CARROLL: Holder's hot air
By Vincent Carroll, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published February 20, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.
Was Eric Holder in seclusion in 2008? Did the attorney general miss the historic year just gone by in which the role of race in America was dissected, debated and deconstructed at greater length than at any time since the 1960s?
Presumably not, since he's a member of President Barack Obama's Cabinet. Then why suggest we're a "nation of cowards," as he did this week, because we allegedly "do not talk enough with each other about race"?
Most of us certainly don't obsess about race. But if we did, what would Holder have us discuss, pray tell? You can read the full text of the attorney general's gassy speech and hardly glean a clue. And this from a fellow who accuses his fellow citizens of cowardice in confronting reality!
Holder laments our nation's unwillingness to "come to grips with its racial past" and its inability "to contemplate, in a truly meaningful way, the diverse future it is fated to have."
Over and over he urges us "to foster a period of dialogue among the races" and to "imagine if you will situations where people - regardless of their skin color - could confront racial issues freely and without fear."
But he never spells out the racial issues he wants us to confront. If the "the vast majority of Americans are uncomfortable with, and would like to not have to deal with, racial matters," as he maintains, then why couldn't he at least have identified the taboo topics that we're allegedly ducking?
To be sure, he does mention one issue: affirmative action. He says its "debate can and should be nuanced, principled and spirited." But not too principled and spirited, apparently, since he also believes "the conversation that we now engage in as a nation on this and other racial subjects [unspecified, of course] is too often simplistic and left to those on the extremes." So what would Holder make of the spirited assertion that racial preferences are morally wrong, a view that many Americans in fact hold? Too extreme, no doubt.
Holder is probably onto something when he deplores the general lack of detailed knowledge of black history, although he seems unaware of the extent to which black history is in fact included "in the standard curriculum in our schools." But all manner of history is underappreciated these days, not just black history; most college students, for example, don't have to take a single history course.
Perhaps Holder would like to see interracial neighborhood groups study the contributions of blacks to this nation. Is this the "significant interaction" between the races that he envisions on the weekends when, he laments, we go our separate ways?
Who knows? For a speech about cowardice, it wasn't particularly brave.
Double standards
Some birdbrain attended Tuesday's Statehouse rally protesting the national stimulus package while toting an anti-Obama sign in which a large swastika appeared inside the "O." So naturally ProgressNow Colorado, a left-wing agitprop group, put out a press release linking everyone within sight of the birdbrain - including Republican state Sen. Josh Penry, who has actually condemned the sign - with his bizarre sentiments.
The end of a tediously predictable story, right? I thought so, but thanks to Ari Armstrong of freecolorado.com, there's one delicious postscript. It turns out - and this will surprise no one who has lived through the past eight years - that ProgressNow Colorado has a Web site whose blogs and reader comments have included a number of Nazi and fascist references to former President George W. Bush and other conservatives - which Armstrong has listed on his own blog.
What? The group can't be held responsible for every nutty leftist who comments on the site? Maybe not, but it exerts more control over them than the organizers of an open-air political rally have over their crowd.
"We do not need Penry and [columnist Michelle] Malkin to return Colorado to the hate state," Michael Huttner of ProgressNowColorado exclaimed this week, oblivious to the irony.
Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
February 20, 2009
6:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
angka writes:
Awesome, Vince! So event organizers have no obligation to the public image-conscious politicos on stage at the event to...control the signage displayed from the stage? That equates to anonymous blog comments in your mind? Seriously?
Remind me to NEVER let you organize an event I'll be attending, Vince.
February 20, 2009
6:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
44roger writes:
As long as blacks see themselves as victims, there will be little progress. Bill Cosby has the right ideas--
February 20, 2009
7:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
HDoby writes:
Mr. Carroll, please spare us your indignation -- the Nazi reference has been, and will continue to be, abused by lame opinion writers of all stripes.
But speaking of oblivious, are you saying you didn't see the picture of Swastika Guy on the STAGE when Sen. Penry was speaking? Perhaps Jon Caldara should rename his organization the Anarchy Institute since it appears neither he nor anyone else responsible for that circus claim to have any control over matters.
February 20, 2009
7:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
tomcam writes:
Mr. Carroll,
Thank you for keeping this important topic out in the public. Holder's comments have actually in my opinion been a breath of "Fresh Air." I am not ashamed to admit that I have not addressed and confronted race in an open way. How many of us have very close friends of a different race that we share thoughts and discuss race topics with? It's about time that we all embraced this issue in an understanding and compassionate way instead of with negative emotionally charged comments. Wouldn't it be great if all of this didn't matter any more?
