Mary Mitchell's Pre Emptive New Race Card
By mike volpe Posted in Culture — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
In Mary Mitchell's new column, she pre emptively plays a new race card. If you are in Indiana or North Carolina and you vote for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, then it is strictly because you are a racist. Here is how she begins to frame the issue.
Looks like Clinton has gotten a lift from the fear-mongering, and is now slightly ahead of Obama in Indiana, and has narrowed his double-digit lead in North Carolina.
Polls in Indiana show Clinton now leads Obama there by four points among likely Democratic voters, 48 percent to 44 percent. Eight percent of voters there remain undecided, according to an analysis by a CNN poll.
That means the Jeremiah Wright controversy has hurt Obama and helped Clinton, even though some voters in Indiana would probably swear on a stack of Bibles that they weren't influenced by the negative coverage.
Thus, what Mitchell sets up is this. Hillary has used the Wright fiasco to play to people's most racist fears, and it has worked because the polls show as much. While Mitchell has heard that folks aren't affected by the Wright issue, she is concerned that their inner most racist feelings will come out at election time.
Politics makes for strange bedfellows because it appears that I will have to defend Hillary Clinton a bit. First, just because you may be concerned about the Wright issue, that doesn't actually mean you are a racist. In Mitchell's world, there is no other reason why anyone would be swayed by what has transpired vis a vis Wright, but there is. Second, Hillary hasn't necessarily used fear mongering to win. In fact, at some point some supporter of every loser will proclaim the winners fear mongered. Certainly, there was no fear mongering toward any inner racist as Mitchell proclaims.
Thus, while her set up is utterly absurd, it does allow her to continue with a theme...
Despite the racially polarizing events, Obama has not wavered from this belief and recently reiterated his belief that if he loses his bid for the Democratic primary, it won't be because of his race.I'm still not so sure.
...
For instance, reported on the New York Times blog on Monday was a piece by a reporter who went to a "mostly white highly educated, professional . . . politically independent" area and found voters were "unaffected" by the Wright controversy.
But the reporter also found that while supporters of both Clinton and Obama said "they did not think the Wright episode should change the race" they feared it might in other areas where "people might be searching for some acceptable explanation for not voting for a black candidate."
That's a truth that many will call a lie.
...
In the secrecy of the voting booth, many of us still vote for a candidate because of his or her race, or gender, or status, or humor, or style, or attractiveness.
But when asked, the majority of voters would die before admitting that they cast a ballot based on those superficial qualities.
...
Because the truth is, some voters will vote for a black candidate. Some voters will not.
If fear-mongering has swayed Indiana voters in this critical primary, it can't be blamed on Wright.
It would be their shame.
There you have it. Barack Obama is infallable. His opponent is wicked, and if you happen to vote for Hillary over Obama, then that is because your most inner and crude racist tendencies have been unleashed.
Let's sum up. In Mitchell's estimation, voters say they haven't been affected by the Wright fiasco, but she doesn't believe them. If they were, it was due to fear mongering by Obama's opponent. If voters are swayed by the Wright fiasco, it is because they have succombed to their most racist tendency. The word chutzpah seems to come up many times when analyzing what Mitchell says.
In Mitchell's world, if you are white and you don't vote for Obama then it has to be racial. There is no way anyone could not vote for Obama for any good reason. Every reason must be rooted in prejudice.
I maybe getting ahead of myself but it appears that Mitchell is putting whites in Indiana and NC on notice. If you vote for Hillary, I will call you racist. It's truly breathtaking to see this racist accuse others of her ills.
In her world, Barack Obama is infallable, and thus voting against him is only done for nefarious reasons. The Wright controversy is nothing more than a distraction perpetrated by his opponents to whip up the prejudism that she knows the average white person has. Thus, cynically she puts all whites on notice in Indiana and NC...vote for Obama or else.
Once again, here is the contact information to her boss: Tom McNamee and you can complain to him by calling 312-321-2510, emailing @ tmcnamee@suntimes.com, or faxing to 312-321-2122. Here is a list of some of the more high profile advertisers in the Sun Times. Intel, Grossinger GMC, State Farm, XM Satellite Radio,Ford, and BlackBerry. Please feel free to make your voice heard.
Also, for the second week in a row, Real Clear Politics has featured her column. To complain please contact any of these three emails: tom@realclearpolitics.com, john@realclearpolitics.com, and feedback@realclearpolitics.com
however that is not the point of the piece. Here, this columnist, Mary Mitchell, is pre emptively playing the race card and accusing anyone that doesn't vote for Obama of doing for nothing more than racist reasons. That is unacceptable, and that is why I left contact info of folks to complain to. Like I said at the end, to top it off, for the second week in a row RCP is featuring Mitchell. If you complain to no one else, complain to RCP for choosing her among all the folks they have to choose from.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor
Either she calls that a forbidden topic that must not be discussed, or she has to have an explanation for the nearly monolithic support for Obama among black voters (unmatched by white voters). And if this pattern isn't racially-connected, then she needs to try out some alternatives (like shopping for clothes) to figure out which one will fit - or perhaps which will fit best into Cinderella's shoe.
Let's see, blacks are all voting for the Candidate of Hope (not to be confused with the Candidate from Hope)...blacks are reacting against efforts to force them back onto the plantation...I'm running out of ideas
Just trying to pre-empt Mary here, but I'm not very convinced.
only sees racism when it is done by other groups other than African Americans. That's why she totally excuses Louis Farrakhan and then turns around and condemns Don Imus. She doesn't see the near unanimity voting for Obama by African Americans as anything bad because Obama is infallable. If you are looking for logic or consistency, she is not your author. That is yet another reason why it is so shameful that again, for the second week in a row, RCP featured her. If nothing else, make your voice heard to that site. They have absolutely no obligation to feature this racist author and yet they are starting a pattern.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor
If you are white and vote for "white" Hillary you are a racist, then if you are black and vote for "black" Obama then you are also a racist.
But are you voting for the black half of Obama or the white half of Obama? Maybe because Obama is half white then the black votes for Obama should only count 50%? Heaven forbid the 90% of black voters vote for a man who is half white.
Why can't it be about the issues. It can't be that people are anti-Marxist/socialist agenda, nope they must be racist.
The only reason why Obama has a shot at the nomination is because of his race and his false posturing as being one who can transcend race. Then Wright's words pull the curtain back from that farse -- and the non-Obama voters are the racists.
M Penny