Answering My Critics - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Answering My Critics

Orlando has surged to everyone’s attention. As well it should.

But before time passes, a look back at a June 7th primary night dust-up on CNN and an important topic. The dust-up involving yours truly that drew, um, some attention. For a flavor on the reaction that was launched by the Trump criticism of the ethnicity of the judge in the Trump University case?

Take a look here at the far left Media Matters where you will find this headline the other week:

CNN’s Donald Trump Surrogate, “The Most Grotesque Person On Television,” Hits A New Low
30+ Media Figures Call Out Jeffrey Lord And CNN For Election Night Meltdown

The article features tweets from these media folks, none of them favorable and all but two tied in some fashion to liberal, mainstream media or left-wing publications. Then here was the usual from over in the precinct of the Washington Post, with posts from Erik Wemple and Callum Borchers.

Mr. Wemple, who appears to have momentarily taken leave of his senses, said of me “that here’s someone on CNN’s payroll sticking up for racism. Process that.” Uh-huh. The guy who relentlessly cites JFK, Bobby Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King as his childhood heroes precisely because they believed, per JFK, that “race has no place in American life or law” is now suddenly a racist in the eyes of a Washington Post columnist. The very same Washington Post that once upon a time endorsed JFK himself in the day and apparently now houses a columnist who finds the iconic late president’s views on a “colorblind” America “racist.” Process that. One can only wonder if Mr. Wemple and his paper will demand to rename the Kennedy Center for George Wallace while extinguishing the eternal flame over JFK’s legendary Arlington grave.

Meanwhile over at the Huffington Post, John Amato of the aptly named Crooks and Liars headlined:

CNN’s Humiliation As Jeffrey Lord Makes A Mockery Out Of Their Election Night Coverage

Amato fumed in part (bold print his):

The humiliating segment could be boiled down to this single outrageous statement by Lord, when he responded to Van Jones objections about Trump, saying, “It wasn’t racist, he’s calling attention to racism! Hello! Hello!”

As Hillary Clinton has said about Trump, I will leave it to the psychiatrists to figure out exactly what is wrong with Jeffrey Lord.

But WTF, CNN? You have just as much to answer for as this Neanderthal, because you gave him this much airtime. This was an important, historic night in the history of the United States, and your coverage was hijacked by a paid partisan who is either consciously disruptive, or else is just plain crazy. In either event, you have no business putting him on your network, and his fellow-panel members should refuse to appear with him ever again.

Shame on you, CNN. Shame.

Ahhh yes. In Mr. Amato’s upside down world leftist world, denouncing racism is racism! But of course! Talk about needing a psychiatrist!

So. Let’s get back to the core point here. When it comes to all of this free-flowing “Donald Trump is a racist” business, it’s time to squarely face the race question head on. Exactly who are the real racists? Trump — or his critics from the American Left? Are you serious?

As I have written for years, the American Left — and the Democratic Party that is its political agent — has trucked in race from the party’s very first appearance on the American political scene in 1800. As Pulitzer Prize winning historian Garry Wills, author of books on Lincoln at Gettysburg and others wrote in Negro President”: Jefferson and the Slave Power, (bold print for emphasis): “Though everyone recognizes that Jefferson depended on slaves for his economic existence, fewer reflect that he depended on them for his political existence. Yet the latter was the all-important guardian of the former.”

Exactly correct. Depending on racism for the political existence of the American Left and the Democratic Party has been a standard of the Left since Jefferson’s day. In that day, as historian Wills goes to great detail to point out, this meant an alliance with the newborn party and slaveowners to push Jefferson’s agenda, not all of which had to do with race. And it is this formula — racism plus progressivism/liberalism/leftism/the Democratic Party, however you choose to phrase it — that is to this day the political engine that lies at the heart of both the Democratic Party, the American Left, and many of its institutional allies.

Back in 2008, I wrote a piece in this space detailing this horrific history. It was picked up by the Wall Street Journal, titled “The Democrats’ Missing History.” It read in part:

As Democrats prepare to nominate Sen. Barack Obama to be the first black president, the Democratic National Committee and its chairman, Howard Dean, have whitewashed the party’s horrific and lengthy record of racism. The omission is in the section of the DNC Web site that describes the party’s history. The missing history raises the obvious question of whether the Democrats, unable or simply unwilling to put their party on record as taking direct responsibility for one of the worst racial crimes of the ages, will be able to run a campaign free of the racial animosities it has regularly brought both to American presidential campaigns and American political and social life in general.

