The race of President Obama – pro or con, it still amounts to nothing

Recently, we received a comment on a post that irked us. Not because of what was being said, or who was saying it, but what was implied.

The exact words were

“I’m tired of the raciest overtones and I believe that the GOP will not be happy until they bring this country down.”

It doesn’t matter who said it or in reply to on what article. The though is the key. A theme that Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee recently spouted on the floor of the House. A theme that is a constant among many of the most extreme of Liberals.

“…I do not understand what I think is the maligning and maliciousness of this president. Why is he different? And in my community, that is the question that we raise. In the minority community that is the question that is being raised.”

The implication is

If you say you disagree with President Obama, It is because you must be a racist.

The theme is ridiculous. But even Democrats like former President Carter have uttered words that evoke that message. The major media has largely run with that message on almost every opposition to President Obama since before he took office.

But let’s stop to think about this for a moment. Is it racist to disagree with President Obama? Is there really no other logical reason to oppose some of his political positions than the fact he has a permanent tan? Even when such opposition comes from people equally of color?

So, under that logic, every Person of Color that opposed President Bush did so because they were racist? The same is true of President Clinton. And President Carter. That is the implication. That the ONLY reason anyone could oppose a sitting President is because they hate the color of skin of whomever holds the office. Oh, and as for say President Ronald Reagan, well opposiition from other Whites MUST be because they hate their own race and are sellouts. Or how about the implication made by President Carter, that the people who carried around signs depicting President Bush as Hitler, and protesting his policies, are just racists? Is there a Democrat, elected or not, that is willing to stand by that statement? Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, any comment?

When you interject other Presidents into the same line of reasoning, suddenly it becomes clear how lopsided and ignorant such an implication is.

In fact, one of the best ways we have ever learned to explain racism are by examples, and reversing the color or those involved in the example. Maybe one of the best examples of this is depicted in the movie A Time To Kill

Now imagine she is White. The men that would do such a thing are animals. Their skin color is irrelevant to what they did, the attrocity of it. But take that same kind of reasoning and now apply it to President Obama, or President Bush.

Is President Obama being opposed because he is Black, or because he is the President? Was President Bush opposed because he was White, or because he was President? Both Presidents have had opponents mock them. Both have had the small-minded spitefully ridicule them and their actions. Both men have had pundits and elected officials oppose their ideals and political actions. Where does race apply?

Do you recall the images of President Bush as the Joker? Do you recall the delight of the media when a shoe was thrown at the President of the United States? Do you think there would have been the same glee if President Obama has a shoe thrown at him? Do you think comedians would have laughed and mocked the scene? Why is it different then?

America is in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya. We still use and buy oil, as much as before. We still have a massive army, and live a better quality of life than 95% of the world. Fanatical Islamists still want ALL of America to be wiped of the face of the Earth. Nations across the globe still denounce every action, or inaction, that we take.

At home, a majority of Americans oppose many of the policies of President Obama, just like President Bush at times. In fact, just like most Presidents since Nixon – at least part of the time of their Presidency. Where is this different? Where is this a “unique” event based on the color of skin of the President?

If we are honest, and set aside political preferences, then we all realize that race is not important when discussing President Obama. His race does not make the Health Care Reform better or worse. His skin tone does not influence the number of people unemployed. His permanent tan does not alter the number of people that have had their homes foreclosed. His birthright of color has not stopped a bullet fired at a single soldier, nor altered the increase in food prices due to ethanol production. The Blackness (or Whiteness as he is bi-racial lest we forget) of President Obama has not removed a single dollar from the interest of the debt that is being accumulated right now.

The issue of race is a distraction from the reality. A way to enflame emotions. A way to stop people from thinking about the facts as they exist. The use of race is, in this application, a means of buying votes on the cheap.

To use my example, reverse the color of President Obama. He is as White as former President Clinton. Or Carter. He has followed the exact same policies. What changes? What is different because of his skin tone?

