Is Obama Transcending Race?

Is Obama transcending race? Unfortunately, he is not! This was one issue that I thought the Obama Presidency would make some serious progress. I was wrong; the issue of race has been devolving in our country during his tenure. The warning signs were there. Obama’s 20 year relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who preaches hate and conspiracy theories, was a hint about Obama’s theology beliefs. Obama’s relationship with pro Palestinian Rashid Khalidi was yet another warning sign about Obama’s theology. Remember, Obama never had any individual relationships with people supporting the pro Israeli point of view. It seems we can’t go a day without the left claiming that all the anger in our country is because we have a black president. Let’s examine the Obama White House’s record on race.

The beer summit between Obama, Cambridge police office James Crowley, and Harvard professor Louis Gates was held because Obama inserted his foot in his mouth during a press conference. Obama claimed Crowley “acted stupidly” without knowing the details of the case. Thus, Obama invited the men to the White House to settle their differences that both Gates and Obama made about race. How did this overreaction transcend race?

The Department of Justice (DOJ) head by African-American, Eric Holder, has been the Obama White House’s enforcer of racial politics. When the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) was caught red handed trying to aid potential clients in illegal activity, the DOJ looked the other way. ACORN is also being investigated in 14 states for voter fraud and the fact Congress discontinued their funding did little to convince the DOJ to investigate these wrong doings by ACORN. If the National Rifle Association (NRA) had been accused of a similar wrong doing the DOJ would have pursued the case, and rightfully so. How does these inconsistencies transcend race?

The DOJ was quick to file suit against the Arizona immigration law claiming the law violates the Constitution’s supremacy clause. Arizona claims they are only enforcing the federal law. The interesting fact about the DOJ lawsuit is it does not claim any civil rights violations due to profiling concerns. Remember, the White House and other progressives have been claiming all along that the Arizona law violates the civil rights of Hispanics. And what’s worse, if the Arizona law is illegal, then why doesn’t the DOJ file any lawsuits against sanctuary cities and states that are also violating the supremacy clause? The DOJ’s stance is obviously one of supporting pro illegal immigration even if it inconsistent with federal law. How is this transcending race?

The DOJ conveniently dismissed a case against 4 Black Panther Party members who were caught on tape trying to intimidate voters at a Philadelphia precinct during the 2008 election. You can bet if the Ku Klux Klan and neo Nazis were intimidating voters; the DOJ would have rightfully prosecuted the offenders. How is this action transcending race?

The DOJ has also bent over backwards giving Islamic terrorists more rights solely to improve the U.S. – Muslim relationship. At the same time the administration has been placing the entire burden on Middle East peace on Israel to make all the concessions. How is this transcending race?

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) voted to repudiate racist elements within the Tea Party movement. Are there racists within the Tea Party movement? Of course, but it is a very small percentage. Keep in mind, at the same time there are racists within the NAACP. There is always going to be a few fringe fanatics within any group or organization. Did the White House condemn the NAACP for their actions to create more racial tensions in our country? No, they did not. How is this transcending race?

The firing of the Department of Agriculture’s rural division head, Shirley Sherrod was another example of the White House’s knee jerk reaction when it comes to race. Shirley Sherrod was caught on tape talking about an epiphany she had about race. Twenty- Five years ago she changed her views from solely supporting blacks to helping all races. The edited tape made it sound as if Sherrod was only favoring blacks in her job today. The White House, which is under pressure for their blatant color prejudice fired Sherrod immediately. A day later when the full tape was heard the White House apologized and offered Sherrod a new job. How are these reactions without understanding the entire situation transcending race?