Woo Hoo! I finally get to conflate my disdain for Microsoft's Zune player with Newsweek magazine's surreptitiously Lefty racism. God knows how long I've been trying to pull off that demi-hat trick. Now, I'm not trying to imply that Microsoft, the MP3 playing Zune, Bill Gates or even Windows Vista are in any way anti-black.
I'm just saying the Lefty masthead at Newsweek is.
The convenient thing about racism from the right is that it tends to be obvious. Generally it comes at you with a white hood and burning cross while screaming pejoratives. Sure, on occasion it likes to disguise itself in a business suit and blue tie. But the minute it starts spouting euphemisms about states rights and reverse discrimination it's pretty easy to see it for what it is.
It's the soft bigotry of the left that's far more insidious. The back handed pandering which seeks to keep blacks within slave shacks on the Liberal Plantation. It is ever present, but much like Microsoft Zune users, sometimes hard to spot.
However the good folks at Newsweek took a giant leap toward making lefty race baitin' all the more obvious with their woefully antebellum cover story on Barack Obama.
When writing of Obama, as with any legit presidential candidate, there's plenty of true insight to excavate. His phenomenal quarter of fund-raising, his health care plan, his early stand against the war in Iraq...
Instead of reporting in depth on any of the above, Newsweek fired up the way-back machine and took a trip to, oh, Feb of '07 to relive the halcyon days of when liberals -- confronted with their own liberalism -- were just discovering that a black man could be "articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." This among other subtle bigotries from the left I've detail in previous posts.
Newsweek's antiquated piece boils down to an explosive expose that dares to take on "one of the most potent -- and controversial -- questions facing the candidate: is he black enough?"
Potent and controversial to whom? The liberals running Newsweek who would insipidly imply there is one standard of blackness?
To ask if Obama is "black enough" infers -- since Obama is a suit and tie wearing/Ivy league educated brother -- a "full black," a "real" black is just the antipode. And to be anything other than "real" is to therefore be "unreal:" a sellout or a Tom or any of the other invectives used by the soft bigots who are out to corral any person of color who refuses to be defined by someone else's concept of race.
To posit such negatives and pass them off as journalism is shameful.
I do have a fairly note that Newsweek attempts to veil it's prejudice by raising its query through an anecdote involving Cornel West.
Sorry. Doesn't cut it.
Anyone, regardless of the color of their skin or the number of their scholarly degrees, who would even suggest there is a "blackness test" is nothing short of a racist.
Are you hearing me, Cornel? Anyone who'd suggest there is a "blackness test" is a racist.
Well, there is one test (call me a racist): with the war in Iraq, health care, nukes in North Korea and (shortly) Iran -- if the best the masthead at Newsweek can come up is to question the depth of Obama's "blackness..." Gentlemen, he is more than black enough.
He's black enough that it distracts you from true issues.
He's black enough that you feel it necessary to compare "authenticity" within our race.
Although, perhaps I speak too soon. I'm sure the gents at Newsweek will spend equal column inches questioning the "whiteness" of John Edwards or Mike Huckabee or Chris Dodd or Ron Paul et al. I mean, c'mon; blackness could not be as complex as you seem to believe whiteness is simplistic.
But I would offer that blackness is complex only because it is difficult for you to grasp. The difficulty comes from the obvious lack of diversity in the world in which you live.
A little place I call the Liberal Plantation.
I'm sure everybody there enjoys their Zune Players, too.