What else to make of the official party history as presented by the DNC on its Web site? It is a history so sanitized of historical reality it makes Stalin look like David McCullough.

The piece goes on to record in detail the obsession with race that has been at the heart of one of America’s two political parties — the Democrats, the country’s oldest party — for now over two centuries. That list includes (but is not limited to) six party platforms that supported slavery, another 20 that supported segregation outright or were silent on the subject, and the role Democrats played in creating “Jim Crow” laws that segregated everything from schools to public transportation, restaurants, and rest rooms. Also not mentioned by the party was its opposition to the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution (successively ending slavery, making ex-slaves citizens and giving them the rights of due process and, last but not least, giving blacks the right to vote.) There was silence also about party opposition to the passage of the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1870, 1871, and 1875, all of which collectively reinforced the various rights of black Americans that made them equal to their white fellow-citizens. Note well that not mentioned is the repeal of the GOP-supported Civil Rights Act of 1871 — also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act, which empowered the President to use the federal government to fight the Klan, the Klan of the period described today by Columbia University historian Eric Foner as “a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party” and by University of North Carolina historian Allen Trelease as “the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.” Note well that the reason — the desperate need — for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — was that Democrats had spent a century undermining those post-Civil War laws that had already dealt with the issues of both the 1964 and 1965 bills.

The repeal of the 1871 Klan law was passed by a Democratic Congress in 1894 and signed into law by Democrat Grover Cleveland, the first Democrat to occupy the White House since the arrival of Abraham Lincoln and the GOP 34 years earlier.

One could go on — and on and on — with this list of leftist racial obsession. Racial obsession (along with violence) is in the culture — the very DNA — of the American Left, and has been since Jefferson created a party built on the backs of the racial obsession that was slavery. Alabama Governor George Wallace and his infamous vow of “segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” was but one example in the 1960s version of this obsession — as is what we now ever so politely call “identity politics.”

Like the fish who doesn’t understand it swims in water, too many who swim in this Leftist culture of racial obsession — and alas that includes far too many GOP elites — many of these Trump critics who were so offended by my message are obligingly swimming along in this racial sewer not only without understanding the fact, but not even deigning to acknowledge it. In some cases, they simply close their eyes to major liberal institutions that play an active role in relentlessly pumping this racial sewage into the media stream. As I noted here back in 2009, then Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor played this game exactly with her assertion that she as a “wise Latina” would make a better Justice than a white male. It’s hard to play the race card more boldly than that these days.

Another example? Easy to find.

Note that Amato of Crooks and Liars published his piece in the Huffington Post. The same Huffington Post that always runs this “editorial note” at the end of its visceral anti-Trump stories:

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

And who does the HuffPo regularly publish on its cyber pages?

That would be Al Sharpton, who launched into David Dinkins, the first black Mayor of New York, by spewing the n-word — as heard here. Here is Sharpton again raving about “Chinamen,” Koreans, and watermelons. And in the wake of Orlando and the mass murder of 49 gays? Let us not forget this charming clip of Al Sharpton — on video no less — shrieking at a TV audience member that the guy is a “punk faggot.” Not to be forgotten as well is Sharpton’s visceral anti-Semitism, as noted here, with the infamous “white interloper” comment that helped fuel the burning of the Jewish-owned Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a fire set by a protester that killed seven people. Then there was this jewel coming out of Sharpton’s role in the Crown Heights riots: “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.”

Note well that in spite of Sharpton’s record as viscerally anti-Semitic, one who casually spews the most racially offensive of rhetoric and his televised gay bashing, the Huffington Post sanitizes all this by saying of Sharpton on its site:

Reverend Al Sharpton is the President of the National Action Network (NAN) and one of America’s most-renowned civil rights leaders. Whether it was his noteworthy run for President of the United States in 2004 or his use of passive resistance and non-violent civil disobedience, Rev. Sharpton has had an irrefutable impact on national politics because of his strong commitment to equality and progressive politics.

