Character, not Color

            In his memorable speech in front of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King dreamed of the day when his children would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.  On June 28, 2012, Dr. King would have been ashamed to see blacks tarnish his words and his dream.

            In response to the Congressional Black Caucus walking out of the House of Representatives to protest the vote to find Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, Alan West, the only member of that caucus not to do so, said it perfectly, "Today, the Congressional Black Caucus and other liberal members of Congress judged the Attorney General by the color of his skin and not by the content of his character."
            Fast and Furious is an enormous scandal. It is clear that the Justice Department authorized the ill-conceived gun-running operation that resulted in the death of an American agent and hundreds of Mexicans. To make matters worse, Justice Department testimony before Congress was proven false, and Holder himself lied about his knowledge of the operation. Congress had no choice but to hold the Attorney General in contempt when he refused to turn over subpoenaed documents and got the President to invoke executive privilege to prevent the truth from coming out. Holder richly deserved to be held in contempt. But blacks, abetted by leftists like Nancy Pelosi, accused Republicans of conducting a fishing expedition and suggested that it was linked to Republican attempts to suppress minority voting. This was in direct reference to the Justice Department suing states to prevent them from instituting voter I.D. , brazenly defying a ruling by the Supreme Court that such a requirement was constitutional.
            As if on cue, the Reverend Sharpton, who long ago established his racist bona fides in the Tawana Brawley case, picked up his banner of hate to accuse Republicans of racism in the Holder matter, just as he had cried racism in the Treyvon Martin case.
            We know there is racism in this country. But nowhere is it more evident than in the race baiting of the Sharptons of this world and the bias of the Congressional Black Caucus.
            President Obama could put a stop to all this by firing Holder and denouncing black racism. Instead he puts his own racist attitude in full view by defending Holder and supporting Sharpton, a regular visitor to the White House. This is consistent with his record of pre-judging white guilt in matters such as the police arrest of black professor Henry Louis Gates in Cambridge (the cops acted stupidly) and the Treyvon Martin case ("If I had a son, he would look like Treyvon").
            Racism, wherever it rears its ugly head, is disgusting and wrong. Let's just not excuse it when it comes from its supposed victims. Character, not color, should be the only measure of a man.

Our Panderer in Chief

            Barack Obama is a nice guy. I think I would enjoy playing a round of golf with him. As long as we didn't talk about any serious issues, I might also enjoy having a beer with him afterwards. He also appears to be a great family man, a loyal and faithful husband, and a loving dad. These days, when the responsible black head of family is a vanishing breed, the President is a superb role model. Too bad he is such a lousy president.

            It has become clear that Obama was not ready to hold such a high office. He has never held a real job, unless you count the time he was a community organizer or an undistinguished state legislator or U.S. senator; he has never run a business or been responsible for a bottom line; he has never understood the virtues of capitalism and free enterprise; and he has never appreciated the exceptional role this country plays on the world stage. What he has learned, on the other hand, is how to manipulate public opinion to get elected.
            Candidate Obama wanted us to believe that he would unify this country. He has done exactly the opposite: he is the most divisive president in history. He has encouraged us to resent the rich and successful. He has blamed Bush and the Republicans for the country's economic failures. He has also blamed the Japanese tsunami, the big banks, big oil, Wall Street, and Europe for delaying the recovery. As for himself, well, he accepts no responsibility for any of our country's ills, not high unemployment, not the housing crisis, not the raging deficits.
            Meanwhile, he is in full campaign mode and has been for close to a year. At last count he has made 180 trips on Air Force One to beg for money and to preach to selected adoring groups. All on the taxpayer's dime, of course.
            If there is one word that characterizes the President's style, it is pandering. It's all part of his divide and conquer strategy.
            He panders to the environmentalists by funding failures like Solyndra, by killing job-creating ventures like the Keystone pipeline, and by unleashing his EPA attack dogs on fossil fuels. He panders to the abortion lobby by enacting a health care law that affronts Catholics. He panders to gays by rejecting the Defense of Marriage Act.
            He panders to blacks by encouraging the likes of Jesse Jackson and the Reverend Sharpton to fan the flames of racial hatred and by suing states to prevent them from enacting voter I.D. laws. He panders to Hispanics by refusing to enforce immigration laws and by suing those states that would, and by issuing executive orders to bypass Congress in achieving his ultimate goal of amnesty for illegals.
            He panders to the UAW, the AFL-CIO, the NEA, and public sector unions. He panders to Food Stamp recipients, to seniors, to the Occupy Wall Street crowd. He panders to Muslims by celebrating their non-existent contributions to the nation's history.
            If you belong to a group that he hasn't pandered to yet, let him know. I'm sure he can find a way to fit you in.

Facts and only Facts

            My niece is one of the lucky ones, When she graduated from college, she was able to land a job with the Atlantic, a classy magazine with a long history of good writing and intellectually challenging articles. When I sent her a subscription to Smithsonian, she reciprocated by subscribing me to the Atlantic.

            A short piece in the June issue by James Parker really got my attention. Entitled Glenn Beck in Exile," the article generally is a putdown of Beck's new venture, a Web/TV network called GBTV. Parker calls it "building a 24/7 media empire in his [Beck's] loopy image."                  The writer doesn't hold back in his scorn for the one-time major irritant of the Obama administration. Labels he hangs on Beck, like "patriotic unction," "zodiac of personal demons," "vials of his wrath," and "quivering curds of his indignation" leave no doubt about his disdain for the former star of Fox News. For good measure he takes irrelevant and gratuitous shots at conservative icons by describing Rush Limbaugh as the kingpin of malevolence and accusing Sean Hannity of triumphant mendacity.

            Parker may be a dexterous wordsmith, but his commentary is neither fair nor defensible. He clearly believes that dripping venom all over the page is more effective than a balanced presentation. His piece is a perfect example of why people distrust the media. Why do writers like Parker resort to character assassination rather than honest analysis? Since when does slander carry more weight than  facts?

            We all have our opinions and biases. I am an avowed conservative with a dollop of libertarianism. Some people agree with me, others don't. But if I take a position on an issue without facts to back it up, then I deserve to be slapped down. Similarly, if a liberal presents a cogent argument, I am likely to concede the point. In support of any political persuasion, accusations of loopiness, malevolence, or mendacity are no substitute for a reasoned and sustainable point of view.

            We are now entering the high season of campaigning for national office. And we are already seeing shameful attacks coming from unscrupulous supporters of both sides. I hope voters will be wise enough to disregard the nonsense and the puffery, and weigh the pros and cons of every important issue facing this country. The future is too important for us to choose our leaders based on scurrilous accusations and shameless demagoguery.