“The issue of race and American politics,” Glenn Thrush and Donovan Slack wrote in a recent Politico article, “never far beneath the surface during Barack Obama’s historic 2008 campaign, is making a loud, overt and surprisingly early appearance in the 2012 presidential race.”
What evidence do Thrush and Slack present to make their case?
Apparently, Newt Gingrich speaks racial “code words” when he calls Obama a “food stamp president” and when he says students should make money as school janitors.
“But,” they write, “ nothing has illustrated the potentially explosive political impact of race ”” an issue that Obama has downplayed throughout his career ”” like the firestorm around the image of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer wagging her finger at the first black president of the United States.”
The problem isn’t that Brewer wagged her finger ”” it’s that she wagged her finger at the first black president of the United States.
To burnish their credibility, they quote Jesse Jackson, saying that the words and expressions of Republican Party members “need to be decoded because they are becoming voluminous and dangerous.”
This is the same Jesse Jackson who, during the 2008 campaign, wanted to “cut [Obama’s] nuts off,” accusing the then-senator of “talking down to black folks.”
I wonder, what is that code for?
“You aren’t likely to hear racially charged language this year from Obama,” the writers gush, “a one-of-a-kind politician whose crossover appeal to white independents has always been rooted in a color-blind appeal to fairness.”
Good thing he’s so different from the other politicians whose appeal has always been rooted in a color-coded appeal to unfairness.
And people wonder why conservatives think the mainstream media are biased.
This is a fundamental conceit of Obama and his acolytes, that the president is so obviously right, and his opponents so obviously wrong, that any criticism of him and his policies must be racist.
We must be precise with our language. A racist is someone with feelings of hatred and bigotry for another person solely because of their race. To call innocuous political phrases like “food stamp president” and policy disagreements between the governor of a state and the president racist is to make silly a word which should be treated with great gravity.
Racism has played a despicable role in the history of America. It is disheartening to read the racist writings of past American leaders and think that our heroes could have held such views. It is painful to read accounts of lynchings of black men.
This is racism. Refusing to allow black men from drinking out of a certain drinking fountain because they are black is racism.
To equate these things with the actions of political party members opposed to the first black president is to devalue the word. It lets real racists off easy.
Republicans ”” at least the vast majority of them ”” do not disagree with Obama because he’s black; they disagree with him because they have different policy prescriptions.
If Hillary Clinton was president, and the number of people on food stamps was the same, you can bet Newt would have still offered the same critique.
Bottom line: the Republican opposition is not racist.
The issue of race and American politics is never far beneath the surface because writers like Glenn Thrush and Donovan Slack never let it sink too far.
Tony Petersen is the opinion editor of The Collegian. Follow him on Twitter @tonypetersen4.
LR • Sep 8, 2012 at 8:51 pm
Observe. The largest minority group that votes GOP would typically start with Latinos, then Asians, and so forth.
Ren • Feb 11, 2012 at 2:22 pm
And why am I not SURPRISED!!!!? NEO NAZI RACIST TONY PETERSON feels it NECESSARY TO WRITE AN ARTICLE TITLED “THE GOP IS NOT RACIST”. HAHAHA!!! WHAT A DOPE!!!!
AS long As TONY PETERSON AND HIS RACIST NEO NAZI BUDDIES… LIKE NEIL O’BRIEN…. CONTINUE THEIR ANTI-MEXICAN behavior, they will always be LABELED RACIST FILTH!!!!! HELL..MAYBE EVEN AFTER THEY STOP!!!! THEY HAVE ALREADY SHOWN THEIR TRUE COLORS!!!! SUCK ON THAT YOU RACIST COLLEGIAN PIGS!!!
Michael • Feb 9, 2012 at 11:57 am
Maybe not racist, but do you at least concede that the GOP, at least their top candidates at top positions, are borderline insane?
you bring up race baiting where race isn’t at the heart of the criticism or disagreement, which is fair. The race card gets played way too much, particularly by liberals. Heck, Morgan Freeman, an African American icon, thinks the answer to racism/race rhetoric is to “stop talking about it.”
Martin • Feb 9, 2012 at 11:55 am
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/03/396428/santorums-racist-welfare-rant/
Michael • Feb 9, 2012 at 9:34 am
There are lots of racists in the GOP. There are lots of racists, reverse racists, and race baiters in the Democratic party. Both parties have large strands of crazy in them. The cure: stop voting for them. Stop giving them $$$. Stop. Just stop. Trying to define any one group, particularly when as large and diverse as major political parites, with one word is futile. Defending the GOP against accusations of being inherently racist just fuels the fire and continues the useless discourse.
GusAppleby • Feb 9, 2012 at 1:31 am
My fellow white citizens demand a public discussion about the forcing of only white countries to turn into brown countries via mass immigration and “assimilation”.
Anyone who says it`s not genocide is either ignorant of genocide law or a liar.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.
joshua4234 • Feb 8, 2012 at 12:47 am
I don’t think they are racist, but I think elements of their base have hints of racism that they sometimes take advantage of by subtle race baiting.
I mean back when Obama came into office, a large element of the base was obsessed with his citizenship because of his father. And what did the politicians do? they strung it out, saying things like “well I dont know why he just doesn’t release his long form birth certificate” and things of the like. And when a large part of the base believes him to be Muslim, what do some of the politicians do, they string it along again saying things like “well he claims to be Christian, I’ll just take his word.”
I think the same things going on now, whether it’s Santorums Freudian slip saying he doesn’t want to make black peoples lives better by giving them other peoples money, or Gingrich saying things like spanish in the language of the ghetto, or he wants to help black kids learn to get jobs or however he phrased it.
I do think the economy would be used as an issue even with Hilary but I dont think the same terms would be used. They might bring up food stamps, but i would doubt it, and I doubt they’d call her a food stamp president. As a percentage, food stamps went up pretty much the same under all of Bush, but I don’t see anyone calling him a food stamp president.
Overall, I think people like Gingrich just don’t give a shit about the poor more than anything to do with race. He says things like he wants to help poor people learn to get jobs and learn to work hard, and he proposed things like having poor students work part time doing janitorial work for their schools. He somehow thinks people not knowing how to work hard or get jobs has something to do with the state of the economy, and having poor kids work at their schools will help them or the economy somehow. All this will do is take more janitorial jobs away from the parents in the community and distract the kids so they do worse in school and have a worse future and get stuck in lower paying jobs.
So to summarize, I think they are more greedy jerks than racists, but still do a little race baiting from time to time.