An interesting pattern has emerged in the last few weeks, as President Obama’s ratings have started to come down to Earth: You can really see a type of Obama-hatred out there that really does cross over into a purely racial territory.
This has gotten especially worse in the aftermath of Obama’s comments and subsequent mea culpaon the Henry Louis Gates arrest, but the pattern has been there all the same. You can look back to the 2008 campaign, with the Jeremiah Wright controversies, the phony rumors of a tape of Michelle Obama defaming whites, and the slow but steady emergence of the Birthers. And these days, the Birthers seem to be getting more and more bellicose.
I think this is going to get more ugly and possibly more violent before it gets better. Â In a post in June called America’s Religious and Racial Equality of Fear, I referenced reporter Shep Smith who was disturbed by the rising hysteria of the white racist right, including those who continue the “birther movement” conspiracy:Â
SMITH: Thereare people now, who are way out there on a limb. And I think they’re just outthere on a limb with the email they send us. Because I read it, and they are outthere. I mean, out there in a scary place…I could read a hundred of themlike this…I mean from today. People who are so amped up and soangry for reasons that are absolutely wrong, ridiculous, preposterous.”
He went on toread an email, filled with the usual paranoid “birther” nonsense,which included an admonishment to Smith. “This is, I promise, arepresentative sample of the kind of things that we get here,” Smith said.
TV and Radio entertainers like Limbaugh and Dobbs are playing a dangerous game fueling these stories. To see Richard Cohen discuss this with the reasonable (for the moment) Bill O’Reilly see the video below
posted July 29, 2009 at 3:22 pm
I suppose I should have guessed that the grabbing at straws by those who choose to put hate before reason would get this ugly and this insane. They realize they are a dying breed, frustrated haters who can no longer control the opinions of their children. They’ve begun to notice the strange looks from others when they spout their hate and paranoia in public. Hopefully, we’ll be able to get some type of affordable national healthcare system in place and they will be able to seek professional help.
posted July 30, 2009 at 11:17 pm
They don’t care for the very simple reason that they do not have to. You see, they have learned that as long as they have a large enough following, it does not matter what the critics think.
posted July 31, 2009 at 10:45 am
I watched the above links of Beck and Lou Dobbs and wonder about what you are calling racism. If someone accuses Obama of being a racist, or insensitive to whites, that in itself is racist? And is it racist to suggest, as Lou Dobbs does, that Obama does not have a birth certificate proving his US citizenship? (Granted this is a bit crazy, as O’Reilly stated, but how is that racist? This is a dangerous position to take, that criticism of Obama is racist. Are you clairvoyant? Can you crawl into people’s heads and detect racism.
Be very careful or you may become what you most detest.
posted August 1, 2009 at 1:30 am
Obama gets what he deserves in this case.
As far as his racism…….He attended a Black church (for twenty some years) headed by a racist preacher( Wright) whom he called Uncle. The guy married him and baptized his girls for crying out loud.
He ditched his so called uncle while he was on the campaign trail only because he needed votes and he knew that if he was associated with Wrights blantant racism and hatred of America that he would probably not win.
You don’t sit and pray and listen to a pastor that spews the kind of hatred that Wright did, and not let it affect you. Come on…..
He jumped the gun with the Gates incident. He put his foot in his mouth and he knows it. He thinks that he is so personable and charming that everyone will just forget about his comments and go on. It might not be that easy. What if Bush had done the same thing only the circumstances were opposite?
Look who he surrounds himself with……..Farakan, The Black Panther Party etc…
posted August 1, 2009 at 8:40 am
As far as his racism…….He attended a Black church (for twenty some years) headed by a racist preacher( Wright) whom he called Uncle.
Conservatives’ (and the media’s) entire reaction to Rev. Wright was pretty blatantly racist. White preachers say what Wright said all the time, about God damning America for its sins, and prominent Republicans attend their churches. But because they’re white men talking about abortion and gay people, instead of black men talking about this country’s shameful history (and present) of oppression against people whose only sin was to not be white, and because it implicates the continuing racist attitudes of white America, it’s something dangerous and other.
He ditched his so called uncle while he was on the campaign trail only because he needed votes and he knew that if he was associated with Wrights blantant racism and hatred of America that he would probably not win.
That’s quite true. He knew, like any African American knows in this country, about the racial double standard that still exists. Again, if Wright were white and telling America that it was damned for abortion or homosexuality, the media wouldn’t have thought twice about it – as evidenced by the close ties of many prominent Republicans to Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell, who have in fact said those things. But because Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright are black, they’re held to a higher standard.
