So . . . we're going to have a tax cheat in charge of the IRS, a man instrumental in the pardoning of terrorists as top terrorism watchdog, and a woman whose husband gets tens of millions from foreign governments in charge of implementing foreign policy.Read it here.Press reaction: Move along . . . nothing to see here.
Now, just for a minute, imagine that this was a Republican administration staffing its highest levels with similar miscreants. What do you suppose the press' reaction would be?
I know, I know, press malfeasance and the application of double standards is nothing new. It's just more blatant these days than ever before.
Conservatives argue that ideological bias is the reason, and to some extent that is true, but I believe something more is operating here. Since the middle decades of the Twentieth Century wooly-headed liberals have bought into the old Stalinist Popular Front line that the American public is largely comprised of ignorant, vicious racists. Against all evidence to the contrary they believe this to be true and in large part their own personal sense of worth is based on showing that they, unlike the common herd, are enlightened and harbor no racist sentiments.
The sense of moral superiority attached to that belief is important to the liberals' self image and as such is impervious to rational argument. Members of the "enlightened" class feel that any criticism of a Black figure is tantamount to evidence of racism, therefore they cannot engage in such criticism lest they open themselves to charges of racism. More importantly, they feel that Obama, America's first Black president, must succeed at all costs because his failure would lend support to what they see as the racist bias of their social and moral inferiors.
Because this perception is not rational, but rather class and culture based, it cannot be defeated by mere argument. Nor is exposing it a sufficient response. Instead such blatant bias must be stigmatized. It is, as several commentators have noted, "liberal racism" and it should always be branded as such.
Nor can simple exposure of liberal bias do much to blunt the effect of liberal racism. Perhaps the most important expository statement was President Bush's declaration in a speech to the NAACP that "low expectations" applied to members of favored minorities was a form of "soft bigotry" [here]. Nor has rational disputation made any difference. The argument and its implications have been elaborated by writers like Jim Thornton [here], Shelby Steele [here]; Tom Sowell [here]; John McWhorter [here]; and many others [here], [here], and [here]. The indictment of liberal racism is, or at least should be, devastating, but it isn't.
Nor does accommodation of racist demands make much difference. Affirmative action was supposed to redress racial grievances, but it only exacerbated them. The election of Obama was supposed to mark an end to the moral imperative underlying this liberal bigotry, or at least that is what many mainstream analysts argued, but the post-election behavior of the MSM makes it clear that liberal bigotry is still alive and well. Colin Powell and Condi Rice were not enough to lay liberal racism to rest. Nominating Barak Obama for president was not enough. Electing him president didn't even put a dent in the racist imperative. Now it is judged inappropriate to criticize the black standard bearer even when he occupies the most powerful position in the world because HE MUST NOT FAIL.
What is needed is systematic stigmatization. Liberal bigots must be challenged everywhere, loudly and repeatedly in whatever media are available. Now is no time to be polite. Call them out, identify their bigotry, and denounce it in the strongest terms. Only moral obloquy will suffice.
