You probably do not have the Flash Player (Get Adobe Flash Player Here) installed for your browser or the video files are misplaced on your server!
The analysis in the video by O'Reilly and his guest, James Taranto ("Why The Left Needs Racism"), from the Wall Street Journal are mostly on point. Decrying those who oppose the leftist-fundamentalist agenda as being "racist" is merely an instantiation of the "keep your adversaries on trial" strategy that they use frequently. Their hope is to move the public focus off of the substantive issues under debate over to a disposition by which their adversary must prove that they are motivated by legitimate points of disagreement rather than base hatred due to race.
Just as with the "soft tissue injury" from historical racial injury where the victim is allowed to tell the society when he is healed - in the case of those who are put on trial their assurances that they are not motivated by race will only be accepted when the "jury" is good and ready to accept that their enemies are not motivated as such. You see - there is no particular advantage for them to yield this point so don't expect it to come.
My challenge as a Black man who does not believe that those who are using my race for their own ideological and political purposes - of which has little to do with our racial advancement - is to take on their claims of racism and not run from the charge. You see to play the "racism tit for tat" game is a flawed strategy. It was ridiculous for those who battled with the question - "Was Rep Cleaver called a 'Nigger' by the Tea Party protesters?" to engage in such a battle - on either side.
Instead I call upon everyone who is serious minded to go beyond the question of what one "ignorant White person" may have said amongst a crowd of angry protesters and instead make note of how much of the "low hanging fruit" of racial intolerance has been removed from the tree of public discourse. Look at how desperate we are right now. No I am not defending the use of such language. I am not falling for feigned outrage.
I believe that Oreilly and Taranto were a bit off on the source of this strategy. It is not the Democratic Party that has hoisted this "all Tea Party protesters and opponents to Obama are racists". This has been crystallized from well known racial political antics that are tried and true. I pointed out last year that with leftist Janeane Garofalo and her claims of racism being the key motivating force behind the opposition to Obama she found the perfect storm. Her real goal is to have leftist policies advanced. With Obama she has the perfect 'ball carrier'. She sees her policies advanced. This time when the right-wing attacked she can redirect their expected opposition away from the leftist-policies themselves and over toward the carrier of them. Once again the opposition is put on the defensive (if they bite) and are forced to make the case as to why they are not "racists". All the while the leftist position is advanced while those who oppose them are on the defense stand.
We also must make special mention of various Black opinion operatives (Eugene Robinson, Roland Martin, Cynthia Tucker, etc). They have nothing to lose if they take the unrepentant position that "YES - the Tea Parties are racist! Here is the pattern of individual behavior that all add up as a criminal indictment, proving my point". Now of course - if someone on the right were to make a profile of the behavior of a "protected class" - making the case that the individual actions of the loosely coupled group in question paints the picture for the whole - they will be accused of profiling. In essence - either you go along with the indictment or you too will be indicted.
How To Thwart The Racism Chasers
Let me be clear - OF COURSE there are some racist Whites disbursed throughout the Tea Party movement that don't like the fact that Barack Obama is a Black man. Find me any group of White folks who don't have a preference for their race. Add the ideological differences to the racial concerns and the confluence of the two make for an exploitable point - both pro and con.
Ultimately only the "Black rank and file" can force the faux claims of racism out of the public debates. This will be done once our people make note of how we are being used and how the results that are obtained after the battle field is cleared don't always translate into our permanent interests when the side that we were made to support "wins". The words "No in our name" needs to be put forth by the masses as certain Charlatans attempt to exploit us as such.
Some people fail to see the cost that are borne by them by running this game. In playing this racial game our communities have been "won" by favorable forces - Black and White. While the people and policies that were popular became entrenched the clear evidence shows that in many cases our permanent interests have not been obtained. The cost is that we did not achieve an EFFECTIVE END and thus our suffering continues.
With discipline we should call for a more transparent engagement where rudimentary and rogue exploitation of race is managed out of the discourse by both sides so that neither side is diverted by well known exploits. This requires both sides to manage their own.
The key flaw in our present political disposition is that the methodology and the vehicle by which we are to obtain our permanent interests are more important than the development of a transparent system of inspection which evaluates if the methodology and the vehicle in common use are EFFECTIVE, changing them when necessary. As we have fundamentalists entrenched within our core consciousness their fixation on the methodology and vehicle will have them to look beyond the domain of their previous "victor" where they now stand as the establishment and instead expand outward, looking for a new battlefield by which they can confront their adversary.
Once the Black community makes note that our enemy has no particular skin color or ideology then we won't be as susceptible to being used as we are today.