Why Is It Working-Class Whites That the Media Deems "Racist"
Jim Geraghty, writing at National Review Online, notes something that has also bothered me about the press coverage during the Democrat primaries. Black voters are going 90+ % for the black candidate, despite the fact that his opponent Hillary Clinton can hardly be described as unsympathetic to "African-American interests", and it's white working-class voters that get pinned with the "racist" tag?
Geraghty provides some examples from our friends in the MSM:
Thomas Frank, New York Daily News: "With the largest number of remaining delegates now being party insiders, they have to decide if Obama can overcome enough of that antipathy - essentially deciding if enough working-class whites will back away from the black candidate, whether because of the false Muslim rumors, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright flap or old-fashioned racism."How about giving credit to the fact that there may be something other than "racism" to describe the antipathy of people toward a candidate who has been so dismissive of their mores by describing them as "bitter" and "clinging" to religion and guns?
Mary Mitchell, Chicago Sun-Times: "For instance, reported on the New York Times blog on Monday was a piece by a reporter who went to a 'mostly white highly educated, professional . . . politically independent' area and found voters were 'unaffected' by the Wright controversy. But the reporter also found that while supporters of both Clinton and Obama said 'they did not think the Wright episode should change the race' they feared it might in other areas where 'people might be searching for some acceptable explanation for not voting for a black candidate.' That's a truth that many will call a lie."
Al Hunt, Bloomberg News: "There may have been some element of racism among these culturally conservative voters, who support Democrats if they think the politician is strong and empathetic toward their struggles; Obama appeared neither."
Richard Kim, The Nation: "Are white working-class voters really racist? How many and where? If a significant number of them are, should Democrats really court them on the terms of their racism? These are questions worth asking since, apparently, a lot of Democrats think they're valid. But as long as the Clinton campaign continues to code the fact that it is counting on a base of white racist support, we'll never have this conversation."
And if "racism" is to be the all-explaining theory of the Democrat primary, then why is no one questioning the obvious "racism" inherent in Obama's 90+ % support from African-American voters? No other demographic group - including working-class whites - is voting in such numbers for any other candidate.