The Racism of Reid and the Democrats

The recent political uproar caused by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev) comments about President Obama’s race bring to the fore the failure of the Democratic Party to stand by its presumptive principles. In an upcoming book, Reid is quoted as privately describing Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” when he ran against the current President in the 2008 Democratic primaries.

Unsurprisingly, the Democrats have rushed to protect the Majority Leader by accepting his apology and commencing an attack on the GOP. Even the vitriolic Al Sharpton, forever looking for an excuse to play the race card, has defended Reid. This stands in stark contrast to a similar incident involving former Republican Majority Leader Trent Lott, who praised the segregationist Senator Strom Thurmond. After stating the arguably ambiguous racist statement that, “…if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years,” Lott was summarily abandoned by Republicans and forced to resign.

Admittedly, the GOP has used this to their political advantage. Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele, who is black, has decried the Democrats’ double standard. However, regardless of whether Reid’s comments warrant dismissal or other punitive action, the incident highlights the increasing hypocrisy in the Democratic Party. Modern Democrats are largely out of touch with the fundamentals of the Democratic Party. While Democrats of yesterday argued for equal opportunity and treatment for everyone regardless of individual characteristics, Democrats of today clamor for special treatment for groups based on these same traits. In a discussion on McGovernism, the political philosophy of modern Democrats rising from McGovern’s presidential campaign in 1972, Norman Podhoretz, in his book “Why are Jews Liberal?,” develops this profound analysis:

…[W]heras the Democrats [since Roosevelt] had believed in treating individuals as individuals without regard to “race, creed, color, or country of national origin,” McGovernism’s embrace of quotas translated into treating individuals entirely with regard to race, creed, and color; and whereas the Democrats had interpreted the idea of equality as meaning of opportunity for individuals, McGovernism took it to mean equality of results for groups.

This new style of racism undermines the very premises on which the Democratic Party is supposedly built. Harry Reid’s comment is only the latest indication of the rampant prejudice and naked disparagement of minorities harbored by the New Left. This adds to a long line of questionable incidents within the Democratic fold; from the inclusion of former Ku Klux Klan member Senator Robert Byrd as one of the leading Democrats in the Senate (current President pro tempore) to the multifarious occurrences of race-baiting by the pernicious Al Sharpton and equally pestiferous Jesse Jackson.

The fact of the matter is the Democrats have long since failed to live up to their own professed high standards of equality. Reid’s snafu is indicative of how the party is only able to think in terms of race. A race-tinted world view is the operating paradigm amongst those who profess a desire to have an equal society. This colored perspective severely debilitates the party from not only forming the ideal society they supposedly envision but also from bettering the condition of those they allegedly aim to help.

It is appalling that the Democrats are continuously able to seize ownership of the race issue by dismissing both the blatant and subtle racism on the Left, while successfully portraying the isolated and peripheral racism on the Right as mainstream. It is even more embarrassing that the supposed leaders of the black and minority communities stand for this subterfuge. As embarrassing as it may be, the Democrats are nevertheless able to maintain their primacy as standard-bearers of racial protection due to their pandering to noble societal goals followed by their dismissal in favor of targeted handouts.

It is high time that Republicans reveal this illiberal agenda for what it is; and maybe win a few minority votes in the process. Republicans can and should proclaim how the rampant favoritism and paternalism of Reid’s ilk not only injure America’s minorities but are also dismissive of the founding American principles of equality. Rather than simply using Reid’s commentary as a simplistic but easy political ploy, they should capitalize on the opportunity to drastically change the debate on and ownership of race and equality in America. Unfortunately, as past experiences have shown, Republican leadership will most likely fumble once again.

"You Lie" Is Joe Wilson a Racist?

In an overwhelmingly partisan vote, the House of Representatives expressed its disapproval of Representative Joe Wilson’s outburst during President Obama’s speech last week. Wilson’s interruption of the President was certainly inappropriate, prompting the Representative to properly apologize to Obama. Some Democrats, however, are increasing the poisonous atmosphere in Congress through their insistence on drawing race into the picture.

Before Congress’s vote, Hank Johnson, D-Ga absurdly stated that without action taken against Wilson people would be wearing “white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside" – a direct reference to the Ku Klux Klan. Likewise, the head of the Congressional Black Caucus, Barbara Lee, D-Ca, said that we “can't sweep race under the rug — racism is still a factor and must be addressed.” While not directly in response to the Wilson affair, former President Jimmy Carter echoed this sentiment. He stated that “I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man."