What a guy! And they think Trump is the problem? Give me a break. Sharpton’s mainstreaming isn’t limited to the Huffington Post, either. In addition to being given a television show by MSNBC, in the Obama era Sharpton is, as reported here in Politico, the “go-to” guy for the Obama White House on race. Yet not a peep from Amato or the others. To protest this kind of racial obsession — make that garbage — is to wind up being designated a racist. Process that!

What does this have to do with Trump and his now already distant criticism of the federal judge in the Trump University case? Everything. Because while the judge’s obsession with his ethnic background may on the surface only be relevant to the Trump University case, in fact I would suggest this situation is emblematic of the much larger problem of the determined re-segregation of American life by the Left.

Take the fact that the group the Judge belongs to — the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is, according to the SDLRLA itself, “one of 18 affiliate bar associations of La Raza Lawyers of California.” The California La Raza Lawyers lists as its founder the late Mario G. Obledo, whom the Post quoted thusly in its obituary of Obledo:

“It’s inevitable that Hispanics or Mexican Americans are going to control the institutions of the state of California in the not-too-distant future,” he told the Los Angeles Times. “If people don’t like that, they can leave.”

As Breitbart reported, on another occasion, on a California talk radio show, Obledo had this exchange:

Obledo: “We’re going to take over all the political institutions of California. In five years the Hispanics are going to be the majority population of this state.”

Caller: “You also made the statement that California is going to become a Hispanic state, and if anyone doesn’t like it, they should leave. Did you say that?”

Obledo: “I did. They ought to go back to Europe.”

Charming, yes? This is nothing but George Wallacism updated. But to liberals? In a classic instance of what might be called the “new segregation” — those who oppose racism like this are… wait for it… the racists. Right.

What Donald Trump has done here, albeit through the accident of the Trump University case, calls attention to a very real, very serious problem in American society today. The American Left — and yes its media outlets as cited above — are determined to drag this country backwards to a time and place — an ugly time and ugly place — when everyone and everything was judged by race.

A while ago Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas observed:

“My sadness is that we are probably today more race and difference-conscious than I was in the 1960s when I went to school. To my knowledge, I was the first black kid in Savannah, Georgia, to go to a white school. Rarely did the issue of race come up. Now, name a day it doesn’t come up. Differences in race, differences in sex, somebody doesn’t look at you right, somebody says something. Everybody is sensitive.”

Justice Thomas is right. Recall that this is the man who spotted this problem decades ago at his confirmation hearings when he had the courage to look liberal U.S. Senators in the eye and memorably say as follows:

“This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.”

He went on to say more recently:

“The worst I have been treated was by northern liberal elites. The absolute worst I have ever been treated,” Thomas said. “The worst things that have been done to me, the worst things that have been said about me, by northern liberal elites, not by the people of Savannah, Georgia.”

What Donald Trump ran into with that Judge is exactly what Justice Thomas has decried. The demand to “kowtow to an old order” of racial obsessiveness. An old order that has resurfaced everywhere from the judiciary to the media to academia, the corporate world, government (where Obama National Security Adviser Susan Rice recently complained that U.S. national security agencies are too white) and beyond.

Again, JFK had it right — and note well that he was busy fighting his own party on the subject of race when he said “race has no place in American life or law.”

Call me crazy. But when we reach the point that protesting racism is considered racism, I’m sticking with JFK (whom Mr. Wemple’s paper once endorsed) on this subject — not to mention sticking with Bobby Kennedy, Dr. King and, yes indeed, Donald Trump too. My critics on this, some of them at least as seen in those Media Matters and Huffington Post stories, self-evidently, are casting their lot for kowtowing to the old order.

They can have the old order. But the country needs to break free of it. We are not going to spend the 21st century re-segregating America. Which is exactly Donald Trump’s point.

I’m with Donald.

Jeffrey Lord
Follow Their Stories:
View More
Jeffrey Lord, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is a former aide to Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp. An author and former CNN commentator, he writes from Pennsylvania at His new book, Swamp Wars: Donald Trump and The New American Populism vs. The Old Order, is now out from Bombardier Books.
Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!