The charge that racism drives opposition to Obama is gratuitous demagoguery.

Many Obama supporters charge that whites who oppose Obama are “racist”, such as in this article by leftwing activist Malik Miah:

http://www.GreenLeft.org.au/2008/762/39334

But if Barack Obama loses this election, it won’t be due to race.  It will be because he is perceived as much further to the left than he now presents himself, and because people just don’t know him.  He’s only been on the national scene for 3 short years.

Obama’s skilled oratory is wearing thin, and voters are beginning to look at his record, such as it is.  His associations with convicted Mafia figure Tony Rezko, the Rev. “God d*mn America” Wright, convicted terrorist Bill Ayers, and his financial involvements with sleazy real estate developers, may be just the tip of the iceberg.  Obama won’t lose because he’s black; he’ll lose because people just don’t trust him.

Where does Miah get his figure that 23% of white Americans will not vote for a black man?   According to the Gallop survey, only 6% of white Americans say they are “less likely” to vote for a black man, while 93% of whites say race makes “no difference” or they are “more likely” to vote for a candidate because he is black.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107770/Most-Say-Race-Will-Factor-Their-Presidential-Vote.aspx

Indeed, polls since 1996 have shown that Colin Powell would easily beat all other candidates, of both parties, were he to run for president.

Why would white America readily elect Colin Powell as president but not Obama?  Because Powell is widely perceived as center-right, as not having a hidden radical agenda, and as a familiar figure who has been on the national scene for many years.  This election is not about race; for most Americans, it’s about trustworthiness.

Miah is determined to see “racism” in every aspect of this presidential campaign when it just isn’t there.  Take, for example, McCain’s ad using the images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton.

The ad was meant to compare the celebrity worship of Obama to that of pop-stars.  It was a comment about the blind adulation of fans who are clueless on issues but easily swept by style and clichés.  The ad had no racial message whatsoever.

Miah projects his own ideological racial analysis upon the US presidential election.  Problem is, his racial analysis is based upon so much circular reasoning rather than the real facts of the US electorate in 2008.

Most fair-minded white Americans do not feel compelled to vote for a candidate just because he is black.  We just don't see Mr. Obama as the Second Coming of Christ, and we do see Mr. McCain, for all his faults, as more solid and trustworthy.

Press 1 for McCain in English;
Press 2 por Obama en Espanol.

"Instead of worrying about immigrants learning English -- they'll learn English -- you should make sure your child can speak Spanish, how your child can become bilingual."
-- Barack Hussein Obama, 7/9/08

Just four points here.

* Many/most Spanish immigrants in fact never learn English, and he knows it.  He pays lip-service to  immigrants learning English, but his emphasis is on Americans learning Spanish.

* He wants the U.S. to become a bilingual nation to accommodate the hordes of illegal aliens flooding the fully open borders under his presidency.

* Most Euros speak two languages, their own plus English, because English is the international language.  Spanish is not.  Learning a second language for enrichment is fine, but American kids need to learn their own language first.  Most US 12th graders read and write at 6th grade level.

* McCain was wrong on amnesty, but McCain does support strict border and employer enforcements, and he voted for English as the official language.

Press 1 for McCain in English;

Press 2 por Obama en Espanol.

RE: Denver singer substitutes national anthem

The bottom line is that the singer used stealth and deceit to substitute her version of the national anthem, so shame on her.  She owed it to her sponsors to either be upfront about her plans, or to withdraw from performing.

Having said that, we should note that the words of the hymn, “Lift Every Voice”, are deeply grounded in faith, hope, and love of God and country (see below).  As a Christian (who is white), I’ve always been moved by the third verse especially.

It was composed by the Johnson brothers, and first publicly performed by school children on the occasion of Lincoln’s birthday in 1900.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_Every_Voice_and_Sing

The artistic setting of the hymn to the melody of the “Star Spangled Banner” is not disrespectful or sacrilegious in itself.  However, this rendition would have been better presented at an unofficial occasion -- say in church or at a concert.

“Lift Every Voice” -- original three verses:

I.  Lift ev'ry voice and sing,

'Til earth and heaven ring,

Ring with the harmonies of Liberty;

Let our rejoicing rise

High as the listening skies,

Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.

Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us,

Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us;

Facing the rising sun of our new day begun,

Let us march on 'til victory is won.

II.  Stony the road we trod,

Bitter the chast'ning rod,

Felt in the days when hope unborn had died;

Yet with a steady beat,

Have not our weary feet

Come to the place for which our fathers sighed?

We have come over a way that with tears has been watered,

We have come, treading our path through the blood of the slaughtered,

Out from the gloomy past,

'Til now we stand at last

Where the white gleam of our bright star is cast.

III.  God of our weary years,

God of our silent tears,

Thou who has brought us thus far on the way;

Thou who has by Thy might

Led us into the light,

Keep us forever in the path, we pray.

Lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met Thee,

Lest, our hearts drunk with the wine of the world, we forget Thee;

Shadowed beneath Thy hand,

May we forever stand,

True to our God,

A major expose reveals Obama’s extensive favors for sleazy real estate developers and their paybacks to his campaigns.

The (liberal, pro-Obama) Boston Globe published this investigative report on Friday:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/

“As a state senator, (Obama) coauthored an Illinois law creating ... tax credits for developers. As a US senator, he pressed for increased federal subsidies. And as a presidential candidate, he has campaigned on a promise to create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund that could give developers an estimated $500 million a year.

“A Globe review found that thousands of apartments across Chicago that had been built with local, state, and federal subsidies - including several hundred in Obama's former district - deteriorated so completely that they were no longer habitable.

“Grove Parc and several other prominent failures were developed and managed by Obama's close friends and political supporters.   Those people profited from the subsidies even as many of Obama's constituents suffered. Tenants lost their homes; surrounding neighborhoods were blighted.

“Campaign finance records show that six prominent developers - including Jarrett, Davis, and Rezko - collectively contributed more than $175,000 to Obama's campaigns over the last decade and raised hundreds of thousands more from other donors. Rezko alone raised (another) $200,000, by Obama's own accounting.
 
“One of those contributors, Cecil Butler, controlled Lawndale Restoration, the largest subsidized complex in Chicago, which was seized by the government in 2006 after city inspectors found more than 1,800 code violations.
 
“Butler and Davis did not respond to messages. Rezko is in prison; his lawyer did not respond to inquiries.”

This gives a whole new meaning to Obama’s slogan, ”Yes we can!”