The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Obama Watch

The Color of Your Character

By on 7.9.12 @ 6:09AM

Liberals have a racial answer to everything they find inconvenient about our president.

Liberals really are a single-minded lot: In their view, the only possible explanation for a person hoping that Barack Obama loses his next election is racism. All things political are analyzed through a filter of skin color, putting today’s left directly at odds with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream that his 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.”

Conservatives might argue that leftists are hypocritical on this score, that they are judging Obama by his skin color and judging his critics by what they perceive to be the content of our characters — based on nothing but our opposition to a far-left president who happens to be black.

But what they are demonstrating is not hypocrisy, it is projection. Liberals assume that since race is so important to them, it must be equally important to the rest of us, that it must, if you’ll pardon the pun, color our every political thought. This is of course particularly true of the liberal elite who suffer deeply from what Hayek termed the “fatal conceit,” a symptom of which is believing that all intelligent people must think as “Progressives” do — and that all people not intelligent enough to think as they do are suited to be ruled by them.

The moral yardstick for the American left is now “the color of your character.”

To liberals, when it comes to non-leftist critics of Barack Obama, the fact that many of us are not black means little less than that we wish the South had won the Civil War.

But when the subject is Barack Obama, the fact that his skin is black (despite his mother having been white) trumps all; nothing that our president does or says reflects any conceivable flaw in character, intellect, wisdom, or even policy.

As most of President Obama’s fundraising seems to come from Hollywood and Manhattan, two opinions from the former are instructive as to liberal, and particularly black liberal, thinking. In an interview with Ebony magazine in February, actor Samuel L. Jackson made clear the depth of his political analysis: “I voted for Barack because he was black. Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them.” Project much, Samuel?

Apparently Mr. Jackson forgets that in the 2008 election, by getting 43 percent of the white vote, Barack Obama did better among whites than any Democrat had in more than three decades. Presumably few of those roughly 30 million white voters who cast ballots for Obama did it because they thought he looked a lot like them.

And on Thursday, actor Morgan Freeman — desperately seeking a way to give race-centric liberals like Mr. Jackson a political indulgence in the unlikely event that reality inclines them against voting for Obama again — told NPR, after noting that “[Barack’s] mama… was [a] very white American,” that Obama “[is] not America’s first black president — he’s America’s first mixed-race president.” I suppose this means we are allowed to consider half of his failures.

Who would have thought that melanin is to economic incompetence what Teflon is to cooking incompetence — though only for Democrats. Thus, the left explains black conservatives like Congressman Allen West, Kevin Jackson, Larry Elder, Dr. Alveda C. King, Star Parker, and Herman Cain as some combination of idiot, sellout, and race-traitor. (Examples here, here, here, and unfiltered, cask strength stuff in first comment here.)

In other words, black Democrats are right because they are black but black Republicans are wrong because they are Republican.

The left lives in an Orwellian world of racial Doublethink:

To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. [George Orwell, 1984, Part 1, Chapter 3.]

Although it is most obvious when liberals disparage conservative blacks, their response to any criticism of the first black president (apologies to Bill Clinton) makes plain that while there are bad apples in all parts of society and politics, the Democratic Party is the true home of racism in America — as it has been for most of the years since the Ku Klux Klan was founded as the earliest Democrat community organizers.

I was reminded of this in a more-personal-than-usual way several days ago when during my radio show, back-to-back liberal callers accused me of being xenophobic and racist.

Page: 1 2  

About the Author

Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (103) |

Appleby| 7.9.12 @ 6:43AM

I moved out of Atlanta and into Canada because I became sick and tired of the litany that a White person is a racist from birth, regardless of what he or she thinks, says, does or believes. There is nothing, they said, that a White person can do to change the "fact" that White = Racist. "It's a Black thing," says the t-shirt. "You wouldn't understand."

In Toronto there are 141 different languages being spoken every day and people tend to hate each other for ethnic reasons they brought with them from the Old Country, which they refer to as "home" and to which they return when there is a lull in the fighting over there. Most of the Americans I meet here are socialists. Nobody has assured me that I am a racist because I am White. It's a nice change.

c. j. acworth| 7.9.12 @ 6:59AM

Not being accused of racism all the time sounds like a nice change for you all right, but it doesn't sound like Canada is a mixed-race hug-fest either, by your account. I guess the answer to the Question is "No, we can't all get along, esp. if some are determined not to."

Appleby| 7.9.12 @ 7:18AM

The fact of the matter is, people who are determined not to get along, will not get along. I was somewhat puzzled by the fact that so many people fled their "homelands" to come to Canada because of the very behaviour they turn around and perpetrate the instant they get the chance.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 8:59AM

And, I'm puzzled as to how you get to VOTE in our Elections, from your NEW HOME COUNTRY?

And why WE, who actually live here, have to suffer through your Picks.

You don't live here.

Your place of Residence is a Foreign Country.

