Aren’t They Getting Tired of Calling Obama Opponents Racist?

Liberal name-calling has been going on for generations. Now that we have a black Democratic president, one might think our nation can become post-racial, but after this administration has taken office, nothing can be farther from the truth.

This brilliant piece from PajamasMedia explains:


Aren’t They Getting Tired of Calling Obama Opponents Racist?
By Frank J. Fleming, August 17, 2009

I’m a little ashamed to admit it, but despite my constant mockery of everything Obama during the presidential campaign (what can I say, I’m a partisan hack), I now realize how much I actually bought into some of his absolutely empty hope and change rhetoric.

When Barack Obama said he was a post-racial candidate, I initially believed him. He seemed different from Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who are incapable of seeing any issue as something other than a conflict between two races. I thought that while his election would be bad for a lot of issues I cared about, it might actually be worth losing on those issues just to move past silly race issues.

Yes, quite naive.

For me, the first indication that Obama was not at all post-racial was finding out what a racist loon his preacher for twenty years was. While I never actually thought Obama hated white people, it was disturbing how easily he tolerated that issue to gain street cred in Chicago. And what should have been obvious is that someone who is that cynical and opportunistic about race issues is going to be even more so when fighting for and wielding more power. Except now he has the entire national media with him.

So here we are: A black Democrat has been elected president, and suddenly all the positions on health care and taxes conservatives have always had are now racist. And I have come to the now obvious conclusion that America can never become post-racial while electing Democrats.

Liberals have always had a problem debating with conservatives. They don’t really understand conservatives’ attraction to individualism and honor and responsibility enough to be able to come up with coherent responses when people say they want low taxes and a small government. All liberals know is that they are very smart, and everyone else is very dumb for not seeing how smart they are and that they should run everything. So they come up with childish name-calling, such as “conservatives are greedy” and “conservatives are evil” to try and shut up what they don’t understand. And they find there is nothing better than the cry of “racism.”

No one likes to be called a racist — it’s about the same level as being called a pedophile — and it’s great for liberals to use, because there is very little defense for the charge. You are basically guilty until proven innocent — and you can’t prove yourself innocent. When called a racist, you can say, “No, I am not a racist.” To which the liberal can respond, “Though you try to hide it, I think deep down you are.” And there’s not much else you can do except maybe punch the guy in the face. But if the guy calling you racist is a minority, that itself might be de facto racism.

Now, even liberals know that if people were arguing with, say, Hillary Clinton about health care, they’d look pretty stupid crying racism. But now that they have a black president and all politics can be traced back to him, they’re free to cry racism for absolutely any political opinion contrary to Obama’s positions. And with public opinion already turning against the president and no other arguments left, that’s what they’ll do.

Why did people join in tea parties to protest runaway spending? Racism, says Janeane Garofalo to a nodding Keith Olbermann. Why are people against a bloated government takeover of health care? Racism, says Nobel Prize-winning New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. MSNBC anchor Carlos Watson said that “socialist” is the new “N” word. Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta-Journal Constitution declared 45% to 65% of town hall protesters racists. Representative John Dingell compared protesters to the KKK.

It’s pretty mindless, though some try to dress it up to look smart — as liberals love to do. (It was almost entertaining to see Phillip Kennicot in the Washington Post try to show that depicting Obama as the Joker is racist (http://tinyurl.com/nxf27u), when in as many steps he could have just as easily shown it was commentary on how Obama is like Kevin Bacon). Still, it’s the debate equivalent of liberals covering their ears and screaming, “Shut up! Shut up!” And why not when they know that if the debate actually centered on the specifics of health care, or Obama’s spending, they would lose big?

But here is an opportunity for Obama to really show he’s post-racial. He could say that people who toss around charges of racism at everyone who disagrees with them are nothing but poison to a political debate. They are as useful to the issue of race as having a Ku Klux Klan member on TV, ranting undisputed. But Obama can’t speak out against mindless charges of racism, because if the Democrats lose the issue of racism, they lose everything.

As the Prop 8 controversy in California demonstrated, the Democrats enjoy a lot of minority support while at the same time ignoring their values. Instead of courting minorities on the issue, they just point to the other side and say, “Well, you can’t vote for them, they’re racist.” Thus we are at a point where someone’s “blackness” is questioned if he doesn’t share the same politics as a rich, white liberal.

If we really became a post-racial society and race was no longer an issue, what would the Democrats’ pitch be for their policies? If they actually had to argue against the idea of limited government and individual power on merit, basically all they would have is, “We’re really smart, and you’re stupid, so let us control everything.” That will attract those who want to be part of the elite ruling class and some weak-willed individuals, but the majority of people of all races would find it insulting. Without cries of racism to silence actual thought on the issues, they’d be a fringe party. And that’s why we will never have a post-racial society while electing Democrats: because post-racial is also post-the Democratic Party.

