Two Top Columnists Question Obama's DNA and "Full-blooded" Americanism

Liberal bloggers and commenters at The Washington Post op-ed section are rightly criticizing a column this week by syndicated scribe Kathleen Parker that questions Barack Obama's "deep-seated" Americanism. But she is only following the footsteps of Peggy Noonan of the Wall Street Journal who raised similar issues three weeks ago -- and was praised by NBC's Brian Williams for a "Pulitzer" worthy effort.

Noonan wrote then:

Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama's problem. America is Mr. Obama's problem...[H]as he ever gotten misty-eyed over... the Wright Brothers and what kind of country allowed them to go off on their own and change everything? How about D-Day, or George Washington, or Henry Ford, or the losers and brigands who flocked to Sutter's Mill, who pushed their way west because there was gold in them thar hills?

Henry Ford was a vicious anti-Semite, but no matter. For Noonan continued:

John McCain carries it in his bones. Mr. McCain learned it in school, in the Naval Academy, and, literally, at grandpa's knee....

Mr. Obama? What does he think about all that history? Which is another way of saying: What does he think of America? That's why people talk about the flag pin absent from the lapel. They wonder if it means something. Not that the presence of the pin proves love of country -- any cynic can wear a pin, and many cynics do. But what about Obama and America? Who would have taught him to love it, and what did he learn was lovable, and what does he think about it all?...

[N]o one is questioning his patriotism, they're questioning its content, its fullness.

No one? And surely not Peggy Noonan. And, of course, Obama has spoken about why he loves American often and at great length, if Noonan might have noticed if she was paying attention.

Now, Kathleen Parker, in contrast, used the words of another to set forth her central premise. At least this time she didn't quote someone who suggested that certain liberals be taken out and shot, as she did in a column back in 2003.

She opened this week's column (she is published in dozens of papers) by quoting 24-year-old Josh Fry of West Virginia who said he backed John McCain over Barack Obama: "His feelings aren't racist, he explained. He would just be more comfortable with 'someone who is a full-blooded American as president.'"

We don't know Mr. Fry, but polls did show that an extraordinarily high number of voters in the recent Democratic primary in West Virginia did -- privately -- admit that race had an awful lot to do with their vote.

But Parker assured us, again, that her own views had nothing to do with race:

Full-bloodedness is an old coin that's gaining currency in the new American realm. Meaning: Politics may no longer be so much about race and gender as about heritage, core values, and made-in-America. Just as we once and still have a cultural divide in this country, we now have a patriot divide.

Who 'gets' America? And who doesn't?...It's about blood equity, heritage and commitment to hard-won American values. And roots.

Some run deeper than others and therein lies the truth of Josh Fry's political sense. In a country that is rapidly changing demographically -- and where new neighbors may have arrived last year, not last century -- there is a very real sense that once-upon-a-time America is getting lost in the dash to diversity.

We love to boast that we are a nation of immigrants -- and we are. But there's a different sense of America among those who trace their bloodlines back through generations of sacrifice.

Parker, of course, ignores the fact that Obama, in fact, is half-white, is related (god help us) to Dick Cheney, and can trace his family back as far as McCain in America -- to George Washington, even. And speaking of "generations of sacrifice": Obama's grandfather fought in World War II.

Those fine small-town Americans may not know any of that -- and Parker sure doesn't remind them. "What they know," she relates, "is that their forefathers fought and died for an America that has worked pretty well for more than 200 years. What they sense is that their heritage is being swept under the carpet while multiculturalism becomes the new national narrative. And they fear what else might get lost in the remodeling of America."

Even Hillary Clinton has "figured it out," Parker writes. Her "own DNA is cobbled with many of the same values that rural and small-town Americans cling to. She understands viscerally what Obama has to study."

After noting other true American values such as easy gun ownership, Parker concludes, "Full-blooded Americans get this. Those who hope to lead the nation better get it soon." Of course, the only half-white and half-native Obama is not "full-blooded." Get it?

