A year ago, in the final stretch of the U.S. election campaign, I would find myself in New York or Los Angeles or points in between and asked for my thoughts on who would win. I usually answered “John McCain,” more in hope than expectation: I’ve no use for the soi-disant “maverick,” who was a catastrophic candidate, but in those heady days between Sarah Palin’s boffo convention speech and McCain’s characteristically inept response to the economic meltdown there was briefly a faint chance that the Alaskan governor might yet save the Republican party from its rendezvous with destiny.
And at that point the worldly liberal Democrat who had sought my views would nod thoughtfully and agree: yes, McCain would win. Not because of Sarah Palin. But because Americans were too racist to stomach the thought of a black man in the White House.
I never reckoned much to this argument. If you spent 20 minutes on the campaign trail almost anywhere, it seemed clear that many voters felt the first 43 chief executives did not reflect the rich tapestry of the American community and were panting to cross “Vote for a black president” off their to-do list. On the morning of Nov. 5, I thought about all those Democrats so convinced of their fellow Americans’ ingrained racism. As my comrade Victor Davis Hanson put it, we conservatives were wrong about the election results, but those liberals were wrong about their country. Which you would think might prove chastening.
But apparently not. We are now eight months into the 44th presidency. The Obamessiah has come down to earth. He’s now just another 50/50 president, his approval ratings having fallen further faster (according to some polls) than any occupant of the Oval Office since Truman. The obvious explanation for this would seem to be his ambitious, expensive, transformative and radical agenda: the governmentalization of health care, cap-and-trade environmental legislation, the federal takeover of the automobile industry, the gazillion-dollar flopperoo of the non-stimulating “stimulus,” more debt, more deficits, more taxes, more regulation, more government, everywhere you turn. This would be a tough sell for even the smoothest pitchman.
But sometimes the obvious explanation is too obvious. Those “tea party” protests? “This is about hating a black man in the White House,” explained the eminent thinker Janeane Garofalo. “The only thing missing is a noose,” huffed L.A. Weekly about a poster showing Obama as the Joker. It turned out to be the work of a left-wing Palestinian from Chicago, but why get hung up on details? If you oppose the massive expansion of government and multi-trillion-dollar expenditures, you’re a racist.
The other day, President Obama gave a speech to Congress on health care, and, in response to a more or less routine bit of dissembling, a Republican representative called Joe Wilson yelled out “You lie!” Because the President’s speech was a dud, the Democrat-media complex decided to divert attention to the no-name congressman’s outrageous ejaculation and give it the old flood-the-zone treatment. Maureen Dowd, the elderly schoolgirl at the New York Times, weighed in:
“Surrounded by middle-aged white guys—a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men’s club—Joe Wilson yelled ‘You lie!’ at a president who didn’t.
“But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!”
“Boy”? Why, yes. Like some bull-necked plantation overseer from the even-more-sepia snapshot days, Mistuh Wilson was teaching that uppity Nigra a lesson he wouldn’t forget.
I suppose it’s possible that opposition to the federal government’s annexation of one-sixth of the U.S. economy is being driven by nostalgia for segregated lunch counters. And no doubt, if you write for the New York Times or teach race and gender studies at American colleges for long enough, it seems entirely reasonable, listening to a patient profess satisfaction with her present health insurance arrangements, to respond, “You know, if you re-sewed the back of that hospital gown so your ass wasn’t showing, your Klan sheet would be as good as new.”
Thus, Melissa Harris-Lacewell, professor of African-American studies at Princeton, was invited on to National Public Radio to expound on the use of “racial code words” in “the current opposition to health care reform.” For example, explained professor Harris-Lacewell, “language of personal responsibility is often a code language used against poor and minority communities.”
Pages: 1 2
Print
Comment
So….Republicans who oppose Obama are racists, yet Dems who voted him in primarily because he was black are?
I do not dislike Obama because he is black.
I dislike Obama because he is incompetent……overmatched for the job. These are the same reasons I dislike Jimmy Carter, Obama's political bosom buddy.
Come on 2010 mid-terms!
This is what I can't stand about Steyn:
The vast majority of people are attributing Obama's decline to both his policies and his leadership. In the very column Steyn cites, Dowd herself describes the racist elements as the "loco fringe" – she too has been critical of the President.
In his swipe at the Times, Steyn also ignores the David Brooks column that flat-out rejected Dowd's opinion.
And finally, Steyn didn't mention the President himself, who when asked about the question of racism pointed to his own election to say that clearly race is not a factor.
This is what I can't stand about Steyn:
The vast majority of people are attributing Obama's decline to both his policies and his leadership. In the very column Steyn cites, Dowd herself describes the racist elements as the "loco fringe" – she too has been critical of the President.
In his swipe at the Times, Steyn also ignores the David Brooks column that flat-out rejected Dowd's opinion.
And finally, Steyn didn't mention the President himself, who when asked about the question of racism pointed to his own election to say that clearly race is not a factor.
The topic of race has been insignificant in the vast majority of debate on the President's performance.
