Liberal media narrative fails: the racist lie from segregation to illegal immigration.
“You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n….s, and they stomped the floor.” — Democrat George Wallace on his first, failed, race for Governor of Alabama
That sound you hear is a rare thing.
A liberal template is being shattered in Arizona. The template of race.
It’s an important liberal template too. Central to the success of one of the biggest of liberal myths. The myth? That the electoral successes of the Left throughout American history have had nothing to do with race, much less racism. That in fact all those angelic lefties out there just want truth, justice and the American way for white and black and brown and yellow and red and any other combination of hues on the color scale. Kumbaya. Divide by race? How insulting!
The truth, however — and that truth is reappearing vividly once again in Arizona — is that the American Left could not have made it to the 21st century without tying itself tightly to abject racism. It has secured political success in the past by playing every possible race card from supporting, in order, slavery, segregation, lynching, the Ku Klux Klan and racial quotas, while fiercely opposing the legal immigration of Asians. The latter were labeled by Democrats as “a servile race” whose presence was objectionable because “they had not sprung from the great parent stock.” Now, in the piece de resistance, the Left is using the race card with illegal immigration. And it is no accident that what began with racial appeals to whites (in opposing rights for blacks and legal immigration for Asians) moved on to racial appeals to blacks and now to brown-skinned Americans. The more the race changes, the more the approach stays the same.
The liberal media, but of course, is complicit. And, it is most import to understand, it has always been so. If liberals were the (literal) slave masters and segregationist bullies of America’s past (and they were), the left-leaning press was the plantation PR agent. They approached progressives and their use of race in such a starkly deceptive fashion as to be a pluperfect example of what this magazine’s editor in chief R. Emmett Tyrrell calls “the Kultursmog.” Tyrrell defines the term (in his new book After the Hangover) as a liberal “pollutant” which “contaminates such vast areas of American culture with Liberal prejudices and bugaboos.” There is no need to rehash here the details of all those Democratic Party platforms (26) that directly supported either slavery itself or segregation when they weren’t whacking away at Asians. Suffice to say the American Left has danced, tangoed, waltzed, and fox- trotted when not sleeping with every incarnation of racism in America from the beginning to this moment. Somehow, this just never made it into the news of the day as reported by all those Lefty journos, the cultural smokestacks never getting around to pumping this particularly cleansing truth into the political atmosphere.
Case in point (there are an endless number) is the New York Times’ handling of the death in 1924 of former President Woodrow Wilson, a hero then and now of the American Left.
The day after Wilson’s death, befitting the importance of a powerful president, the Times published a three page review of Wilson’s career. Three pages in fine print, beneath the headline Career of Woodrow Wilson as College Executive, Governor and President. There was not a single, solitary word that Wilson was not only a thorough-going racist, had avidly courted like-minded segregationists to get elected (carrying the 13 states of the “Solid South”) but had used his presidential power to both segregate the federal government and appoint rabid progressive-racists to powerful posts, such as Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels. Daniels, on cue, promptly segregated the US Navy.
And of these decidedly important events which vividly illustrated the historic tie between the American Left and racists the Times reported: Nothing. Zero. Not one solitary word in a three-page, fine print career review.
The Times did have space for other headlines though during the so-called “Progressive Era.” They are unintentionally revealing of the American Left’s view of race.
“Woman Rescued from Negro”
“Woman Stabbed by a Negro”
“Negro Attacks a Teacher”
“Negro Kills a Sheriff”
“Negro Saves $30,000”
Got that? Not “Woman Rescued” or “Woman Stabbed” or “Man Attacks a Teacher” or “Man Saves $30,000.” Noooooooooo. It’s a Negro. Yet when a white man was caught sending bombs to three people, the headline ran: “Three Bombs His, Janitor Admits.” Race never made the story, the man’s ethnic surname identifying him as an Irish American. A white man.
This was — and is — the way the liberal media deals with race. It is a necessary base line for the success of the American Left. The Times was relentless in reporting blacks as perpetrators of all manner of bad deeds — because this supported the need for progressive-racists to appeal successfully for white votes. It worked. And when Woodrow Wilson died, the historical record of what he had actually done — the true nature of the relationship between the left and racism during the Wilson presidency — vanished. Right in front of the eyes of 1924 Times readers. Then again, how can something vanish if it’s never reported in the first place?
As time moved on, a strange similarity began to emerge as the Left finally engaged with American blacks.
Progressives presented big government to blacks in precisely the same way they presented it to white Southerners: tied tightly together to the idea of racial identity. Thus emerged a whole generation of progressive black politicians who were the mirror image of their white supremacist counterparts: each exploiting the combustible mix of racism and big government.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?