As for Parker's support for serve-your-country Americanism, few may remember her 2003 column that attacked Jessica Lynch, another West Virginian, and one who nearly lost her life for the U.S. in Iraq. "What the hell was Jessica Lynch doing in the U.S. Army?" Parker asked.

"Regardless of what did or didn't happen over there, Lynch's book, movie and notoriety are not wasted, but offer a cautionary tale: A 5-foot-4-inch, 100-pound woman has no place in a war zone nor, arguably, in the military.

"The feminist argument that women can do anything men can do is so absurd that it seems unworthy of debate. That some women are as able as some men in some circumstances hardly constitutes a defense for 'girling' down our military - and putting men at greater risk - so that the Jessica Lynches can become kindergarten teachers.

"Lynch is not so much 'a symbol of Bush administration propaganda,' as Frank Rich wrote in The New York Times, as she is a victim of the PC military career myth sold to young women through feminist propaganda."

Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Fails on Iraq. It has been hailed by Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald and others, and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen. Mitchell is editor of Editor & Publisher.

Comments

[CarlyCorday]

"[H]as he ever gotten misty-eyed over... the Wright Brothers and what kind of country allowed them to go off on their own and change everything? How about D-Day, or George Washington, or Henry Ford, or the losers and brigands who flocked to Sutter's Mill, who pushed their way west because there was gold in them thar hills?"

I'm an ex-repug, my paternal granny was D.A.R., I'm so much N.A. on both sides that we can't settle as to which Indian tribe of the many. I'm a "white" Anglo-Saxon Protestant at the far end of middle age, mother of 5, grandmother of 10, daughter of a WW2 vet, granddaughter of a WW1 vet, mother of a soldier, with NO immigrant ancestors, strictly pioneer stock...and none of these things make me misty-eyed! GRRR! Gold in them thar (native Sioux) hills? Henry Ford? Who gets misty-eyed over that?

So I guess in conclusion: Any "American" with Native ancestry isn't "American" the way "real Americans" are, cuz, I mean, how COULD you be? So don't run for high office, the "what gets you misty test" officially bans you from our conservative white majority of hearts.

You too, descendants of African slaves. This is it. The verdict is in.

[tedbear]

I don't think being "full blooded American" is what is being discussed here. I think it is being "full blooded white." There will always be ignorant, fearful people, the question is: should so-called journalists twist the truth to this extent.

[InDaZone]

My mom is an immigrant from Korea. I joined the ARMY after 9-11.... but I guess I couldn't possibly love this country as much as a "full blooded American".... whatever that means.

These people that want to tout their DNA as proof of how American they are do not understand the ideas or principles on which this country was founded.

[CarlyCorday]

InDaZone, please do not listen to this wild invention of one tiny segment of the "press"...please ignore this cooked up tripe! NOBODY thinks this way except a wee minority of soon-to-die out narcissists with nothing on God's earth to be proud of, so they jump on racial pride, false nationalism, and good old Crucify-Je­sus-Every-­Day xenophobia, proving themselves as useless, toxic, and destructive to mankind as all the [forbidden word deleted] collaborators of genetrations past.

[lorca1986]

I ask, can these two get any more stupid? My grandfather on my mother's side was born in Italy so does that make me only partly American? How did these two ever get jobs being "news journalists?"

[bethinCary]

Sorr-but I've never gotten misty-eyed over those things either...
I don't see it as the decision of a couple of columnists to tell me what I should get misty-eyed vover either.
I respect the fact that all people are different and have different experiences--so there is no STANDARD for what moves everyone that can be measured.

