So Now It’s Racist to Call Obama Policies “Socialist”?
How low will Obama-supporters and their allies in the MSM go to charge John McCain and Sarah Palin with racism?
It seems now that any criticism Republicans level against Obama is racist. I guess if you look for something hard enough, you’ll find it anywhere. Lewis Diuguid, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist, contends that in calling Obama policies “socialist,” “McCain and Palin have simply reached back in history to use an old code word for black.“
WOW! I just have to shake my head at the absurdity of this guy’s notion. Or, perhaps, as one smart college blogger put it, “I should have known it was a racist epitaph since McCain was saying it.“
Do these people know how much they’re soiling the political discourse by so labeling any criticism conservatives offer? Instead of attempting to rebut McCain’s charge, they insult him.  They just want to believe that all Republicans are racist hate-mongers, even if they have to twist the record and invent new definitions of words to do so.
Maybe it’s because Diuguid, like Obama, is an devotee of Saul Alinsky who was not interested in debate, but in gaining power by whatever means necessary:Â Â “A People’s Organization is dedicated to an eternal war…A war is not an intellectual debate, and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play.“
And they accuse McCain of “running one of the most appalling campaigns we can remember.” Guess that’s because the MSM haven’t been monitoring themselves this time around. Or other mean-spirited Obama supporters.
46 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Maybe what this means is that the obama campaign is getting scared since the polls are tightening up - so since they have announced that if obama loses - it’s racism.
They are simply setting up for that narrative.
Comment by Leah — October 21, 2008 @ 7:11 pm - October 21, 2008
Agreed; that, and the only tactic Obama has is to call someone racist. It’s related to the fact that the only useful thing he has is his skin color.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 21, 2008 @ 7:31 pm - October 21, 2008
Which means for the next four years, anyone who criticizes any Obama policy will be called a racist.
That is, if anybody is even allowed to criticize the Dear Leader without getting the Joe Wurzelbacher treatment.
Here’s another idiot wondering “What if Obama Really is Jesus? He even threw in a phony Bible “quote.”
Comment by V the K — October 21, 2008 @ 7:50 pm - October 21, 2008
@1:”Tightening up”? LOL Seen the polls today?
@2: Not true, ND. He also has an opponent dumb enough to disarm himself of his greatest argument (experience) for the sake of winning a news cycle. Quite an asset, as it turned out.
I agree that the socialist = racist is dumb, but tell that to RedState, which claimed that Obama’s use of the term “hoodwinked” was clearly racebaiting, since Malcolm X used the term once. Or something. So finding racism hiding under rocks and bushes doesn’t seem to be limited to the left.
Comment by torrentprime — October 21, 2008 @ 8:29 pm - October 21, 2008
The first things to go with Socialism is dissent.
Comment by LCRW — October 21, 2008 @ 8:45 pm - October 21, 2008
That Alinsky attitude, more than anything, is *the cause* of social evils. At least on the political level. It means no one can have a rational discussion about anything, society is at war with itself, and government produces short-sighted policies that greatly exacerbate the evils.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — October 21, 2008 @ 8:49 pm - October 21, 2008
For twenty years Obama sat in the pews of The Right Reverend Wright’s church listing to his horrid racist rhetoric…………….and, did not hear it. I can only imagine what the media response would be if McCain had been a member of Falwell’s church. I live in South Carolina and am a gay Republican. I voted in voted in the primary for Fred Thompson. Thompson did not win, but I was happy that South Caroline rejected Huckabee.
Comment by Swampfox — October 21, 2008 @ 8:53 pm - October 21, 2008
Before Clinton was elected, the MSM downplayed and denied his penchants for lying and philandering… which later became the hallmarks of his presidency.
Now, the MSM is downplaying Obama’s radicalism and corruption. What do you think will define his presidency?
Comment by V the K — October 21, 2008 @ 9:24 pm - October 21, 2008
People should write the Kansas City Star and suggest that Diuguid get a brain transplant.
Comment by Dave — October 21, 2008 @ 9:35 pm - October 21, 2008
Does anyone else think the admonition in the Bible to forego casting the first stone or remove the beam in your own eye applies in any shape or form to all the charges of racism that the Democrats hurl whenever it seems to suit their purpose. Those who scream loudest about racism always seem to be right at the top of the list of those practicing it.
