Why can’t the white man say “n****”?

I know I wrote about Barack Obama last time, but the media coverage surrounding him is fascinating, and as you’ll see, also a bit saddening.

A little over a week ago, LA Times columnist David Ehrenstein wrote a piece entitled “Obama the ‘Magic Negro.’” It’s a strange and wild bit of writing and it raises questions – not to mention eyebrows – about how Liberals view the issue of race and how they view people of different races.

Here’s the link to Ehrenstein’s column to prove I’m not making this s*** up: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,5335087.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail.

Ehrenstein begins his column affirming that “every carbon-based life form on this planet” knows that Obama, Senator, D-Ill., is running for President. Ehrenstein posits that Obama is also running for “an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination – the ‘Magic Negro.’”

According to Ehrenstein and Wikipedia (LA Times columnists are quoting Wikipedia now? There’s journalistic integrity for you.), the Magic Negro “is a figure of postmodern folk culture . . . who emerged in the wake of brown vs. Board of Education. . . . to ‘help the white protagonist.’”

Furthermore, explains Ehrenstein, the Magic Negro is there to “assuage white ‘guilt’ (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American History, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.”

Well, if that’s not stereotypical and racist, then I don’t know what is. Apparently it’s ok to be racist towards people who have acted as racists in their past.

But I digress. Ehrenstein argues that the Magic Negro is most prominently portrayed on the Silver Screen by actors such as Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Scatman Crothers, Michael Clarke Duncan, Will Smith, and, “most recently,” Don Cheadle. “And that's not to mention a certain basketball player whose very nickname is ‘Magic.’”

Ehrenstein writes at length (see above link) about the roles these actors have played in several movies in which they benevolently help in-need white folks. Some of these Magic Negro figures in the films get killed for helping the white protagonists, to which Ehrenstein quips, “See what helping the white man gets you?”

But the example he gives of “David Hampton — a young, personable gay con man who in the 1980s passed himself off as the son of none other than the real Sidney Poitier. . . . Hampton discovered that countless gullible, well-heeled New Yorkers, vulnerable to the Magic Negro myth, were only too eager to believe in his baroque fantasy” in order to obtain entrance to Studio 54. In the very next sentence, though, Ehrenstein notes that one of the few who didn’t fall for Hampton’s tricks was Andy Warhol, who, according to Ehrenstein, “had no need for the accouterment of interracial ‘goodwill.’”

Excuse me? Because Warhol wasn’t conned by a con man means he’s biased against black people? That’s some great logic.

All the above is s**** and giggles compared to what follows. Ehrenstein really shows how highly he holds white Americans with this preposterous proclamation: “But the same can't be said of most white Americans [comparing white Americas to Warhol], whose desire for a noble, healing Negro hasn't faded. That's where Obama comes in: as Poitier's ‘real’ fake son.”

Ehrenstein chalks-up Obama’s political success to his speaking eloquence, his books, and the way his criticisms have “magically” been “waved away.” Writes Ehrenstein, “Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders.” No worries, though, because Obama’s “tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).”

Ehrenstein wraps-up his racist rant with this paragraph, and I will quote it in full so that all of its absurdity can be appreciated:

Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.

Let me interpret for you: white Americans are racist because their support for Obama is purely racial.

I coach girls’ high school basketball in Loveland, Colo. I’m the C team coach, and the Varsity coach, Jay Klagge, is a liberal democrat from the lakes of Minnesota. Six months ago Jay had already plastered his mini-van with an “Obama ‘08” bumper-sticker. Jay’s a great guy, great coach, and a civics teacher. We don’t agree on anything politically, but I don’t believe for a minute that he is a racist and would support a black presidential candidate to “assuage his white guilt.”

And no, I have no white guilt. Why should I? I never owned slaves. I never called a black man a “n*****.” I never participated in any racial segregation. Heck, the whole northern and western parts of America were bastions of freedom for people of every “color.” “White guilt” is something that the mainstream media and the world of academia try to pour on us poor white folks whenever they get the chance.

The very idea that white Americans are as shallow and as guilt-ridden as Ehrenstein thinks them to be is highly offensive, stupid, and a tad bit racist. No white support for Obama is good enough for Ehrenstein because we obviously can’t like Obama for political reasons because he’s only been in the Senate for two years and doesn’t really say anything anyway he speaks, anyway. To Ehrenstein, the only reason why white people have jumped on the Obama bandwagon is because this “Magic Negro” will save us from our past.

How do you think this piece makes Obama feel? Like those song-and-dance n******? Like an empty, black bucket of pretty rhetoric, only popular because of an entire demographic’s “guilt”? Like nary a politician but very much like a “fake” folk hero? Like a Magic Negro and nothing more?

Still it amazes me that black people – like Ehrenstein (yes, he is black) – can feel no guilt or shame whatsoever by flinging around “n****” or “n*****.” I mean, if it’s wrong for white people to use the word, why is OK for black people to use it? But if that’s the case, only w**** people should be allowed to use the term “w****” in describing themselves. Or, at the very least, a w**** person should be allowed to use “n****” and “n*****” just as freely as the black people do.

In the world of political communication, columns like this send us back a couple hundred years. We’re told over and over again the racial demographics play a large role in elections, but isn’t Ehrenstein going a bit too far?

Isn’t it fascinating that the leaders of academia and the Left almost always seem to point out the differences of people before any other characteristic. No one is ever a “candidate” or “American,” especially in the political arena. There’s always some identity tag that is applied to political figures, whether they’re male, female, black, white, etc, etc. Obama can never only be a presidential candidate – Ehrenstein made that quite clear.

If we as a society are trying to move away from racism and segregation, why do people like Ehrenstein continue to see color and other differences before they see anything else?