February 20, 2009
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Liberalsrising writes:
"black history" is a strawman. I noticed Prager immediately make that same distortion on the radio yesterday. What some whites need to be educated about is how it "feels" to be a black person in the United States.
February 20, 2009
8:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
cowboy69 writes:
Unfortunately, people like Mr. Holder make it more difficult to be open and honest about race because the liberals in this country continue to make everything racial due to political correctness. I would like to see him stand toe to toe with a veteran that has served America honorably so he has the right to make his comments. Will see who the coward is then.
February 20, 2009
8:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
Heather Mac Donald at City Journal wrote an excellent piece on the Holder coward comment: http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0...
February 20, 2009
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hank writes:
So the left is hypocritical when it objects to Nazi references from but the right isn't when it pooh-poohs Nazi references from the right after objecting to Nazi references left?
But Michelle Malkin isn't innocent of making (blatant) Nazi references to Obama herself - see this image she posted on her blog for instance:
http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/mi...
Here's the blog entry:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/24/...
February 20, 2009
9:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Debunkin8tor writes:
"Angka" = the ruling body of the Khmer Rouge, according to Wikipedia. The Khmer Rouge is best known for slaughtering 1.5 million people through execution, torture, starvation and forced labor. No doubt Angka is also a fan of Che Guevara as well.
February 20, 2009
9:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
valwayne writes:
Eric Holder enabled the most corrupt pardon in U.S. history for Marc Rich a billionaire white man who had fled the country to avoid justice after the Clintons collected big money from his ex-wife for the Clinton library. A corrupt pardon for cash donation deal. Now Eric Holder who is the epitome of of what is wrong with the justice system in America wants to call us cowards on race, beef up the civil rights division, and discuss inequities in our justice system. Did white billionaire Marc Rich get better treatment than the average African American man accused of a crime? The answer is yes...the African Americans went to jail/prison while while Eric Holder got the billionaire fugitive white man a pardon. But this is just the opening salvo. Today we are all cowards on race...tomorrow anybody that disagrees or criticizes Obama will be a racist. Its coming!
February 20, 2009
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
SlouchingTowardBoulder writes:
Huttner is an absoulute leper.
February 20, 2009
10:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
djaymick writes:
angka
I read your comment and am amazed at your shortsightedness. During the Democratic primaries, there were two incidents where Obama supporters degraded women. One was at a Hillary rally, where a member of the audience held up a sign that read, "Iron my shirt". The other one was at an Obama rally where supporters wore shirts that read, "Bros before Hos". If you want another example, look at the Presidential primaries and there were shirts at an Obama rally that read, "Sarah Palin is a C**t."
Did President Obama address this? Did he apologize for his followers? If he did (I'm not sure), it was then dismissed as "someone who had their own opinions but don't reflect those of Obama".
Why is it then that when Republicans do the same thing, even apologize for it, they are the ones driving this "hatred"?
February 20, 2009
10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
navymom writes:
It seems strange to me that in the United States we even have a month dedicated to "Black History". Do we have a month dedicated to "White History"? If the intent is to stress the historical importance of an "oppressed minority", do we even have a month dedicated to "Korean American History, Vietnamese American History or Latin American History"? I also do not see a month dedicated to "Women in American History". Yet all I hear in the month of February is "Black" history and how I am supposed to immerse myself in understanding and appreciating the role of "Black" Americans in history. Why is it not called "African American" history, btw. If I as a white person today were to call someone "black", I would be quickly corrected and, by some, condemned for using the color of a person's skin to identify them.
As for Mr. Holder's assertion the segregation outside the workplace needs to end, there is plenty of blame on all sides. Because I have, for most of my adult life, lived and worked in areas that have tended to attract fewer people of color there has not been as much opportunity for me as for those in a larger city. That being said, most of my friendships tend to be developed in my church and my neighborhood. In both of those areas, I don't pay attention to the color of a persons skin. I never have.
I will relate one experience from my life to illustrate voluntary segregation on the other side of the fence. My brother was in the military when he was young. He met and married a "black" woman who was also military. My father did not accept her, and her parents did not accept my brother. My mother (who divorced my father over this and other reasons), sisters and I, on the other hand, embraced her and loved her. They had a son, whom we embraced also. Their marriage did not work out and she severed the relationship with the whole family, not just my brother. We have not seen my nephew, whom I still keep a baby picture of, in over 30 years. She chose to raise him in a community, segregated from his "white" family. We would have continued to fully embrace them and love them, but she did not give us that opportunity.
