The R-Word and Glass Houses

Is it just me, or is the word "racism" being thrown around a LOT over the past few weeks?

Today, Jimmy Carter, still fighting after 30 years to be relevant, accused Joe Wilson of being a racist when he shouted "You lie" during Obama's last address. Actually Jimmy's words were that Joe's act was "based on racism." Same thing. Jimmy continued, "There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."

So far, the White House is officially (appropriately and gratefully) staying out of the fray, with Mr. Mealy Mouth Robert Gibbs offering, "I don't think the president believes that people are upset because of the color of his skin."

For the record, I think Joe Wilson's outburst was stupid and contemptible. I do think he owed both the President and the House an apology -- he only offered the former. (Frankly, unless Congress wants to visit percentage approval ratings in the teens, they can't stand any more embarrassments...from the left or right.) Do I think his comment was racially motivated? I doubt it. But, no, I can't say for sure. Either can you. No one but Joe Wilson can. No one, left or right. Black or white.

So tonight is about the increasing use of the R-word. Last week, it was thrown about that many of the right wing Tea-Partiers and the attendees of the 9/12 demonstration were racists.

And those that sought to have Red...errr...Green Jobs Czar Van Jones investigated or removed were racists.

And those who are pursuing the ACORN scandal are racists.

And it occurs to me, that this isn't about racism. It's about the left taking 200+ years of cultural turmoil and pain and making it a political weapon.

Now that fortunately a black man is President (yes, I said fortunately...just not one with the ideals I would've preferred be the first), supporters and cronies who trumpeted Obama's historical achievement -- overcoming the perceived limits of his race -- are quick to use his race to deflect any perceived opposition. And that is as hypocritical and repulsive as it gets.

Why? Because, very quietly and insidiously, it's become no longer a racism of black versus white. It's morphing into a racism of left against right. (What ISN'T becoming a polarization of left versus right? But that's another blog...) It's trying to redraw the teams. Now, to be racist, you have to be white AND conservative. And frankly, that doesn't fly with me. (Remember Bill Clinton being crowned the first Black President? Coincidence that he was a Democrat?)

Just like when feminists spoke out against Sarah Palin. Suddenly the threat she posed to the left's success revealed their true colors. Established feminist organizations (aka N.O.W) that should have trumpeted her instead joined in the media-driven defamation dog pile. That proved it wasn't about women's rights, it was about liberal women's rights.

If either Hillary or Sarah had been elected in their respective roles, and anyone would've disagreed with them, I expect that the opposition - left or right - would've been accused of being sexist. And the same distortion happening now to "racism" to include political affiliation would happen to the word "sexism." We'll be confronting that challenge soon, I imagine.

What essentially sickens me about the racism defense is the reckless use of base, emotional arguments to defend rational action. The way, in particular, the left is playing the race card to deflect criticism of policies and decisions made by a President. Like this...

"I guess we'll probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside, intimidating people," Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., said when asked if Wilson's comment reflected the sentiment of racists. "And you know that's the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude is not rebuked."

That's ridiculous. And it disturbs me. Yes, I'm sure there are thousands of really creepy people sitting in trailers somewhere with Confederate flags taped to the wall behind them plotting nasty things, seeding their kids with hate. Those people disgust me. But they're fringe and totally inconsequential to the massing opposition to this administration's policies.

I think Obama's undeniable legacy will be the fact that he broke racial barriers to ascend to the greatest office on the planet. My rational fear is that the policies he'll institute will forever damage the economic and military integrity of our country. THAT'S why I oppose many of his actions. Not because he's black. And that's the point. The left need to acknowledge that the vast, vast majority of the opposition to the President is based upon logical thought. Playing the emotional race card to abate that opposition is shameful.

To be clear, I acknowledge that the minority party is always going to be marginalized by the party in power. Just the way environmentalists and other left-leaning groups have long been dubbed "loonies" or "radicals" by the right. So the practice isn't a new device just of the left. Categorizing opponents to a President as "racists" is.

Here's the bottom line to remember. If and when Obama's approval ratings continue to fall, census math would hold out that the white members of the Democratic party would suddenly need to be labeled racist, too, for their opposition, lest they reveal the hypocrisy on display now.

People in glass houses...

Furry birthday, Finlay

July 22nd marked Finlay's first birthday. He celebrated by stuffing all three of his new purple chew toys into his mouth at once...a feat he relishes. His record to date is four.

Happy birthday, Mr. Fin. Here's to many more.

The Hangover hangup

Lori and I went to see The Hangover last night at the 8:10 show. Funny, albeit totally over the top, movie.

Walking out of the theater, both of us were flabbergasted to see a mother and her three kids walking out. Two boys, probably twelve and nine, and a girl who was maybe seven or eight.

I've witnessed children in movies that I thought were inappropriate for them before. Most of the time, it's infants in action flicks. My reaction is mainly that I think it has to be scary for a 10 month-old to hear the explosions and loud music. It usually results in that baby bursting into crying fits and the rest of the theater rubbernecking and silently cursing the parents for waiting so long before taking the baby out.

I've also witnessed plenty of teenagers sneaking into R-rated slasher films during my days working in movie theaters. You laugh it off as a rite of pubescent passage. In fact, I saw three probably 14 year-old boys skulking into The Hangover last night. You would've thought they were robbing a bank with all their feints and nervous cackling.

But to have kids of seven or eight years in The Hangover?! Are you kidding me?! And the youngest a girl? Maybe because I have two daughters, that shocks me even more. But if anyone who's seen that movie thinks it's appropriate for a seven year-old girl, I question your moral center (and/or your eyesight.)

So, let's try and give the mother the benefit of the doubt. Let's say the oldest kid was trying to pull a fast one and sold the movie off as something other than what it was. Or let's say they came to see Harry Potter only to find it sold out and she needed a quick backup plan...unwittingly going into The Hangover. Or let's say their house was tormented by poltergeists and they needed safe haven. No matter what scenario I concoct to rationalize those kids being there, they all fail to hold water. By the third f-bomb or reference to whores, bodily orifices, or any sex act you could imagine (most were in the movie), you'd think any decent mother would take their kids out. Not this woman.

By all visible standards, she looked like a nice enough lady. Well-dressed. Kids didn't look like trailer trash. No flies buzzing around them as they marveled at electricity or running water. Just normal, appropriate looking kids in a totally inappropriate movie.

We've all had moments in our lives when we've witnessed the questionable parenting skills of others. We've seen mothers being too rough with their bawling toddlers in the grocery store. We've seen fathers chewing out their sons too harshly at baseball practice. We've seen parents letting their kids run rampant in restaurants, breaking things and acting like little tyrants.

Personally, Lori and I have never been the kind to insert ourselves into these situations. Most people are the same way. You figure as long as the kids aren't in imminent danger or about to suffer bodily harm, it's better to turn the other cheek. But last night pushed us both to the brink.

I'm sure our aghast comments were clearly heard by the mother. The oldest son looked back at us as Lori and I uttered our dumbfounded remarks. Did I see guilt or embarrassment on his face? Maybe a little. I would've much preferred to see it on his mother's.