You don’t sit and pray and listen to a pastor that spews the kind of hatred that Wright did, and not let it affect you. Come on…..
Please point me to what I’m sure are the numerous message board posts, blog posts, and other articles written by you blasting Republicans for their ties to hateful people like Robertson, Falwell, John Hagee, or other right-wing hatejobs who also pronounce God’s damnation on America (and on much flimsier Scriptural evidence, as Wright had the Prophets to work with in pronouncing God’s judgment on a nation that mistreats its poor and oppressed). If you cannot do so, then you are a hypocrite for blasting President Obama here.
He jumped the gun with the Gates incident. He put his foot in his mouth and he knows it. He thinks that he is so personable and charming that everyone will just forget about his comments and go on. It might not be that easy.
He jumped the gun? Really? Again – how did the officer not act stupidly, arresting an old man in his own home?
Also, I’m impressed at your keen insight into President Obama’s personality and what he’s thinking. You must have spent a great deal of time with him in order to be able to know his thoughts so well. Please point me to what I’m sure are the numerous pictures of you and President Obama spending time together, such that you’re capable of making a claim that you know what he’s thinking.
What if Bush had done the same thing only the circumstances were opposite?
Bush wouldn’t have done the same thing, because Bush has never looked at the world through the eyes of someone who can be pulled over for driving through the wrong neighborhood, who is tailed by employees at retail stores simply because of the color of his skin, who can get arrested for being in his own home.
Look who he surrounds himself with……..Farakan, The Black Panther Party etc…
Please present credible evidence from verifiable and trustworthy sources – aka respected news outlets, not Fox News, the Washington Times, or other right-wing hate sites – showing that President Obama willingly associated with Louis Farrakhan and the Black Panthers. Note here that I said that you have to show evidence that President Obama associated with them – not that they tried to associate themselves with President Obama. If you cannot provide such evidence, intellectual honesty demands that you retract your statement or be known as a liar.
posted August 2, 2009 at 11:53 am
What James Gilmore said. Second and concur.
Look, churchmouse, we all get that you are conservative and a fundamentalist Christian. That does not mean you have to park your considerable brains at the door on this subject.
Your side will always defend Bush #43 and Palin, you count them as ‘one of you’. Fine. That does not mean, however, that you have to turn a blind eye to what are clearly mean-spirited, racially and ethnically motivated attacks against Obama.
The courts rejected the Birthers’ arguments during the election. They rejected these arguments because the Obama campaign was able to satisfy them that he is, indeed, an American by birth.
Take the time to look at which justice, appointed by which president and a very prominent member of which party finally dismissed the Birthers’ arguments.
We can argue your literal interpretation of some Biblical passages elsewhere. This one, however, is not a situation where you are arguing from a valid basis.
posted August 2, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Wright said, “For every one Oprah, a billionaire, you’ve got five million blacks who are out of work,” he said. “For every one Colin Powell, a millionaire, you’ve got 10 million blacks who cannot read. For every one Condoskeeza [sic] Rice, you’ve got one million in prison. For every one Tiger Woods, who needs to get beat, at the Masters, with his cap-blazing hips, playing on a course that discriminates against women. For every one Tiger Woods, we got 10,000 black kids who will never see a golf course.”
Barack Obama said Rev. Wright used “incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and blacks alike.”
Obama said Wright’s sermons went beyond a “religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country — a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America.”
I am surprised that Wright still loves Obama even though obama called him out. maybe it was planned to work this way. He forgets that his mother who gave birth to him was WHITE. That would make him half black.
How could any pastor who preached the word of God be so consumed with so much hate, jealously and divisiveness? And how did Obama sit idly by and do nothing? To be part of a church for over twenty years that stands on a message of hatred ?
Man of God???? Wright even slammed Italians……….” “The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.”
He hates everyone except Blacks.
Wright…“In a world that is controlled by white supremacy, in a country that is on its way to hell in a hand basket because of lying politicians, in a culture that still thinks ‘white is right’ and with young people who do not have a clue as to our story, our history, our legacy or our destiny, we still have African-American Christians who are more concerned about ‘bling bling’ than about freeing our minds,” Wright wrote.
Bling bling? You mean like Rap starts in the hood? Please……they make fun, mock and demean woman, their language is filty and so is the message.
