that a lot of them are motivated by an underlying racial bias. The Tea Party leader recently made comments on AC360 that the racially motivated protestors are on the fringe of his movement, but them stammered and stuttered when he was confronted with his own words that he believed President Obama to be an Indonesian Muslim radical.
The fact is, there are radical, racially motivated individuals that are front and center in this “conservative” movement that are making a lot of noise and getting a lot of attention. Let’s not forget the noise being made by the absurd, loud-mouthpieces of the Right – Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, etc.
Finally, the two instances you cite of former President Bush getting booed are not comparable to the Joe Wilson outburst. Had Joe Wilson not interrupted the President, then the videos would be comparable as President Obama was getting booed and heckled by Republicans before Wilson’s outburst.
P.S. How is claiming that illegal immigrants are covered under the bill “disingenious?” Section 242 of the bill specifically states that people in the country illegally are not eligible under the bill.
P.P.S. To clarify, I don’t believe you are a racist if you disagree with the President. My wife disagrees with almost everything the President does and/or says and I don’t think she is a racist.either. My main problem is the deteriorating discourse that was egged on by the loud-mouthpieces of the Right during the month of August. Joe Wilson was the epitomy of that deteriorating discourse.
It disturbs me when people pull the race card. It disturbs me even more when commenters on this blog call their ideological counterparts “worse than sewer rats and cockroaches.” Jonolan, please google “Julius Streicher,” “Kristallnacht,” “nazi cartoons,” or any other number of related terms to gain a little historical perspective in the matter.
I’m very well aware of history, Rogier. I’m also aware that there’s no good point in sugar coating the nature of America’s enemies or lending them respect that they do not deserve and could not appreciate anyway.
It’s all over the British press as well. Obama is god here in the UK. I’ve yet to read a negative piece about him. Oh, it looks like Jimmy Carter has jumped on the racism bandwagon: http://tinyurl.com/op49nq (site: http://www.telegraph.co.uk — link way too long). Why am I not surprised?
So Ken,
Your saying its totally okay to be fuckstain now because the people in power a year ago were fuckstains then? Does that mean when the next Republican president gets elected we can be justified in calling democrat protestors douchebags?
As our mommas always said “2 wrongs don’t make a right”
I guess all you foul-mouthed folks are supportive of the government running your life. Most people that want the government to take care of them do not have the capacity to understand the concept of “standing on your own two feet.”
Come on people. If you want things fixed, insist that all law makers, assistants, etc be covered by the same policies that they feel is in YOUR best interest. Healtcare & social security would be fixed if they had to be part of it. Are they better than the rest of us?
Can anyone say “TERM LIMITS?”
Have a nice day…
Mike: no. I’m saying when someone is unfairly called a racist, I will point out that they are unfairly being called a racist, but I’m not going to have any sympathy about it if they’ve been throwing around incendiary terms with equal meritriciousness. It’s not the unjustified use of “racist” is acceptable. It’s that the asshole who has been doing the same thing his whole career is not worthy of any warm feelings — and is, in fact, worthy of a kick in the nuts for whining about what he has spent a career doing.
Case in point — Glenn Beck, who loves to throw “treason” around but is now all butthurt about “racism” being thrown around.
Just as long as you give both of them the same kick in the nuts. If they were both just insulting each other then who cares let them have each other. However they are both insulting protesters in general and NOT just each other. So yeah I got no sympathy for Glen Beck or Maureen Dowd in this case they are both idiots, however I would have sympathy for the people who are opposing them without resorting to name calling.
wells:
The founders turn over in their graves every time somebody promotes the idea that the government should act in that somebody’s self-interest. The government is supposed to be better than that. Politicians are supposed to be better than that.
Call me what you want:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyrXQ38dT9g… Read More
This stuff IS racist. Certainly not all criticism of President Obama is racist but no one is saying that.
This post is nothing more than a shallow attack on a straw man.