Comment by Not Always Right — October 21, 2008 @ 9:39 pm - October 21, 2008
#4: Torrentprime, I’m just curious, have you EVER, in your entire life, stated a cogent thought or opinion that didn’t have an equals sign somewhere in the middle of it? Is there ANYTHING in your world that actually DOESN’T equal something else? Seriously, every comment is the same, “well, that may very well be, however, it’s no worse than what’s happening over here…blah blah blah Republicans…†The worst thing about liberals is their endless conveyer belt of equivocating, bullshit axioms: children-at-the-Folsom-Street-Fair = Jon Benet Ramsey; Muslim fanatics = conservative Christians.
Humor me, torrentprime—I know you can do it because you’re the expert: what does a group of adult men and women at a political event wearing t-shirts that say in big letters “SARAH PALIN IS A CU*T†equal? That has to equal something, right? What does that equal? Or, let’s just skip straight to the bonus round–what does HITLER equal? Does Hitler equal something to you? Surely, he must! I know he equals something and you’re just the guy to come up with it, so whaddya think? Say it with me: “While it may be true that Hilter murdered millions of people, obviously the [blank] exhibited by [blank] is just as shocking and poses a [blank] [blank] [blank] to the rational citizens who [blank] [blankety] [blank] racist Republicans!†Just admit it, TP, you KNOW the words that belong in those blanks and it’s killing you not to feverishly fill them in.
Torrentprime, as long as you are incapable of condemning something that actually deserves condemnation without flapping your gums for another half-hour about supposed evil Christians or sinister beauty pageant contestants, then you will always sound like Mad Libs, The Moral Relativism Edition. It’s so TIRED.
Comment by Sean A — October 21, 2008 @ 10:23 pm - October 21, 2008
I say keep it comin’. An accusation of racism used to be able to silence a football stadium, but now, the Left has used it so cheaply and cavalierly for so long that now it elicits more criticism against the idiot who played the race card than any real condemnation of the accused. Another 5-10 years of liberals like Barney Frank throwing it around and it will be completely meaningless and anachronistic–like calling someone a horse thief or a barn-burner.
Comment by Sean A — October 21, 2008 @ 10:53 pm - October 21, 2008
Epithet! (Not “epitaph”!)
Comment by Throbert McGee — October 21, 2008 @ 11:32 pm - October 21, 2008
Nah, if he gets elected anyone who criticizes Obama will be prosecuted.
Comment by American Elephant — October 22, 2008 @ 1:46 am - October 22, 2008
8. V,
I don’t know about you, but I think it’d be f**kin hilarious if two Democrat presidents in a row got impeached. Certainly cathartic. couldnt happen to a more deserving bunch.
Comment by American Elephant — October 22, 2008 @ 1:54 am - October 22, 2008
Oh absolutely. The question is, are you? Or are you watching the MSDNC/Tax Cheatermann/Rabid Liberal/Team Killing Fucktard polls?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 22, 2008 @ 2:26 am - October 22, 2008
Bet you bought into it when 450,000 Europeans, on the MSDNC poll, thought Comrade Obama won the first debate, eh TP?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 22, 2008 @ 2:27 am - October 22, 2008
Not true, ND. He also has an opponent dumb enough to disarm himself of his greatest argument (experience) for the sake of winning a news cycle. Quite an asset, as it turned out.
LOL….is anyone else amused by the fact that torrentprime and other Democrat pseudocons are claiming that, because they think a vice presidential candidate is inexperienced, that the solution is to elect an even more inexperienced President?
I think it’s more on the order of them trying to rationalize their voting based on skin color.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 22, 2008 @ 2:33 am - October 22, 2008
What happens when thing get worse under the first black president than they were under the man liberals insist is the worst president ever? The first black president becomes the worst president ever.
Why do liberals insist on setting up blacks for failure?
Comment by American Elephant — October 22, 2008 @ 3:22 am - October 22, 2008
People seem to forget that socialism already exists in America. It’s called the Department of Defense (”free” health care and education for for active duty miltary and their depdendents).
