‘Here’s a little secret,” Keith Olbermann told viewers in 2010. “When racist white guys get together and they don’t want to be caught using any of the popular epithets that are in use every day in this country about black people . . . the racist white guys resort to euphemisms and code words.”
At least Olbermann acknowledged that not all white people are racist; but three and a half years into the first “post-racial” presidency, one might get that impression. Take the list Olbermann enumerated on air: “Cocky, flippant, punk, and especially, arrogant.” Last week, Congressional Black Caucus executive director Angela Rye added cool to the list: “Even cool, the term cool, could in some ways be deemed racial.”
Liberals have spent the past four years tearing out page after page of Merriam-Webster. “Articulate” and “bright” were forbidden early in the 2008 primary season, with Obama defenders dredging up a classy Chris Rock joke that “articulate” is “some s**t you say about retarded people that can talk.” But CNN, Legal Affairs, and other media outlets had bestowed the same compliment on John Edwards during his meteoric rise years before. A 2004 Slate headline called Edwards “bright and articulate and really, really youthful,” while Steve Benen wrote at the Carpetbagger Report in 2003 that “Edwards is a very bright, articulate, and aggressive lawmaker.” (NRO)
Then Senator Biden in 2007 about Obama: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” Biden said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.” (CNN)
In April, Mitt Romney unveiled a new campaign slogan at a stop in Ohio: “Obama Isn’t Working.” Racist, cried Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher: It evokes “the stereotype of the ‘lazy,’ ‘shiftless’ black man.” Van Jones, Obama’s erstwhile “green-jobs czar,” said in a web chat that the slogan set off “racial fire alarms.” But as the Romney campaign explained, the slogan was a tribute to Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative party, whose “Labour Isn’t Working” poster, designed in 1978 when the Iron Lady was running for prime minister, was named by Campaign magazine the poster of the century: Its image of a winding unemployment line “pointed to Britain’s economic climate of rising unemployment, rising inflation, and a growing national debt.” Sound familiar?
Criticism of Obama policy is also racist. During debates over the president’s health-care overhaul, NPR claimed that “a sharp divide [exists] between whites who have a liberal outlook on racial issues compared with those who have a conservative outlook on racial issues.” Meanwhile, responding to South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during the president’s 2009 health-care address to Congress, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote, “But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!”
Reflecting on C-SPAN on Obama’s election to the presidency, filmmaker Michael Moore said Obama succeeded among young voters “because they’re not as racist as the previous generations,” implying that all those older white folks who rejected Obama at the polls were racist.
And if liberals can find racism in Obama’s electoral victories, they can certainly locate it in his defeats. After a federal prisoner received more than 40 percent of the vote against Obama in May’s West Virginia primary, state Democrats blamed the racist voters. But, of course, in a closed Democratic primary, those could not be bigoted Republican voters. The state Democrats condemned their own.
The Left hears so many “dog whistles” in today’s public discourse that one fears to say anything at all. And that’s the point. Liberals use the accusation of racism as a cudgel to cow political opponents. But the refusal by so many on the left to approach with honesty disagreements on questions of policy indicates intellectual bankruptcy, and many are growing savvy to the invocation of race to forestall substantive debate. Furthermore, what anti-black racism does exist in America could not possibly account for the nearly 50 percent of voters who disapprove of the president’s performance, or his policies’ frequent failure in the courts, or his poor performance in his own party’s primaries.
In his book Abuse of Language, Abuse of Power, Josef Pieper wrote, “The dignity of the word, to be sure, consists in this: through the word is accomplished what no other means can accomplish, namely, communication based on reality.”
Liberals have spent the last four years manipulating and excising words because they refuse to confront reality.
