Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Melanie Phillips on Obama's Racist Attacks Against Police

From Melanie Phillips, "The Mask Slips":
This affair is toxic because it touches many nerves: America’s neuralgic conscience over its historic racism, the monstrously unjust over-reaction to that racism, and the election of a President who supposedly embodied, in both his identity and his approach, a post-racial New Man and an absolution for past national sins. Now the mask has slipped, and even those with Obama stars in their eyes can’t hide their dismay.
As regular readers of this blog know, I have been banging on from the start of Obama’s rise to power about the astonishing discrepancy between how he was presented by the media on the issue of race and what he actually had said and done. His whole background from the earliest days onwards was steeped in anti-white grievance politics of the most bitter and corrosive kind. This was all ignored. His two-decade membership of an anti-white church was ignored, his early anti-white mentors such as Frank Marshall Davis were ignored, his participation on the Nation of Islam ‘Million Man march’ and his association with Nation of Islam cadres were ignored.

And as Krauthammer aptly observed – and as I wrote
here – Obama’s major speech on race in March 2008 in which he finally ‘renounced’ his former pastor, the anti-white bigot Rev Jeremiah Wright, which was hailed as the greatest piece of oratory since the Gettysburg address and which supposedly transcended racial animosities to create the colour-blind Brotherhood of Man, was anything but. In this speech Obama actually said Wright should not be renounced, and that Wright’s racism was actually all the fault of white people. The fact that so many people failed to hear or read what Obama actually said and instead heard or read only what they wanted to hear was truly frightening.

Now, thanks to the histrionics of Henry Louis Gates, we can see how Obama’s dysfunctional attitude to race plays out in real time. Gates’s arrest was an honest and understandable mistake by the Cambridge police who were investigating what appeared to be a break-in. It clearly had nothing to do with Gates being black – not least because other officers backing up the arresting officer were non-white. Gates’s protests were preposterous, and vividly demonstrated the pathological resentment and injustice – not to mention the strutting arrogance and narcissism -- of anti-racist ‘victim culture’.

For the President of the United States to get involved at all in such a local matter was off-limits. For him to do so without even bothering to discover the facts was disturbing. For him to damn the Cambridge police as ‘stupid’ whereas it was clearly Gates who was ‘stupid’(and worse), thereby demonstrating how the Presidential knee automatically jerks to the crudest of anti-white (and anti-police) tunes regardless of the facts, was deeply alarming.

But not surprising.

Related: A really interesting twist, from ABC News, "Harvard Prof Gates Is Half-Irish, Related to Cop Who Arrested Him: Two Men at Center of Controversy Linked by Irish Heritage" (Via Memeorandum).

See also, Doug Powers, "Officer Crowley, Stimulus Funding Machine?"

And, another related piece, which includes exactly the kind of pathological resentment Phillips highlights; see Eric Kleefeld, "Obama-Haters Becoming Increasingly ... Racial In Their Rhetoric" (also via Memeorandum).


jim treacher said...

Obama's not a racist; he just judges people without having the facts, based on the color of their skin.

Unknown said...

". . . anti-white mentors such as Frank Marshall Davis were ignored. . ."

Why do you say that Davis was his mentor and anti-white? Do you have any empirical evidence to support your claim? Davis was committed to complete racial integration, and had five children with a white wife.

(BTW: Opinion is not empirical evidence. Primary source evidence, such as Davis's writing, is empirical evidence.

Although Obama's book indicates "Frank" was a family friend who offered him advice on racial issues, Obama wrote that Davis "fell short" and his views were "incurable." Obama did not even visit Davis for three years before going to college. Obama's book, itself, proves that Obama did not consider Davis to be a "wise and trusted counselor," which is the definition of "mentor." By what creative definition can Davis be considered his "mentor"?

Let us evaluate the empirical evidence with dispassionate objectivity, rather than accepting unsubstantiated accusations and deliberate misrepresentation from pundits of questionable integrity. As they say on CSI: "Follow the evidence."

Stogie said...

Donald, you write very well, and when you do it's like a surgeon with a scalpel, minutely dissecting the facts for all to see.

Your description of the roots and causes of anti-white racism ring true, and Obama's culpability in it well described and established.

That's why I read your blog daily. I learn a lot, not just about the events of the day but as an example of scholarly and stellar writing skill.

Anonymous said...

The 'monstrously unjust overreaction to that racism'? Seriously? So, the racism, by which you would have to include hundreds of years of slavery, isn't monstrous - but the reaction of aggrieved people to that historical injustice is 'monstrously unjust'?

Wow, man, I just stumbled on your blog, but I think I know all there is to know about you.

Let me guess, next you'll be calling for reparations for the hurt feelings of white people.

Seriously dude, get a clue.

Anonymous said...

I was unwilling to believe that Sgt. Crowley was a racist until the discrepancies between was he put in his police report came out and what the 911 call showed. Add to that the statements of the 911 caller.

I certainly believe that after it was establoshed that was Gates' was the proper occupant of the home and the arrest, the officer acted vindictely in arresting Gates on charges that could not possibly have been proven, as the rapidity that were dropped indicates.

As the facts come out, statements like Professor Douglas's come closer and closer to paranoid fantasy than astute political observation.

Unknown said...

Just for reference, what definition of "racism" covers your claim that Obamais a "racist"? Does he treat people differently based on race ("racial discrimination"), or does he perhaps believe in racial superiority ("racial prejudice")? That pretty much covers different aspects of racial bias. "Racism," according to dictionary.com, is more limited:


1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3.hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
[END QUOTE (See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racist)]

Racial bias is broader than racism. Just a 20% preference for one's own ethnic group may constitute bias but not racism. It seems that conservative bloggers are playing word games, such as the Fallacy of Equivocation:

(The "fallacy of equivocation" is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense, by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time. It occurs when an equivocal word or phrase makes an unsound argument appear sound.)

For effective communication in this debate, please help define "racism" in your context. As I recall, Obama only said the officer acted stupidly on arresting the professor. From this, are you jumping to the conclusion of "racism" with no other evidence?