Also, in America, socialism seems to be synonymous with communism. Given that proponents of segregationism during the Civil Rights Era linked blacks to both forms of government, the GOP’s lack of care in the language used to criticize Obama’s proposed policies can be and is seen by some to be culturally insensitive. This exacerbates the idea that conservatives are out of touch not just with mainstream America, but with the unique experiences of minorities, and a willingness to confront those issues not with dialog, but with assimilationism.
Comment by J — October 22, 2008 @ 6:35 am - October 22, 2008
#19 “People seem to forget that socialism already exists in America. It’s called the Department of Defense (â€free†health care and education for for active duty miltary and their depdendents).”
I’ve been hearing this bone-headed meme around the Internet a lot during the last few weeks, and what these statements all have in common is that the author always fails to explain the point. J, no one has forgotten that our tax dollars cover valuable, expensive benefits for men and women (and their families) who have provided essential, life-threatening services to our country. That’s not “socialism.” Neither is the public funding of fire departments and law enforcement because there is a benefit conferred for the tax dollars allocated. Is your point that these facts mean we should just roll-over and allow our tax dollars to be handed out to non-taxpaying Americans simply for taking up space and earning less money? Are you trying to say that we’ve waived our right to reasonably distinguish between the two situations and should just hand over our paychecks? If that’s your point, it’s an idiotic one. It’s also repugnant because it plainly reveals your disdain for men and women in the military who have earned the right to that particular entitlement, in favor of people who want the same benefits because, well…they just like free stuff. The fact that you single out soldiers receiving public benefits tells us everything we need to know about you.
Comment by Sean A — October 22, 2008 @ 8:04 am - October 22, 2008
#19: “the GOP’s lack of care in the language used to criticize Obama’s proposed policies can be and is seen by some to be culturally insensitive.”
Seen by “some” as culturally insensitive, J? Don’t you mean by YOU? Have it your way–explain to us how the GOP could have criticized Obama’s plan to “spread the wealth around” in a way that would not have been seen by “some” as culturally insensitive. Let’s have it, J. If you don’t provide us with instruction on this matter, we’ll have to assume that EVEN YOU are incapable of formulating acceptable “criticism” for the GOP to use against Obama (which will, of course, simply be a concession that ANY criticism of Obama is racist–which is what we suspect anyway). I’m serious, J. YOU TELL US WHAT CONSTITUTES ACCEPTABLE NON-RACIST CRITICISM OF OBAMA’S POLICIES. (We wouldn’t want to offend anyone.) Can you?
And on a related issue, would it be considered culturally insensitive for me to attend an RNC fundraiser wearing a t-shirt that says, “OBAMA IS A WORTHLESS CO*K-SUCKER”? Do you have an opinion one way or the other? Because I’m just totally in the dark at this point regarding what’s “acceptable.”
Comment by Sean A — October 22, 2008 @ 8:19 am - October 22, 2008
#19: “This exacerbates the idea that conservatives are out of touch not just with mainstream America, but with the unique experiences of minorities, and a willingness to confront those issues not with dialog, but with assimilationism.”
J, your unbelievable ignorance just keeps coming. You sound like a cartoon parody of a leftist, wannabe intellectual that in reality is too dumb to know how out-of-touch and racist he is. What are the “unique experiences of minorities,” J? Apparently you know what they are and I don’t. So please, enlighten me. Since the topic is Obama’s “socialist” policies, aren’t you really saying that the “unique experience of minorities” is growing up poor in the ghetto? Am I getting warm? Because unlike you, J, I don’t assume that every black person grew up in South-Central on welfare. Further, I don’t assume that people who did grow up poor and on welfare can’t use the temporary handout to eventually make it on their own. Unfortunately, you don’t have the same faith in minorities that I do because what I call “making it on their own,” you call “assimilationism.” According to you, J, it’s racist (”assimilationist”) to believe that people can rely on themselves and for me to object to the government perpetuating failure by using my tax dollars as handouts for people who are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.
My view, “assimilationism,” believes that even poor minorities can make it in the world and accomplish whatever they wish. Your view believes that poor minorities are totally helpless, irreversibly ignorant and completely incapable of accomplishing anything in life without a life-long, guaranteed handout from me. Between the two views, yours is the one premised upon racism, not mine.
Comment by Sean A — October 22, 2008 @ 8:45 am - October 22, 2008
You know, they celebrated when socialism came to Cuba and Zimbabwe, too.