The Left’s fixation with bringing race into the discussion is disingenuous and reprehensible. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to suggest that Rep. Wilson’s or any American’s disagreement with Obama’s and the Democrat’s policies have anything to do with race. Wilson’s outburst, while unacceptable in that forum, was the result of well-thought out policy differences, not a deep-seeded racism. The fact that this was the first time a President has been shouted down while speaking on the floor of the House is a testament to the divisiveness and partisanship that has grown under the current administration. The fact that a Representative, who by all accounts is respected and respectful, broke such rules of decorum only speaks to the fact that the administration’s policies are threatening to a vast swath of America.

The Democrat’s endeavors to paint this as racism, is simply an attempt to stifle discussion. By trying to divert the discussion, they are seeking to avoid real discourse over the issues. While Wilson should have addressed his concerns in another forum, Democrats are willing to pull out every stop to silence him. President Carter’s blanket statement is even more dangerous. To label any disagreement with the President as racism takes America down a perilous path. Under such a Carteresque world-view dissent is not allowed and the opposition is silenced.

The only issue of race in any of this is in the heads of these Democratic statesmen. Whether they truly believe these disagreements with the administration are race-based or whether they are simply using race as a political tool to silence Republicans, the Democrats are sorely misguided. It is time for the Democrats to mature past the siren’s call of race as their fall-back explanation for every disagreement with Republicans. Americans care far more about good policy than the skin-color of the individual proposing it. If Democrats are so naïve to think otherwise, they are hurting themselves and America.

Gates Plays the Race Card at Harvard

The race baiting prompted and promoted by Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. is a repugnant display of an outdated and backwards way of thinking. As has been continuously reported over the past few days, Professor Gates was arrested after cops responded to a break-in call. The most unfortunate aspect of the situation is that, lead by Gates himself, the matter has devolved into a race issue.

According to all parties, the police officer responded to a neighbor’s call regarding a break-in attempt at Gates’s house. As it turned out the purported burglars were Gates and his driver. Rather than thanking the officer for a speedy response and for potentially saving his property Gates, by his own admission, immediately blew up. He stated that his initial reaction was, “[that a]ll the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. And I said to him no, out of instinct. I said, ‘No, I will not.” He immediately refused to cooperate and questioned the officer’s intent, stating “Why, because I'm a black man in America?”

This is the crux of the problem. Gates’s immediate, knee-jerk reaction was to assume that the officer’s behavior was racially motivated. Such a thought process most definitely comes from his intense intellectual focus on black issues. Gates has mired himself in a narrow-minded and outdated way of thinking, where the predominant argument revolves around supposed black oppression.

The logical and unbiased response to the situation would not have been to immediately assume racism. From the accounts given by both sides, it is easy to see how the neighbor could have perceived the situation as a burglary. The police, operating only on the fact that a witness allegedly saw a burglary in action, arrived to investigate the situation. The officer’s job is to investigate and ensure that the citizen’s property (and possibly life) is protected. Any citizen not preprogrammed to scream racism would recognize this on its face. A natural reaction would be to cooperate with the officer, immediately try to clear up the misunderstanding, and thank him for his service and desire to protect one’s property.

However, Gates was unable to do any of this. Instead Gates resorted to berating the officer, refusing to cooperate, and escalating the situation. He continually challenged the officer and pushed the race issue— well before he was arrested. As the police report indicates, the officer was merely doing his job and was surprised and confused by Gates’s aggressive racial charges. Only after Gates continued his verbal assault was he arrested for disorderly conduct. This was a direct result of his aggressive behavior— NOT the color of his skin.

Ultimately, this is a problem that occurs far too often in America. There is no indication in either side’s story that there was an issue of racism except in Gates’s head. It is unnecessary for every instance that involves a black citizen and white cop (although as pictures indicate there were black cops present as well) to devolve into calls of racism. The problem is not one of racist cops, but of a worldview that insists on viewing white America as racist and refuses to embrace a post-racial America. Gates admits his disdain for post-racialism in his interview with The Root. This obsession with fighting non-existent white racism only serves to concoct racial tensions where they did not exist before.

This is the real underlying problem. It needs to be corrected in order for America as a whole and the black community in particular to fully accept the successes of the Civil Rights movement and move on to tackle real issues. Gates should be ashamed of his tantrum and the harm he has done to quest to end racial issues in America.