I don't give a Rat's Ass how you're allowed to Vote in MY COUNTRY, from your Country.

I don't like it, and neither should anyone else.

As far as I'm concerned?

Letting you vote, is no different than letting Illegals vote.

Stay the Hell up there, and BUTT OUT of our affairs.

Appleby| 7.9.12 @ 4:21PM

I HAVE ANSWERED THIS QUESTION ABOUT TEN TIMES, BLOCK HEAD: PLEASE READ IT THIS TIME, OR GET SOMEONE TO READ IT TO YOU.

A PERSON DOES NOT GIVE UP HIS OR HER CITIZENSHIP WHEN HE OR SHE MOVES TO ANOTHER COUNTRY. YOU DO NOT GET TO VOTE YOUR ADDRESS! HAVE YOU NEVER HEARD OF THE "ABSENTEE BALLOT"?

I AM NOT A CANADIAN. I AM AN AMERICAN. AND AS SUCH, EVEN IF I LIVED ON THE PLANET YOU FLED TO CRASH-LAND ON EARTH, I COULD STILL VOTE IN THE AMERICAN ELECTIONS.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:45PM

You're NOT an American.

You WERE an American.

Now, you're a CANADIAN, or are you too STUPID to understand that?

You live in CANADA, you stupid old bag!

Americans LIVE IN AMERICA!

Brookschwarzenegro | 7.9.12 @ 9:15PM

So if Michael Reagan bought a house in Mexico and lived there but sometimes visited CA, he is no longer American??

Brookschwarzenegro | 7.9.12 @ 4:55PM

Whites are still on top-- but not forever.
The Arab Spring means Islamic nations can gain leverage someday and exploit you as you have been exploiting them; you always thought of the region as an oil spigot and the residents as expendable.

Now they will pay you back in your own coin.

Skippy| 7.9.12 @ 5:49PM

They will die wholesale like they did in Iraq.
Your Arab depopulation program is inspired!
Then we can start pumping their oil from the wells we drilled.
They can only drill into little boys.
Remember: white people have the vast majority of wealth, resources and weapons.
Wonder how that will come out?

Brookschwarzenegro | 7.9.12 @ 9:17PM

You are obviously an Old Southerner; remember, you lost the Civil War; you can lose any war.

Skippy| 7.10.12 @ 4:46PM

How many ways can you be wrong?
Each day brings a new answer.

MK48| 7.10.12 @ 12:16AM

Hey dip shit brooks, TLP was talking about the bag's allegiance....having a vaca home in beener ville to stay for a few weeks a year is a little different.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 8:28PM

How have whites been exploiting Arabs? By inventing superior technology that runs on oil? By finding oil under the Arabs who were camping on it in tents like illiterate primitives? By building the equipment to extract and ship the oil? By paying Arabs billions for which they themselves have not lifted a finger? By not forcing rich Arab countries to share their wealth with poor Arab countries?

JmsA| 7.9.12 @ 9:32AM

I'm called a racist just about everyday out here in L.A. If I had a dollar for every time I have been called a "pinchi (damn) gringo", and worse, I wouldn't have to work another day in my life. Yet, I have never thought of moving to another country, let alone a neosocialist one.

MK48| 7.9.12 @ 12:09PM

Appleby.........I see when things get tough you cut and run..........just like all "traitors".

Just remember I was one of many who put there life on the line to give you your freedom.....as far as I am concerned you should join the same club Jane Fonda belongs to.

Traitor Bitch..........

Drunken Sailor| 7.9.12 @ 1:56PM

Straight and True

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:53PM

"Straight and True."

I see you know our good friend - MK48.

He's a good man.

Wish we had more like him.

"Man the torpedoes. Full steam ahead."

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 4:09PM

Welcome to the Club.

Appleby| 7.9.12 @ 4:25PM

Nope; I moved to Canada because I was curious as to why socialism has never worked anywhere it has been tried. The only way you can learn that is from the inside. Y'all don't have a clue in the world what socialism is really like. Neither did I until I spent a few years living under it.

I have not permanently left my country; I will be moving back home next year upon retirement. Meanwhile, I take a great interest in having a country to come back to, particularly since my family lives in America. Unlike most of you, I suspect, who have never been farther from home than Disneyland and only know about other countries when America bothers to report about them on television.

Drunken Sailor| 7.9.12 @ 4:44PM

I beg to differ. Lived in Italy for three years. Saw socialism up close. You can keep it.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:49PM

She's so FULL OF SHIT, I can smell her from here.

Skippy| 7.9.12 @ 5:52PM

How arrogant!
Thanks for looking down your Great White Northern nose at us fools who did not abandon our country in her time of need.
You may not recognize much down here next year after your well-deserved retirement.
What with all the rubble and bodies in the streets and all...

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:55PM

Ya hear that, ya old bag.

We're on to you.

Some of us - ME - have been, from the start.