Nothing.

Therefore opposing the policies of President Obama is not about race. We dare any Democrat, elected or not, to provide 1 law or proposal that was not passed, or even opposed, because of the skin color of President Obama and not his political beliefs.

We ask each of you, think about it. Name 1 thing that is political that President Obama has done that was opposed ONLY because of his race. Even secondarily, even denarily. We are beyond sure, that it cannot be done. Because while it may sell newspapers, draw a television audience, or pack a comedy club it isn’t real.


Only your support allows us to provide election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and/or World of Vass – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.

About the Author

Michael Vass
Born in 1968, a political commentator for over a decade. Has traveled the U.S. and lived in Moscow and Tsblisi, A former stockbroker and 2014 Congressional candidate. Passionate about politics with emphasis on 1st and 2nd Amendments.

2 Comments on "The race of President Obama – pro or con, it still amounts to nothing"

  1. Comment as found at http://www.blackandwhiteblog.net/2011/07/26/the-race-of-president-obama-pro-or-con-it-still-amounts-to-nothing/comment-page-1/#comment-1119

    ripuree Says:
    July 26th, 2011 at 11:42 am e
    Mr. Vass, it is not true that people are calling oppopnents of Pres. Obama racist, because of the opposition per-se. The problem is the racist scenarios in which statements of opposition are offered. Examples are the “birthners”, and those seeing the urgent need to take back “their” country.

    Putting out such statements in a country where the roots and engines that supported instutionalized racism were never effectively dismantled when slavery was unwillingly ended, is to add flame to logs that were well soaked in oil.

    Statements are coming from clear and conscious minds, with intentions to divide and keep the status quo “all white”. Such satatements are intended to reinforce and maintain the myth of the U.S. being a “white man’s country”, which now needs to be taken back to days when a black man could never be in the White House. The message is clear even to a deaf person, because the racist default programming pervades every aspect of daily life.

    I am sure that you are well aware Mr. Vass, that no black mother is teaching her children to prefer the look of Caucasian/White over her own race. Yet test after test still proves that black children still predominantly and automatically prefer every other race’s image but our own. And the percentage of black women who will not wear their natural hair “dead or alive” proves that black adults are no different in that relm. So racims (which had trained even black people to continue automatically hating ourselves) is a default in our society. And in such a climate, where blacks learn to accept that White is always right and black should always stay back, it doesn’t need direct instructions to incite great concern in the minds of many, when a black family is in the White House.

    I don’t need to tell you Sir, that Judeo Christianity, the English Language, History, plus other areas of academics are all encoded with White Superior, White Right vs. Negro/Black Inferior, Black Wrong. Such continued covert racism from respected institutions worldwide, continues to ensure that the collective psychic of black people remain where white peopole say it should be. Therefore if we’re seen to be getting out of place, only a few choice statements need to be said.

    Every person who goes through the ecucational system in the U.S. understands very early, that next to God; the Pilgrims and Founding Fathers were the most honorable men. And as honorable men, every murder they committed to disenfranchise Native Americans, or maintain the enslavement of Negroes are accepted as serving the common good. At the same time the sanity and integrity of men like Nat Turner, John Brown and others (who killed whites; because they were wantonly denying black humans from living like humans) are still questioned and riduculed.

    The fact is that humans are still currently being taught that White humans have more value than black humans. We all quietly accept this without question. Our subconscious is daily and uninterruptedly reinforced with those notions. And while we say nothing about the foundational institutionalized racism that daily gets more deeply embedded in our collective psychic, like an unknown computer virus, we question those who provoke more more people to subtly maintain such thoughts.

    How many of us ponder the fact that; while it was whites who were doing wicked and evil things to Negroes during slavery in the Americas, they still had the nerves to define black people in their dictionaries (which came about during Negro enslavement) with the most dreadful meanings of condemantion (which described their actions more truthfully). While the meanings which more closely described the Negro humans they held in complete bondage; they applied to themselves.