So instead of the African American or any other group of people celebrating this people's history month or that people's history month, why do we not integrate the history and do away with organizations such as the NAACP that continue to tell us that we are a divided nation. I, for one, believe that we need to just all be Americans.
February 20, 2009
11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
KindaWeak writes:
navymom,
Kudos!!!
You have shown great wisdom in your posting. Indeed we need to move past race and recognize that we are all just people and Americans, each of us unique in so many ways and all of infinite value. Until we do so the forces that want to pit us against each other based upon such superficial differences will continue to weaken us all.
February 20, 2009
11:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
freethinker07 writes:
Before I would have a frank discussion about race, I would like to be assured that I would not face a lawsuit. The last time I tried to have a discussion about race with a black I got sued.
There is a lot more to the story obviously, but there are a lot of people who would be vulnerable to lawsuits if they were frank. There are even more whose future employment or advancement might be jeopardized if they were frank. Even if they said things which had already been said by Bill Cosby and they meant their remarks to be friendly and helpful. There are even more who don't know and don't want to find out the hard way.
Holder will wait a long time for this discussion.
February 20, 2009
12:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
GunnyBob writes:
How dare the Rocky attack a top Obamanista. Did you not receive the missive stating anyone who dares dissent against the Obamessiah or any of his sub-deities shall be deemed a racist, KKK member, bigot, fascist, Nazi and un-American hate monger?
Retract this immediately or the Secret Service will search your home, like the driver in Oklahoma who dared place an anti-Obama sticker on his car.
February 20, 2009
1:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hank writes:
Yeah Gunny, we should reserve words like bigot, fascist and Nazi for folks who call for things like shackling Muslims. Otherwise, they are just plain old everyday hypocrites.
February 20, 2009
1:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
GunnyBob writes:
Jeez, now I have upset Hank, who has managed to bring shackles and Muslims into the fray, whatever that's about.
February 20, 2009
1:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hank writes:
Now what makes you think I'm upset Gunny? Was it your imagination getting the best of you or was it because you couldn't come up with another childish name like "Obamanista" or "Obamessiah "?
February 20, 2009
2:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
P_Denver writes:
" ... come to grips with its racial past"
Does anyone else smell the stench of "repatriations" being included in the next stimulus package?
I love being held accountable for things that happened before I was born.
The past is past. Let it go. Let's talk about NOW. Let's talk about the FUTURE. Let's discuss things we can do something about.
Learn from the past -- don't repeat the mistakes. Hold people accountable for their CURRENT behavior.
February 20, 2009
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
GunnyBob writes:
Someone doesn't like it when an insulting moniker is attached to his god. No sirree, don't like it one little bit.
February 20, 2009
2:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
P_Denver - I agree. My grandparents emigrated to the USA around 1905 or so, both sides of my family being from Hungary and Czechoslovakia. My family has never owned slaves and we were not even here when it all happened. My family were indentured servants and peasants in eastern Europe farming someone else's land and scratching out a subsistence living in an almost feudal existence when slavery was happening here in the US. I am sick and tired of being lumped in by every black that seems to think every European-American owned slaves or had ancestors that did. I am not going to feel guilty for it and I am never going to apologize for it and I am NEVER going to pay for it. You want a race war? You want a revolution in this country? Then try taxing us all with a reparations bill or keep up this white guilt crap on every one that descends from European ancestry. Eric Holder is a liberal idiot who defends terrorists and helps pardon fugitive felons and has no business being the AG. His remarks are assinine.
February 20, 2009
2:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hank writes:
Gunny - Not my god (there goes your imagination again). Besides, such childish insults doesn't bother me in the least, they simply reflect on the lack of maturity of the person that's doing the "attaching".
February 20, 2009
3:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
3SourcesJG writes:
Liberalrising wrote: "What some whites need to be educated about is how it "feels" to be a black person in the United States."
Do you mean how it feels when a black person who tries to earn a living through education and individual improvement is accused of "acting white" by race hustlers like Jesse Jackson?
The lasting division in America is not over race, as AG Holder claimed, but over economic productivity. Now especially, with the historic presidency of Barack Obama, the "racism" charge is merely a distraction from this, the true grievance. Leaders of the new administration have contempt for anyone who can, or does, earn his own living through industriousness and individual productive effort. Accordingly, they act to dramatically expand the confiscation of wealth from producers and to lavish handouts upon the lazy and the corrupt. They are, in the truest sense of the term, looters, and they control the levers of power in the administrative branch of our government. We're about to see if the "separation of powers" model can withstand their assault on the Constitution.
February 20, 2009
3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
jonas writes:
What's to debate? White bad. Is there anything else permitted to be said?
February 20, 2009
4:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
MM2 writes:
Jesus the stupid is strong with this thread. Well, Gunny Bob is here, so that's not a real shock. He sure does do a good job of outwitting the prentend liberals that exist only in his head.
That said, Vince you're smarter than throwing up a tu quoque and washing your hands of the matter. The anti-stimulus protesters knew that ProgressNow would be looking for red meat. They should have had their advance team looking to make sure that this guy had his sign confiscated, replaced or altered.
If the guy refused, then it's the advance team's job to make sure that nobody of any importance gets photographed within a mile of the guy.
The protest organizers dropped the ball. It happens. Pointing to somewhere else where a liberal called Bush a Nazi as a rebuttal is well....roughly as stupid as runing around screaming "Bushitler" or "Obamamessiah".
February 20, 2009
4:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
angka writes:
It's just amazing to me how many ways people can make excuses for event organizers woefully failing at their job.
Offensive sign? Free speech.
Offensive sign ON STAGE with your keynote speakers? Sorry, but Caldara and friends who got the permit had control over that. They screwed up. It happens, but going completely bonkers pointing fingers at everyone else instead of owning up to the mistake is just dumb-assed.
February 20, 2009
5:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
bassman writes:
P myers and Michael can relax. Obama is not dumb enough to even float the idea of reparations. MM2 is correct that these organizers dropped the ball, as is wont to happen at a rally. At an Obama rally someone showed up with a sign saying Clinton was a c. Nobody can seriously claim that this man's rascist sign was approved or condoned by the Independence Institute. 3 sources point was good. Indeed, I imagine Obama himself probably heard the "acting white" comments while working as a lawyer.
Imagine if a McCain Attorney General had made the coward statement in reference to affirmative action. He'd be forced to resign the next day. Considering the role he played in the Rich pardon and defending Columbian and Puerto Rican terrorists, Holder had no business in even being nominated.
February 20, 2009
6:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
GunnyBob writes:
You live on the edge, Vincent. You went after Holder and therefore the Obamessiah in public and in print. You can now forget about getting any of that bailout money.
I take back half the bad stuff I said about you.
February 20, 2009
8:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
Speaking of history: For the last several hundred years in this nation, white people have *reserved* to themselves the right to approve or disapprove remarks about race from colored people. Vincent Carroll shows us that history is alive and well (as it usually is).
February 21, 2009
7:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
angka writes:
Which reminds me, Gunny Bob, how's that campaign to force Muslims to wear GPS tracking devices working out?
Since you're suddenly all concerned about peoples "rights," you know? Anytime this guy shows up in a conversation the level of discourse drops several pegs. Kind of like Jon Caldara himself...
February 21, 2009
11:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
navymom writes:
Anderson, your point?
If your point is that only "white" people approve or disapprove of remarks about race, then you are stating a falsehood. You do not know the skin color of every person on this thread, for instance. I believe that I am the only person on here who actually stated the color of their skin, yet there are probably people of color on here who have disapproved of Mr. Carroll's comments in the article.
Every person, regardless of skin color or ethnic background, "reserves" to him or herself the right to approve or disapprove of remarks and opinions on any subject that is being discussed. If it were not so, then this thread would have never started as would no other threads on any articles. Having an opinion is human nature. If there were no opposing opinions, we would all just be societal automatons, spewing the same rhetoric that is pounded into our heads by whomever holds the power. I, for one, am much more of an independent thinker than that.
Much more important than whether we approve or disapprove, is how we hold the discussion. Are we civil to one another? Do we let the other person have their opinion without berating them? While some on RMN would say that I am not always successful because of my passion on a particular side, I at least strive to hold civil discourse.
The point that many "white" people, especially white males, are trying to make is that we have gone so far in trying to repair the ills of the past generations that while "white" people are far from slaves, they do sometimes feel that they are being put at a disadvantage when preference is shown to people of color in the name of affirmative action. Right or wrong, that is a fact.
On the other hand, I believe, that minorities often feel that they don't get the opportunities to prove themselves in the workplace primarily because of skin color and the perceived inferiority of people of color.
What we need to do is somehow get past looking just at the color of a persons skin, "white or black", and look at the person who lives inside the outer shell. I don't have all the answers, but I will be much less likely to look for those answers if people on threads such as these only want to be on one side of the issue. That isn't aimed at you, but is only a statement for the posters in general.
February 21, 2009
1:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
navymom, my point is that white people sometimes assume a greater privilege to determine if discussions of race are "appropriate" or not.