What about loving your neighbor Rev. Wright?
posted August 2, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Panthera…….Who said I supported Bush and Palin? I voted for Bush yes only because of my pro-life views. Democrats are pro-abortion and I wont vote for someone that would believe that abortion particularly partial birth abortion is ok. That is the Democratic Party.
I will never vote for a Democrat. I didn’t like McCain either but he had more experience and can speak without a telepromptor. Obama I am not even convinced is a citizen.
I do not necessarily like Palin, I like Huckabee and Alan Keyes. I truly believe our nation was ready for a black president but not Obama. I think he was unqualified and only got elected because he was black. If you look at polls today, only blacks seem to keep supporting him. I think he dipped below 50% this week.
Obama gets what he deserves and he put his big foot in his mouth last week with his comments. We have a lot of big problems and he is focusing in on this. I thinks its odd that Obama and Gates were friends. Hmmmmmmm I wouldn’t put it past him to have set the whole thing up.
posted August 2, 2009 at 8:09 pm
I will never vote for a Democrat. I didn’t like McCain either but he had more experience and can speak without a telepromptor.
So can our President. Can’t you come up with anything new, instead of trying to resuscitate the pathetic talking points that didn’t work against him during the campaign?
Obama I am not even convinced is a citizen.
Ah, how nice. You’re pitching your tent with the “birther” crowd, who in their deep-seated racism can’t conceive of a black man being a real citizen. Check your allies, buddy… your fellow-travelers on that nutty conspiracy theory include white supremacists and similarly-hateful nutjobs. I’d advise you pick up the clue-phone and block the whacko Orly Taitz’s site from your browser.
I do not necessarily like Palin, I like Huckabee and Alan Keyes.
Alan Keyes? There’s your problem right there. You’re one of the fifteen people in America – five of whom are related to Alan Keyes – that take him seriously as a political figure.
I think he was unqualified and only got elected because he was black.
Which Constitutional qualification for the job does he not meet? (Make no reference here to the long-since-disproven birther nonsense; this is a place where rational adults have conversations, and thus the paranoid conspiracy theories of the willfully ignorant have no place here.)
If you look at polls today, only blacks seem to keep supporting him. I think he dipped below 50% this week.
You have a rather nasty habit of making claims and failing to support them with evidence. You still have yet to provide a source indicating that President Obama has associated himself with Farrakhan and the Black Panthers, even as you made the same accusation in another thread with the same lack of evidence. Intellectual honesty demands that you support claims of fact with links to verifiable and reliable sources. Let’s see ‘em.
Obama gets what he deserves and he put his big foot in his mouth last week with his comments.
Gets what he deserves? For what? Again, you have yet to demonstrate that Officer Crowley didn’t act stupidly. You simply assert and assert and assert and provide no evidence and no support for your claims. If you cannot support your claims, I recommend you either (a) stop making those claims or (b) find somewhere to post your rants where people aren’t expected to support claims with evidence.
We have a lot of big problems and he is focusing in on this.
It wasn’t as much Obama focusing on this as it was the media. It was one question at the end of a long press conference, the rest of which had been devoted to health care policy (during which, I’ll note, President Obama answered press questions without a teleprompter). It was maybe 1% of the total press conference.
Yet it was all the media could talk about the next day – probably because the white racist hegemony feels like it’s absolving itself of more sins by having another “conversation about race” instead of doing what it ought to do and materially improving the lives of people of color, and also probably because the white-owned and white-dominated media wants to avoid talking about real issues like health care that might upset their corporate puppetmasters.
I thinks its odd that Obama and Gates were friends.
Why? What’s odd about that?
I wouldn’t put it past him to have set the whole thing up.
Ah, another unsupported claim, this time couched in the weasel words of “I wouldn’t put it past him.” If you’re not going to support your claim, please don’t post it where it gets in the way of conversations between thinking people.
posted August 2, 2009 at 8:57 pm
“…the ‘birther’ crowd, who in their deepseated racism…”
Why is demanding proof of Obama’s status as a native born American citizen racism? It is typical of the “progressives” (liberals) to call names rather that respond to arguments. Chairman Obama can put this to rest quickly by producing an official birth certificate from the state of Hawaii. During the campaign the same issue arose regarding McCain’s birth. He was born in the U.S. Canal zone and quickly produced his birth certificate. Why can’t Mr. O do the same?
And now, it is time for this typical white person to return to his favorite Sunday afternoon activity, cleaning his rifle. Oh, and for the record, I voted for Gore and Kerry.
posted August 2, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Why is demanding proof of Obama’s status as a native born American citizen racism?