Canada's resident neo con coming to the rescue of Wealthcare. Funny thing is Mr. Steyn, public single payer healthcare is pretty popular wherever it has been implemented. Even Thatcher in Britain did not dismember the NHS. Methinks thats why the Neo cons in the US are so paranoid about reform. They know people will like it and they will not be able to get rid of it. Public Healthcare is popular in the US, try convincing seniors to get rid of their medicare or vetrans to drop the VA. Or for that matter get Republicans in congress to scrap their health plans.
THe resistance to Obama is little more than old fashion Mccarthyesque fearmongering of the US right. Its a shame an old Canadian magazine is starting to spew the FOx "news" propaganda.
So Mr. Steyn should we also abandon our socialized military and our socialized education system?
this article is accurate, but there are some deeper points to be made:
1) native americans were the original people in america.
2) “black-white” relations have not been examined within the broader issue of american race problems dating back to the native americans, who were exterminated by american governments.
3) obama is not a racist.
The lack of respect for your ideological opponents displayed in this piece serves to discredit your arguments, and to make it easier to label your article as a conservative diatribe (whether it is or not).
You claim that the Obama White House is taking advantage of race issues to deflect criticism, but Obama has repeatedly stated that his race has not hurt him. You would be much better off blaming Obama for the statements of whoever happens to agree with him; though that statement would lack legitimacy for seperate reasons.
You also underhandedly imply that Obama won because he is the first black president. This suggestion is hypocritical in a column that seeks to attack a group for playing games with race.
Any racism that has affected Barack Obama played out long ago when he was growing up. You can safely declare the end of racism when we see equality in the prison population statistics, or when you find conclusive evidence of a gentic predisposition for crime shared by Latinos, Blacks, and Aboriginals.
P.S. I love it when comments are deleted on message boards tied to articles written by free-speech crusaders.
Steyn says it like it is!! good on him—most people can not comprehand–left & right. During the war we were alowed 2 use "slang" 4 races–so what's wrong with that? Has everyone lost their sense of HUmor!!! I only use–this as example- heaven forbid– I should offend any one—- chinese were –chinks–blacks were negros—Japaness were japs—indians were indians—Italians –waps–Russians -russkys–GErmans were Nazis—so on it went. It wasn't used as racist– only in your minds!!! U wouldn't want 2 know what we were called– I lived– so keep up the good work–styen–enjoy your columns immensly!!!
Here is a good analysis in support of Mark Steyn's column from a blogger on WordPress:
http://divinesatisfaction.com/2009/10/08/the-hate...
WOW why should I care I dont live in the states come on MacLeans stop shuving this american media controversies down our throat were in CANADA not AMERICA I DONT LIKE AMERICA
Janeane Garofalo? SNL flunky. Why? Please stop quoting sub-celebrities. Does anyone really care what they think? Please stop, this celebrity infatuation is killing my soul. Whether I agree with the article is pointless, please stop abusing us with celebrity opinion…
I wouldn't say Obama's choices are the reason for his lower opinion ratings, but maybe his inaction on them. If he committed dearly to his campaign promises then his approval rating would be higher. To be honest there is an overtone of racism towards Obama. The Sercret Service reported that there is a 400% increase in legitimate threats to Obama's safety by certain members of the public, though only a 5% increase in men inrolled in the Secret Service. I honestly can't believe that Steyn would support Palin, though. His postive opinon of her is something that I fail to comprehend, never mind able to understand, and no I'm not sour grapes towards those to the right of me (no matter how far to the right), there are many Rebublicans and conservatives that I deeply admire and respect, but Sarah Palin!?
And what made you think, with his background, behavior, and associates, that he was a healer? Goes to a church and listens to hate-filled rants, has a friend who says he wished he had set off more bombs, and the guy refused to show anything as proof of who he was, but arrogantly expected us to take his word for it. Made those narcissitic speeches about "I" "I "I" and married a woman ashamed of her country.
Oh, yeh-came off as a real Ghandi, didn't he?
Another right wing Jewish immigrant looking to divide America.
Put Steyn, right next to Orly Tatz, & Rupert Murdoch.
Ehm – Steyn isn't Jewish, but thanks for trying to participate in the debate. You tried with all your might, Failiot!
Janeane Garofalo presenting as an intellectual who would be frightened by those poor white trash tea partier rebels. If they didn't know who she was (a never has-been starlet), just by her appearance, she would terrify the socks off most of these people. Combination librarian, biker-chick with a touch of native american (hip jewelry). What is she? Someone without a movie career who'll say anything to get attention. Wearing dorky glasses won't make you intelligent. Are those tatooes real or the lick-on and wash off kind.?
Ever notice how Leftist scum trot out anti-gay stuff when it serves their purposes? Oh, they're all for gay rights, etc. when it helps serve their political coalition. But when they want to take potshots at their opponents, what do they do? Do they debate the merits of the argument? Why no…they insinuate the opponent is a closeted homosexual. Typical Leftist troll…it's why half the country hates your #)&%# guts. But let me help you out doofus; on this thread we're talking about race, so the appropriate action for drooling uber-trolls is to scream 'racist"…you need to save your "fag" remarks for a different thread.