White Americans For Romney Video

No. Actually, I made that up. But what reaction did you have to that headline? Did the word 'racism' enter in? We're you ready to burst a vein in your temple (if on the left), or shake your head and say indignantly, "He did not..." (if on the right)?

Well I watched this campaign ad video, and 'racism' was exactly what I thought of at the :25 mark. Watch the clip for yourself:



The double standard is excruciating. So was the BS about the Iraq War being over. Are all of our troops gone? No? Not over.

But the racism and pandering of this ad is sickening, and it wouldn't be tolerated well if the video swapped out 'African American' for 'white'. I think the media and the left would be apoplectic. Rightfully. But, let's see what the reaction is. The right is about to explode, between this and the Obama-faced flag flying in Lake County, FL.

This ad could convince me that Obama doesn't care if there is hard strain in race relations. If you work hard to extend a double standard, what else could one conclude? That he was unaware of this ad? Ok, it lacks the "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message" tagline. It does have the Obama logo, though. Looks authentic. Maybe it's a dirty trick? Hmm...

Ugly Rhetoric

Every movement has its ugly rhetoric, where people get carried away emotionally at rallies and say regrettable things. I'm seeing calls for violence and bigoted displays out of the Occupy Wall Street movement on a scale not seen in the Tea Party. This is not good.

These kinds of things are only going to rile the Tea Party and the right against Occupy Wall Street, if they aren't there already. I have watched this political discourse go back and forth for about two decades now, where each side makes horrible remarks, the opposition reacts and is shocked, SHOCKED! I tell ya, and then they trade places, and evoke the misdeeds of the past to justify the misdeeds of the present.

Whenever I see this dynamic in play here, my mind goes to the former Yugoslavia, to the Serbs and Bosnians. How long have they been doing this? 700 years? It doesn't work.

I am convinced that left and right can get together on this, but it will take focus, and will require one side or other to take the high road. Since the OWS folks are on the ground and it's their moment, the onus is on them. So far? FAIL.

And, for what it's worth, my expectation is always that the left has greater capacity to take the high road, but always disappoints me more spectacularly, with rhetoric and imagery that is well over the top of what the right puts out there. I'm seeing it right now. The hatred and seething in many of these folks is well beyond the Tea Party. I'd love to see a leader- a Ghandi, an MLK Jr., someone who can make a point firmly without succumbing to hatred- take charge of Occupy Wall Street. This is where being leaderless is hurting movements.

Physician, Heal Thyself... Part 683

Looks like everybody in Indiana with a blog has something to say about Andre Carson's foot-in-mouth moment. Me too. Most of what I think about it has already been said by others. From RTV6:

The tea party remarks contrasted those made by Carson earlier this year in the aftermath of the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona.

"I think we have to recognize that we're all fellow human beings, one, and that we have philosophical differences, but those differences have to be met with some kind of civility," Carson said in that interview with 6News in January.

At the time, Carson said he believed debate should focus on policy and not rhetoric.

"It's unacceptable whether you're Democratic or Republican. We have to sit down and see how we can come together and debate and critique each other with civility, with respect and with honor," Carson said.

I vaguely recalled these words yesterday as I was sifting through the muck. Abdul Hakim-Shabazz pointed out that Rep. Carson would have done well to heed his own words regarding rhetoric in the aftermath of the Giffords shooting. Yep. Physician, heal thyself.

As for everyone else? Indy Star's Matt Tully has some useful insights:

The reaction was typical. Those who have defended overheated rhetoric from the right condemned Carson. Those who have criticized the inappropriate words of tea party members became champions of Carson's irresponsible speech.

Along Tully's lines, here's what I observed yesterday over at Masson's Blog:

Both right and left seem to think that a) Their side doesn’t make this kind of gaffe, b) When their side does, they justify or excuse it, c) When the other side does it they are shocked, Shocked, I tell you! or outraged, or both, and d) go on to explain how the media treats the other side better.

Well, when dehumanizing the other side so regularly, so completely, eventually it always comes back at your side- whichever side that is. Also, the price to be paid for being so vigilant in enforcing political correctness.

As for me, I'm not incredibly shocked nor offended by what Carson said. What gets me is when an individual can use sweeping language to describe large numbers of people. To me, that's the very kernel of racism and bigotry. And, I don't believe people of African descent are immune from being racist. No free passes. This is what Carson is guilty of, in my opinion: Racism, bigotry, generalization, and dehumanization. Does that disqualify one from being in Congress? A these 'gotcha' moments more important than the policies they vote for?

Maybe it's time to stop it with the 'gotchas'. Maybe it's time to stop it with political correctness. We'd do a lot better if we really did just focus on policy. Maybe that's asking too much. Maybe it's too much for me to ask those who demand political correctness of one side to demand it of their side too. Consistency has been woefully hard to come by in my lifetime. I've been pointing out, for instance, since early 2009 the disappearance of the anti-war left. Prior to that, from 2003-2008 I was pointing out the disappearance of the fiscally conservative right.

Yeah. Don't immune your side. Until that happens, we're going to have a LOT of bullshit in this country.

Glad The Barrier Is Broken

The major upside to the Obama victory is that now the color barrier is broken for the highest office in the land. Now The Man will be a black man. 

Well, it's about time. When the contest came down to a white man with bad ideas and a black man with bad ideas, it may as well have been the black man with bad ideas. At least then Black America can at last stop thinking of the country as a place run by racist redneck crackers. We can put the race card away for once and for all.