It’s kind of amazing how short everyone’s memory is…
http://www.bushorchimp.com/
No one complained a few years ago about the above the way the left is complaining about similar images now. I often wonder what would happen if someone dared to throw a shoe at President Obama. Would he be praised for making a bold political statement, or denounced as a bigot. Which do you think?
If you ask me, that’s real racism — when a different meaning is attached to the same conduct, depending on the players.
“If you ask me, that’s real racism ”
Perhaps that is why no one is asking you. :)
This country has a history which shouldn’t be ignored. Everything happens in a context. Yes, the “Bush-chimp” comparison was in poor taste (and to be honest, there is nothing especially simian about President Bush) but this was a slur frequently directed at blacks and not at whites.
You’re proving my point for me: “This country has a history” that cannot be ignored, or overcome, so long as people actively promote unequal treatment. Kind of a catch-22.
Would you care to explain this spurious claim that Wilson has a history of racism?
In your previous comments you’ve already shown that you have no capacity to understand what racism is, so I’m I’m marginally interested in what excuse for your anti-American attitude you’ll use to pillory Wilson.
You are accusing me of having “no capacity to understand what racism is” without knowing anything about me and my experiences, other than what I have posted here. You also accused me of being anti-American based on my limited comments here..four sentences?
Why don’t you help me understand what racism is, according to your definition?
Your other writings lead me to believe that your definition of racisim is very different than the generally-accepted definition. But you seem to think you have a lock on what the concept is.
So, will you do that for me? Will you help me understand and define our terms? What is YOUR concept of racism? Define it, please.
Yawn. Refusing to answer the questions put forth to you and the attempting to twist those questions back on the person asking them shows a lack of credible argument, but that’s what Americans have come to expect from our domestic enemies.
Jason, if someone threw a shoe at President Obama, I wouldn’t call them a racist. The isolated act of throwing a shoe at a President is not racism.
I don’t believe the isolated act of someone callling out “YOU LIE” on the floor during Obama’s speech is a racist act either.
But when taken in context – and the context is that 1.) Wilson has a history of being a racist separate and apart from this particular incident and 2.) The President was not lying but Wilson was…well, Wilson is fair game for any calls of “racism” that come his way. He has in fact demonstrated with the sum total of his public acts that he is racist and so his exaggerated claim of “YOU LIE” against Pres Obama needs to be seen in that context.
Would you care to explain this spurious claim that Wilson has a history of racism?
In your previous comments you’ve already shown that you have no capacity to understand what racism is, so I’m I’m marginally interested in what excuse for your anti-American attitude you’ll use to pillory Wilson.
this is the middle link
There are very few on the left who believe that everyone who disagrees with President Obama is a racist.
For the most part, accusations of racism have been reserved for those who act like racists. There were lots of ugly racist signs at all the teaparty events and the 9/12 march had even more of those.
The attempts to demean Obama for wanting to address schoolchildren also have racist overtones & underpinnings.
And as has been pointed out Wilson has a racist history.
So, your statement that the left is calling everyone who disagrees with the President racist is false.
People who act like racists are being called racists. Period.
You prove our point with the nature of your denial. You have no conception of what racism truly is and just apply the term to anyone who’s angry at Obama.
Try looking beyond race for a cause for grievance; you just might evolve into an approximation of a human bening.
Why don’t you cite specific examples like I did instead of finger pointing? Your obtuse finger pointing proves MY point. I must have made you very uncomfortable, you sound angry.
[…] course, some people got their feelings hurt and have responded; here is one such response: @Left-wing Nutjobs: Disagreeing with the President does NOT make me a […]
I think being called a racist for disagreeing with Obama is not as bad as being called a traitor for disagreeing with GW Bush – that accusation was thrown around carelessly and dangerously by many in the media during the “war on terror” and the subsequent hysteria of 9/11. The implication being, of course, that you can’t possibly be a patriot if you dare to disagree with the Commander in Chief. Being called a racist sucks, but it sucks a whole lot worse when people like Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are fanning the flames by accusing liberals of high treason based on their politics alone.
