The famous bridge seems to have collapsed
by http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=554
Most of us http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=3216’s mind. We now know about his policies toward European Americans (more LBJ-syle set-asides, affirmative action, and quotas), but he has also provided us with a window into his mind about how he views us.
TAKING OFFENSE VERSUS ANALYZING THE SPEAKER’S MIND
The Hannitys and Limbaughs and O’Reillys seem unable to discuss Obama’s willingness to label and describe us without getting tangled up in the concept of “giving offense.” Their lack of intellectual acuity doesn’t speak well for us.
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=788; and when to claim “I’m so afraid!” in public discourse.Yes, dear reader, the “spontaneous” outbursts about offense are almost always fraudulent, but reporters who are in on the secret make a great to-do about minority claims of offense, frankly, as part of the campaign of defamation against the diverse European American peoples.
As sensible adults, we diverse white American peoples don’t claim offense, but we do find speech that denigrates, stereotypes, and uses code words or phrases worthy of analysis to determine the mind of the speaker.
So let’s take a look at Obama’s mind.
ACTING WHITE
Obama made these stereotypical code words (“acting white”) part of his famous July 27, 2004 Democratic Convention speech. He claimed that the context was when some black American students mock more studious black American students. And he even remarked in his speech that this was a slander! But he neglected to speak out against the way these code words mocked and denigrated diverse white Americans, smothered our diversity, tended to divide our nation on a racial basis, and implicitly claimed that African Americans had the right to convert our skin color into a remarkably unpleasant slur.
That Obama would arrogantly use these stereotypical code words in public was telling, but his high-handed refusal to apologize for using them was unforgivable. Imagine a European American having to define or explain an anti-black slur in public. We may be sure that an apology for even speaking the term would be called for, notwithstanding that the term may be in common usage within the black American community. Blue-collar and white-collar workers have lost employment for failing to conform to this multicultural rule. Should we grant Obama an exemption? Resisting Defamation says we should not excuse Obama’s use of “acting white” without an apology because it shows an underlying claim to supremacy on Obama’s part, the kind of supremacy that claims the right to name, label, describe, or define the other.
In short, he has abandoned any effort to promote a slur-free society. Tell us again just how he bridges the black-white gap?
WHITE RESENTMENTS
Obama memorialized this arrogant description (“white resentments”) of the diverse white American peoples’ feelings and emotions in this multicultural society in his March 19, 2008, speech on race. Once again we see his underlying claim to supremacy, the kind that claims the right to describe and define the other. As code words, they are also an attempt to smother our diversity, to name our feelings, to mock legitimate emotional responses, and to trivialize the social and economic disadvantages placed in the way of the past generation of the diverse white American peoples.
Once again, he has failed to make any effort to promote a slur-free society. What is that gap he wants to bridge again?
TYPICAL WHITE PERSON
Obama used this code phrase during a radio interview on March 20, 2008, in his shocking reference to his grandmother. (He had “thrown her under the bus” in his March 19, 2008, speech on race in an unforgivable way already. Poor grandmother, to be mocked by her grandson. There is something of the King Lear and post-flood Noah narratives in his disgusting and loathsome reference to his grandmother.)
The notion of “typical white person” is another effort to http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=376 diverse white Americans, to smother our diversity, to divide the nation on a racial basis, and to use a formulation that has long since been identified as an unacceptable way to describe people in the African American, Asian American, and Latino American demographics. Try using “typical black person,” “typical Asian person,” or “typical Latino person” in public discourse and watch the metaphorical pitchforks and torches advance, double-time, toward your person, your family, your home, and your employment. Of course, Obama knows that this formulation is inappropriate and arrogant. His sense of supremacy, however, tells him that he is entitled to use this code phrase without social or political harm to himself.
And once again, he fails to promote a slur-free society. The famous bridge seems to have collapsed.
THE INDICTMENT
European Americans do not take offense at Obama’s rude and arrogant naming and describing code phrases.
But we do indict him for displaying these disturbing characteristics:
1) His claim to supremacy, the claim that gives him the right to name, label, define, and describe the other.
2) His arrogance that works in tandem with his claim to supremacy.
3) His willingness to smother the diversity of the very diverse white American peoples.
4) His claim to have insight into a uniform and non-diverse emotional life of European Americans, a state of resentment.
5) His willingness to use language that divides the nation, not unifies it.
CONCLUSION
These five charges, taken together, demonstrate the state of Obama’s mind toward European Americans. Taken together with the three code words and phrases, we find him disqualified him from posing as a unifier, a bridger, an innovator, or a change agent.
http://www.ResistingDefamation.org this important site