FREE SPEECH ALERT: Police Interrogate "Suspect" in Obama 'Joker' posters

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." President Ronald Reagan

Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs writes this critical piece:


FREE SPEECH ALERT: Police Interrogate "Suspect" in Obama 'Joker' posters
Pam Geller, August 14, 2009

In a violent breech of American's right to free speech, law enforcement seek to impose criminal penalties on free expression. In my article at The American Thinker, "Now Being American Is Un-American" (http://tinyurl.com/lxmlvu), I quoted Rand, "The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"

"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible."

Natan Sharansky in his book, The Case for Democracy (http://tinyurl.com/qnypcc), set out by dividing the world between "free" and "fear" societies. Then employed a simple test to discern a free society from a society based on fear: Can one enter a public square and express any opinion without fear of being arrested? If not, one is in a society that runs on fear. We have, my dear fellow Americans, entered the realm of a society of fear.

The first sign not depicting Barack Hussein Obama as the messiah is a crime. But this ( http://tinyurl.com/loebch) isn't?


Clermont police interview suspect in Obama 'Joker' posters: (http://tinyurl.com/ocm93t for full article)

CLERMONT - Clermont police have interviewed one suspect who is admitting to putting up the dozens of posters pasted around the city depicting President Obama as the Joker character from the Batman film The Dark Knight, city officials confirmed.

Assistant City Manager Darren Gray said city officials have an individual "admitting to putting up 500" of the posters.

Clermont Police Capt. Eric Jensen said the male individual has admitted to putting up some signs, but investigators suspect others were involved and their investigation is continuing.

"We have talked to an individual," Jensen said. "He only admitted to some of it...We're still tracking down leads and talking to folks. We have not arrested anybody."

At this point officials are not sure how much damage was caused by the signs or the dollar amount associated with the clean-up.

Dozens of the posters were pasted around the city earlier this week. A pair of the posters were pasted to a Clermont Post Office collection box. They prompted the postmaster to contact the Postal Inspector's office, which is looking at potential federal crimes for defacing federal property.

City officials, meanwhile, are trying to determine what local crimes might be associated with the posting of the images on public and private properties. They've also been busy ripping down the sticky signs because they're a violation of city ordinance regarding illegal signs.


Back on the 6th of August I wrote an oped piece at Newsmax, Obama's "Racism" vs. Bush "Dissent": (http://tinyurl.com/knhjuw for full article)

Patriots, be on notice. This is the favorite tactic of the left. Any criticism of Obama, no matter what or how legit, will be labeled racism. Tea party? Racist! Opposition to socialism? Racist! Opposition to nationalized healthcare? Racist! Opposition to cap and tax? Racist! Opposition to the ethnic cleansing of Jewish people in Israel? Racist!

This tactic used to be effective. One case study is the 2006 Virginia Senate race, and the destruction of George Allen’s re-election campaign by the “macaca” incident. A presidential contender was destroyed by a leftopathic lie, despite the fact that the charge of racism was utter nonsense. Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s insult to Indian people went unremarked and unnoticed in the mainstream media.

The media has also ignored the real significance of the Obama Joker poster. It isn’t racism; it’s a sign of America’s rude awakening. The editor of the American Thinker, Thomas Lifson, observed that the poster showed that the inevitable backlash against Obama’s far-left policies has begun: “It is starting. Open mockery of Barack Obama, as disillusionment sets in with the man, his policies, and the phony image of a race-healing, brilliant, scholarly middle-of-the-roader.” But Lifson noted that “the President’s supporters have condemned the image, calling it ‘mean-spirited and dangerous.’ ”

Mean-spirited? Dangerous? Racist?

For years I covered the left’s spiteful and malicious attacks on President George W. Bush. He was likened to Hitler. “Bushitler” was so commonly used, it became a cliché. Leftists compared the jihadi attack on the twin towers to the Reichstag fire. And other motifs came into play as well: Vanity Fair even published an image of Bush as . . . The Joker. No one said a peep. Not a word. Instead, we were told that “dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”

And indeed it can be, at least unless you cross our Dear Leader Barack Obama. After eight years of relentless Bush bashing and America hating, The New York Times’s opinion makers are warning about the dangers of dissent. Bob Herbert recently warned about “right-wing hate-mongers” and “gun crazies.” Frank Rich sounded the alarm about “far-right rage.” Paul Krugman worried over “the rise of right-wing extremism.” Charles M. Blow came out more or less openly for a police state: “Society needs to do a much better job of creating an environment where hateful beliefs are never ignored and suspicious behavior never goes unreported.” What kind of “hateful beliefs”?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made it clear who these people have in mind when she lied outright about anti-Obama protesters, claiming that they’re “carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare.”

LIE! This has never happened at any of our rallies and protests. The left employed the swastika for years against Bush; the right has never engaged in this. Pelosi is spreading more lies and smears of good, decent folks. At the leftist rallies, the hatred against Bush was pushed and promoted relentlessly. The rallies that were organized by the far left infrastructure for years never hesitated to orchestrate the most vicious attacks on Bush. But when one poster mocking Obama appears in Los Angeles — a poster that was not orchestrated, not part of any moveon.org strategy — and it’s the shot heard round the world.