It is amazing how many nuts live on one small island.
Amnesty will make all illegal’s legal over night; therefore they get the health care and BO is then telling the truth
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2009/09/regarding-jimmy-carter-was-this-even-up.html
There are very few on the left who believe that everyone who disagrees with President Obama is a racist.
That’s not been my experience. The moment you get the better of a lefty in any argument (which is usually embarrassingly easy) they’ll find a way to call you racist. It’s their favorite trick. Once they brand you a racist they can write you off and refuse to deal with you because, hey, who cares what a racist thinks. This saves them the trouble of actually addressing any points you made.
This practice predates Obama by a couple of decades.
For the most part, accusations of racism have been reserved for those who act like racists.
Which is, of course, anyone who disagrees with the left. I saw a column last week that claimed, without a trace of irony, that wanting a small government was racist. Their “logic” was Small Government = States Rights = White Supremacy. This is what passes for an intellectual argument among lefties. It used to be only the far left, but it’s become much more mainstream since Obama took office.
There were lots of ugly racist signs at all the teaparty events and the 9/12 march had even more of those.
There were a few. There were 70,000 people there, so of course we’re going to see some tasteless signs, and a few that are outright racist. The lefty media kept showing us the same dozen signs over and over and over again. The signs carried by the other 69,982 people were ignored.
Without a doubt, simply disagreeing with Obama does not mean you’re a racist. Anyone on the left (or the middle, or the right) who says otherwise is making the same kind of opportunistic slam that guys like Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are so often (and so rightly) criticized for.
So, to that extent, the article makes a good point.
At the same time, it’s a point that any rational human being who’s not just trying to advance a position would understand implicitly.
The issue for the rational-right, however, is that they have a serious guilt-by-association problem.
The aforementioned Beck, O’Reilly and Limbaugh (and others) – whatever their actual personal views – traffic in racism. Sometimes that racism is obvious, but more often its veiled in a cloak of fear-mongering about the world ending because the left is secretly plotting to destroy America, about Obama’s agenda to make this a Muslim country, and a whole host of other bat-shit-crazy nonsense. Because these douchebags make their living trafficking in racism (and other isms), if you hold them up as heroes and go out an organize yourself a hoe-down based on the same ideology they spew, then it’s by no means irrational to ask whether or not you are in fact a racist. In fact, it’s a very logical question.
Similarly, crazy and racist are hardly strangers to one another, and if you’re out protesting the nation’s first black president, screaming a bunch of crap that makes no freaking sense (like, for example, “Obama’s Plan = White Slavery”), then I’m gonna go ahead and wonder if perhaps you’re swimming in the the klanish end of the pool. I’m going to wonder it about not just you, but also about the guy standing next to you who’s also yelling, and about the lady standing next to him. It’s a very reasonable thing for me to wonder under the circumstances.
And, if Michelle Malkin, Joe Wilson and others hold up the nut-job laden tea parties as a revolutionary political movement that we should all support… well, then I’m going to have to go ahead and ask if maybe Michelle and Joe too have some less savory racial views. And, if then the esteemed Mr. Wilson later shouts out “You lie!” to the president — which is, when done by a sitting Senator during a congressional address, an astonishing insult to the presidential office — then I may wonder if Joe gave himself permission to do it because the president is black (in reality, I didn’t wonder about Wilson’s racial views, though, it did piss me off).
We all know that there are a bunch of people out there fueling, and drawing fuel from, the thinly veiled racism that exists in our culture with respect to Obama. If you choose to associate with these folks, then you’re going to have to expect to be lumped in with them.
What the rational-right needs to do is stop letting the nut-jobs be your only voice and your only face. The rational-right (perhaps like moderate Muslims) needs to start marginalizing your own whack-nuts, and advancing well-reasoned voices and opinions. Until you do so, I’m happy to assume that you’re all members of one big happily hooded family.