Comment by V the K — October 22, 2008 @ 9:06 am - October 22, 2008
24: And they’re still celebrating. It’s the law.
Comment by Sean A — October 22, 2008 @ 9:29 am - October 22, 2008
Socialism=code for racism. I agree, if the subject is Nazi Germany. They used the government to cleanse the population, indoctrinate the children, smash dissent, burn books, censor the arts, control speech, manufacture election results, and economically enslave the people.
The trick here is the definition of “racism.” The genius at the Kansas City Star is AOK with socialism, he just thinks it is being attacked because a black man is promoting it. This is true Orwellian doublespeak at its most basic use.
Comment by heliotrope — October 22, 2008 @ 10:52 am - October 22, 2008
This character “J” (#19) is a crude piece of work. He has the Obama talent of shimmer and glitter talk while saying nearly nothing. He must be a community organizer or a writer of TV infomercials.
1.) We have had a “mixed economy” since Saint Franklin of Roosevelt foisted “social” “security” on the little people. This opened the flood gates to rent subsidies, food stamps, WIC, Section 8, Medicare, Medicaid, Prescription Drugs for Seniors, Pell grants, FHA, TVA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, government bailouts and Native American casinos and tobacco stores. Socialism all.
2.) When you turn yourself over to the military, they own your life. They have the power to send you to be killed. In exchange for this, they pay you, keep you healthy and patch you up if you survive. You are treated no differently than any sound industry treats its production components. If you stay the course you get a generous retirement package and a general release from your obligations.
You can not take socialism out of communism. You can have crippling socialism without the formality of communism. Socialism is a creeping cancer. St. Franklin of Roosevelt opened a door that has only opened wider.
Look at all of the failures of capitalism that are now begging for tax payer relief. Look at all the socialist laws and regulations that drove them to that point.
American jobs are being driven out of this country by socialism. The pet food scare last year is a great example. There are no producers of wheat gluten left in the USA because of the high costs that wage and production laws and multi-levels of taxation have placed on the industry. So, wheat gluten (and many other non-glamorous key ingredients to our diets and pharmaceuticals) are produced in China. The socialist answer to this is to force China, which is socialist, to act more like “responsible” socialists.
This is where people like “J” are forced to talk in tongues. It is the maddening idiocy poor Alice met when she encountered the Queen of Hearts.
The Communist Party was very strong in the US in the 1930’s and many historians believe that Roosevelt enacted socialist legislation in part to dampen their appeal. The efforts by the Communist Party during the civil right era were real and documented. They played as great a role as the KKK.
I know the “segregation” era well, having lived through it. If “socialism” was being bandied about in any “code word” fashion, it failed to make the newspapers or the general reporting. HUAC, the House UnAmerican Activities Committee was in it prime in the 50’s and it was looking for the “card carrying communists” among us. A popular TV show was “I Led Three Lives” about an FBI mole in the Communist Party. But there was no general concern over “socialism.”
When Eisenhower got the Civil Rights Act of 1957 moving and sent the National Guard into Little Rock, there was no general concern over “socialism” or “communism” involved.
This attempt to create “socialism” as a racist code word is almost laughable, except people like “J” with a true Brownshirt thought process will stop at nothing to make the world of Orwell a reality.
Comment by heliotrope — October 22, 2008 @ 11:40 am - October 22, 2008
Help! I am caught in the spam filter and I can’t get out!
Comment by heliotrope — October 22, 2008 @ 11:44 am - October 22, 2008
Whew! It is really musty in there. Thanks for outing me.
Comment by heliotrope — October 22, 2008 @ 12:11 pm - October 22, 2008
Actually, the short version of J’s comment is “Screw the troops.”
Comment by V the K — October 22, 2008 @ 12:16 pm - October 22, 2008
Meanwhile, The Obama Regime to take Michigan’s labor and tax policies nationwide. And we all know what a success they’ve been in Michigan.
Comment by V the K — October 22, 2008 @ 12:23 pm - October 22, 2008
Sean, I’m blushing like a schoolgirl and really in awe. Based on the spittle on your keyboard, you must be terrified of me, right? I mean, that’s the standard the current right has used about the rational right’s and the left’s discussion of Palin (”they talk about her so much it just shows they’re afraid of her”), so I guess I can apply it here.