Demanding proof isn’t racism. Not accepting multiple sources of proof when they’ve been presented, and believing despite every single bit of evidence that our first African-American President is not an American citizen, is. I guarantee that you wouldn’t be asking this question of Barack Obama were a white man with a white man’s name. Just look at your bedfellows – every white supremacist and racist crank the extreme Right can dig up.
It is typical of the “progressives” (liberals) to call names rather that respond to arguments.
I’ll respond to your arguments when you present one worth responding to. As it is, you’ve got a whole bunch of unsourced claims. In an argument, you present evidence and support for your claims, such that the person with whom you’re arguing can engage and respond to that support. Absent that, you don’t have an argument, just a rant.
Obama can put this to rest quickly by producing an official birth certificate from the state of Hawaii.
He did present a birth certificate. He presented it during the campaign. It was verified by multiple reliable sources to be an official birth certificate from the State of Hawai’i. Unless, of course, you’re suggesting that the government of Hawai’i is in on the conspiracy as well.
And now, it is time for this typical white person to return to his favorite Sunday afternoon activity, cleaning his rifle.
ummmm… have fun with that? Not sure why I should care what you’re doing with your Sunday afternoon.
posted August 3, 2009 at 12:28 am
I suspect we all know full well what the ‘cleaning his rifle’ comment means.
Look, we won, you lost. Either get your acts together and come up with someone the rest of the voters in America prefer in 2012 or accept that the American president until 2016 will be Obama.
Which is fine with me – I rather enjoy having a president who is intelligent, articulate, decent, honest and competent.
posted August 3, 2009 at 12:49 am
“Which is fine with me – I rather enjoy having a president who is intelligent, articulate, decent, honest and competent.”
He is a master deciever and faud and time will show this to be true. His popularity is dipping this week below 50%
This is my favorite clip of Obama. When I need a laugh I watch it.
LMAO He was hilarious…trying to make excuses. He is absolutely a joke. He can’t think, articulate……….was he drunk?
I also love this……Howard Stern sends reporter to Harlem to interview blacks about Obama. LMAO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5p3OB6roAg&feature=PlayList&p=EA02C28DCA36E623&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=32
And just how did Obama get elected? Race wasnt an issue?
This says it ALL……….They must have watched him in that teleprompter gig. LMAO
They think Palin will do a good job. LMAO
They are against stem cell.
Absolutely hilarious.
posted August 3, 2009 at 11:47 am
Boy it got quiet in here all of a sudden, nobody liked the clips? LOL
posted August 3, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Boy it got quiet in here all of a sudden, nobody liked the clips? LOL
No, for me at least, it got hard to argue with someone who completely fails to present anything akin to a reasonable argument supported by evidence. On numerous occasions I have asked you to support your outrageous claims; every single time you have failed to present such support, instead choosing to hide behind rapid changes in subject and weasel words. Thus, it’s clear that you aren’t interested in a reasonable discussion or engagement with intellectual (or really any kind of) honesty, but rather in presenting unsourced, unsupported, and in many cases completely fabricated right-wing talking points.
If you’d like to be engaged with, you can start by actually presenting an argument rather than more flimsily-sourced rants worthy of hatemongers like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Until then, I think we’d like to have a conversation among rational adults; if you’ve got nothing to contribute to such a conversation, the least you could do is not get in the way.
posted August 4, 2009 at 1:04 am
How could any pastor who preached the word of God be so consumed with so much hate, jealously and divisiveness? And how did Obama sit idly by and do nothing? Obama was a member of that church. If he thought the message was so hateful and wrong, why didnt he leave? The message must not have bothered him, because it took an election to ditch the guy.
posted August 6, 2009 at 12:35 am
From churchmouse: “How could any pastor who preached the word of God be so consumed with so much hate, jealously and divisiveness?…”
So if I grant you your original premise (I don’t), your Christian solution is tit for tat, hate for hate?
Can you explain your theological basis for this position?
posted August 7, 2009 at 12:39 am
Christ is about love and forgiveness but that isnt all He is about. He is about righteous behavior and standing on the Word.
The solution is Christ and living the worldview that He commands for us. He has set the rules and boundaries. These are NOT negotiable.
What don’t you get here? I do not hate anyone. I do not hate homosexuals anymore than I hate adulterers or people who lust or use profanity. But I condone the sinful acts they do. They should not condone my behavior if it is scripturally ungodly.