But then, we already knew that.(NRO)
And as if that wasn’t enough unreality for you:
A Tax for Nothing
Question: Do you fill your car’s tank with gasoline that is part cellulosic ethanol, an environment-friendly distillate of wood chips, corn cobs, and switch grass? Let me answer for you: No, you don’t. You couldn’t if you wanted to. Petroleum products blended with cellulosic ethanol aren’t commercially available, because the technology for mass-producing cellulosic ethanol hasn’t been perfected. None of which has stopped the Environmental Protection Agency from imposing hefty yearly fines on oil refiners. According to the The New York Times, in 2011 automotive fuel producers were assessed $6.8 million in penalties. That amount is expected to climb dramatically this year. Guess who ends up footing the bill for the difference?
This has got to be the ultimate example of government bureaucracy gone mad. How did it happen? Blame can be divided over the last two administrations. In his 2006 State of the Union Address, George W. Bush promised to “fund additional research in cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but from wood chips and stalks or switch grass.” The following year, Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), which mandates that oil refiners begin blending cellulosic ethanol into their gasoline and diesel products.
The “advanced biofuel contribution” under the law was to begin in 2009 at 0.6 billion gallons of cellulosic biomass and rise incrementally, first to 1.35 billion gallons in 2011, then to 2 billion gallons in 2012, and so on. By 2022, 21 billion gallons of fuel pumped into the nation’s cars and trucks was to be cellulosic ethanol.
The law further stipulated that if refiners failed to comply with the EPA mandate, they would pay a penalty.
The only problem with this arrangement was that the grant recipients responsible for coming up with Bush’s “cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol … from wood chips and stalks or switch grass” instead came up empty. In a 2011 report, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that “currently, no commercially viable bio-refineries exist for converting cellulosic biomass to fuel.” The report also noted that the renewable fuel standard “may be an ineffective policy for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions,” since the full life cycle of the fuel, including its transport, could lead to higher emissions than conventional petroleum.
Undaunted, the Obama administration has forged blindly ahead, continuing the elusive search for a technology that will produce cellulosic biomass—at taxpayers’ expense. Since thanks to the EPA mandate we are already paying more at the pump, the American people are truly getting nothing for something. (Hot air)
But at least if you agree with a Liberal you’re not a racist. But if you’re White you were born one. But everyone gets taxed for a non-existent technology. Now doesn’t that just make you feel so much better…. 🙂
And if not, there always the Obama Event Registry (as mentioned yesterday):
Got a birthday, anniversary, or wedding coming up?
Let your friends know how important this election is to you—register with Obama 2012, and ask for a donation in lieu of a gift. It’s a great way to support the President on your big day. Plus, it’s a gift that we can all appreciate—and goes a lot further than a gravy bowl.
Setting up and sharing your registry page is easy–so get started today.
Yesterday, Michelle Obama suggested that Americans give her husband money because he once shoveled snow around her car. He was apparently a husband to us all. (ahh…..)
When you click through to the Obama Event Registry, the Obama campaign informs you just why you should send Obama money rather than having grandma buy you that crockpot:
Got a special milestone or event coming up?
Instead of another gift card you’ll forget to use, ask your friends and family for something that will go a little further: a donation to Obama for America. Register your next celebration—whether it’s a birthday, bar or bat mitzvah, wedding, or anniversary—with the Obama campaign. It’s a great way to show your support for a cause that’s important to you on your big day.
Because Obama and his potential $1 billion campaign can use the money better than you ever could. Your special day should be his special day.
But wait – it gets even more fun. You actually get to build and customize a registry page! You can suggest a fundraising goal (I suggested negative $16 trillion – I’d like the Obama campaign to pay back the country for what their man has taken out of our pocket). Then, you type in a message to your friends. The Obama website suggests: “For my big day, I’d like to show my support for a cause I believe in — re-electing President Obama. That’s why I’m asking my friends and family to donate to the Obama campaign. Thanks for chipping in!” Finally, you input a picture – and voila! You’re ready to shill for Obama on your wedding day.
No wonder Democrats support divorce-on-demand. A wedding that starts like this certainly won’t end well. (Ben Shapiro)
The American people and Obama are the ones that need a Divorce in Reality not From Reality.