When I saw this story:
Lee Daniels, director and producer of the new film “The Butler,” lashed out on Monday’s Piers Morgan Live at Americans who are “angry that [Obama] is president” and who are “showing their true colors.”
I immediately thought of this one, which will be seen as ‘proof’ that the assertion in the first story is correct:
But does this second story confirm that whites are ‘showing their true colors,’ or does it actually explain the problem because it is telling the truth? Yes, I am suggesting that the perceived increase in racial tension in this nation might not be due to white racism finally showing its true colors, but because black racism is now in the White House and is seeking revenge against not only whites, but this nation, itself.
Now, why would I suggest that the real racism lies with Obama and the people in his administration? Let’s count the reasons we could make this argument:
1 – If all whites were racist, the civil war wouldn’t have been fought, blacks would still be slaves and the Civil rights movement would have never happened, and if it had, it would have failed.
2 – Obama, himself, has made racial slurs toward his own grandmother in his own books.
3 – Obama has called this nation a racist nation, and said that the Constitution should be used to make reparations on an institutional level – such as Obamacare and similar govt. programs (which are usually tailored to favor minorities).
4 – Obama directed Holder (another black) to dismiss the CONVICTION against the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation against whites.
5 – The Obama Administration refused to do anything about the NBPs posting a bounty for Zimmerman – dead or alive.
6 – Obama sided with Martin – the real aggressor in this case – and did so in a manner that was clearly motivated by race.
7 – Obama’s DOJ sent federal employees to advocate against Zimmerman and for Martin – before the trial was even held. This was a racially motivated, govt. sponsored act of obstruction of justice. THIS IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF RACISM and it was conducted by a black administration against a Hispanic who the Administration tried to deem white.
Now, we could go on, there are plenty of examples that, were Obama and his Administration white, would be called ‘proof of racism.’ But this doesn’t fit the narrative that only whites can be racist. There is no political power to be gained by admitting that Obama is a racist, or admitting that he is at least equally culpable in the erosion of race relations.
So, in the end, the assertion in the first story could actually represents confirmation bias because there is plenty of objective reason to believe that the damage to race relations is the result of a racist BLACK President and his racist Administration.
[NOTE: I just covered the racial aspects of the assertion in the first story. I didn’t even hit on the political reasons Americans might be angry with Obama — none of which have anything to do with the color of his skin but with his policies. This is actually another mark in favor of viewing the assertion in the first story as confirmation bias and — possibly — a confirmation bias itself motivated by racism.]