..... I’ve always thought that subconsciously, Liberals are racists. Not that they hate people of other races – quite the contrary – they truly love them. But they do think that people of other races are inferior and therefore unable to make it on their own. So they do whatever they can to help them (with other people’s money, of course). The War on Poverty is a perfect example. So is affirmative action. And 0bama is another.
So the T-P media falls all over themselves trying to help him. They cover for him, attack his enemies, whatever it takes. They project their racism onto their opponents. And the more inferior they think the person is, the more they try to compensate. Hence the completely in-the-tank attitude over 0bama.
Whether condescension and paternalism towards people of other races is “love,” exactly, I’ll leave for you to decide. And of course we already know that this “love” is limited to those minority members on the liberal or left side of the fence. [ When it comes to conservative blacks, the racism really comes out. ] Fortunately for liberals, that would include the vast, vast majority of minorities such as blacks.
Ever since Obama’s candidacy was first declared during the 2008 campaign, I’ve noticed that one of the most common types of article about him is what I’d call the advice column. There is no dearth of liberal and/or leftist pundits, or even ones who call themselves neutral as well as certain softies on the supposed right (David Brooks, Peggy Noonan), trying to tell Obama what he should do to be even more successful.
Maybe now that he’s triumphed by being elected to a second term they’ll stop and figure out what they should have figured out long ago, which is that, in the sense of political strategy, this man (or his advisers) knows exactly what he’s doing. And in the policy sense, Obama’s agenda is probably not quite what they think it is, unless they’re already in with the in-crowd.
Plus, Obama isn’t going to take their advice. He’s not scouring the papers for helpful hints on how to govern. If he wants any help on that score, he’s got Valerie Jarrett.
I’ve long wondered why all the helpful columns. Yes, I know the media is liberal and/or leftist, and they’re on his side. But still, I just don’t remember all this help offered another president on left or right (and of course the “help” offered those on the right is always of the “he should give in more to the other side” variety, which is nothing remotely like what’s suggested to Obama).
So why more than any other president does Obama draw out this advice mode in the blogosphere and MSM? Did he seem needier in some way? I assumed it was because he was young and inexperienced, but maybe “Snackeater” is onto something (besides Fritos). Is all that helpfulness due to an assumption that he’s racially challenged?
Well, probably some portion of it. When I really think about it, I believe that the impulse that motivates them was/is actually racial anxiety (can he play in the big leagues?) combined with an intense, a truly extreme, desire for him to do well because of his race and his status as the first black president. In a sense, he’s Too Big (and Too important) To Fail.
Their wish for him to succeed is multiply-determined. It’s not just his race; his liberalism or leftism (take your pick; I’ll take the leftism) taps into theirs, except for Noonan and (arguably) Brooks, who may not be conservatives but who could not be described as liberals or leftists. These latter two might be the purest example, therefore, of the need to have Obama do well because of his race.
It would have been fascinating, wouldn’t it, to have seen what pundits on the left would have said if the first black president had been a conservative or even just a garden-variety Republican. Would the left have been just as helpful with their hints with a President Condoleezza Rice, for example (who, after all, is not just black, but a black woman)? It takes no time at all to realize the answer is “no, no, a thousand times no.” Rice (like other black conservatives or Republicans) became an Honorary Old White Guy long long ago—or worse, a Traitor to Her Race, good only for ridicule of the vilest (and most racist) sort.
So, as with many things, it’s complicated. Obama is not just the white liberals’ perfect dream of a black president, he’s the white liberals’ perfect dream of a black liberal president. And as such, he must be defended no matter what he does.
And you can bet your life that Obama knows that, and acts accordingly.
[NOTE: The only time Obama ever ran up against a situation in a national election where he couldn't take advantage of this was during his run for Congress against Bobby Rush in 2000, when he made the egregious error of running against another black liberal, a popular guy with far more impressive street creds, including a history in the civil rights movement, in a district made up mostly of working class blacks. Rush made the most of the contrast, saying about Obama:
He went to Harvard and became an educated fool...Barack is a person who read about the civil-rights protests and thinks he knows all about it.
Ouch! But could anyone else have set something similar about Obama and gotten away with it? Only people with the same profile as Rush---and Obama never ran into one again. As Rush later said about that 2000 race:
He [Obama] was blinded by his ambition. Obama has never suffered from a lack of believing that he can accomplish whatever it is he decides to try. Obama believes in Obama. And, frankly, that has its good side but it also has its negative side.
Rush didn’t have the handicap of idealizing Obama because of Obama’s race, nor did his voters. But although the next opponent Obama faced in a national election was also black, it was a very different proposition. Not only was this a statewide Illinois election for national office, and therefore had a much higher percentage of white voters than his 2000 campaign against Rush had featured, but his opponent in the 2004 Senate race—after Republican nominee Jack Ryan was suspiciously sidelined by a scandal late in the campaign—was the hastily-appointed Alan Keyes, who could be said to be at least as educated and intellectual as Obama, and a black conservative to boot (making him eligible for Honorary Old White Man status and worse), as well as an unpopular newcomer to Illinois. It was no contest; Obama won by tsunami margins.]
