Yesterday I saw a post by Ed Asner (Lou Grant) who claimed Hollywood weren't challenging Obama's threats to Syria in case they looked racist. Now here's the best example of many previous of how half or so of mankind has lost its mind in the 21st century while the uninfected look on powerless.
Barack Obama is indeed partly black, no doubt about that. So was Idi Amin and so is Robert Mugabe. So is Herman Cain. Now when Julia Gillard got bollockings for being not female but an absolute total bitch she blamed it on her gender. Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir and Benazir Bhutto however got on with their jobs and were treated with the respect they deserved, even when people disagreed with their policies. Herman Cain is all black, unlike Obama, and Republican. He was popular, honest and decent, and as a result had his character smeared not because he was black but because he was a potential challenge to Obama.
Since when (I'd say the mid 70's) did race and gender been more important than who someone is and what they have done and can do? Should someone's identity be more important than their character and ability, and if so why? I find this one of the many questions without an answer. But where the brains have totally vanished is where apparently normal people only see race and gender and very little else. If a black leader does something wrong then is this less able to challenge than anyone else? Isn't everyone supposed to be equal under the law, and under the left isn't everyone equal? So by favouring ethnic groups and women where is the justice there? Positive discrimination is only positive against the small groups favoured and negative against everyone else, as is negative discrimination positive for a small group, ie there is absolutely no difference between the two is there? If anyone is treated worse then sort it out, but don't raise them above everyone else as some sort of punishment for putting them down originally.
In the end people are people, and picking on the obvious qualities you can see to sort them into favoured categories is no different from any other form of nepotism or at the extreme level apartheid. Does it really make any difference if the victims are white and male or black and female? If someone is favoured then the others are all victims. Switching your discrimination from black to white or female to male is no different and no better but that is exactly what today's left are doing, Labour are now promoting positive ethnic discrimination in the public sector after they brought them here in the first place and most fell to the lower levels by what would normally be called 'the free market system'. Poke around with that and you are throwing stones into the machinery and tying the hands of the economy and society.
If anyone still doesn't get me, I will tell a short story from a recent TV programme. A police car stopped another for doing something dubious and the driver, as around half do, said 'You only stopped me as I'm black' (the race card seems to be one of the most powerful since the Masonic handshake) to which the policeman replied ''Sir, we were behind you and it is dark, we couldn't see who the driver was until you got out'.