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 8:25PM

Appleby. I lived in New Zealand under Labour. I know fully well. For some reason, NZ is considered to have a "free economy." I call bullshit on that.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 8:36PM

Many of the intolerant responses questioning your Americanism from self identified conservatives seem to illustrate one of Mr. Kaminsky's points that conservatives do not do as well as the Left at overlooking minor differences among their team mates (and as a result one may add, have seen the ball moved incrementally to the far left field). What does it matter from where an American anti-Obama vote originates, Antarctica for all I care. All hands on deck in a storm. Just vote him out. Don't waste time infighting among ourselves.

CJW| 7.9.12 @ 4:30PM

What do you expect from someone who voted third party to help elect Jimmy Carter and will now sit it out to help Obama.
Good riddance. Send some more to Canada.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:50PM

You said it!

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 2:23PM

You moved to Canada because you didn't like being accused of racism? Why didn't you move to, like, Albany or Buffalo? Or maybe Des Moines?

Appleby| 7.9.12 @ 4:27PM

I lived in Buffalo for seven years. You ever lived in Buffalo? Didn't think so. Buffalo is just as racist as Atlanta, and there are no jobs because the unions drove them out to North Carolina.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 4:39PM

I lived in Albany for 18 years. They weren't racist, not overtly so, just machine Democrats. Today, they just expect the government to provide them with cradle-to-grave entitlements, sort of like Canada.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 4:42PM

By the way, as some poster here hinted, those socialist Americans you run into in Canada are emigres who came there dodging the draft. Or their children (and now, grandchildren). For the record, I was against the Vietnam War too, but I (like most others of my ilk) chose to remain here and deal with it instead of run from it.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 5:07PM

By the way, if you should run into Jesse Winchester, please tell him that I LOVE "Yankee Lady."

MK48| 7.10.12 @ 12:31AM

Crap......I live in the most socialist area in the US try voting in CA and see what you get....you talk about pissing into the wind.

Applegirl....been to Africa, Inda, Mexico, Tiwan, Philippines, Japan, and a few others my old mind has forgotten.

Want to see socialism in the rough not some white bread place like Canada live and work in some of thoes places then maybe we can talk.

I hear Jane Fonda has a retirement home maybe she will let you stay there.

Occam's Tool| 7.11.12 @ 2:41PM

Let's talk about Jesse Jackson, Jr., or, as I like to call him, "Chip" (Short for Chip off the old block of bird shit)

My bet what's wrong with Chip? Hepatitis C---treatment with interferon can cause severe depression.

How he caught it? I'm sure he shares his daddy's sexual ethos.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 4:47PM

Why would Canadians call you a racist because you're white. Now if you were French or English/Scottish, or Protestant or Catholic, you could catch some Canadian hell. But racially, they're just about all white European with a white European culture. Mayonnaise and white bread all the way!

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 5:57PM

She's an Idiot, that's why.

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 8:21PM

I want Allen West for VEEP. I'm a racist.

Ryan| 7.9.12 @ 8:34AM

One thing to add - the leftist mind tends to believe that their positions are the only logical and reasonable ones, and any others must come from some malicious intent - hence the calls of racism. They simply cannot fathom that rational minds can be conservative.

Derek Leaberry| 7.9.12 @ 8:56AM

You are actually correct. That is the liberal mindset.

Stephanie| 7.9.12 @ 9:45AM

Well Ryan, I believe that progressive leftist democrats are mentally ill.
So it works both ways.

Derek Leaberry| 7.9.12 @ 12:31PM

Morally ill as well.

JD| 7.9.12 @ 12:18PM

It's a matter of perspective. Most on the Left cannot comprehend alternate perspectives. In fact, they can't even comprehend the possibility of the existence of alternate perspectives. They assume that we share their perspectives exactly, at which point our alternate conclusions must surely be illogical. They can see no other explanation.

Pepe LaPue| 7.9.12 @ 8:58AM

This reminds me of the story of the plant foremant in Ohio who was in the process of firing a black kid. The black kid said "you're firing me because I'm black".

The foreman thought for a moment and said, "no, I hired you because you were black. I'm firing you because you're useless".

TCOX| 7.9.12 @ 11:23AM

Just like Obama.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 8:42PM

Exactly.

Fast and Curious| 7.9.12 @ 9:02AM

We won't get along because too many do not hold that as a goal. Identity politics, "multiculturalism", etc. are too valuable to the Sharptons, Obamas, and Jacksons of the world, not to mention the democratic party. We speak of the "black community". Where exactly is this place? Where is the hispanic community. I see people with all kinds of pigmentation out there, and I would be happy if they all called themselves "Americans".

The concept of "diversity" is a racist one. Dividing the country into groups based on anything other than American citizenship is very, very destructive.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 4:10PM

Bingo.

Derek Leaberry| 7.9.12 @ 9:03AM

Deep down, Obama is anti-white. His father was and his mother was. Most liberals of whatever color are also anti-white. Modern liberals generally hate everything in American history pre-1960s with a few exceptions like the New Deal, most of the Constitutional amendments after the first twelve, certain aspects of the Progressive Era legislation and jazz music.