Extra hat tip to you for bringing Hitler into it, too; I may just have to print this out and show it to my friends. Thanks for the props.
Yes, ND30, because an executive of a state for 18 months (complete with ethics violations) and a mayor of 6k person town (left in debt) is so much less experienced than a US senator and 8 year state senator representing about as many people as entire said state. But if the only thing that will make you feel better about the fact that 20% of Republicans are voting for Obama is to tell yourself that they are voting for him based on his skin color, then by all means, do so.
Comment by torrentprime — October 22, 2008 @ 7:01 pm - October 22, 2008
Ah, yes, Sarah Palin’s “ethics violation,” because wanting fired a wife-abusing, child-abusing cop who gets drunk in his squad car on duty is just so awful.
Because bad cops must be protected, but a plumber who asks a question that embarrasses The One must be destroyed.
Honestly, I couldn’t live with myself if those were my ethics.
Comment by V the K — October 22, 2008 @ 7:46 pm - October 22, 2008
Yes, ND30, because an executive of a state for 18 months (complete with ethics violations) and a mayor of 6k person town (left in debt) is so much less experienced than a US senator and 8 year state senator representing about as many people as entire said state.
Oddly enough, torrentprime, you also forgot her service on the state oil and gas commission, which is a rather high position in Alaska.
Probably because, while on it, she complained about ethics violations by her fellow Republicans, resigned from said commission, and blew the whistle on said violations, ultimately resulting in the resignation and fining for ethics violations of the state Republican Party chair.
In short, Palin has demonstrated more activism, more courage, and more capability in her time in office than have Obama and Biden in their entire time combined. One would THINK that you would be supportive of a Republican who had so clearly demonstrated that she doesn’t tolerate guff, chicanery, or wastefulness even in her own party.
But then again, why would we expect you to value any of that, when, as you make obvious that you consider it an ethics violation to demand the firing of a wife-abusing, child-abusing cop who gets drunk in his squad car on duty, and say nothing about Obama’s endorsement of corrupt racists like Kwame Kilpatrick, William Jefferson, and Charles Rangel?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 22, 2008 @ 7:58 pm - October 22, 2008
Palin has demonstrated more activism, more courage, and more capability in her time in office than have Obama and Biden in their entire time combined.
F’n’ right!
And I just gotta say, anyone who says, “I’m a true conservative, so I’m voting for the most radical socialist to run for president since Eugene Debs and Gus Hall…” is either lying, stupid, or quite possibly both.
Comment by V the K — October 22, 2008 @ 8:19 pm - October 22, 2008
#32: So, torrentcrime, I’ll take that as a yes: ["the rational right's and the left's discussion of Palin" = my discussion of you]. You have NEVER communicated a single thought swirling around in your head that did not contain an equals sign in it somewhere. Clearly, I was right about you, torrentprime. Or would you prefer torrent=prime?
And no, torrentslime, I am not terrified of you. I find you annoying–just as I do every other intellectually dishonest, mealy-mouthed, equivocating, leftoid dim-wit that I encounter here or anywhere else that politics is discussed.
And as for props, you’ll get no praise from me unless you rise to the challenge I proposed re HITLER. Are you capable of simply condemning Hitler’s genocidal tyranny and hellish atrocities and then shutting the fu*k up? Or, are you afraid that if you start typing, by the time you’re done, you will have instinctually equated his Final Solution to…I dunno…Abu Ghraib? Yeah, you should probably stay away from that one.
Comment by Sean A — October 22, 2008 @ 8:31 pm - October 22, 2008
I used to post on a couple of gay African-American blogs. I have had to stop. I can’t understand where they see any hint of racism in the McCaiin campaign.
Comment by Swampfox — October 22, 2008 @ 9:13 pm - October 22, 2008
Sean A, I’m a military brat. I grew up in the military community overseas. My father is a retired officer now working for the Department of State and he’s currently in Afghanistan for one year before he retires. My mother has been a Department of Defense Dependents School Teacher for the past 34 years. Gen. Colin Powell (Ret.) is my former base commander. I have a great deal of respect for the men and women in uniform because they comprise many individuals I’ve known my entire life.