    And lastly, was it not white race scientists who classified all humans with straight hair and lighter than black shades as Caucasian? Thus subliminally suggesting to all Peoples of Color that together they all belong to the same Clan, while Negroes were different, thus all groups of humans could find a common Prey/Enemy in those with the blackest skin and woolly hair. Did white people not change their original meaning of White from being synonomous to Caucasian, to make Caucasian later include, black, brown, red and yellow human? And when science later decide that we’re all One Race, yet textbooks do not change, and no Universal Official correction is made to the masses of humans who believed the first take, are whites not continuing to unduly, subconsciously and automatically benefitting from programmed racism; while blacks continue to silently, subconsciously and automatically suffer?

    With such a long uninterrupted history of laying down white superiority black inferiority white people needn’t make direct statements anymore to activate mass hate and hysteria for a black person in power.

    From such covert, subliminal universal collective iimbalance, should white people be encouraged even in the slightest way, to think that they can say whatever they want on the world stage, without accepting the racial consequence they stir up?

    Again I say that when slavery was ended the meanings in dictionaries, books of academia, and Bible remain intact. The symbols of white power in momuments and daily nuances remain intact. The Media still use its widespread power to ensure that the minds of the masses remain unchanged. So wwe still live in a world that programs a great anumber of black people to use their eloquence and socio-economic gains to defend the covert subliminal racism that works like an undetected computer virus. We still live in a world, where even a lot of well intended white persons, don’t see how the system is set up to reward them just for being white.

    Its from such a well established universal default foundation of racism that opponents of Pres. Obama knowingly operate to divide and conquer. They know that they only have to suggest that this country needs to be “taken back”; for financially and socially vulnerable and weak persons to unravel and unleash.

    So Mr. Vass its really not the opposition per-se that stinks of racism. Its the pre-emptive jokes, “birthner movement”, and ideas that the country need to be “taken back”. Its the racist backdrop that was created for the opposition that make the treatment of Pres. Obama different than anyone else.

  2. Ripuree,

    You make many statements, some based in fact, most are assumptions or inferences made based on those facts. But you do not address the issue I spoke of. In fact you avoid it.

    You do not address how there is any difference in the political opposition on policy that faces President obama is different than say the opposition on policy that faced President Carter. You didn’t even touch on the fact that by this logic, the opposition against the policies of President Bush implies that those that opposed him did so due to being racist against Whites. Do you believe that?

    You instead use emotion. You enflame the reader about past attrocities and current issues on the social aspect of America. Issues that do not prevent the passage of laws, nor prevent a single dollar in interest from being generated.

    You provide no proof. You don’t even try to infer proof. You just pile on the emotional rage.

    Exactly how does a preference to watch Whites on television or a movie (as you imply), which is oversaturated primarily with Whites and no reflection of the reality of American diversity, prevent passage of the debt ceiling increase? Exactly how do “Judeo Christianity, the English Language, History” alter the natioal budget?

    At exactly what point does saying raising taxes takes money out of my pocket and I don’t like it, become a racist remark? When does asking the Government to pay its bills, as American citizens must every day, become racial?

    Answer these questions please.

    Is America post-racial? Hardly. But what does that have to do with promotioon of political policy that leans heavily on socialism? How does defending the nation, or showing leadership, or explaining why we are fighting a war in Libya have anything to do with race – for anyone?

    Stop playing emotional games. And when you do you will see that you can answer my questions with race as an answer. Because it does not apply. Even if you really want it to.

    I know racism, I have felt it in my life more than a few times. But I despise people using that real issue for political gain. It makes my suffering, and that of those who died in the name of equality, less than what they were. I don’t avow that.

    Drop the emotion, give me proof. Make a real case. Answer my questions without distraction. Anything else proves me right.

Thank you for lending your voice. We appreciate hearing what you have to say.

%d bloggers like this: