Sanctimonious Stone Throwers

November 13, 2008

God bless Sarah Palin, and shame on elitists from both sides of the aisle who have denigrated, demonized and dissed her. I don’t care how many “smartest people in the room” types offer pseudo-sophisticated analyses to prove she was a drag on the GOP presidential ticket. They are all manifestly and embarrassingly wrong — and woefully out of touch — which is par for the course for elitists.

Speaking of elitists, it’s time to address their contempt for rural and southern America, particularly their ongoing smear of the South (and, truth be told, rank-and-file conservative Republicans) as racist.

For all the accolades Barack Obama is receiving, he should acknowledge a bit of egg on his face for invoking race with his failed prediction that his opponents would play the race card. “They’re going to try to … make you scared of me,” he said. “You know, ‘He’s not patriotic enough; he’s got a funny name.’ You know, ‘He doesn’t look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills.”

Then there was Newsweek’s poster boy for liberal smugness, Jonathan Alter, hypothecating a scenario in which Obama could lose because of racism. Alter said the following factors would have contributed:

–“Erosion in the critical I-4 corridor near Tampa and in the Panhandle, where the astonishing Republican margins among whites could be attributed only to race.”

–“The transformation of the northern part of (Virginia) couldn’t overcome a huge McCain margin among whites farther south. They weren’t the racists of their parents’ generation, but they weren’t quite ready to vote for the unthinkable, either.”

Alter then cited an earlier Newsweek story, which asked, “Is America Ready (for a black president)?” “The answer: only if Obama proved close to a flawless candidate, and even then, we won’t know for sure until Election Day. That doesn’t mean Obama lost because all, or even most, McCain voters allowed race to be a factor. But enough did to change the outcome.”

While Alter said he didn’t think his scenario would play out, it doesn’t excuse his presumptuous, unfair and erroneous assessment of people he doesn’t know.

But Alter’s piece was no more offensive than a postelection story by The New York Times’ Adam Nossiter, in which Nossiter echoed Obama’s comments about rural America and some people’s discomfort with his looks and name (read: race).

Nossiter wrote: “Fear of the politician with the unusual name and look did not end with last Tuesday’s vote in this rural red swatch where buck heads and rifles hang on the wall. This corner of the Deep South still resonates with negative feelings about the race of President-elect Barack Obama.”

But the South, gloated Nossiter, is no longer going to be a major factor in presidential politics because parts of the “‘suburban South’ … have experienced an influx of better educated and more prosperous voters in recent years.” Southern counties voting more Republican this year, he said, “tended to be poorer, less educated and whiter,” as they have been “rural and isolated (and) less exposed to diversity, educational achievement and economic progress.” According to the omniscient Nossiter, “Mr. Obama’s race appears to have been the critical deciding factor in pushing ever greater numbers of white Southerners away from the Democrats.”

Nossiter cited one political analyst saying “there’s no other explanation than race” for Obama receiving a smaller percentage of the Alabama white vote than John Kerry did in 2004.

Oh? How about reasonable anxiety about Obama’s alliances and gaps in his biography, not to mention that he made the mistake of revealing his socialism and contempt for rural, Bible- and gun-toting Americans when away from his teleprompter?

One might think the liberals’ persistent demagoguery on race mostly for partisan gain would subside with the election of Barack Obama, but one would be wrong.

Prescient commentators predicted that if Obama won, there would be no letting up. They speculated that charges of racism might even escalate, as an emboldened left would begin an all-out war against conservative talk radio.

Lo and behold, before the Electoral College has even convened to formalize Obama’s victory, the slanderous group e-mails have begun. I personally received a number of them today, one of which said conservative talk radio is “‘All Hate All The Time’ — racist, homophobic, sexist.”

Don’t think they aren’t methodically laying a foundation to strip conservative America of its most powerful First Amendment outlet, talk radio, so they can restore their coveted liberal media monopoly.

There’s apparently no limit to the shameless tactics of those willing to use false and divisive charges of racism to vilify an entire group of people (which, ironically, is the pernicious thought process inherent in racism) who are probably truer to racial colorblindness than their sanctimonious accusers.