Sure, everyone has a right to an opinion. I'm just saying that that some people assume a greater right to speak or condemn the speech of others on certain matters. It's part of an assumption of authority. Just as teachers assume authority amongst their students, white people have traditionally assumed authority amongst people of color--as does Vincent Carroll here. His admonishment of a black man (not the least, the US AG) for his remarks about race is not unlike me yelling at a prone, injured football player to "s*ck it up"-- even though I've never played in the NFL.
I'm all for seeing past skin color, but it's insufficient to proclaim that because we hold certain ideals (a "color-blind" society), that racial notions have ceased to exist or to influence us. I firmly believe that our family's histories, and their place within society, have a great deal to do with who we are today.
I leave you with a test I use to gauge these things: Eric Holder's speech on racial cowardice hurts you, me (I'm white), or Mr. Carroll how? Are we going to lose our jobs or something? Is the next black person we meet maybe going to look at us wrong? If my intended sarcasm didn't come screaming through in my original post, you have it now.
February 21, 2009
3:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
navymom writes:
anderson, so are you saying that Mr. Holder as the AG didn't assume the authority to speak on matters of race but Mr. Carroll did? I did not see it that way at all. I simply saw one man critiquing a public officials public statements.
If, as you obviously believe, he was admonishing him on his stand on race, then Mr. Holder was admonishing the entire country in an area that is not really the purview of the office of the Attorney General. The right to assemble with whom one pleases is a constitutional right not to be interfered with by the Attorney General. I am not insinuating that he was trying to interfere with that right, but I will say that he is trying to social engineer through his office by telling the "people" that we are cowards unless we discuss the race issue and integrate outside the workplace.
My family is integrated. I have a biracial nephew, a Japanese niece-in-law, 2 nephews whose family is ethnically Hispanic, a Philippian cousin-in-law, and a Korean cousin-in-law. That being said, when we interact, we don't think of each other as anything but "family".
February 21, 2009
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
Whether Holder's speech was more insightful and appropriate or less (I'm not making a judgment here), an underlying message in this column was a white man asserting the long-held privilege to admonish a black man for speaking out and saying the "wrong" thing about race (i.e., being critical of race relations in America). It happens all the time. White people often get apoplectic when colored people "speak out" (see J. Wright, Jackson, Sharpton for example)(and listen closely for all the colored people who are *still* not in positions of power--the silence is deafening). It's an unwritten rule today that colored people are not to be too critical of white people in general--and it cannot even be implied. Even a peaceful guy like MLK Jr. was widely reviled in his day. Times are changing but some things still remain the same.
February 22, 2009
8:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Just one of may attempts to cause
in fighting. A mere distraction.
February 22, 2009
1:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
JayRoy writes:
anderson,
The "unwritten rule" you referred to, is, today, much more prominent in the opposite direction.
February 22, 2009
1:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
JayRoy writes:
anderson,
I agree that "some things remain the same": of course there still exists some racism from "whites" toward "blacks". I personally observe, however, that the "pendulum" of the segregrated way of thinking certainly has now swung in the opposite direction of what it was in the days of Dr. Martin Luther King.
February 23, 2009
10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
I thought I made my point clear. The unwritten rule is whites asserting their long perceived superiority over colored people. There is no converse rule because colored people (generally speaking) have never held power in this country--and they still don't. It's laughable when white people talk about "black racism" (what you allude to)--as if they've suffered in any meaningful way. Who are you trying to fool?
February 23, 2009
10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
anderson writes:
I don't mean to seem harsh. My point is that I'm not hurt by Holder's speech, or Wright's speech, or any other public proclamation that racism and inequality still exist in this country.
February 24, 2009
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
rjnova writes:
Holder playing the race card after this election makes the old I am a victim routine tiresome. I cannot say much for his bravery when his boss Bubba pardoned fugitive Rich after his wife gave $250K to Clinton’s library. But it is time to drop the victim cries.
Blacks have all the opportunities of every other ethnic group in this country. Their problem is, and many ignore, the 40 years of Great Society welfare system in this country has ruined the black family as an institution. Whenever he chooses to recognize that fact and begins to take on the mission of getting the black community to step forward and take responsibility for changing the cycle of black high school drop-out, out of wedlock babies, single family mothers, drug sales and usage as a life style and all the other self destructive activities of black’s indulgence, that is when he will be doing blacks a service.
This constant drumming that whites are the cause of black problems simply ignores the fact that blacks are the only minority in this country that cannot break out of the government handout and patronage that has proven to be their ruin.