Comment by J — October 22, 2008 @ 10:03 pm - October 22, 2008
Sean A, the unique experiences of minorities I speak of have nothing to do with growing up poor in a ghetto. Examples would include, and I’ve actually shared them with GayPatriotWest:
1) Having your parents explain to you what a the “n-word” means because you were just called it the night before by a classmate at your 9th birthday party and you never knew what it meant.
2) Calling in response to an ad for a car and being told it is great because the car has been “n* rigged,” an expression I’d also not heard until that call.
3) Seeing the look of surprise on a recruiter’s face when showing up for a job interview at a firm that required an associate fluent in German.
4) Having a student at music camp say, “I don’t mean to sound racist, but I didn’t know black people lived in Germany.” I just told the guy that we’re allowed to apply for passports, too.
I haven’t let these things get in the way of me working hard and developing my career. They’ve both helped fuel a drive in me to fight against stereotypes, in addition to giving me that unique experience as an American which I refer to.
Comment by J — October 22, 2008 @ 10:09 pm - October 22, 2008
Sean A, please be aware that minorities comprise more than poor individuals. I cannot speak for that group because I’m not one of them. Within the black community, I suppose I would be accused of belonging to the moderate to upperclass segment of our community.
I suppose that whites a non-whites would have differing views on assimilationism. In my view, it means that if you ignore the experiences I’ve had, you’re ignoring me altogether.
You, yourself, seem to be uncomfortable with the topic unless it is to use the same sad stereotype one sees in the news.
Comment by J — October 22, 2008 @ 10:37 pm - October 22, 2008
Heliotrope, I bet it’d be interesting to hear of your experiences during segregation. The only experiences I have to draw from are my grandmother’s and my mother’s. My father was fortunate to grow up relatively free of segregation.
It’s support of a web-based accounting interface application that I do, not community organizing.
I thought the KKK had drawn paraellels between communism and the acts of oppoents to segregation in the South. I recently saw an ad by the KKK that supporters of Goldwater created but which Goldwater refused to have aired. Communism was used repeatedly in the ad. The National Guard was present for the Little Rock 9, as well as for James M. who sought to attend law school at Ole Miss. If not socialism, then communisim was definitely used to appeal to segregation proponents which some historians might say led to the GOP winning southern Dixiecrats before the Reagan years.
I would say that American jobs are being shipped overseas not by socialism…unless you’re talking about the .08% employers pay in FUTA taxes for the first $8,000 of an employee’s taxable wages (and only if the SUI taxes are paid timely and there is no outstanding loan balance on the state’s end). I feel confident that if you asked non-executives at Delta Airlines, they’d say they were missing some of the wealth that would have “trickled down.”
Comment by J — October 22, 2008 @ 10:49 pm - October 22, 2008
Heliotrope, I thank you for your perspective. I was recently watching footage of an ad by KKK supporters of Goldwater, which Mr. Goldwater forbade from being aired. In the ad, communism was mentioned multiple times as a buzzword, along with the term n-rism and Judaism. If that’s the language my mother heard while growing to adulthood during the 1960’s in Mississippi…
I would argue that it is the bottom line that has driven companies to move American jobs overseas, not socialism (unless you’re talking about the .08% companies are obligated to pay for Federal Unemployment Taxes on the first $8,000 of an employee wages during the year, unless there is an outstanding loan to the state that impacts the credit the business would otherwise receive for that tax).
I don’t think total socialization is the answer, and I do think the policies Obama has suggested are only mildly socialist compared to what I experienced in Europe growing up. However, I do think a country is judged by how it treats the least fortunate of its citizens, and it is highly judgemental to use codewords such as “personal responsibility” to allow for a growing caste system.
Comment by J — October 23, 2008 @ 7:52 am - October 23, 2008
J, last week Joe the Plumber asked Obama a question about his tax plan. Obama’s response showed unequivocally that the plan is to reward successful, risk-taking business owners by taking away a large chunk of their success and giving it to people as a handout so they could somehow be “successful†too. This stupid, completely unoriginal idea was accurately identified by conservatives and the Republican candidates as “socialism.†The immediate response from the Left was to accuse conservatives of using the term as a racist “code†for “black†and/or “nig*er.â€
It was within that context that I read your comment (#20). Thus, it was entirely reasonable for me to interpret your statements the way I did: (1) that conservatives have no right to cry “socialism†if they support the public funding of medical and other benefits for active military, veterans and their dependents; (2) that you agreed that the GOP’s use of the term “socialism†was “culturally insensitive;†(3) that the GOP is out of touch because it doesn’t understand the “unique experiences†of poor minorities who really need and deserve the handouts that Joe the Plumber should gleefully pay for; and (4) that by expressing objections to Obama’s plan, conservatives were engaging in some kind of racist, mean-spirited campaign to make poor minorities “assimilate†by working hard so they can pay their own way through life without demanding handouts from other taxpayers like Joe the Plumber.
