The list of questionable criticisms, all politically motivated is fairly long with the President. This is not uncommon, all Presidents are criticized after all.
But what is fair? Politics is a contact sport, not for the faint hearted. In reviewing the Civil War, one only has to look at the political cartoons of Thomas Nanst to realize demonizing a political opponent is nothing new. Lincoln was depicted as the devil, as an idiot, as practically everything negative; and this was by northern critics. The souths critics were even worse, more racist, more aggressive and hateful.
So, I reviewed in several sources, the political criticism of the past president, George W. Bush.
I found plenty, most issue oriented: the War in Iraq, not finding WMDs, the economy, the famous mis-statements of Bush, the I.Q. issue, etc.
Most of these criticisms came from the Democrats and the political left of course. And they were pretty hard hitting.
What I did not find were any references to where President Bush was born, where or if he went to college, criticisms of his parentage, and criticisms of his ethnicity.
These are the basis of many of the criticisms of President Obama today.
There is plenty of political barbs, aimed at the Affordable Care Act, the economy; etc.
But the core of the criticisms are more personal, more questioning the basic character and core values of the President.
In fact, they resemble the criticisms of Lincoln in their ferocity.
Now, as most of you I hope remember, the core of criticisms of Lincoln came from "copperheads" (northerners sympathetic to the south) or from confederates. This would seem understandable, since the nation was in a Civil War.
And fueling this was the core reason for the Civil War, slavery. And behind that issue, lurked a deep racism, born of a need to justify enslaving over two million people, after kidnapping them from their African homes. Slaveowners developed a justification for a practice that is a crime in most of the world today: Africans were inferior, non-humans, who were bred to work and nothing more.
So, racism behind the criticism of Lincoln; just as it lies behind the criticism of President Obama.
Now this is not to say, those who oppose the ACA are racists. Far from it. However, the Birther Movement, that will not go away, is racist, claiming the President was really born in Africa, not in Hawaii as overwhelming evident shows.
And it goes downhill from there. Pundits on Fox News, make snide remarks related to race all the time about the President and his wife. These are allegedly "political criticism" and are justified in their ferocity by the criticism liberals made of President George W. Bush.
But a review of that criticism does not bear this pay back out. In all but the I.Q. issue, which facts showed Bush to be actually above average in intellect, the vast majority of criticisms were issue oriented.
The criticisms of President Obama are different. The birther issue, is a non-issue, meant to promote the African part of African American that the President (being from an African and American marriage) most exemplifies. The cartoons on the internet, that put the President in watermelon patches, chicken eating "negroes"; etc., are still up, even though the election is past.
Again, the racism that motivated the Civil War viscous depictions of Lincoln come to mind.
America had a real chance when President Obama, a Harvard educated person of remarkable intellectual status was elected to show it had shed the racism that has dogged it for hundreds of years. Political criticism was to be expected given the deep ideological divide in the country today.
Unfortunately, Conservatives (not all but many) have failed that test, and almost by some kind of inherent racist habit, have resorted to criticisms that are at core racist, and eerily reminiscent of the attacks on Lincoln.
The conflict that spawned those criticisms killed over 600 million Americans, and dogs this nation to this day.
I would suggest that we all look deep into our souls, and stop it!
No comments:
Post a Comment