Christ said what marriage should be. Christ said who, what and where sex should take place. It is obvious in scripture what He ordained.
He made females for males. One woman, one man united in marriage. No one should put asunder. The man leaves his FATHER AND MOTHER…….and is joined to his female wife and they become ONE.
No where in scripture does it say or imply anything different.
If it does say something different produce the scripture. This as I said has nothing to do with hate, it has to do with putting God first and doing what he says is right.
posted August 8, 2009 at 12:40 am
The “professor gone wild” episode involving Harvard professor Henry Lewis Gates, Jr. has generated enormous media attention, but few, if any, commentators have tried to explain why this distinguished African American professor “lost it.” Having personally encountered numerous black affirmative action professors first hand, let me offer an explanation that transcends this particular incident. First, Gates is the classic black “empty suit:” the articulate, well-attired, well-credentialed, superficially scholarly African American who is really an imposter, an actor playing a role. Gullible white outsiders (but not professors in “real” academic departments), are just easily conned by fancy vocabulary, name dropping and similar ruses.
Second, empty suit impostors enjoy what I call intellectual diplomatic immunity on all matters touching on race, a sense of intellectual entitlement that probably began in college, where “compassionate” white professors knowingly tolerate stupid class comments and shoddy papers to “help” strugglers admitted by affirmative action. Of the utmost importance, well-socialized whites simply learn that it is impolite, even potentially dangerous, to dispute these dubious assertions. It is as if empty suits were cars with “DPL” (diplomat) license plates and therefore immune from speeding tickets. Indeed, the more transparent the mendacity, the higher the speaker’s social standing, and the greater the white acquiescence in both.
For example, how many times have these empty-suit black “experts” glibly explained away black crime by insisting that police disproportionately target African Americans, or that blacks perform poorly on standardized tests, since all tests are culturally biased? Or opine that African Americans are virtually debilitated psychologically by white-held “dangerous” stereotypes about their IQ, work habits, or impulse control? Or that corporations and universities still refuse to hire capable blacks despite intense government pressure? Much of Black Studies is little more than such fabrications dressed up in academic jargon. It is not the mere foolishness of these pronouncements that draws our attention; what is remarkable is that whites seldom, if ever, confront the outrageous assertions from the empty suits, let alone defend themselves against baseless charges.
Observing the race-related double standard can be painful for whites. In a public debate over dreadful African American SAT scores a black expert might rave and rant about invisible racism, a Euro-centric curriculum, the lack of black role models and mentors in schools, inattention to the unique learning style of blacks and similar explanations, but it will be a rare day if he or she is called upon to offer any scientific proof. By contrast, his debate opponent will immediately be excoriated if he even dares hint at IQ differences, though copious, detailed citations are immediately provided. Our empty suit imposter will predictably respond with “How can you possibly say that? We all know that no such evidence exists!” The counter-charge–where is your scientific evidence?–will be casually side-stepped, since how can a white tell a well-credentialed black about the black experience.
This immunity has two major consequences. First, the absence of rebuke only strengthens the pontificator’s flawed version of reality. An entire class of people will now occupy a fantasy land; blithely making it up becomes a way of life, a barely noticed habit. Recall President Obama telling his Cairo Muslim audience about how Muslims contributed so much to the building of America, including sports and the civil rights movement. And even that there are seven million Muslims in America. Surely somebody must have read this speech beforehand, but who will bell this cat? To differ in such circumstances is not just the normal give and takes of intellectual argument; objections indicates disrespect (“dissing”), and the stronger the “disrespect” the more vehement the outrage. The process feeds on itself–savvy whites learn that to disagree with those possessing diplomatic immunity only invites avoidable trouble, and like a creature without any predators, the empty suit grows increasingly self-confident, pompous and addicted to deference.
Second, the physical presence of these self-possessed experts renders public intellectual honesty virtually impossible. The empty suit is a human intellectual neutron bomb–his very presence kills off all disagreeable ideas while leaving physical reality intact. At most, a few whites hearing crackpot assertions may sarcastically whisper disagreements to close-by friends or, more likely, later express bewilderment to trusted confidants. Public disagreement is always muted, most likely a quibble than a direct challenge. If the empty-suit, diplomatically-protected speaker states that white suburban schools out-perform black inner city schools because since they spend more money (a bald-faced lie), the typical “challenge” during Q and A might be, “Is money the only factor in academic accomplishment?” The well-socialized white would never, ever say, “Your statistics are hogwash, many black-dominated schools far outspend white schools, and the worst performing but well-funded schools are in places like Washington, D.C. and Newark, N.J. where nearly all the students, teachers and administrators are black. What about Utah where whites perform well despite about average school funding? How do you explain that?”
No doubt, such a “hostile” question would bring an embarrassed silence and scowls from blacks in the room. Rather than receive a serious, detailed answer (probably beyond the speaker’s ability in any case), the questioner would be chided for his impudence. Thus understood, public “Dialogues on Race” or “Conversations” where these protected empty suits assemble are ceremonial professions of faith, cathartic events in which educated blacks gain a modicum of psychological satisfaction by berating hapless white devils. It is no accident that these speeches often occur in black churches and have a revivalist “Amen, brother” flavor. Speakers also gain opportunities to “be important,” burnish professional resumes, practice their impersonation skills and otherwise gain legitimacy as a race spokesman (an achievement far more important than getting the facts right).
To return to Gates and his “gone wild” confrontation, it is no wonder that some working-class, uniform-wearing white who earns a small fraction of his Harvard salary is instinctively judged stupid, disrespectful, and impudent–even a racist cracker–when questioning the highly self-esteemed, often honored professor in his own house. This is not about law enforcement; it is about an artificially inflated ego that has gone unchallenged for decades. Of course Gates said to the cop, “Do you know who I am?” That somebody, let alone a white policeman, might question him and demand his ID, assaults his very persona, like giving the Pope a speeding ticket. What’s next? A lowly Harvard undergraduate demanding Gates supply statistical evidence that the U.S. is hopelessly mired in racism or that the legacy of slavery explains the poor academic performance of blacks? This is all about proper deference, not a burglary investigation. Recall the similar “how dare you?” fury when Harvard President Lawrence Summers told Cornel West, another empty suit professor with DPL plates, to stop trying to be a rap star and do serious scholarship. West was outraged over this dissing and quickly decamped to Princeton where he once again enjoys immunity from reality.
Is this a problem to be corrected? Should whites try to speak knowledge to stupidity? Might roving “truth squads” shadow these black pseudo experts and publicly confront them? This might be tempting, even beneficial for public debate but silence is best. On balance, white anguish aside, these exasperating rituals may be socially beneficial, the best way of coping (odious though it may be) with a hopeless mess. The black intellectual class is kept happy, at relatively little cost (notwithstanding high university salaries for their airhead pontificating), convinced that they are respected serious “scholars,” while whites continue on, doing their own, legitimate academic work. In any case, intellectually upgrading these empty suit scholars would be a waste of time–there are no remedial Ph.D. programs.
Openly challenging these diplomatically protected persons can even be disastrous. Just imagine the social damage if the immunity from criticism were withdrawn, that is, if there occurred an onslaught of rock-solid rebuttals when a putative black scholar claimed once again that blacks are unfairly targeted by racist cops. Or if affirmative action university job candidates were grilled about their research, in the same way that white or Asian candidates are hauled over the coals. Such intellectual challenges to the empty suit would indisputably demonstrate that he is in over his head, a fool who cannot master logic, let alone statistics and scientific evidence. This would cause public humiliation (“disrespect”), the puncturing of an inflated ego, and, worse, a public demonstration that blacks cannot intellectually measure up to whites. The charade would be exposed and the upshot could only be yet more anti-white anger and resentment, as well as increased litigation against various institutions for failing to meet minority recruitment targets.
Thus, on one hand, the Gates episode brings to the surface what has been occurring for decades–intellectually sub-par blacks endlessly shielded from a disconcerting reality in a well-intention effort to create racial diversity. On the other hand, accepting that unpleasant reality may be a more prudent course of action than fighting it.
posted August 9, 2009 at 10:50 pm
How could any pastor who preached the word of God be so consumed with so much hate, jealously and divisiveness?
All of you right wing, evangelical-fundamentalist Xian types are consumed with hatred for gay people, hatred for Jews, hatred for blacks, hatred for Democrats, etc.
The rest of us have no use for you.
posted August 14, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Christians are told to love their enemies but also are told to abhor evil. That’s the rub. Do most Christians hate blacks. No many voted for Alan Keyes a black. I voted for Glenn Poshard a democrat. No the problem is not democrat, blacks, or Jews, or gays but SIN and that is something that God hates so if Obama has policies that are Christian then Christians should support him but if he support unrighteous policies those policies should be hated and vigorously opposed.