Victor Davis Hanson makes it simple and concise. I’ve added the emphasis.
Democrats should now ask themselves how a party of supposed racial transcendence inevitably ended up with primaries predicated along hardening racial lines, and a unity, trans-racial candidate who for twenty years was intimate with a pastor and spiritual advisor who seems to have derided almost everyone and everything, from America, to Italians, to Jews and Israel, to whites and moderate blacks, with serial slurs worthy of a Don Imus or Michael Richards.
Until Obama addresses the conflict between his rhetoric of hope and the reality of his past, he is no more of a transcendent figure than Hillary is.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)Â
"Democrats should now ask themselves how a party of supposed racial transcendence inevitably ended up with primaries predicated along hardening racial lines……"
This is a great point, but it masks an even greater point: the much vaunted "national conversation on race" is not a dialogue, it is a lecture.
It works for a white guy to list all the racial sore points with great empathy and to tear up and chew on his lip. It earns points, but it doesn’t score. The great racial conversation will take the powerful voice and authenticity of a Martin Luther King who will be talking to both races while leading by example. There will be no room for race pimping in that conversation.
The idea that this leadership will come from a professional politician is ludicrous. Politicians pimp for votes as easily as they breathe.
Republican blacks in high places get accused of not being "black enough." That is because they eschew race pimping. They end up serving the nation and the Constitution and stay out of the race lecture game.
Some good stuff out there today. Barack Obama’s Latest Pastor Problem: Anti-Gay [ed: AND race-baiting] Rev. James T. Meeks.
Guess Who Meeks and Obama are both linked to? (Hint: Rezko) Hat tip Ace.
Just imagine what an Obama presidency would be like… every policy debate stalled by the Race Card; with a Clinton presidency, every debate stalled by the Gender Card.
Doesn’t matter. He’s black and blacks can’t be racist bigot assholes.
3: Â So by your logic, that’s the excuse to continue electing white men only as a president? Â puh-lease.
Back to Hanson’s characterization of the Democrats, "a party of supposed racial transcendance…"
I’ve long thought of the Democrats as the party of people who think in racial categories and can’t escape them. We know that for close to 200 years, they were the party of overt racism. We also know they are the party of abortion and Planned Parenthood, and that Planned Parenthood was originally founded by racists (as a socially acceptable eugenics scheme). The following video ties all that together, and must be seen/heard to be believed:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/02/more-racist-planned-parenthood-clinics-exposed/
Obama has tried to play the race card through much of this campaign. Early on, surrogates like Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. tried to hem Hillary in. (It was OK to bash a woman but) criticism of Obama wasn’t criticism of a candidate, it was an attack on a black man.
Wheneve media types (CNN’s Campbell Brown comes to mind) and Obama supporters making the rounds of cable news shows talk about Obama’s difficulty attracting rural, white blue collar voters there’s often a tone of voice that implies it’s because those voters are racists. Yet is seems just hunky dory that nearly 90 percent of blacks voting in the primaries and caucuses are voting for the black candidate. (I’d guess a majority of them have no real idea of where Obama stands on the issues – their support is based on one thing, Obama’s color.)Â
So by your logic, that’s the excuse to continue electing white men only as a president?  puh-lease.
No, the logic is (and I’m not surprised you don’t get it) that we shouldn’t elect somebody just because they’re black or a woman.
That’s all Orgasma has going for him. That’s the only reason liberals spooge themselves in his presence.
And I still want to know who put liberals in charge of other people’s money. You still haven’t answered that one, Kevin.
8: Â No we shouldn’t, and that’s the reason why people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton couldn’t get elected president; they could only appeal to a very small group of citizens. Â As much you hate to admit it, Clinton and Obama have qualities that clearly have made them acceptable as candidate for millions of Americans
9: Â And what exactly is your question, besides another attempt to attack democrats as a bunch of commies?