For the record though I can just tell you..
I get mistyeyed over the fact that men & women of this country are having thier youth-thier dreams-robbed of them by an unjust/imp­erialisiti­c war.
I get mistyeyed over ignoring the veterans of this war---and those coming home that will effect a generation of this country with PTSD, missing limbs...
I get mistyeyed over the fact that people are ignorant and ideologic enough to just hand over thier own civil liberties to a President and party that cannot be trusted to do what is best for me or the country as a whole...
I get misty-eyed over thinking that people of this country have not even attempted to find their own moral compass between the Bush/GOP framed ideology of right and wrong (thinking they have the right to set the standard for morals) --they don't rely on thier own gut instincts or curiousity to seek the truth over just buying talking points.thier own moral compasses.It's a materialistic party willing to sell everyones' soul down the river to achieve thier own capitalistic means.

[CarlyCorday]

Me too, bethinCary! I'm too busy sobbing aloud and closing windows so my neighbors won't think I need help, to sit around getting misty-eyed over Henry [deleted] Ford and the [deleted] Wright Brothers. This article has damaged my warm fuzzy feelings for Orville and his sib. This article scares me to death. It shows me there's something coming that I didn't think could happen ever again, at least not here. Something so bad that there really might be no hope.

[jimmyaj]

"...their forefathers fought and died for an America that has worked pretty well for more than 200 years."

What drivel... sometimes it sort of worked, once in a while in the last 200 years. And it has fallen apart in the last thirty.

[idest]

Exactly jimmyaj! And sometimes it didn't work at all...see also THE CIVIL WAR

[valkyrie607]

I'm way more cynical about America than Obama could ever be (he is running for office, after all), and I'm related to frikkin' Willam Bradford. You know, the Mayflower dude.

What load of horse puckey.

[LeaveArtieAlone]

Parker and Noonan are either writing a satirical article or they are loony.
Will future presidents have to take a lineage test from this point forward? What will be the requirements? Do we now tell naturalized citizens “gee sorry, you are a second class citizen”? Do we downgrade people who were born here that “oh sorry your parent(s) is from another country so you are not as important as the rest of us”?

BO was a threat to the Republicans from day one! They transported Alan Keys to Chicago to run a campaign based on BO’s father being from Africa because (in the Republicans’ mind) BO could not understand the AA’s history. AK lost. Stupid is as stupid does and no one fell for it, however, I am confounded by the constant test BO must be placed under. These tests of lineage, OJ, and rappers, is he black enough, is he white enough, is he man enough, is he enough of a feminist? (in the book) BO has had to deal with these kinds of severe scrutiny in his public and private life and has come out a winner! Wimpy, I think NOT!!! How many of us could deal with this constant pressure to be everything to everyone all the time and continue to WANT to work for change and be for the people? Optimistic, bright, dreamer and gutsy guy! Yes we can!

[Citizenofreality]

I would match up my own American pedigree against the pedigrees of these two ridiculous women any day. I'm proud of my American heritage, but I'm equally proud of the fact that my mother was a naturalized citizen and that she embodied the spirit of the "full blooded American" as much as my father whose birthright it was.

[MRMRSP]

WHAT MAKES A PERSON A "FULL-BLOODED" AMERICAN???
SINCE MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN MY "BLOODLINE", SOME 200 YEARS OR MORE AGO, [AND I WOULD THINK IN OTHERS' FAMILIES TOO] WERE NOT BORN HERE, WOULD THAT MAKE ME AND MY FAMILY "PART-AMERICAN" ???
ps: I WAS BORN IN CHICAGO, IN 1958

[AmandaRuth]

jesus, peggy and kathleen, just say white is right and get it over with. So many words, such little minds.

[TomAmitai]

Do Parker and Noonan think "a sense of America" is a genetically heritable trait? Do they believe in Lysenkoism? Do they have any shame?

[tea in the harbor]

You have got to be kidding. People who died hundreds of years ago are relevant to this election in some moron's mind? There was once a science that determined peoples likely criminal behavior by the shape, size, and texture of their ears, perhaps that should be resurrected as well. Insane ramblings such as this are proof that evolution is not linear, but not that it doesn't happen.
I have ancestors who signed the Declaration of Independence, I also have some who were rightly hanged, so which am I? If memory were to carry in bloodlines we would all be hopeless schizophrenics!