So, J, based on YOUR COMMENT and the context in which this blog post appeared, where did I get it wrong? Do you agree that the use of the term “socialism†by the GOP was racist? Culturally insensitive? If so, you don’t just get to slink away after slapping that card down. I want to hear your opinion of how the GOP could have avoided this attack for being “racist.†And what about those “unique experiences†you’ve given so many examples of? Are you saying that if the GOP knew (or assumed) that you had gotten your feelings hurt at a birthday party because of your race they wouldn’t have used the term “socialism†to describe the tax plan of a black candidate? And who were you referring to when saying that minorities are required to “assimilate†instead of being coddled with “dialog?†I interpreted that as you saying Joe the Plumber should not dare to question the need some poor minority might have for the money that he earned because it imposes “assimilationism†on the poor, unlucky soul who wants to take the handout in peace. If that’s not what you were arguing, then I have no idea what you’re trying to say. And judging from your more recent comments, I’m not sure you know what you’re trying to argue either.
If you want to be understood and be a part of the discussion, you’re going to have to be A LOT clearer with the point(s) you’re trying to make.
Comment by Sean A — October 23, 2008 @ 9:56 am - October 23, 2008
Sean, I typed exactly what I meant. I felt that calling Obama a socialist was racist, I would have said so. There is a difference between being racist (”a believe that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race”) and being culturally insensitive. The latter I I simply meant to demonstrate the ingnorance or lack of regard for history before making a statement.
The insistence on using poor minorities as a primary example to prove your own point, however, is a indicative of a certain degree of ignorance when it comes to minorities, as studies have shown that there are more middle class minority professionals than those who are poor. To trivialize experiences (I think of them more as defining moments rather than instanes of getting my feelings hurt) I’ve had that, according to the GOP’s core principles, would seem un-American, is indicative of a lack of awareness of racism outside of what has been read in history books. If you’re aware of these experiences and think before you type, you can get the same point across in a manner that is inviting of discussion that can help all Americans.
There seems to be a rush to call the proposed tax plan socialist, and the people so calling seem to be those who’ve done more reading about socialism than living in a socialist system like I did. When we’re paying 51% or more of our salaries in taxes, maybe then the country will have taken a greater turn towards socialism. Until then, the proposal to lift a disproportionate burden from the middle class’ shoulder seems more fair than socialist.
And people seem to get that both candidates will say what is needed to become elected. The plans proposed are not carved in stone.
Comment by J — October 25, 2008 @ 8:54 am - October 25, 2008
Sean, I was referring to anyone who would support focusing on the individual rather than race. Yes, one should be judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. But by not discussing race, it gives the appearance not of inclusion, but that one is simply removing an uncomfortable topic from the table. If you can’t talk about it, how can you confront it? It’s a passive-agressive, dare I say conservative, approach.
Comment by J — October 25, 2008 @ 8:58 am - October 25, 2008
I wouldn’t call it overt racism because socialist isn’t code for “we don’t like blacks.” But it still deals with latent prejudices. It’s easier to label a person that doesn’t look like you as being radically different from you.
Let’s face the facts, the most socialist thing proposed this entire campaign was John McCain’s plan to nationalize bad mortgages. The government would literally held the title to your house. Other than the bailout itself, probably one of the biggest economic intervention proposals since the New Deal.
But no one calls McCain a socialist. Hell, no one even suggests McCain likes big government. He’s treated like he’s Barry Goldwater reincarnated.
These labels stick on Barack for the same reasons they were used against MLK. It’s easy to label someone that doesn’t look like you as being different from you in other ways. Add the fact that Barack has a funny name, and you have the walking contradiction that is McCain supporters.
Comment by Derek — October 26, 2008 @ 3:34 am - October 26, 2008