PJ| 7.9.12 @ 9:04AM

When I read about an individual being accused in this country of being racist for no reason, it gets me so mad! These idiots have no idea what racism is. Talk to any foreigner & one will eventually hear some truly racist comment come out of his/her mouth, such as bashing another ethnic group's IQ. Has anyone talked to a Asian or an upperclass Latino lately? How about those Europeans or even Africans? Racism is all over the world.

My advice to those who are being attacked as a racist, throw it back at them. ------- Accuse them of being racists for even bringing it up. AND don't be afraid to attack!! You can not rationally talk to true racists which these leftists are but you can verbally shut them up as one would with bullies.

Obama & ilk are losing ; that's why these tactics are being used!

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 9:22AM

I learned something, today. Liberals are Racists.

I didn't know that

I knew that they Hated Jews, Christians, and Mormans who's last names aren't - Reid.

I knew that they hated our Armed Forces, the Boy Scouts, Bake Sales, Lemonade Stands, and Heterosexual Sex.

I knew that they hated Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Coal, and Big Corporations that make Big Profits, while, at the same time, they LOVE Big Government, Big Taxes, Big Unions, Big University, and Big Salaries for their Hollywood Sycophants.

I knew that they hated Butter on Popcorn, Salt on an Ear of Corn, and any Gasoline that isn't made from Corn.

They hate Big Cars, Big Houses, Big Private Planes, and Big Bank Accounts, unless all of these things are theirs. (and, they usually are)

Racism, huh?

So, you're saying that they DO things that they accuse everybody ELSE of doing?

That they're, pretty much, a buncha Do as I Say, not as I Do" guys?

I guess that's why they never LIVE near any Blacks, or have any Blacks on their Staffs, and have Offices in Harlem (just for show) that they never go to.

The Great White Tourist is, truly, all wise.

Jack of Spades| 7.9.12 @ 9:28AM

Most liberals believe the "Republicans and other right-wingers are racists" line because they want to believe it. The Democratic pols and liberal media people who play the race card play on this either from cynicism or because they 're also self-deluded. And you can't talk people out of a lie they tell themselves.

Louis Jenkins| 7.9.12 @ 9:34AM

At last, an article that speaks of whites looking through white sun glasses. Or are we (the whites) saying what it is we truly see, a communist, a liar, and a brigand, which can come in any color, any shape, or form. America, those of us in the fly over states, really don't need visual aides. We've enough sense to understand and reach logical conclusions, that a) Purp is a dingbat, and b) that the Democrats use race as a potent slur. If I am racial because I don't care for the One, the Obamanator, then I will wear the sign with pride. Huzzah!

Petronius| 7.9.12 @ 11:53AM

This piece is too verbose. The moral yardstick of the Liberal is total rejection of traditional morality. And racism to them is refusal to accept their adopted minorities on their terms. Skin pigmentation doesn't count. Down deep they are all rotten spoiled snots demanding, and now commanding government to order the world to their liking. Think the mud wallow at Woodstock: sex, drugs, sloth, and rock and roll. They have succeeded in breaking the back of Atlas. And when the economy crashes because of THEM, it will be open season with no limit.

MK48| 7.9.12 @ 3:21PM

Here is Johnny Depps definition of a "Liberal".....is a communist with a college education thinking neg*o thoughts.

Question ......would that be racists.

MK48| 7.9.12 @ 3:22PM

That peice of information came from the movie RUM DIARY.

WallyG| 7.9.12 @ 11:59AM

It all stems from liberals inability to deal with reality and face facts. In their narrow minded, intellectually stagnant, uncurious world of phrases, cliches and group-think, anyone who is more successful than theyt are must have done it, as Obama claims, by taking from the poor...so when a drone like Obama faces scrutiny and there is no record besides his current historic failure, liberals bowels twist and their minds collapse into the "oh yeah?", "racist", and endless filthy slogans about those who are obviously smarter than they are.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 12:01PM

The reason why lefties have long since consigned the Rev. Martin Luther King's hope that America might one day judge people by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin is that lefties haven't thought in terms of character since long before 1963, when King said that. Lefties fear character and whenever they can, they mock it and belittle it, often as old-fashioned and the hallmark of an oppressor.

Tom Kyba| 7.9.12 @ 12:14PM

The racial formula is easy. If you are a caucasian of any sort, you are a racist. If you are not caucasian, you are oppressed, and if anything, morally superior for your supposed suffering. If one of these minorities decides to excoriate you and anything you hold dear, you must stand and take it and agree with the assessment, because you can't possibly relate to their experience. White liberals believe this wholeheartedly, and will in turn decry their own race and prostrate themselves before any race hustler they can find, believing that this proves that those "other" whites are the real racists.
Liberals are progressives, and as such, they have discarded the related concepts of guilt and shame as being part of the old "dinosaur" belief system of the Ozzie and Harriet white bread generation. These "old" religiously-based concepts, which were intended to help guide people toward good moral behavior, which liberals will have nothing to do with, have been transferred to issues of race. And, as with virtually everything they touch, liberals have made a hash of it.