What happened to “dissent is the highest form of patriotism”?


UPDATE: Larwyn sent this - da money quote:

In the wake of a Florida news station covering the “vandalism” of Obama as Joker posters going up around the country, Infowars has discovered an Obama quote published in The Washington Post thanking Obamanoids for posting the artwork of Shepard Fairey on government property. Fairey created the now famous image of Obama used during the election.

“I would like to thank you for using your talent in support of my campaign,” Obama wrote the artist last year. “The political messages involved in your work have encouraged Americans to believe they can help change the status quo. Your images have a profound effect on people, whether seen in a gallery or on a stop sign.”


Does the word "HYPOCRISY" come to mind?

IS OBAMA REALLY LIKE THE JOKER?

In his usual tongue-in-cheek, witty style, Frank Fleming of PajamasMedia has an interesting comparison to the Joker and Obama:


Is Obama Really Like the Joker?
By Frank J. Fleming, August 6, 2009

Posters started appearing in Los Angeles depicting Obama as the Joker with the word “socialism” below his face. The image quickly spread throughout the internet, gaining knee-jerk liberal condemnation and making people ask things like “What does Obama have to do with the Joker?” and “What does the Joker have to do with socialism?” and “Is this racist somehow? I’m pretty sure it has to be racist.”

Well, as it’s my job as some guy on the internet, I will definitively answer all of these questions.

First off, it’s worth looking at whether the poster is racist. Liberals seem pretty certain it is. An LA Weekly blogger commented that “the only thing missing is a noose.” Now, you might be scratching your head and saying that the only people who would call this racist are brain-dead liberals who shriek “racism!” at every criticism about Obama as an alternative to thinking and only cause more problems by confusing the issue of racism and should thus be chased out of society and forced to live in the sewers, only emerging at night to feed on garbage and bugs.

And while that’s quite fair and probably true, we should still give the possibility of racism a fair hearing. Don’t you remember the long, racist history of black people being compared to the Joker? Of course not, because I just made that up — but it could be true in some alternate universe. Also, the image involves white makeup on a black person. White on black — that has to be racist somehow. I’ll bet makeup places won’t even sell white pancake makeup to black people. They’d be like “No! Get out of here, black person! We won’t sell that to you! That’s racist!”

Beyond the racism in the image that’s quite obvious to crazy people, the other question is whether there are any real substantive comparisons between Obama and the Joker. On the surface, they don’t seem at all alike. The Joker is psychotic, and I’ve heard Obama called a lot of things — arrogant, incompetent, deceitful, a Communist — but not psychotic. Obama doesn’t seem like he’s out to kill anyone — not even terrorists — and only leaves the option of killing people on the table to help make ends meet in his health care plan.

Also, the Joker seemed chaotic but was very careful in his planning, while the chaos from the Obama administration seems much more explainable by pure incompetence.

Furthermore, the Joker was actually somewhat subtle in how he tried to destroy Gotham by psychologically breaking down the will of its people, but Obama’s methods for destroying everything are a bit more ham-fisted, such as proposing expensive new programs while we’re already hugely in debt. Finally, the Joker has always been depicted with normal-sized ears.

Still, there are many similarities worth considering. The Joker was seen crashing a party, threatening wealthy elites with a knife, and taunting them with the phrases “Why so serious?” and “Want to know how I got these scars?” Similarly, Obama often threatens CEOs with government takeovers and taunts them with the phrases “Why so capitalist?” and “Want to know where I got these cars?”

The Joker also hung out with the insane and the violent, as Obama hangs out with Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers. The Joker is always telling conflicting stories, and so does Obama — such as whether the stimulus was supposed to stimulate the economy or not. And both have mysterious pasts (personally, I’ve seen neither of their long-form birth certificates). Plus, I hear in the health care bill there’s a plan to put old people on one ferry and young people on another ferry and give each a detonator to blow up the other (it really is the only way they can make the numbers work).

There is a major difference between Obama and the Joker, though, and it’s the socialism caption on the poster that speaks to it. I’ve never known anyone to call the Joker a socialist; he’s always portrayed more as an anarchist. The only reason Obama’s policies seem similar to anarchy is that he’s just so incompetent in instituting them, but really Obama is for socialism. So that’s the difference: the scope of Obama’s destruction is much bigger.

For instance, the Joker blew up one hospital, but Obama’s government takeover of health care will destroy hospitals all over the country. Obama’s plans really aren’t something you can throw a batarang at; he’s more on the level of a Superman villain like Lex Luthor — except Luthor is a businessman and has actual economic experience. In fact, the destructive power of Obama is something you might want to send the whole Justice League after.

But there is no Justice League; Aquaman can’t save us now. In reality, it’s up to the Republicans to stop Obama. And as they try to work with him and make some compromises with him, I have something to tell them: some men aren’t looking for anything logical, like bipartisan support. They can’t be influenced by polls, reasoned with, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.