Maureen Dowd Plays the Race Card

By inference, Maureen Dowd implies that all conservative African-Americans are Uncle Toms

Maureen Dowd by Fred R. Conrad, The New York Times

In an column published today on the NewYork Times website, Opinion columnist Maureen Dowd effectively employed the race card she so vehemently accuses the “loco fringe” of waving.

Commenting on Congressman Joe Wilson’s outburst during President Obama’s address of the joint meeting of congress, Dowd states she “heard an unspoken word in the air: ‘you lie boy!‘”  I didn’t hear the word “boy”.  In fact, I didn’t have the slightest temptation to imagine the word “boy” in associtation with Wilson’s accusatory statement of; “You lie!”  What I heard, and what most people understood, was Mr. Wilson blurting out that what President Obama was, well, a lie.  Perhaps the fact that Ms. Dowd imagined the word “boy” at the end indicates a problem with her own thinking, not that of Wilson.

Further along in her column (if you want to call her diatribe of drivel a column), Dowd makes the claim that all who oppose the president’s policies must certainly be racist.  She states the president is in the midst of a “period of racial turbulence sparked by his ascension.”  (Wow! I don’t know whether to laugh out loud as I write this or to cry for the obvious lack of intellect made so patently clear in this statement.)   Going on, Dowd says the “shrieking lunacy” of those who oppose Barack Obama’s policies is entirely racially motivated.  What a simpleminded approach; one that negates the need for Dowd, or those of similar persuasion, to actually think.  Quoting such icons of rational thought such as (Dem) Don Fowler (a stunning moron) and (Dem) Jim Clyburn (not the brightest bulb in the chandelier), Dowd displays amazing intellectual laziness.  By assigning a racist label to any opposition to the administrations policies, Dowd can feel secure in her righteous indignation and continue in ignorance of the real motivation behind the march on D.C.

What is disregarded in this essay of glorious ignorance, is; what would motivate African-Americans to oppose President Obama’s (and congress’s) agenda?  It’s difficult to use the race card against them I suppose, but Dowd varnishes over this inconvenient fact.  There are people of all ethnic backgrounds who don’t see eye to eye with what comes out of the halls of Washington D.C.  Some of them were present yesterday at the 9/12 rally in D.C.  One African-American, Mason Weaver, (a conservative) even addressed the crowd and received a warm and noisy affirmation when he spoke of liberty from oppressive government.

Now I wonder, why would a crowd of mixed ethnic heritage, loudly cheering an African-American speaker be thought racist?  Oh, that’s right, it’s simply that Ms. Dowd does not think.  If she did think, she would realize that by assigning the label of racist to all the Tea Party protesters, either the African-Americans present, like Mason Weaver, are also racist in their attitude toward President Obama, or they are Uncle Toms.  Which would they be Ms. Dowd, you can’t straddle the fence on this question.

With columnists like Maureen Dowd penning such gibberish, it’s no wonder The New York Times is experiencing a decline in readership and revenue.  The sad fact is, with this kind of writing, they won’t experience a reversal of fortunes any time soon, unless, of course, they can convince their spend happy heroes in Washington to write them a big fat check.  A check drawn against our accounts.

But I guess Maureen Dowd, and her ilk, would lable us racist for opposing that as well.

UPDATE: At least there is some common sense prevailing in the UK regarding the type of prejudicial and sophomoric view Maureen Dowd portrays.

Damian Thompson, blogs editor for the Telegraph Media Group, says it rather concisely:

In his column titled, “Maureen Dowd’s Disgusting Insinuation That Joe Wilson is a Racist Would Land Her in Court in Britain“, Thompson makes this pointed observation:

“The New York Times demands high enough standards of evidence when the target of a defamatory remark is a liberal. But Joe Wilson is fair game – not because he behaved so badly, but because the financially troubled “old gray lady” and her employees are still in the grip of Messianic delusions.”

I don’t wish for the demise of The New York Times, as Thompson does, I just would like to see some thoughtful, accurate and factual opinion rather than biased, conjectural garbage.

Thank you Mr. Thompson for pointing out the slanderous nature of Dowd’s commentary.