Tom Kyba| 7.9.12 @ 12:24PM

Perhaps an analogy would help.
For liberals, minorities are like their pets or unruly children and therefore cannot be expected to behave properly all the time. "Oh there goes that rascally Al Sharpton again. Let's give him a tv show."
Conservatives, on the other hand, see minorities as just other people; different appearance or skin color, but just people, and accordingly treat them like people.
If I wanted to go all Freudian on liberals I would say that, psychologically, they need to have minorities to patronize, because they must have people they consider inferior to them in order to prop up their fragile psyches.
Liberals, heal thyselves.

Mars the Avenger| 7.9.12 @ 1:27PM

Tom, I agree with your assessment, but believe liberals will never heal themselves. My approach is simple - in the few instances in which I have been confronted with the "racist" label, I simply take off my shoes and get in their face to tell them they can take their racism and stuff it up their a--. Their reaction is one of consternation for the lack of an apology, the vehemence of my response and the removal of my shoes (30+ years of martial arts training - in case things go kinetic). I just have zero tolerance for that kind of bullshit.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 2:21PM

What does removing your shoes have to do with defending yourself outside of the dojo? Personally, I'd think that the shoes add some punch to that foot-socky thingie.

Skippy| 7.9.12 @ 2:37PM

I agree. What's with the whole "Billy Jack" barefoot thing?
With shoes, my feet are well-protected weapons.
Without, they are an instant weak-point target.
But then, I never took any martial arts training, so I tend to just shoot first and walk over there later.

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 10:11PM

Skippy---because it's a lot more fun to do the "I'm going to take my left foot and smash the right side of your face" thing when you are barefoot. Really, it is.

TLP| 7.9.12 @ 4:13PM

Sit.

Roll over.

Beg.

Now, Vote.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 4:52PM

You can't be trusted to watch your own weight, so we're going to pass a law outlawing you drinking 32-ounce bottles of soda pop.

Now that that issue is taken care of, who are you voting for to be our president in November?

Ronsch| 7.9.12 @ 2:44PM

My favourite comment I ever heard on racism was when I was working with my younger brother's boy scout troop in Phoenix, AZ, back in 1988...The troop was predominantly Hispanic and Black, due to the sponsors' idea of fostering good morals among inner city youth by providing them with examples of good people of all stripes...After the first Scout-O-Rama ticket fiasco (we had a deluge of new applicants, but they all quit after selling their tickets to the Scout-O-Rama and pocketing the money), we were discussing MLK Jr., and at one meeting I asked about racism...one of the black kids said he could not be a racist because he was black. I asked him where such an idea came from and he piped up that it was what his mother had told him...

Anthony| 7.9.12 @ 3:34PM

Interesting how minorities are told that they are immune from all forms of basic human behavior because of their status as "disenfranchised".
This is the morally and intellectually bankrupt concept that human behavior is solely driven by ones "power" status.
This is about as inane as saying a minority can't hate another human being because of lack of status.
It's just another leftist "Get out of Jail Free Card", that allows minorities and lefties to behave as they damn well please with no consequences.
"We're bad cuz we have no control". Bullshit.

Drunken Sailor| 7.9.12 @ 4:49PM

I ran into the same mindset. Amazing isn't it? I suggested they look up the work racism in the dictionary. No where does it say any race is immune or could not be a racist.

The term Reverse-racism drives me nuts as well. There is no such thing unless you mean you LIKE someone because of their skin color. Think about it.

JD| 7.9.12 @ 8:22PM

@#$%!$ Racist dictionaries clearly have the definition wrong, then!

I joke only slightly. The Left's capacity to redefine words is but a subset of its overall ability to change facts that debunk its ideology. Two plus two is five, comrade!

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 8:50PM

You're right about what reverse racism should mean logically and it's what got Obama elected, by people who liked him because of his skin color.

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 5:02PM

Black people will hate white people for as long as they perceive that white people are engaged, 100%, in a plot to hide the goodies from them.

First, they thought we white folks were hiding the goodies by enslaving them. Then, they thought the goodies were there if they just made a fuss about being treated equally. Once they got equality and discovered that equality doesn't mean they get goodies for themselves, they decided that all us white folks are in a plot to keep it all away from them.

They will continue to think that as long as they have leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who find it worthwhile to perpetuate that delusion. That means they will think that forever.

So get used to being called racist by black people; they're convinced that we whities mean to keep them down. 100%.

Who Knows?| 7.9.12 @ 2:51PM

“A view is plausible because we prize it; we are enamored of its externals. We hold fast to it as the truth. No doubt the process is unconscious and goes beyond empirical experience. Nevertheless, it acts as a cover in hiding the real from us. In that state we do not even know that it is a view. So long as we are in illusion, we do not know it as illusion.

