Kathleen Parker on Race

racial In her column, “Let’s stop dealing the race card,”  which appeared in the local Gannett papers today, April 21, Kathleen Parker addresses race in politics. She starts by citing the case of an obscure state Representative, a black Democrat, for labeling other black politicians as Uncle Toms, apparently as an example of playing the “race card.”   She continues by relating Attorney General Holder’s complaint about a lack of civility in politics. Holder speaking about “unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity” asked: “What President has ever had to deal with that kind of treatment?”  Parker then suggests that Holder was referring to racial animosity, although he didn’t say so. She then writes: “Holder cannot pretend that his conduct of the Attorney General’s office is in question only because of his skin color.”  This is an astonishing statement as Holder never did that.  There is a huge difference between personal attacks on a politician and criticism of statements and actions. We might better support or oppose Tom Reed, Martha Robertson, or another based on their record rather than on their race, sex, or party affiliation.

Parker then takes another giant leap of illogic writing” Given that most blacks are Democrats, it is hardly surprising that they support the President. Likewise, it is hardly surprising that Republicans do not.” I find two unwarranted assumptions here:

  • Black Democrats support the President mostly because of their common race.
  • Democrats can be expected to support President Obama and Republicans should not.

First, many black voters supported President Clinton and likely President Obama for the same reason–they agree with them and with the Democratic Party platform. Second, the idea that only those in a presidents party ought to support him is pernicious–Democrats and Republicans alike would do well to support the country’s choice of President even though disagreement over policies may follow party lines. I am not advocating blind support: Democrats and Republicans alike have too often remained passive while a president led the country into trouble that might have been avoided. The idea that Republicans are bound to oppose everything a Democratic President says and does (and vice-versa) is a recipe for stalemate in politics as we have seen in recent years.

Parker concludes by suggesting that “all those suppressed feelings of anger, hurt, and frustration” are the “death rattle of our racist past,” a conclusion not clearly supported by anything that preceded it.  More likely the prevalence of racial divisiveness in politics, lack of progress in school integration, lingering economic injustice, as well as blatant feelings of anger, hurt, and frustration are indications that racial injustice and divisiveness are far from being things of the past.

© William Hungerford – April 2014

 

Advertisements

About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in Congress, Economics, Education, Political, Racism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Kathleen Parker on Race

  1. Anne says:

    Some of the very smartest, and very best, writing on this subject can be found at the Project on Race in Political Communication website (raceproject.org) (and, full disclosure, I have worked as a research assistant for them in the past). I always enjoy the assertion that we in this country are somehow safely post-racial; the facts do not bear that out, of course, any more than the non sequitur logic of a Kathleen Parker does.

    Like

  2. solodm says:

    This has to be the most naive, (or deluded, so I’ll choose naive) piece Ms. Parker has written to date. All she’d need do is visit the Southern Law Center website to do a bit of research. And yes, I do believe a great deal of why Republicans and Conservatives dislike President Obama, is because his policies and successes have shown their’s to be anywhere from ineffectual for problem solving, on though to damaging for the American people. However, Attorney General Holder’s remarks were also on the mark. The hatred for this Black President is evident through out all media, and often stated with not even thinly veiled racial slurs.

    When Ms. Parker chose to write:” Given that most blacks are Democrats, it is hardly surprising that they support the President. Likewise, it is hardly surprising that Republicans do not.” Was she saying is OK for her to play the race card, just no one else? Did she bother to wonder why, if in fact true, “most Blacks are Democrats”?

    Like

  3. whungerford says:

    Parker wrote “The race cards have been flying fast and furious lately;” let’s look at her examples:

    1. Alabama state Rep. Alvin Holmes who called some people Uncle Toms..
    2. Attorney General Holder who complained about incivility.

    That’s all she mentions. I suppose Holmes illustrates that Democrats who happen to be black may be prejudiced. Eric Holder, who played his race card face down if at all, is exploited to smear the Obama Administration.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.