Posted by
Patrick Henry on Monday, April 05, 2010 6:10:48 PM
About five decades ago a theologian announced with great flourish that "God Is Dead," in
his book of the same garish title. Analysis of his argument suggested that the over-use of
God to justify seemingly contradictory and ungodlike rhetoric and behavior had rendered
God's name and existence meaningless and therefore irrelevant in society. While God seems
to have survived, the terms "racist" and "racism" are defintely dead, and liberal politicans
and the media have killed them.
Dispatched by unspecific over-use to categorize the views of anyone with the temeriity to
disagree or protest, the words are simply no longer descriptive of anything real or relevant.
This is not to say that racist attitudes have perished, for they are still alive and well. But the
words once effective in describing them have lost credibility to many in America today.
Take, for example, the descriptors chosen by NY Times writers Paul Krugman, Maureen
Dowd, Frank Rich and Bob Herbert, and by Eugene Robinson and Courtland Milloy of the
Washington Post. Characterizing all opponents of Barack Obama's policies, and his health-
care reform in particular as Cro-Magnons (Milloy), Neanderthals (Herbert), bigots, haters.
nutbags, extremists and racists (all of the others), they take particular pleasure in bashing Tea Partiers and tax protestors. The credibility-straining argument seems to be that since Obama
is black and since many of the poor are persons of color, opposition to Obama and healthcare
reform equals discrimination against them.
Then come congressional Democrats, a prime example of which is Steve Cohen (R-TN)
who argued on a radio talk show that Tea Partiers are no more than racists without robes
and hoods, a clear comparison to the Ku Klux Klan. Both Democrats and the media have
shouted to all that would listen that Representative John Lewis (D-GA) was repeatedly
labeled with the N-word by Tea Party protesters, and that one even spat on Emanuel Cleaver
(D-MO). But incredibly, in that swirling throng replete with recorders, reporters and camera
phones not one single piece of real evidence has come forth to validate the claims which the
protesters have adamantly denied. And Cleaver himself has admiited that the man who
confronted him did not willfully spit on him but got so close that some of his saliva sprayed
the congressman as he talked. But facts never got in the way of Krugman, Dowd, Herbert,
Rich, Robinson or Milloy spinning a good yarn, expecially if it served to discredit a conservative.
Chronic lying, however, has its own price. When the words one uses no longer signify any
proveable objective reality, both the message and the messengers simply become irrelevant.
"Racist" has simply become liberal code for "I hate what you stand for," and the shame it is
intended to bring just isn't sticking anymore. Instead, more and more people are beginning
to see the real haters and bigots for who they are, and that doesn't bode well for the mainstream
media, or for the Democrats who are so desperate to hold onto the power that seems daily
slipping through their fingers that they only hope they have left is race-baiting.
Homosexuals ruined a perfectly good word for happy ("gay"), and now liberals are doing
the same thing with "racist." It's too bad, because there certainly are people who don't like
Obama because he's black, and who do discriminate against others because of the color of
their skin. We're just going to have to put our wits to finding another word for them -- one
that can only be used to describe objective behaviors and that will carry just as onerous a
connotation. Then we'll see how long it takes for someone to render it meaningless by
over-the-top inappropriate use.
But all of that said (and this may come as a rude news flash to the liberal media), Barack
Obama does not get a free pass on rotten ideas just because he's black. His version of
healthcare reform, government takeovers of private business, cap-and-trade energy and
union card check would be reprehensibly stupid even were they proposed by the first
green or purple president. Lunatic spending isn't sane just because it's proposed by a
black man, nor are they necessarily racially discriminatory who stand up and label it for
what it is. Calling the Tea Parties "racist" only makes the liberal media look dumb. They
can't refute the case against government profligacy, so they just call names instead. But
like the Ice Man, November cometh.