http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell072010.php3

 

July 20, 2010 

Race Card Fraud 

By Thomas Sowell 

 

Credit card fraud is a serious problem. But race card fraud is an even
bigger problem. 

Playing the race card takes many forms. Judge Charles Pickering, a federal
judge in Mississippi who defended the civil rights of blacks for years and
defied the Ku Klux Klan back when that was dangerous, was depicted as a
racist when he was nominated for a federal appellate judgeship. 

No one even mistakenly thought he was a racist. The point was simply to
discredit him for political reasons -- and it worked. 

This year's target is the Tea Party. When leading Democrats, led by a
smirking Nancy Pelosi, made their triumphant walk on Capitol Hill,
celebrating their passage of a bill in defiance of public opinion, Tea Party
members on the scene protested. 

All this was captured on camera and the scene was played on television. What
was not captured on any of the cameras and other recording devices on the
scene was anybody using racist language, as has been charged by those
playing the race card. 

When you realize how many media people were there, and how many ordinary
citizens carry around recording devices of one sort or another, it is
remarkable -- indeed, unbelievable -- that racist remarks were made and yet
were not captured by anybody. 

The latest attack on the Tea Party movement, by Ben Jealous of the NAACP,
has once again played the race card. Like the proverbial lawyer who knows
his case is weak, he shouts louder. 

This is not the first time that an organization with an honorable and
historic mission has eventually degenerated into a tawdry racket. But that
an organization like the NAACP, after years of fighting against genuine
racism, should now be playing the game of race card fraud is especially
painful to see. 


Some critics of the Tea Party have seized upon banners carried at one of its
rallies that compared Obama with Hitler and Stalin. Extreme? Yes. But there
was nothing racist about it, since extreme comparisons have been made about
politicians of every race, color, creed, nationality, ideology and sexual
preference. 

Some Obama supporters have long regarded any criticism of him as racism. But
that they should have to resort to such a banner to bolster their case shows
how desperate they are for any evidence. 

Among people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008, those who are likely to be
most disappointed are those who thought that they were voting for a new
post-racial era. There was absolutely nothing in Obama's past to lead to any
such expectation, and much to suggest the exact opposite. But the man's
rhetoric and demeanor during the election campaign enabled this and many
other illusions to flourish. 

Still, it was an honest mistake of the kind that decent people have often
made when dealing with people whose agendas are not constrained by decency,
but only by what they think they can get away with. 

On race, as on other issues, different people have radically different views
of Barack Obama, depending on whether they judge him by what he says or by
what he does. 

As Obama's own books point out, he has for years cultivated a talent for
saying things that people will find congenial. 

You want bipartisanship and an end to bickering in Washington? He will say
that he wants bipartisanship and an end to bickering in Washington. Then he
will shut Republicans out of the decision-making process and respond to
their suggestions by reminding them that he won the election. A famous
writer -- Ring Lardner, I believe -- once wrote: "'Shut up,' he explained." 

You want a government that is open instead of secretive? He will say that.
He will promise to post proposed legislation on the Internet long enough for
everyone to read it and know what is in it before there is a vote. In
practice, however, he has rushed massive bills through Congress too fast for
anybody -- even the members of Congress -- to know what was in those bills. 

Racial issues are more of the same. You want a government where all citizens
are treated alike, regardless of race or ethnicity? Obama will say that.
Then he will advocate appointing judges with "empathy" for particular
segments of the population, such as racial minorities. "Empathy" is just a
pretty word for the ugly reality of bias. 

Obama's first nomination of a Supreme Court justice was a classic example of
someone with "empathy" for some racial groups, but not others. As a Circuit
Court judge, Sonia Sotomayor voted to dismiss a case involving white
firefighters who had been denied the promotions for which they qualified,
because not enough blacks or Hispanics passed the same test that they did. 

A fellow Hispanic judge protested the way the white firefighters' case was
dismissed, rather than adjudicated. Moreover, the Supreme Court not only
took the case, it ruled in favor of the firefighters. 

Obama's injecting himself into a local police matter in Massachusetts,
despite admitting that he didn't know the facts, to say that a white
policeman was in the wrong in arresting a black professor who was a friend
of Obama, was more of the same. So is Obama's Justice Department overlooking
blatant voter intimidation by thugs who happen to be black. 

There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything post-racial about Barack
Obama, except for the people who voted for him in the mistaken belief that
he shared their desire to be post-racial. When he leaves office, especially
if it is after one term, he will leave this country more racially polarized
than before. 

Hopefully, he may also leave the voters wiser, though sadder, after they
learn from painful experience that you can't judge politicians by their
rhetoric, or ignore their past because of your hopes for the future. Voters
may even wise up to race card fraud. 

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to