History: during the reign of Bill ‘n’ Hill (two Presidents for the price of one) I opened a can of worms with my military superiors over the newly imposed categorization of personnel into race, the latest of which was Hispanic. I maintained that race historically was a skin pigment matter-white is Caucasian, yellow is Asian, etc. Hispanic is ethnicity, or where your ancestors originated, not directly related to pigmentation. Is Swedish a race? Australian? Needless to say, I lost the argument and Hispanic remained a race. To this day, it makes no sense to me; my boss at the time, an elegant black lady with freckles, (whose skin was whiter than mine during the summer, when my Italian dermis tans) maintained she was ‘Japtalian’; even our sophisticated database couldn’t handle that one.
Fast-forward about thirty years. The Democrat presidential candidate, bi-racial but black in appearance, promises to rise above not only politics, but also race. He is proclaimed to be post-racial. Many in the electorate are fascinated by the possibility of the first black president*; a chance to finally prove, without any doubt, that America is no longer a racist society. How can we be racist having elected, with many white votes, a black man? Finally, at long last, the issue of race will be put behind us, no more to be a matter of any consequence.
Confession time: when I’m able, I listen to Rush. Not always, just when I can. I’m only a quasi-Dittohead; some of his humor doesn’t always do it for me. However, I end up agreeing with most of his themes. (As an aside, the elegant black boss-lady: NOT a Rush-baby. Found his locution ‘talent on loan from God’ deeply offensive. She wasn’t a big Reagan fan either. But I still love and admire her to this very day-she’s an achiever, a true American Patriot in every sense of the phrase.)
Anyhow, Rush predicted that electing Obama would exacerbate, not heal, America’s racial woes. Like I said, I usually end up agreeing with his themes, and Rush was right once again on this one.
Since the ‘Immaculation’, it seems that race has become the least common denominator for nearly any friction point or disagreement, whether racial issues make sense or not. Such thinking is subtly encouraged by the ‘regime’: rallying supporters, the President emphasizes women, blacks and Latinos; Attorney General Holder calls us cowards (maybe not-so-subtle) and non-prosecutes New Black Panthers; a white Cambridge cop, arresting a black, is stupid. All policy criticism devolves into racism: Tea Partiers-racists; watch Fox News-you’re a racist; Arizona passes a law enforcing existing laws-Arizona’s law is racist.
If you dare to disagree with anything that falls out of Obama’s mouth, why, it’s because you’re a racist! You just can’t stand (despite all those white votes) having a black guy in the White House! Thank you Janeane Garofalo, who can get away with bleating this tripe because she’s (wait for it)….white!
I guess it’s time to assert Jack’s Corollary to Godwin’s Law, (reductio ad Klanum). Time was, the first person to drop the Hitler card automatically lost the argument. I propose we do the same for the race card.
As with the Nazis, once the analogy has been applied to just about everything, you lose sight of its original meaning. I’m no longer certain I’d recognize an actual racist statement anymore; now that everything’s racist, nothing truly is. Racist: semantic content equals zero; meaningless.
And Hispanic, (La Raza notwithstanding)–in my mind, is still not a race.
*Kind of like Morgan Freeman, but younger. He can save us when the asteroids come-a-calling!