Racism is the Only Way for McCain to Win?

There is nothing worse than race baiters in the media in my opinion because they create an industry of racism. In my opinion, the worst is Mary Mitchell of the Chicago Sun Times. She began one piece about Jeremiah Wright like this

White people don't get it, black people do, now it's time to move on

The problem with race baiting as a media niche is that it pays. It is one thing for a few drinking buddies to get together and expound racism amongst themselves. While that is despicable, at least those folks still have to make a legitimate living. Mary Mitchell, on the other hand, earns her living by being a racist. I for one am troubled by racism as an industry. I don't think that racism ought to pay well.

That's exactly what we have with this piece by Jacob Weisberg.

What with the Bush legacy of reckless war and economic mismanagement, 2008 is a year that favors the generic Democratic candidate over the generic Republican one. Yet Barack Obama, with every natural and structural advantage in the presidential race, is running only neck-and-neck against John McCain, a sub-par Republican nominee with a list of liabilities longer than a Joe Biden monologue. Obama has built a crack political operation, raised record sums, and inspired millions with his eloquence and vision. McCain has struggled with a fractious campaign team, lacks clarity and discipline, and remains a stranger to charisma. Yet at the moment, the two of them appear to be tied. What gives?

If it makes you feel better, you can rationalize Obama's missing 10-point lead on the basis of Clintonite sulkiness, his slowness in responding to attacks, or the concern that Obama may be too handsome, brilliant, and cool to be elected. But let's be honest: If you break the numbers down, the reason Obama isn't ahead right now is that he trails badly among one group, older white voters. He does so for a simple reason: the color of his skin.

This sort of race baiting, assigning racism to other groups, is nothing more than racism. It's shocking enough that an entire group of Americans, older white people, are assigned a racist motive in their votes. What's really shocking is that Slate, a for profit endeavor, would employ Weisberg to say this. Make no mistake. Weisberg is allowed to say whatever racist comments he wants. He is not free to make money doing it.

Weisberg goes into a series of straw man reasons for his racist theory.

Such prejudice usually comes coded in distortions about Obama and his background. To the willfully ignorant, he is a secret Muslim married to a black-power radical. Or—thank you, Geraldine Ferraro—he only got where he is because of the special treatment accorded those lucky enough to be born with African blood. Some Jews assume Obama is insufficiently supportive of Israel in the way they assume other black politicians to be. To some white voters (14 percent in the CBS/New York Times poll), Obama is someone who, as president, would favor blacks over whites. Or he is an "elitist" who cannot understand ordinary (read: white) people because he isn't one of them. Or he is charged with playing the race card, or of accusing his opponents of racism, when he has strenuously avoided doing anything of the sort. We're just not comfortable with, you know, a Hawaiian.

Then there's the overt stuff. In May, Pat Buchanan, who writes books about the European-Americans losing control of their country, ranted on MSNBC in defense of white West Virginians voting on the basis of racial solidarity. The No. 1 best-seller in America, Obama Nation by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., leeringly notes that Obama's white mother always preferred that her "mate" be "a man of color." John McCain has yet to get around to denouncing this vile book.

What Weisberg conveniently disregards is that for as many people believe that Obama is a Muslim, there are just as many that believe that McCain was some sort of VC sympathasizer, or that he has made up most of his POW experience. In other words, there are nuts all over the internet, but that doesn't mean that Obama will lose because Americans are systemically racist.

Furthermore, in his racist diatrobe he also conveniently disregards Obama's overwhelming support among African Americans. Are we really to believe that race had nothing to do with Obama's overwhelming support among African Americans over Hillary Clinton? Are we to believe that voter registration will explode in that community for reasons that have nothing to do with race?

I am not naive enough to believe there aren't racists in America. I am of the opinion that just as many folks will vote for Obama on racial lines as against. Weisberg is from the cult of Barack Obama where his candidate can do no wrong. Those that oppose him can only do it for nefarious reasons. Barack Obama is one of the most culturally, economically and militarilly liberal Presidential candidates EVER. He wants to raise trillions of dollars worth of taxes. He believes in abortion on demand even after the baby leaves the womb. He will appoint judges to the left of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. He will attempt to lose in Iraq, negotiate with Iran, and attempt to reduce our own nuclear arsenal while Russia strengthens. Yet, in Weisberg's world, the only reason to oppose him is racism.

Frankly though, I don't much care what racist thoughts Weisberg has. What I do care about though is when Slate decides to pay him for them.