We become aware of its contradictions, as we analyze it and know it inside out. Self-conscious reflection is not possible if anything were taken as true and unitary, as simple. When we entertain a view, we are possessed by it; we look at things in this COLORED way and are not even conscious of it.

Only as a contrast is felt between what appeared and what it really turns out to be, there is self-consciousness. We must stand aside and perceive the inner flaw or fissure in our position.

Any fact of experience, when analyzed, reveals the inner rift present in its constitution. It is not a thing in itself; it is what it is in relation to other entities, and these in turn depend on others. This process thus proceeds indefinitely, and leads to a regress. Practically minded, common sense does not care to go deep. Philosophical systems, in their anxiety to uphold their own views, slur and gloss over the inherent flaw and instability of their contentions.”

The Central Philosophy of Buddhism; T.R.V. Murti, 1955 pages 135-136

Bill84728| 7.9.12 @ 4:56PM

So common sense is of low value because it doesn't go deep enough, and philosophy, because it seeks to determine deep principles, is compromised because of the motivations of the philosopher.

Okay. So how does Buddhism resolve the issue in a way that is neither superficial nor reflective of the basic rift between the objective and the person experiencing the objective?

Who Knows?| 7.10.12 @ 9:37AM

“Metaphysics or true philosophy is non-dual knowledge. The possibility of intellectual intuition is not only accepted but is taken to be the very heart of reality. It is Truth. In intuition, Knowledge and the Real coincide, essence and existence are identical. It is non-dual as being the negation of the opposites.

Only when we look at a thing from a distance, through the mediation of concepts and viewpoints, is there the possibility of discrepancy between what exists and our comprehension of it. Reason works through differentia and distinction. It cannot dispense with the duality of opposites without losing its nature as Reason.

The standpoint of Reason is that of a particular special viewpoint; it is not universal or disinterested knowledge. Non-dual knowledge is the abolition of all particular viewpoints which restrict and distort reality.

Non-duality is not attained, as in Hegel, by the synthesis of particular views, but by their negation. A view is negated only when we are conscious of its falsity.”

Central Philosophy of Buddhism, T.R.V. Murti; page 214

Jack London| 7.9.12 @ 3:08PM

You gave the game away Ross – anyone who willingly turns up to hear Geert Wilders has his stall clearly set out. And I bet Jan Brewer, Glenn Beck and Wayne LaPierre had your little heart all a stir.

JD| 7.9.12 @ 3:43PM

If we can ignore everything a person says because we have decided that they were wrong once, then there's no liberal left that I have to listen to.

Jack London| 7.9.12 @ 4:03PM

Wrong once? What are you smoking? These poisonous people are dining out for life thanks to acolytes such as Kaminsky turning up like puppets with blank checkbooks.

Skippy| 7.9.12 @ 6:01PM

Wilders is a hero.
Mohammed was a pedophile.
That makes you...

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 8:23PM

Geert Wilders kicks ass every day and twice on Sundays. His hair is more of a man than most Liberals' entire bodies.

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 8:24PM

Jack, we know that beheading three month old Jewish baby girls makes your balls tingle.

Oldporsche| 7.9.12 @ 4:14PM

Since it all revolves around skin color, it's proof positive "Jack London" , that you are truly shallow, in thought and character.

Ross Kaminsky| 7.9.12 @ 4:35PM

Well, they're all more conservative than I am, but the basic answer is yes...it is good to know that there are people who still believe in such primitive concepts as liberty and the rule of law. Unlike you and The One.

DRed| 7.9.12 @ 9:13PM

"I've had enough of Islam in the Netherlands: no more Muslim immigrants in. I'm tired of the worship of Allah and Mohammed in the Netherlands: no more mosques. I have enough of the Koran in the Netherlands: forbid that fascist book."

This is your champion of liberty?

Occam's Tool| 7.9.12 @ 10:14PM

DRed: yup. Seeing people murdered in your country for disagreeing with those people gets the blood up. Query: I'm the antihomosexual bigot because I want to keep them from being killed by Islamists while I oppose gay marriage, and you're the pro-gay rights guy because you support gay marriage but defend Muslims who murder gays.

How does this work, sir? By the way, I don't believe Wilders is anti-gay. How do you square this circle?

DRed| 7.9.12 @ 10:51PM

It's pretty easy. I don't defend muslims who murder gays and I don't think you're a homophobic bigot (you're just a guy who is probably wrong about the harmful effects of gay marriage). What I'm saying is that Wilders is pretty clearly not a believer in religious liberty, and it's dishonest of Ross to claim that he is.

Occam's Tool| 7.11.12 @ 2:47PM

Well, just how many Muslims do you defend then, seeing as the vast majority in the US who go to Mosque would, if they followed their Imams' beliefs, support the stoning of gays?