I would have been miles happier to vote for a black man with good ideas, but there wasn't one running for President. This year. Obama will have helped clear the way for the future.

Buchanan Has It All Wrong

Pat Buchanan is whining about a double standard being applied to the candidates. He cites the treatment of Sarah Palin as his proof.

The media cannot get enough of the "Saturday Night Live" impersonations of Palin as a bubblehead. News shows pick up the Tina Fey clips and run them and run them to the merriment of all.

Can one imagine "Saturday Night Live" doing weekly send-ups of Michelle Obama and her "I've never been proud" of my country, this "just downright mean" America, using a black comedienne to mimic and mock her voice and accent?

I take it a different way. It says to me that women have come to treated be on par with men in the political arena. Well, white women. White women have come to be treated on par with white men.

After all, everybody knows that white men run this country. White men in high places have been subject to ridicule in media, and especially on SNL for years, thinking all the way back to Chevy Chase's bumbling Gerry Ford routine. White men in high places, and now white women in high places, are all subject to spoof, satire, send-up, and all manner of piss-taking the media is capable of- because it is safe to ridicule them.

When the New Yorker ran a cartoon of Michelle in an Angela-Davis afro with an AK-47 slung over her shoulder, New Yorker editors had to go on national television to swear they were not mocking Michelle, but the conservatives who have so caricatured Michelle and the Messiah.

Is there a media double standard? You betcha.

Nah. It just means that white women have made it. They are fair game for ridicule. No more kid gloves. And it isn't strictly partisan, because as we note with the first Tina Fey send-up of Palin, there was what? Yes, a matching send-up of Hilary Clinton. So, it isn't partisan at all. Sure, Biden's an idiot who lets loose with just as much absurdity as Palin. It's just that Tina Fey is a dead ringer and hilarious as Palin. Who's a dead ringer for Biden who would be funny? Besides, the media doesn't regard black politicians as being on par with white politicians. Obviously. Or they would send 'em up.

That will change soon, or should. After all, a black man is going to be running things pretty soon. I eagerly await the satire.

Rare, Honest- Refreshing

I was bowled over by a CNN article, on it's own news story.

It's very rare that I'm going to be interested in that kind of story. News that talks about itself? That's usually self-absorption on the order of an American Idol contestant, and thus, not at all interesting. But since it may signal that finally, FINALLY, on the day after the holiday to celebrate the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., finally CNN and other mainstream media may begin to be getting the greatest essence of King's great speech:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

You see, CNN and all the other major media tend to denote Barack Obama as the 'black candidate', and Hilary Clinton as the 'female candidate', at least implicitly. A recent CNN article promoted this 'vision' as the main way for black female voters to look at the Democratic primary in South Carolina, with race and gender the only factor; issues a non-factor, John Edwards a non-factor... nevermind for Dennis Kucinich. Choose: a female president, or a black president.

For these women, a unique, and most unexpected dilemma, presents itself: Should they vote their race, or should they vote their gender?

In the context of Dr. King's words, or any other intelligent context, it's appalling. But, it's refreshing that CNN viewers and website readers rebelled. It's just as refreshing that CNN had the courage to create an article out of the acknowledgment of their stupidity. That's the sort of accountability in media I would like to see more regularly, so kudos to CNN.

The email response is just marvelous. Here's just one message:

An e-mailer named Tiffany responded sarcastically: "Duh, I'm a black woman and here I am at the voting booth. Duh, since I'm illiterate I'll pull down the lever for someone. Hm... Well, he black so I may vote for him... oh wait she a woman I may vote for her... What Ise gon' do? Oh lordy!"

Tiffany urged CNN to "pull this racist crap off" the Web site and to stop calling Hillary the "top female candidate."

"Stop calling Barack the "Black" candidate," she wrote.

The entire articles are worth reading. And if you didn't yesterday, read the entire text of Dr. King's great speech. Then remember: 'content of character', and think about the policy they would promote.

More Unsolicited Advice For Ron Paul

Keep apologizing. Please- do everything you can to renounce the racist and homophobic views put forward on your old (circa 1992) newsletters.

The attacks on you have been numerous. They probably hurt you in New Hampshire. If you don't make strong statements, they are going to continue to hurt you within the offended groups.

I am glad you made this statement, which was published by CNN:

"Libertarians are incapable of being a racist, because racism is a collectivist idea."

That's important to me, because nationally visible libertarians are few. When Ron Paul, most-visible libertarian is seen as a racist or homophobe, then libertarianism is liable to be seen as racist or homophobic.

So, keep distancing yourself from these writings. You would do even better if you identified who wrote them. There is fair criticism about not identifying the writer, if not you. Check out what Alex Blaze had to say, on Bilerico.com, a top gay issues website:

But still, laziness isn't a good quality in a president. If he didn't have time to edit a newsletter with his name in huge letters across the top, or at least read it before it went out and make sure that the "Ron Paul column" was something he'd agree with, then he should have stopped publishing.

Until the writer is identified by you, those who were hurt by the comments on your newsletter are going to continue to sling arrows and mud your way. It distracts from your very worthy message of liberty, and worse- makes people equate liberty with racism or homophobia, which of course is patently wrong. It's a huge disservice to liberty and the libertarian movement, but if the primary evidence they have are these news items about the 'racist and homophobic writings of Ron Paul', then what else are they to think?