[yhgtup]

It's awful, people like these two women have the advantage of the press to express their personal political agendas. The media, the Clinton campaign, the Republicans, all thought Rev Wright would be the end for Barack Obama. It wasn't! Now, these same foes are trying to question his "americanism". He##, Barack can trace his ancestry further back than I can, and I'm a white country gal from kentucky! Everyone who is surprised at Brian Williams for considering this trash "Pulitizer" worthy, go to [e-mail] to let him know.

[Johnjlws]

HuffPost's Pick

There’s no simple “John Wayne Green Beret in Vietnam” definition of what constitutes this land and her people.

Far too often, for far too long, however, we’ve allowed a few to define us by our differences. Joe McCarthy strove to eliminate communists by accentuating our differences. Not this time, Joe. Not this year, Joe.

Ask an American Indian, ask a Japanese American, ask an African American ask an Hispanic American “what is America?” and the answer of what is America may be far different than a tear-filled recounting of the “massacre” at the Little Big Horn, or an equally heart-felt rendition of the “brave patriots who made the ultimate sacrifice at the Alamo.”

Obama thinks differently because he is different. And, if he doesn’t “tear up” over D-Day I’m not sure that’s a bad thing. I believe he “tears up” over a burning desire to insure there is never again another one. I think he “tears up” when We the People allow our President to act as king and suspend civil rights and discard our Constitution.

America is not a flag, it’s not an event, it’s not a song. That’s what Obama gets, that’s what he’s shown to us this year, that’s what George Bush and John McCain will never understand and that's why the politics of fear and the campaigns of smear won't work. Not this time. Not this year.

[mlambert890]

Not surprising that this is a "HuffPo pick". Unfortunately, as usual, it does Obama a disservice.

Rather than essentially agree with the smear piece being covered here and then rationalize why its ok, how about just staying silent and allowing Barack to speak for himself?

The essence of this post is that its just fine for Barack to not take pride in the USA because the USA is a horrible country. After all, there are two sides to every story and the side that paints the USA as being even sympathetic, is simply wrong. Nothing but shame is a worthy feeling as a citizen of the USA.

The problem here is that BARACK NEVER SAID ANY OF THAT. I REALLY wish "supporters" of Barack like this would STOP defining him according to what *they* want him to be. He is not your apologist hero despising all things American.

It seems that the smear merchants and the farthest left wingers are almost in league. BOTH want to define Barack as some anti-American radical who wants to wipe away the traditions of the USA and call its entire history into question. The only difference is that the right fear this and the left crave it.

The reality is that Barack doesnt actually feel this way and is merely being coopted by both sides to suit their own extremist ends.

[memphispaul]

Well, what do you know.
A citizen that misses the boat by a wider margin than either Parker or Noonan.
Another lost citizen subsisting upon the fragments and shards of our beloved republic.

[Johnjlws]

Since I can’t speak for Barack (duh) I hesitate to suggest what I think he might think, sort of like you did in your response “reality is that Barack doesnt [sic] actually feel this way and is merely being coopted [sic] by both sides to suit their own extremist ends.” Actually I believe (note, for the slower amongst us, this is my belief and is not the Obamas’) the Obamas care very deeply for our country as do I. What I also know is that if you criticized the war in the last 5 years, you were criticizing the troops as you weren’t really “American;” you were defined as a “tarrarist sympathizer” who was too stupid to know that if we didn’t “fight them over there, we’d fight them over here;” you weren’t really an American if you criticized the stupidity that has defined this President’s and John McCain’s blindness toward the complexities of the Middle East.

I believe dissent is most American, the most American thing we can do. To march in goosestep with the “leaders” is to perform a severe disservice to our union. I dissent. I admit we’re not a perfect nation. We have a ways to go, but I also believe, too, we’re one of possibly only a handful of countries on earth currently with the capacity to get there. Hopefully President Obama can lead us in a direction more conducive to our vision and more directed toward our immense possibility because McCain certainly cannot.