Maybe George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin because he’s a hate-speech shouting racist.
And maybe Zimmerman was acting out of self-defense because he considers Skittles a deadly weapon.
I don’t know.
Maybe Rick Santorum was about to call President Obama something disgustingly racist when he halted himself after saying the letters “NI—“ in a speech a few weeks ago.
And maybe Santorum was about to call President Obama a “NI-ckelback fan,” which is almost as disgusting in my book.
I don’t know.
Humor aside, and truth be told, those incidents are lone moments in time, where the context is muddied and the details may never be known. And I know people want to use these incidents to have a discussion about racism, but I think we’re going to result at an impasse without the bi-product of actually learning anything.
We are trying to examine the complex forest of racism by looking at individual trees.
It’s possible I will never understand racism fully, because I’m a white man in his 30s. I also would guess that I wouldn’t understand sexism fully; nor would I (currently) understand ageism.
And, being a teacher, frankly I doubt I’ll ever truly understand capitalism, either.
I do think there are three types of racists when it comes to caucasians: There are the Absolute Racists, the Accidental Racists, and the Racists in Denial.
The Absolute Racists are racists who know it, and say so with pride. And that’s disturbing, but at least you know who you’re dealing with.
I would think (or, at least, I hope) that a majority of racist caucasians in this day and age file under “Accidental Racists.” They’re decent, empathetic people whose only fault is they secretly harbor a paranoia that they might one day be seen as racist in some awkward situation; and they err towards the cliché of professing, “But I have several black friends!” in their defense of their own cultural naivety. It doesn’t really solve anything to say that-- but at heart, you know they mean well.
In order not to appear racist, people tend to overcompensate in a ridiculous manner to appear better people than they actually are. It’s not a perfect solution, but at least its progress in the name of goodwill.
And then there are the people I am most concerned about: The Racists in Denial. These are people who act in an obviously racist manner, as they are unable to hide their subconscious, spontaneous indignity for people of color, but are also unable to swallow the label itself. They simply don’t want to admit they are what they are at heart. They are both racist, and dishonest with themselves as people.
And, with that, I bring you to the Republican Party.
Now, let’s be careful here: I am not saying the entire Republican Party is completely full of racists. I am saying, however, there has been a pattern of both overt and subtle racism within their party, and we need to have a national discussion about that for a long, long time.
Take Joe Wilson (R-SC) yelling “YOU LIE!” at the President of the United States during a nationally-televised speech to Congress (something he admits was “spontaneous”).
Take Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, famously photographed wagging a finger in Obama’s face and saying she “felt threatened by him.”
Take the birthers movement. Or the Tea Party activist who photoshopped Obama’s face in a family photo of chimps. Or the Republicans who referenced Obama as a “tar baby.”
Now add that Santorum line into the context I’ve provided, instead of treating it as an isolated incident.
Whatever you think about Barack Obama’s policies, he will (and should) go down in history as a Jackie Robinson/Martin Luther King-esque figure. No matter what the political future holds, the man holds the distinction of being first. And, like the men of the generation before him, he has had to endure a level of disrespect in being first, and handled that with absolute dignity. The question—and the discussion we need to have—is to what degree and level (if any) racism has affected the way people treat him as opposed to every other President to hold that dignified office.
This group of events deserves our attention; because one event is debatable, but if a pattern emerges-- among the elected representatives of one political party in the United States of America, mind you-- that is troubling for our nation. If the representatives of the people are acting in a manner of disrespect for the President because of racism, their constituents will act in the same fashion.
This wealth of moments leads to times where one might ask himself, “Are they standing in the way of the President’s ideas—ones they have proposed in similar fashions themselves—because he’s a Democrat, or because he’s African American?” And that is a question we should not be asking about the representatives in our democracy 65 years after Jackie Robinson and almost 50 years since Martin Luther King.
So I call on the media to talk about this the way we have dissected the Trayvon Martin tragedy: ad nauseam. And I don't want it whispered. I want it out loud. I want RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called to the carpet daily to explain why his party is not what it could appear to be on every channel, every hour. The media holds no taboos anymore, anyway. We have discussed women’s contraception, so we might as well ask if the Republican Party has a reputation—or a purposeful agenda—of racism.
We don’t need accusations; we just need discussion. And we need to have this discussion now, while he is President, around every water cooler in America; because if we’re not willing to examine an is-it-or-isn’t-it political racism on the grandest stage in the entire world, we will have more Trayvon Martin discussions again later.
These are not trees. This is a forest now. And it is on fire. Help put it out.
My prediction, by the way, is that once we have ten days of mass media asking if Republicans defy Obama because of his party or his skin color, and whether or not everyone should legitimately associate them with being racists—once that discussion is in the mainstream—I bet we suddenly find our government working together; maybe even agreeing again. I bet the bi-product of this discussion, if nothing else concretely positive, is that the Republicans start working in a friendly manner with the President a whole lot more.
In order not to appear racist, people tend to overcompensate in a ridiculous manner to appear better people than they actually are.
It’s not a perfect solution, but at least its progress in the name of goodwill.
I suggest to you that it is far more prevalent in the White House than most places... Race relations have never been worse than under this President. Please apply the same "critical thinking" to the POTUS
1) CBS, NBC and CNN all deliberately doctored or misrepresented evidence from the event to make it appear that race played a part in the shooting. 2) The new black panthers broke state and Federal laws when they solicited kidnapping and murder with the bounty that they placed on George Zimmerman. 3) The President, or any other leader on the left, didn't critisize the new black panthers and the Attorney General did not bring charges against them. 4) The news media is guilty of portraying Trayvon as a child by only using pictures of him from when he was 12 and 13 years old. He was in fact a 6 foot 2 inch athletic youth on the cusp of manhood. I think it is despicable that the left in this country tries to gain politically from tragedy, even as to go so far as to fabricate their own set of facts that fits their template.
Pot, have you met kettle? Opinion (which majority of your response is) does NOT equate to facts.
which of the four points presented by Mr. Koch are opinion? I have seen news articles supporting every one of them as fact.
"CBS, NBC and CNN all deliberately doctored or misrepresented evidence from the event to make it appear that race played a part in the shooting." "Deliberately doctored" is an opinion. The 9-1-1 call in question was EDITED, not doctored (no, not the same) If the uneducated wingnuts on the right want an example of "doctored" audio, they need to look no further than the person they're regurgitating: Rush. People can decide if race is a factor based on Zimmerman's very-own language. "The new black panthers broke state and Federal laws when they solicited kidnapping and murder with the bounty that they placed on George Zimmerman." Actually, their so-called "bounty" is for the capture. Murder & kidnapping were not used that I've seen. The NPBB are irrelevant and, again, a regurgitated talking point from the uneducated right-wingers (like Hannity) who need something to whine about to cater to their dummy demographic.
Actually, many on the left have criticized them. But since the wingnuts are only interested in spewing what they've been fed, this is what they believe (sorta like how they believe they know what they're talking about or anything about the law). How about LEARNING the laws before criticizing someone for allegedly not upholding them. Why should the Pres. give this group the time of day? Oh, because he's a Dem and the ever-growing uneducated right-wing faction need something to whine about. But, hey, keep giving this group the attention. "The news media is guilty of portraying Trayvon as a child by only using pictures of him from when he was 12 and 13 years old. Opinion. Uhh..17 IS a child. His build doesn't change the fact he was a child. At first, those were the pics that were made available. Plenty of other pics have been used. But, again, this is an "issue" with the dummy demo on the right because they're being told this is an issue. Because, as they continue to prove, they're too damn lazy/uneducated to actually think for themselves. So, they come on the internet and rehash what they heard (and spare me the BS it's not because I watch/listen to Hannity & Rush & know what they say). So, people can sell their partisan crap to the morons who'll suck it up (market is plentiful there). I'll call it out!
"Actually, many on the left have criticized them. " Many journalists and pundits have but not President Obama or any leaders on the Left and there are still no arrests pending for members of the NBPP. "Uhh..17 IS a child" is correct, but disingenuous. A 17 yr. old "child" is much closer to adult than to the child they were at 12-13. Finally, "people can sell their partisan crap to the morons who'll suck it up", like you. To borrow your favorite term, who's the DQ here?
Calling facts opinion just because they damage your ideology is really damaging to any tiny point you might accidentally stumble into.
And just how exactly would the black panthers "capture" him without kidnapping him?
Where are those facts you demand from others? Try again please.
- Jeff's prepared my returns for 4 or 5 years now. Pretty basic return I'm salaried and my wife stays home. He's reasonable and provides good service. - I was introduced to Jeff by by ex-husband. He helped me develop a financial plan which has give me tremendous peace of mind following my divorce and takes care of my returns at a reasonable rate. - Jeff prepares all of our business returns - we have 4 companies and 6 rental properties. He's very intelligent and provides great service.
The NBC handling of George Zimmerman's call to 911 the night of the shooting was most certainly doctored. Which is to say edited audio is cut in the interest of time without changing its meaning. What NBC did was to place parts of the audio together that didn't originally appear together for the expressed purpose of changing the meaning. I will give you that what ABC and CNN did was not doctoring but misreporting what was on the police video, in the case of ABC, and what was on the 911 audio in the case of CNN, for exactly the reason I stated above, i.e. to change the meaning to support the agenda that this was a race-related crime. And the New Black Panther's bounty was in the form of dead or alive, so they were inciting people to kidnap and then kill George Zimmerman. Also, you may convince more people of you view point if you would work more on the presentation of your arguments and less on being insulting to your intended audience.
I would hope truth would triumph, but the politica of the day would convict a potentially innocent man to suppress the emotions of the mob...one life for the greater good, despite the.stupidity or reality..
1) For those comments directed at me, try and re-read the blog with a slightly more objective tone. I never explicitly said the Republicans were a party of racists. I made that a distinct point. And as far as my implications, I tried to punctuate them with a lot of "I don't knows," "ifs," and "maybes." In fact, I said we do not need accusations. 2) However, I am not the first person to suggest that a pattern is emerging within the GOP. Bill Cosby was on CNN today making almost identical points. 3) I did not, actually, start the racism debate. That was a joke-throwback to a previous satire I wrote on abortion. I didn't "start the fire." It's been always burning, since the world's been turning. 4) Speaking of jokes, that whole "I'm a teacher, I don't understand capitalism" thing? That's a joke, too. You know, because we don't get paid a lot? Get it! Slap a knee, everybody. 5) I'm not calling for a McCarthy-esque Congressional Hearing on Racism in the Republican Party. I'm calling for an extended media discussion. We all know Congress is too busy debating steroids in baseball and whether or not college football should have a playoff system.
you are a coward. I have, as you requested, reread your article. You hide behind "plausible liberal deniability" when you say you never "explicitly said the Republicans were a party of racists" but that was the whole, uncut cloth of your article. Yes, you ARE calling for a McCarthy-esque, guilt by association response from the unquestioning liberal, lapdog media. If you do not recognize that fact then you are the problem.
"I'm a little shocked at how mean-spirited some people are sometimes." Funny, coming from someone as mean-spirited as you are where Republicans are concerned.
I really resent people who state that all people with my pigment have racism in them. You know not of what you speak.