|
|
#7
03-19-2008, 10:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Why Obama Talks of Black “Anger” But White “Resentment”
[Marcus Epstein] During his masterful speech at the 1992 John Randolph Club, the late Murray Rothbard observed: Anger by the good guys, the accredited victim groups, is designated as “rage,” which is somehow noble…On the other hand, anger by designated oppressor groups is not called “rage,” but “resentment“: which conjures up evil little figures, envious of their betters, skulking around the edges of the night. Obama’s speech today did not directly speak about “rage”—just “anger”—but only with whites did he mention “resentment.” “Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren’t always expressed in polite company.” “Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments” Obama said the “anger” by blacks may be “counterproductive,” but he presents its as completely legitimate. He makes it clear that he thinks most black dysfunction is largely—though not solely—rooted in the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. In contrast, while Obama tried to be conciliatory to white “resentments” by “recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns,” the only “legitimate” concerns he recognizes are economic problems such as healthcare and outsourced jobs—which he sees as the root causes. Illegitimate concerns are “blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally.” As Steve Sailer noted, Obama had to deal today both with Wright’s racial and his leftist demagoguery. The second, at least, remains unrepudiated. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4rk8w_newt_news 
|
|
|
Threaded Mode