You need to look at "While Europe Slept," by Bruce Bawer, who is a gay American Liberal living overseas who shares Wilders' belief on Islam. It makes for VERY interesting reading.

In short, DRed, I think you are missing the next great totalitarian v. free societies conflict's build up. No need for name calling, here. But seriously, check out Bruce---he shares most of your belief system EXCEPT regarding Islam. You will find it interesting.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 9:22PM

You don't know the first thing about Islam, if you fall for that religious liberty sheep's clothing for what is a totalitarian ideology. If the German guy with the mustache had defined his totalitarianism as a religion, guess you would have been defending its inhumanities as you do Islam under the umbrella of "religious liberty".

Incidentally, you're the one who's wrong on the harmful effects of gay marriage too but analysis of why can't fit on a bumper sticker like your thinking. http://www.weeklystandard.com/.....asp?page=9 Stanley Kurtz

Ross Kaminsky| 7.10.12 @ 9:52AM

DRed,

Given Wilders' view, which I am mostly sympathetic with, that Islam is a totalitarian political ideology masquerading as a religion, his position is justifiable. That does not mean I would support that policy here in the US, however, at least not until Islam is recognized as something other than a religion, which will probably never happen on a broad scale.

DRed| 7.10.12 @ 3:43PM

What's not justifiable is saying that he's a champion of liberty. I suppose it's easier when you can decide that Islam is no longer a religion (in a comment thread to an article complaining about the Orwellian left, no less) but I still don't understand how banning books makes one a champion of small government and freedom.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 9:11PM

Wilders could blow his critics out of the water on a pop quiz on Islam and what the Koran actually says. Libs keep defending a book and a hybrid religion/ideology they know nothing about that preaches world wide domination by Muslims and a constant state of war in non-Muslim lands until we a) convert b) die c) bow down as dhimmi with no rights except what capricious Muslim masters deign to give. (Libs have a head start in groveling dhimmitude). For intellectually lazy libs (but I repeat myself) you don't even have to read up on the Koran. Just observe how non-Muslims are treated in all 57 Muslim states. That would be your future under the Koran, the book you defend out of your usual deep ignorance. Quick, what do takiya, abrogation and hudna mean?

Ross Kaminsky| 7.9.12 @ 4:36PM

By the way, it's pretty funny that you object to Wilders rather than to those who want to kill him. The "religion of peace" indeed has its useful idiots in the American left.

spike59| 7.11.12 @ 5:49AM

i'm not sure how 'useful' Jack may be, except as future fertilizer

Alej| 7.10.12 @ 2:40PM

"Wayne LaPierre ? ?"

You hate guns, too ?

Von Mises Jr| 7.9.12 @ 5:29PM

If you read Von Mises "Socialism" or "Theory and History," it is clear that Marx theories are bullship. "One World Socialist Government" cannot calculate prices. Small problem, don't you think?
Centrally planned economies as explained in Hayek’s "Road to Serfdom" MUST pick winners and losers. Example: Solyndra investors - winners, Chrysler bond holders - losers.
There is also the problem with "Material Productive Forces." Economic systems morph from late capitalism to communism to Ross Kaminsky's example of "Rodney King" socialism where "Can't we all just get along." Well it is supposed to happen like magic when the drones figure out socialism - GOOD, VERY GOOD.

So Marx could not defend his theories against intelligent and sane people such as Bastiat or his predecessor Adam Smith. So Marx just used ad hominem attacks with NO explanations of his theories.
Racism, sexism, xenophobia are simply blanket ad hominem attacks by the so-called smart people who believe in the Utopia of Marx and Lord Keynes, and cannot defend their theories against the criticism of Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell, and Walter E. Williams.

Frank Natoli| 7.9.12 @ 5:37PM

Color is criteria #2. The welfare state is criteria #1.

When Ken Blackwell ran in Ohio, and Michael Steele ran in Maryland, black voters in both states voted overwhelmingly for their white liberal opponents. It's the welfare state; it's not color.

It wasn't always that way. When Richmond fell, Lincoln took a Union warship down the Potomac, up the James, and from the dock drove his own wagon through the streets, to the despair of his protective guards. Just freed former slaves mobbed him, calling him Moses, leading them out of slavery.

And blacks voted solid Republican for 70 years. It wasn't until the demon of FDR's welfare state called to them in the 1930s did they flip, and have voted solid Democrat ever since.

As Thomas Sowell ably documented in "Vision of the Anointed", it wasn't centuries of chattel slavery that destroyed the black family. He notes the heart rending accounts of former slaves attempting to find lost spouses for years after Lee surrendered at Appomattox. And he notes that in the census of 1890, for the first time a question was asked about marital history, and blacks reported slightly higher rates than whites.

Only in the late 1930s did the cancer of the welfare state begin to work its way through the black family, and continues to do so to this day.

