Obama Proves America Is Still Racist

Ben Shapiro

2/7/2008 3:54:25 PM - Ben Shapiro

Super Tuesday was certainly super for Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama. The less-than-one-term senator proved he was more than a flash in the pan with wins in Alabama, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota and Utah. Obama is a serious challenger for the Democratic nomination.

The media -- and Obama's supporters -- would have us believe that Super Tuesday was super for America. Obama's big showing, we are told, demonstrates that Americans have finally moved beyond the racial divisions of the past.

This is exactly wrong. Obama's big showing demonstrates how far Americans still have to go when it comes to race.

Barack Obama is the Halle Berry of American politics -- he's a pretty, nonthreatening face who happens to be the right color and, therefore, demands our plaudits. Never mind that he was brought up by his white mother, went to a private high school and has spent about as much time facing down serious racism as Mitt Romney. He's got African genes, and we're all supposed to pull the lever for him to prove to ourselves that we're not racists.

Let's not kid ourselves: Obama's candidacy is strictly about his skin color. If Americans were truly ready to move beyond race, they'd take a look at Obama The Candidate rather than Obama The Friendly Black Guy.

And here's what they'd see:

Obama is a candidate whose empty bombast could float a fleet of hot air balloons. "We are more than a collection of Red States and Blue States," Obama spouted on Super Tuesday during his victory speech. "We are, and always will be, the United States of America." This prompted my 14-year-old sister to exclaim, facetiously, "So that's why they call it the United States." Obama is a modern day Warren G. Harding, of whom William McAdoo once said, "His speeches leave the impression of an army of pompous phrases moving over the landscape in search of an idea. Sometimes these meandering words would actually capture a struggling thought and bear it triumphantly a prisoner in their midst until it died of servitude and overwork." The only difference between Harding and Obama is that Obama's speeches never actually capture a struggling thought -- and if they did, they'd have to waterboard it for information. Obama's speechmaking isn't deep. It is profundity for dunces.

Obama is a candidate who knows less about foreign policy than Rick Salomon, who at least knows about Paris. He has suggested unilaterally invading Pakistan while inviting Muslim dictators to a sit-down, no questions asked. He points to the gap between "worlds of plenty and worlds of want" as the source of Islamic terrorism. He states that the real threat to peace in the Middle East isn't Islamic extremism, it's "cynicism." He's Pollyanna on steroids.

Obama is a candidate with the same amount of federal experience as Ken Salazar. Salazar is a Democratic senator from Colorado, elected in 2004. He has actually been involved in major legislation. He won his seat in a heated race -- unlike Obama, who inherited his seat when Republican opponent Jack Ryan imploded due to a sex scandal. You probably haven't heard of Ken Salazar. But you've heard of Barack Obama. That's for one reason and one reason only: Obama's race.

So before Americans punch the ballot for Obama and pat themselves on the back for their racial awareness, let's get one thing straight: It's the soft bigotry of low expectations that's lifting Obama to unprecedented heights. If voters looked realistically at Obama, unblinded by the desperate desire to elect a nonmilitant African-American to the presidency, they'd scoff. And they'd have every right to do so. Obama is utterly unqualified to be president of the United States. If we elect him to the White House based on the misguided desire to feel good about our own broadmindedness -- if we ignore his emptiness in favor of his melanin -- we deserve what we get.