Alec Baldwin — the poster child for racially-obsessed liberals

Alec Baldwin was in the news this morning for having another rage attack on New York’s streets, this one complete with foul racial epithets. The easy line to take with this is that Alec Baldwin is a racist.

I’m not sure it’s quite that simple, though. Instead, I see Baldwin’s problem being one of racial (not racist) obsession. To liberals, everything in their world gets run through a racial prism. Nothing is neutral. It’s either about race or . . . it’s about race.

Even when something couldn’t possibly have anything to do with race (e.g., dog food), the absence of a race discussion is itself racist. After all, there are probably poor children somewhere, who are probably black, who are possibly eating dog food in lieu of human food, almost certainly because of racist Republican economic policies or attacks on welfare.

What this means is that, when a cosseted, undisciplined, rage-filled Progressive gets angry, there is only one way to lash put: In racial terms. Just as a dog’s thoughts are ball, ball, food, ball, food, food, ball, belly rub, nap, ball, food,, the sum total of the Progressive’s thoughts are race, black, white-Hispanic, racism, racist, black, and, when angry the n-word.. Truly, aside from a continuous background loop of “me, me, me” sung by a Hollywood-inspired celestial chorus, the racial soundtrack is the only thing filling Baldwin’s brain.

The problem for all of us, of course, is that too many Americans, both black and non-black, have been taught for the last 40 years that this racial paradigm/prism is the only lens through which to see the world. Until this changes, we will not find common ground, and we will continue to live in a racially-obsessed society, with the worst racists being the ones who obsess most about the subject.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Evil will out sooner or later.

  • Danny Lemieux

    “To liberals, everything in their world gets run through a racial prism. Nothing is neutral. It’s either about race or . . . it’s about race.”
    And that is precisely why they ARE racist.

  • USMaleSF

    America is indeed a race obsessed society. Obama would not be in the White House, twice, were it otherwise. No amount of high-minded conservative hand-wringing (or Rubio worship) will change this. 
    “Racist” and “racism” are terms that can only ever hurt Whites. They have no other meaning and function. Consequently, we should never use them or countenance their use. Pro or con. 
    The special sacredness of Blacks since the 60’s is utterly undeserved, as is the notion that certain words –like the inverse of the Divine Name in Judaism– are so evil as to be unpronounceble. That rule is an exercise in Black psychological dominance. Calling someone a coon or a nigger is just like calling someone a honkey. (Even Christ Rock admitted that niggers ruin everything…for blacks.) A word spoken in anger; nothing special, just because a sacred Black has been insulted.
    To continue to play this race game as the last fifty years has dictated is suicidal for Whites.
    I loathe Mr Baldwin not for his momentary racial feelings under pressure but for his anocranial liberalism.

  • Mike Devx

    Yep, if you’re viewing everything through a “racial prism” – if everything is judged *first* upon the color of your skin – how is that not racist?  It is racist!
     
    This is a “Chicken Little” problem that liberals should take seriously.  There is racism out there, but we’re so used to false accusations of racism that it obscures the real cases.
     
    A few months back, the owner of a restaurant started selling T Shirts with an image on them.  The image was of a large wooden box, tilted up by a stick, with a long string attached to the stick.  On the ground under the box was a taco.  The caption underneath read:  How to catch an illegal immigrant.
     
    I believe he created the t-shirt to protest illegal immigration and make money for his failing business, both.
     
    It was apparently a popular t-Shirt.  But it prompted a lot of cries of racism.  And in this case, the cries of racism were absolutely correct.  But I think a lot of people dismissed them because we’re used to so many Chicken Little cries of racism that just aren’t true.
     
    ps: If you can’t see the racism in that t-shirt, consider different t-shirts:
    – Same box, stick and string, but with a slice of watermelon under it, and the caption: “How to catch a welfare recipient”
    – Same box, stick and string, but a 12 year old boy under it, and the caption: “How to catch a priest”.
     

  • jj

    I dunno, Mike, you bring up an interesting point.  Your last two examples seem to me to work better as samples of cliches than they are of anything else.  (And nobody would be offended by the priest one, either: that’s completely allowed.)  There’s a sad reality about cliches.  Put simply it’s that nothing ever becomes a cliche unless there’s a pretty powerful element of truth in it.  Budding writers are all taught to avoid things like “the sun rose in the east” because it’s a cliche – but you know what?  The goddam thing does rise in the east, and has done so at the dawn of every day there’s ever been.
     
    Is it racist to point out truths, though they may, for one group or another, be rather unfortunate?  Are they not still truths?  “Drunken Irishmen” is a cliche, and I suppose could even be seen as some species of racist – but booze was the solace of one whole hell of a lot of Irish males whose lives were otherwise more or less hopeless for the last couple of centuries.    It’s a cliche – and maybe racist – to link Italians and organized crime, but the Mafia did not get its start and flourish in Australia.  It’s racist to put your French allies in the rear at the approach of any battle, but they haven’t won one since Napoleon died, so is it unfair, or is it a simple acknowledgement of a simple truth: they’re no damn good in a fight?
     
    Things only become cliches because of that element of truth.  If they’re delineated on a racial basis – drunken Irish, crooked Italian – does that racial basis then invalidate the essential grain of truth someone spotted to move the observation into the “cliche” status?  Because it has a racial basis it’s no longer true?
     
    I don’t know.  But I do know we have ourselves in the interesting position of not even being able to address some pretty obvious truths anymore, which is going to make it damned difficult to cut through to the underlying problem and fix it.  It’s a cliche, and Harry Belafonte would have you believe a racist one, to point out that if you remove the black contribution to the US crime statistics, this becomes a pretty seriously peaceful country.  Talking about and trying to address this ought not to be a racial issue, it ought to be a common-sense one – but it isn’t.  If you say that you’re far more likely to be killed in Central Park at midnight by a black guy than a white guy, is it racist?  Not statistically; statistically it’s obvious.  But we have ourselves in a position where you’re not allowed to notice that plain fact.
     
    I thought the t-shirt was pretty funny.  Put a bottle of Black Bush under there, it’ll work for the Irish.  A bottle of Talisker will net you a few Scots.  A carton of Gitanes, you’ll scoop up a Frenchman or two.  Tacos?  Well, our populations descended from the Irish, English, Dutch, Danes, Poles, French, Norwegians, Swedes, and Italians – they’re not going to be too drawn to Tacos, are they?  Racist – or obvious? 

  • Libby

    This prime example of an ugly progressive outburst reminds me of how the Left prides themselves on being the most pure and ardent supporters of minorities and the LGBT community, but they reflexively use the most vile racist and homophobic language to put down people they hate – see Michelle Malkin’s hate mail or the gay slurs hurled at Andrew Breitbart.
    So how do these people like Baldwin get away with this behavior while conservatives are forever being accused of using “code words” and “dog whistles” when they fail to live up to their portrayal as closeted KKK members?

  • Charles Martel

    Box, stick, string over a 2-year supply of Aleve: “How to catch grumpy 64-year-old blog commentators named Charles.”

  • Spartacus

    You give the French too much credit, jj — Napoleon was a Corsican!  ;)