It will continue until the black voter recognizes the problem and finally says enough.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 9:37PM

This would be like expecting an addict to summon up the will to defy his pusher. Blacks are too far gone to save themselves and no one can do it for them. They have conservative black role models to follow but refuse and have followed the Dem pied piper in a downward spiral for decades. Dems have something in their goody bag for every black: obvious Welfare handouts, affirmative action policies that land blacks jobs for which they are less qualified than other candidates, (overwhelmingly in government) and lastly for blacks who have become successful on their own steam, there's the shiny blame whitey card for what would otherwise be the embarrassing pathology of the black community at large.

Skippy| 7.9.12 @ 6:03PM

"If I had a President, he would look like Mitt Romney."

Butch| 7.9.12 @ 8:07PM

The untouchable subject.

In the 70s, psychologists Arthur Jensen and Richard Herrenstein, Harvard and Columbia, I believe, and Nobel Prize-winner William Shockley, inventor of the transistor, all got their careers ruined because they all simultaneously came to the same conclusion concerning race and IQ. Their conclusions pretty much explained everything, and that was the problem. Jensen, a highly distinguished scholar, died a broken man. More or less the same result for Herrenstein, although he did co-author The Bell Curve with his student Charles Murry before he died, but the book more or less avoided the subject of race. Jensen had his car overturned and set on fire by a mob while he was trying to present a paper the mob wouldn't let him present. Jared Taylor's fact-packed book Paved with Good Intentions also got him ruined. A CUNY prof researching the same area also finally was more or less forced to retire and remove himself from the scene.

The left and the Democrats have to have that 95/5 black block vote to survive. Without it, they lose almost every election, national, state, and local. They will do anything to protect it. Ruining people's careers is on the table when it comes to this subject.

Race is tied up with every bad statistic, and always avoided. Even the national obesity problem is most predominant in the "South," analyzed in the media only geographically, and not by the obvious?

Oldefarte| 7.9.12 @ 8:12PM

To blindly align your every action to skin color is not only stupid but self-destructive as well. If I voted strictly for only candidates possessing similar characteristics to my own, I would be acting "STUPIDLY" [and African-Americans are totally guilty of this]. This not only does not benefit them but also is detrimental to their overall welfare, since many/most of the politicians etc possessing their skin-color credentials are lacking in professional qualifications needed to assist them. Sadly these racial brothers/sisters are taking unfair advantage of their similarities for their own personal gain. Non-minority liberals likewise use race as a political weapon to also enhance themselves, and are hypocritical in their actions. Liberals use the unionized public schools system to foster same's inept/unqualified teachers in order to guarantee an end result of an uneducated, illerate GRADUATING population. They then turn around and blame conservatives/moderates within the private sector for being forced to offshore well paying jobs overseas, when the true culprit is the ineptly taught and uneducated graduates. Since liberals are then allowed to maintain their political power by telling this uneducated/gullible class that only through their stewardship and candidacy can things be improve, it becomes a quid-pro-quo situation of a never-ending circle of support between these two elements!!!!!!!!!!

Cobalt| 7.9.12 @ 9:13PM

LMAO

LmaObama.com

http://lmaobama.com/gallery/

Stuart Koehl| 7.9.12 @ 11:01PM

If 60% of white voters vote for a white candidate over a black candidate, that is blatant racism.

If 90% of black voters vote for a black candidate over a white candidate, that's just racial solidarity or black pride.

Got it?

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 9:44PM

Yep. Without the double standard, Dems would be doomed.

Laine| 7.12.12 @ 9:47PM

My short and sweet rebuttal to lib racism accusations is: "I disagree with the policies of Obama's white half". This has the salutory effect of reminding them that he's half white. They hate their "first black president" balloon being pricked. That's what makes it sweet.

More Articles by Ross Kaminsky

More Articles From The Obama Watch

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

May 23, 2013 | Betsy McCaughey

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

May 22, 2013 | George Neumayr

Anyone Still Believe Me?

May 21, 2013 | Aaron Goldstein

Obama’s Far Left Hand

May 15, 2013 | George Neumayr

That Is What We Do

May 14, 2013 | Jay D. Homnick

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/09/the-color-of-your-character

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord|4 comments

Lerner’s Plea

Ray V. Hartwell, III|7 comments

Eugenic Abortion 2.0

Daniel Allott|4 comments

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey|3 comments

What Are the Risks of Syria Involvement?

Christopher Orlet

Obama’s Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.|3 comments

Obama’s Drone War

Jed Babbin|2 comments

Catholic Culture In America

G. Tracy Mehan, III|2 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Issa Recovers

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

The Religion of Peace Strikes London Again

Aaron Goldstein | 5.22.13

Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack

Quin Hillyer | 5.22.13

House Judiciary: Constitutional Rights Vital in Wartime

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

U.S. Admits 4 Americans Killed by Drones

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

Colorado Governor Gives “Reprieve” to Murderer

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Steven Crowder: Jesus vs. Muhammad

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Kaminsky’s Corollary to I, Pencil

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.