The Left Is OK With Barack ‘My N—a’ Obama?
The office of president of the United States used to command respect.
At the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner this past Saturday, comedian Larry Wilmore emblazoned the rankest of rank hypocrisy embraced by an American Left that routinely plays the race card whenever anyone dares to challenge their worldview on the subject. In what a hopelessly corrupt media is characterizing as a “tribute” to Barack Obama, Wilmore concluded his 20 minute routine with the following: “Yo Barry, you did it my n—a,” Wilmore gushed while pounding his chest. “You did it.” Obama smiled and pounded his chest in return.
Beginning with the benefit of the doubt, perhaps one might assume this was a moment where Obama didn’t wish to make a scene, and upon further reflection might be willing to chastise Wilmore for his poor choice of words — or the disrespect he evidenced for the presidential office itself, regardless of its occupant.
Forget about it. As White House Spokesman Josh Earnest later explained, Obama “said that he appreciated the spirit and the sentiments that Mr. Wilmore expressed.”
What spirit and sentiments is that? In its “usage alert,” Dictionary.com offers the warning that n—r “is now probably the most offensive word in English,” and that its degree of offensiveness has “increased markedly in recent years.” So much so that it has been virtually obliterated, with the term “N-word” taking its place.
Wilmore’s ostensible out? “Piers Morgan … he quoted me as saying, ‘Yo Barry, you did it my n—r,” Wilmore explained. “That’s horrible. I would never do that. I said n—a.” Wilmore explained the latter is a “term of endearment some black people use” while the former is a grievous racial insult. Really? Nearly all media outlets censor both words, as do we in our humble shop. Moreover, the notion that some words are respectable or affectionate when used by members of one race, but racist invective when used by members of other races, has far outlived its absurd usefulness.
Yet as always, leftists have a rationale for such a grievous double-standard. “Cultural appropriation” is defined as the “adoption or use of elements of one culture by members of a different culture.” The Left considers such appropriation racist when “members of a dominant culture take elements from a culture of people who have been systematically oppressed by that dominant group,” explains columnist Maisha Z. Johnson. In other words, both n—a and n—r are perfectly acceptable when black Americans use them, but “racist” when whites or members of other races “appropriate” them.
Or is that conservative whites? Actor Samuel L. Jackson staunchly defended white Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino’s liberal use of n—r in his movie The Hateful Eight, (and several others as well) deriding people who want to “nitpick this whole n—r thing,” and insisting Tarantino gets a pass for being “authentic.” Jackson added, “Quentin captures the language of who those people are and what their time is.”
What about the fact that it’s 2016 and Wilmore was speaking, not only to a room full of reporters, celebrities and politicians from various races and both political parties, but to Americans nationwide on C-Span? Or that the reaction to his remarks were described by black American April Ryan, Washington bureau chief for the American Urban Radio Networks, as “an eerie, awkward silence and quietness” or the idea that many guests “were appalled,” including black Republicans?
“It’s not the first time in the Monday after the correspondents’ dinner that some people have observed that the comedian at the dinner crossed the line,” Earnest said, galloping to Wilmore’s rescue. “I’m confident that Mr. Wilmore used the word by design. He was seeking to be provocative. But I think any reading of his comments makes it clear he was not using the president as a butt of a joke.”
So calling the president of the United States “my n—a” would only offend if Obama were the butt of the joke? Even racial arsonist Al Sharpton gets it. “I was offended by Larry Wilmore just referring to him with the n-word, I’ve got to say that again,” Sharpton said on his Sunday morning MSNBC show. “I just thought that was so inappropriate, that the stature the president has, and I wouldn’t use the n-word anyway, I just thought that was a bit much.”
Sharpton might not use the n-word now, but he has certainly used it, and other equally derisive slurs, in the past. Nevertheless he is half right. Throughout American history we’ve had presidents with or without stature. But the office itself has always commanded a certain level of respect. In abiding Wilmore’s “comedy,” Obama makes it clear that part of his effort to “fundamentally transform the nation” includes cultivating a disdain for the tradition and respect that office is supposed to engender.
Moreover, in the last seven-plus years Obama and his Department of Justice have made a mockery of race relations in this nation. From its failure to prosecute Black Panthers for intimidating voters in Philadelphia in 2008, through its establishment of the 21st Century Policing Task Force premised on the idea that most white cops maintain racist views, the DOJ has made racial-polarization an integral part of its agenda. When that agenda is coupled with Obama’s determination to weigh in on various controversies, including the Cambridge Police Department’s arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates (“they acted stupidly”), the Ferguson riots (“There’s no excuse for police to use excessive force against peaceful protests”), and the Trayvon Martin case (“If I had a son he would look like Trayvon”), it should surprise no one that Americans’ worries about race relations have hit a new high.
Recently, EPSN not only fired former Major Leaguer Curt Schilling, they “disappeared” him from a documentary about his critical role in helping the Red Sox come back from a three game deficit against the Yankees in the 2004 American League Championship Series (ALCS). All because Schilling espoused politically incorrect (read conservative) viewpoints. By contrast, Wilmore remains firmly ensconced in his position on The Nightly Show at Comedy Central. Furthermore, there will be precious few, if any, calls for his resignation.
Why the glaring difference? “The White House Correspondents Dinner has become a gross and garish display of inside-the-beltway incestuousness” wrote National Review’s Peter Kirsanow — two years ago. “Republicans/conservatives should finally confirm that the gala is nothing more than a Democrat/liberal insiders’ celebration….”
Make that a Democrat/liberal insiders’ celebration where the word “n—a” has become acceptable — as long the “right” person is saying it.
Start a conversation using these share links: