Is anger at Obama based on his race?
Lots of conversations recently about whether the anti-Obama fury is race-based. Jeremy D. Mayer writes on Politico.com that he doesn’t think it’s all based on racism, but that Republican leaders are too complacent with the anti-black language and imagery being used by some of the anti-Obama leaders.
To make his point, he speculates on what would have happened had Joe Lieberman been elected president.
“Imagine that Joe Lieberman had been inaugurated this past January, as an independent with a neocon foreign policy that infuriated Democrats and a domestic health care plan that enraged Republican,” Mayer writes. “We’d surely see some posters at anti-Lieberman rallies showing hook-nosed bankers meeting in cabals planning the invasion of Iran or the destruction of the American health care system…
“But the mainstream leadership of both parties would immediately react to even subtle appeals to anti-Jewish sentiment. One reason Pat Buchanan ended his long career in Republican politics as an obscure third-party candidate was his consistent tendency to cozy up to neo-Nazis, former Nazis and other anti-Semites. When former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) and those closest to her spouted anti-Semitic rhetoric, mainstream Democrats largely abandoned her.”
Mayer contends that one reason the race-baiting continues is that the GOP has little at stake in offending blacks because so few blacks vote Republican. Jewish voters and donors are sought by both parties, though, so anti-Semitism is quickly denounced.
However, he says, “There won’t be significant numbers of blacks in the Republican coalition until phrases like “welfare thug” attract the Republican outrage they so richly deserve.”
(1 votes, average: 1 out of 5)
Loading ...
Jean is projects editor at the Post-Dispatch. She is a member of Bridges Across Racial Polarization, a group devoted to creating friendships and fostering communication among racial and cultural groups in the community. After growing up in a small town in Kansas, she lived in Kansas City and Wilmington, Del., before moving to St. Louis in 2004. She and her husband, Dan Wiggs, live in University City. 
The whole race baiting discussion just shows how morally and intellectually bankrupt both parties are.
Hmmm, Pictures of a watermelon patch on the White House lawn, Curious George dolls with Obama stickers, Editorial cartoons matching policy to dead chimps and militant afros/ak47s. Posters here using phrases like “shukin (sic) and jivin’”, Uncle Tom, half-breed unamerican son of a Kenyan Arab born outside of the U.S. etc. I would say most of the anger ends up looking a lot like racism.
He’s our President and his work is the most visible in the world. Any U.S. President’s policies will always be infinitely scrutinized and criticized. It goes with the office. But, I don’t think it’s based on race. I believe he’s competent. His downfall is he seems to believe government should be everything to everybody. Government has never been efficient at anything. Let us keep more of our hard-earned money and we’ll improve our lives on our own. I don’t want half my check gone before I get it. He’s trying to represent those who, for whatever reason, are either unable or unwilling to educate or employ themselves. He’s our President and debate should end at the shore line. The loyal opposition is still loyal.
I really don’t know. Isn’t he biracial?
Yep, good luck having a civil discussion about race in St. Louis. I remember once hearing that African-Americans can’t be racist because they lack the power. Now that we have an African-American president and attorney general, is it okay for blacks to be racist now?
Nah, he is an egotistical maniac who thinks he walks on water and wants to change the world! His color? That’s just a bi-product of what he is doing, BUT, it will influence the general public against voting another one in office!!!
Of course it is about Obama’s race. Everything is. There is indeed a racist under every rock.
If one goes to Google News one will find a plethora of news articles/columns that show liberals believing the following:
1.) The Obama Joker posters were racist. (But the Bush Joker Posters somehow weren’t to liberals).
2.) The word “Socialism” under the picture of the Obama Joker was racist.
3.) The Tea Party people were racist.
4.) The 9/12 marchers were racist.
5.) Joe Wilson is a racist, even though he only said, “You lie.”
And on and on it goes…
*****Liberals love to play the race card whenever and wherever they can. And liberals love to take a few instances at a march or rally among thousands of people, lump them all together, and say that all of the marchers and ralliers are racist.*****
Maureen “Moron” Dowd said that “fair or not,” Jow Wilson actually meant to say “You lie, boy.” So, when Jimmy Carter said that Obama was “this black boy,” at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, Maureen Dowd (being the hypocrite that she is) heard nothing and said nothing, yet she somehow heard Jow Wilson say “You lie, boy,” (when Joe Wilson never said that). It makes you wonder what other imaginary things go on in her head. I wonder how many imaginary friends she has.
On top of all of this, Obama can say that in his book “The Audacity of Hope,” that he heard Rev. Wright’s say that “White folks greed runs a world in need,” the first day that he sat under one of Wright’s sermons. Obama also said in his book that that sermon brought a tear to his eye. He then went on to attend that church for 20 years.
Obama engaged in racial stereotyping and said that his white grandmother was a “typical white person.” And these aren’t the only times when he has shown that he has quite a few racist bones in his body. And both of Obama’s books show an obsession with race on his part.
The criticism of President Obama has nothing at all to do with race. This is not the same as saying that racism does not exist. There are certainly some racists that oppose Mr. Obama. However, there are also some racists among the 96% of blacks how voted for him. This is beside the point. The opposition to the President’s policies could be said to be based on race if the people opposing his policies would be for them if he were white. The vast majority (or all) of the most vocal protesters would be against the proposals if they were made by a person of any color (or a little green Martian for that matter). The last time I checked, Mr. Obama’s race has not changed since he was elected by a large majority including many white Americans.
Anybody that runs as a centrist and then moves sharply to the left after the election is going to see some strong opposition. People have been duped and they are very angry. Mr. Obama was only able to pull off this deception because of coverage by an adoring press. A more conservative candidate could never have gotten away such nefarious associates (Rev. Wright, Van Jones, ect.), lying to the public, or hiding his true political leanings.
Would the press less a Republican candidate get away with the tale tales Mr. Obama is telling about his health care plan? These include the following: his plan reduces costs, everyone can be covered for everything with no cost to anyone, Medicare funding can be cut by $500 million with no decrease in services, and no middle tax increases. The Senate plan now being discussed includes expensive surtaxes that will be passed on to consumers. The individual mandate forces many poor individuals to buy expensive plans that they do not want or need. Is this the hope and change that cause Americans to vote for Mr. Obama?
The press is now throwing out red herrings such as calling his opponents racist in order to distract from the real impact of Mr. Obama’s policies. If the press and Mr. Obama’s other surrogates want to be taken seriously, they need to quite playing the race card every time they start losing a policy debate.
Why is it that anytime a white person disagrees with a black person that it is considered racism? Why can’t I just tell you that I don’t like Obama’s policies and will do all I can to stop them. ‘Cause that is exactly the way it is with me. In fact, if Al Gore was in office I would still feel the way I do. I don’t like Gore or Obama and I don’t like the liberalism of Obama, Gore, Pelosi et al. But when I first admitted I didn’t vote for Obama I was classified immediately as a racist. And it has only gotten worse as time has passed.
Ray Campbell,
Liberals are desperate right now, thus:
They race bait so as to set up a diversion that will take the attention away FROM the abomination known as ObamCare and TOWARDS those who are opposed to it.
They do this to try and make it appear that those who are opposed to ObamCare don’t oppose it because it stinks to high heaven, but oppose it because Obama is black. That is why they have to take the very few odd balls and loose cannons that show up at the rallies and try and make it appear as if they truly represent ALL of those that participated in the Tea Parties, marched at the 9/12 March, showed up at the town halls and so on.
Libderals tried the route of calling them nazis, brownshirts and an angry mob. Didn’t work. It backfired.
Then they tried to label them as being dangerous domestic terrorists. Didn’t work. It backfired.
Now they are trying to smear tham as being racists. Won’t work. It is backfiring right now.
People are tired of the race baiting coming either from the White House, from Obama’s fellow Democrats, from the MSM and from supporters of Obama and the Democrats.