20 Responses to “Helping Obama” Occam's Beard Says:
January 26th, 2013 at 3:26 pm I believe that the impulse that motivates them was/is actually racial anxiety (can he play in the big leagues?)
Because they know in their hearts that he’s not up to it.
Observe people watching a physically and/or mentally disabled kid attempting to do something and failing miserably. Everyone – I include myself – gushes about what a good effort that was, how he’s almost got it, etc., and considers anything less than fulsome praise – and certainly any truthful assessment – as rude and ungentlemanly. Notice how the psychology closely resembles that of liberals toward Obama.
........
Otiose Says:
January 26th, 2013 at 5:11 pm The harm that positive racism does to Obama and a great many like him is huge. Based on his behavior/words I suspect he (and many of his supporters) thinks very highly of himself i.e. that he’s another FDR or Lincoln. Reality and some time will destroy that perception.
If you could track the personal lives and career achievements of many of the blacks that went to Harvard around the time of Obama you would likely find that many perhaps most have been seriously harmed by all the care provided over their time in schools and later at work to make sure that they don’t fail and to protect them from themselves.
And this is done by conservatives too.
Many years ago I was reviewing a tall stack of resumes for a modest temporary job opening. My standard practice was to put aside all the people who had majored in college in any ethnic/gender studies (e.g. women studies, black/asian/whatever). Someone I had double checking me noted that one resume of a person in black studies didn’t have any spelling or grammar mistakes, so after an impressive interview I ended up hiring them. I also ended up advising them over the next several years and watching them get screwed both by their own inability to turn down offered goodies (the 400 lb fat person refusing just one more Twinkie problem) and the corporate and educational system who need to fill quotas (if I may be a bit cynical here) and knowingly (IMO) hire them into inappropriate situations and then hold them to low standards.
Before this person could finish a masters degree they got hired away into a prestigious NY firm. Before they could really accomplish anything at the first firm they got hired away by another.
It did not end well and after 15-20 years what they were really good at was filling quotas.
And I told this person at each step that they were being hired to fill a quota / that they should finish the degree etc, but how can a person avoid something like this. And I’m sure that the people in the system making the offers and decisions were trying in their minds to do good, but that law of unintended consequences hits hard.
This mental disease – perhaps some holdover of white guilt or whatever – is pervasive in our culture. I’m hoping that eventually that Obama’s reign as president and his incompetence will finally become apparent to some critical mass of people that our culture can finally begin to put behind us the extremely counterproductive need felt by the establishment to hold certain groups to lower expectations.
Broadly analogous — I think Lincoln said something to the effect that the Civil War was God’s punishment on the country for slavery. Well, to me it’s not too far off to see the harm we are suffering from Obama as some sort of divine punishment for traveling too far down the affirmative action road. He’s a loud and clear call to rethink how to atone for past racism.
parker Says:
January 26th, 2013 at 6:37 pm In general those on the left do not view people as distinct individuals. From their POV individuals are defined according to race, gender, class, and so forth. When presented with someone who refuses to fit into the pigeon hole, like Clarence Thomas or Condi Rice, liberals have only one recourse which is to label them as traitors to their group identity as defined by leftist ideology.
“.. I believe that the impulse that motivates them was/is actually racial anxiety (can he play in the big leagues?) combined with an intense, a truly extreme, desire for him to do well because of his race…” I think this is in the bullseye. He is in their eyes TBTF.
Jan of MN Says:
January 26th, 2013 at 6:47 pm Otiose says:
“[Obama] is a loud and clear call to rethink how to atone for past racism.” I don’t think there’s any need to atone for past racism, unless you find that you yourself have been guilty of it. Even if your ancestors were slave owners, that’s not *you*. I could condone programs (not necessarily government sponsored) that taught job-hunting skills such as interviewing, understanding employer on-the-job expectations, and generally preparing oneself for action in the workplace, AS LONG AS they are programs offered to anyone who needs them, with no concern for race, ethnic background, gender, etc., and certainly no quotas.
I think that people who fall all over themselves demonstrating their approval for all things minority or ethnic are mainly trying to display their moral superiority for the edification of those less enlightened.
Oh, and to tillurdizzy: George W. Bush used the phrase “the soft bigotry of low expectations”, although I don’t know whether it was original with him.
........
Occam's Beard Says:
January 26th, 2013 at 8:09 pm Even if your ancestors were slave owners, that’s not *you*.
Ellis Island official: “Welcome to America, you have a lot of atoning to do for slavery.”
Immigrant: “Que?”
...... |