Thanks Jess, for proving the point so well by providing a perfect example. Have you ever watched the people you’re denigrating? I don’t mean carefully selected YouTube clips, but a show or two or three? I doubt it. Although Beck, O’Rielly and Falwell have some pretty goofy ideas (along with some bang-on accurate ones) I’ve never seen any of them say anything racist. But then, to a lefty, anyone right of center is automatically racist, or “traffics in racism”, which sounds more reasonable that screaming RACIST! but is still saying the same thing. It’s a lazy substitute for thinking, and lazy thinking is endemic on the left.
Yeah, I have cable. I’ve watched them all, many times, over many years. I stand by my view. Frankly, it’s only the willfully blind or the terminally stupid who can’t see the subtext.
Ah, so anyone who doesn’t share your skewed viewpoint is blind and stupid. Got it.
Do you buy your smug by the pound, or do you get it in 55 gallon drums?
Not any of my viewpoints, but this on this one, yes.
Yeah, ummm, factcheck.org determined that Wilson was the liar in regard to the illegal immigrant thing. So, you might want to fix your “facts”. Thanks.
Yeah, ummm, you might want to check your definition of a “fact.” Whether illegal immigrants are covered under a plan that allows them to walk into any emergency room in the country and demand free health care is certainly debatable. Unilaterally stating that they are not covered, simply because they are denied subsidies, is, as asserted above, less than genuine.
Fischer, come on… a) isn’t that the law now? Nobody can be turned away at an emergency room. b) Saying that the health care bill provides for illegal immigrants to get health care is like saying that a law enforcement bill is giving something to illegal immigrants because they get to call 911 just like the rest of us.
Of course, I will admit that I haven’t read the bill — I’ve left that area of expertise up to you. But, I’m willing to bet that whatever “fact” we’re discussing here might say that Illegals can’t be turned away from a hospital because of inability to pay.
I’m not delighted at paying for an illegal immigrant’s leg to be put in a cast. However, I am equally unhappy about paying for a six-generations-in-America-redneck to go to the hospital because he tried to jump his jetski from a lake into a swimming pool.
“Illegal immigrants” are not a threat to this country. The threat is the rot from within our own “native born” population. I’ll take a Mexican neighbor who swam across the Rio Grande to get a job over some hee-haw watching nitwit from Polk County any day of the week. Chances are, in two generations, the Mexican’s family will own a business or be sending kids to college or both. Meanwhile, the progeny of Cletus T. Pudknocker will still be sitting on lawn chairs in front of their trailer bitching about how the Yankees took away their slaves.
I don’t disagree with anything you just posted, Marc. My only point was that there is nothing factually wrong with Rep. Wilson’s opinion that the president is lying to him. Illegal immigrant coverage or lack thereof is a debatable point — certainly not something that can be “fact checked.”
Meeeehhhh…. there kind of is….
okay… without conceding or disputing that you are correct re:the factual basis of illegal immigrant coverage, how about this one: President Obama said families earning less than $250,000 a year wouldn’t be subject to any tax increases; but the latest proposal contains a mandate for families to buy health insurance, from their employer or otherwise (i.e., the “public” option). If any tax payer doesn’t comply, they will face a $750 per person or $1,500 per family tax penalty, paid directly to the Internal Revenue Service. That would mean adding a tax burden to working Americans who are already struggling with the high cost of health insurance — which is the supposed reason for reforming the system in the first place. Can I call that a lie?
Hmmm…. maybe.
I’m not quite sure that is a “tax increase” or a “fine.”
a fine is a penalty for doing something wrong; a tax is a penalty for doing something right.
For your clients’ sake, I sure hope you argue legal cases better than you analyze politics.
The left-wing white civil rights activist fights for equal opportunity, assuming the black man will be a partner for progress. The right-wing civil rights activist fights for equal opportunity to insult, assuming the black man will be a liberal. The common denominator? assuming.
Your argument to give him the benefit of the doubt would carry much more weight if Wilson hadn’t been so completely dead wrong in his criticism.