And the Lord said y’all got to rise up!

Senator and 2008 Democratic presidential candidate Joseph Biden, let us all know that Barack Obama, fellow Senator and candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential ticket, is a “clean” and well-spoken black man.

Thanks for coming, Mr. Biden. Be sure to run again next time.

While politically suicidal, Biden’s comments do shed light on Obama’s rhetorical abilities. Obama’s eloquence is no secret and his lucidity is responsible for his popularity amongst the press and people. I don’t think Obama even knows where he stands on the issues of the day. But the brother can speak!

The Illinois Senator visited his people this last weekend in Selma, Alabama, speaking at the Brown Chapel A.M.E. church on the 42nd anniversary of the civil rights protest known as “Bloody Sunday.” On March 7, 1965, hundreds of black protesters were beaten and sprayed with tear gas as they marched cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. The event eventually led to the passing of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Obama, being black, was given the prestigious honor of speaking on Sunday morning at the church where the march began 42 years ago. Hillary Clinton, being white, spoke at First Baptist Church, just down the street from Obama. Both candidates littered their speeches with religious talk, especially Obama, who talked at length about Moses and how he led the Israelite’s – or, in this context, black’s – out of slavery into the Promised Land. Obama dubbed this generation the “Joshua generation” because they still need to continue the fight for racial equality.

But the big topic of the day was race and racism and how far a certain race has come in its struggle for freedom.

Hillary took the noble path and neglected the bitterness between her campaign and Obama’s, saying that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 paved the way for Obama to run for President. She continued, noting that “by its logic and spirit, it is giving the same chance to Gov. Bill Richardson to run as a Hispanic. And, yes, it is giving me that chance.”

Well, I’m confused. Does Hillary think she’s black? Andre Sanders, 31, an auto parts supplier in Selma, is confused as well. Said Sanders, “Folks are saying, ‘Yeah, we're going to get us a black president with Obama.’ But Hillary's something, too. She's game tight. You can't run a scam on her.”

“Game tight”? Ballin’!

But apparently there was lots more confusion going on in Selma. Obama and Hillary were in such a tizzy to reach out for more of the black vote – I mean – to commemorate the history of black civil rights in America that they forgot who they were. Hilliary, obviously, forgot her skin color, and Obama forgot he was a “clean” black.

Obama’s speaking style adapted to his religious African-American environment like a gecko against tree bark. Reading the transcript of Obama’s speech is misleading, for it lacks his – how shall I say – southern subtleties.

In his speech, Obama went to great lengths to show that he is indeed part of the heritage, history, and honor of Selma. Being the offspring of a white Kansas woman and a Kenyan makes Obama only “half-black,” and being raised in Hawaii and Indonesia doesn’t do much for his desired connection to the civil rights movement. But Obama talked about his ancestors who were slaves and his father, Barack Obama, Sr., who immigrated from Kenya to America, all thanks to the brave people of Selma and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

When talking about how his father and mother (whose ancestors owned slaves) got together to have a family, he described their unpopular union of a white woman and black man as “some good craziness goin’ on.” In the speech text, it’s “going on.” Not so in the audio.

Obama continued:

“There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don't tell me I don't have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don't tell me I’m not coming home to Selma, Alabama.”

In the video, “coming” is “comin’,” and the second instance of “Selma, Alabama” is slurred together so that it sounds like one word, Southern style.

The very next sentence, Obama proclaims, “I’m here because you all marched for me.” On tape, however, Obama goes South yet again, and his “you all” is really “y’all.”

Obama’s southern/black pandering continues: “If it hasn't been for Selma, I wouldn't be here. This is the site of my conception. I am the fruits of your labor. I am the offspring of the movement. When people ask me whether I've been to Selma before, I tell them I'm coming home.”

But I heard this clip on the radio, and Obama’s “before” is “befo’.” “Befo’”? This guy graduated from Columbia with a B.S. in political science and from Harvard with a law degree, and suddenly he’s speaking with a southern drawl in an African-American church in Selma’labama? He’d better watch his step befo’ he alienates his white constituents.

Al Sharpton, referring to Obama and his quest for the White House, said, “Just because you are our color doesn't make you our kind.” I wonder if the Rev. Sharpton would take back that statement based on Obama’s style and “blackness” in his Selma speech.

But the degree to which Obama is gunning for the black vote is astonishing. Obama is bending his own history in order to appear more “black.” His father didn’t come to America because of initiatives spawning from the Voting Rights Act, and Obama himself was born in 1961 – four years before Bloody Sunday. Obama was born in Hawaii, not Selma or anywhere else in the South. When people ask Obama if he’s been to Selma befo’, the truth would be something like, “Hell, no, dog. I was born nearly half-way ‘round da globe. But I’m still black. Vote for me.”

To Sharpton and others, being “black” is being a descendent of slaves. To Hillary, being “black” is being married to Bill Clinton, America’s “first black President,” and she actually brought her hubby to Selma in order to bolster her black credibility. To Obama, being “black” is being the offspring of a black man and a white woman and also speaking the southern, black lingo in order to impress the to-be voters.

It’s sad to see the disregard of an ethnic group’s heritage all for their political support. Some would say we’ve come along way, and we have. Racism will never be completely wiped off the map, but when we look around America today, we see all sorts of ethnic groups in all sorts of high-profile and prestigious positions.

But to me it seems flagrantly racist when politicians change their rhetoric, style, and skin color in order to get a few more votes. Obama and Hillary didn’t go to Selma to honor those who marched for freedom four decades ago; they went to Selma to exploit an ethnic minority and to use their heritage and bravery for political purposes. Obama and Hillary didn’t see Americans; they saw votes; they saw blacks.

And all God’s people said, “How long? How long must we wander in this wilderness?”