Well lets face reality, Senator Landrieu's comments were right on target. When Blacks finally got the vote in 1964, Whites in the South which was predominantly Democratic, left to join the Republican Party. Members of the rightwing GOP have used posters at Republican rallies referring to Obama as a monkey and no republican stepped in to say this is wrong. One cannot blame African Americans from running from the GOP as if the devil himself were after them. Also, since Obama is the first African American president, racism in America is at an all time high....it is fear from Whites that they are losing the upper hand. The Tea Party came into focus because they were so against this president. Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Senate Minority leader, said on Obama's first Inauguration eve that he and his party would do everything in their power to make sure Obama failed. If the President of the United States fail, then the American people will fail. There is gridlock in the senate because these Republicans simply hate the African American president because he is black.
Fortunately for President Obama, the US consists of more than just white men/women; it was Latinos, Gays, Liberals, Independents, College students, Asians, moderates and African Americans who placed him in office the second time. By the year 2040 the changing demographic (Latinos) in America will alter drastically the voting pattern of the US.
For example, if someone criticizes the political policies of the government of Israel, the rightwingnuts call them "anti-semetic," or a "joo-hater."
Someone criticizes Obama, and they get labeled "racist" by some of the tree-huggers.
People are more alike than they realize sometimes.
It's GREAT to be me. --- "45% liberal/55% conservative"
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy" until you can find a gun.
Gov. Bobby Jindal, who last year said that conversations about race are themselves problematic, called Landrieu's remarks "remarkably divisive." Roger Villere, the state chair of the Republican Party, said they are "insulting to me and every other Louisianian." Rob Manness, the tea-party Republican running against Landrieu, called on her to apologize.
If Louisiana could manufacture merchandise the way Republicans manufacture outrage, our economy would be humming. But, unfortunately, all this phony anger, all this pretend injury gets us nowhere but deeper into the abyss of denial about our country and region's record on race.
Were there nonracist reasons to vote against Barack Obama in his two presidential runs? Of course. A voter could have believed that those two Republican tickets offered better solutions than the Democratic ticket did. That said, unless we mention race, how do we explain Obama in 2008 performing 10 points worse among white Louisiana voters than Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry had performed in 2004?
Obama didn't do well anywhere in the Deep South. The region now belongs to Republicans. But Louisiana stood out as the state that had the single biggest drop in white support for the Democratic ticket. Remember: Kerry wasn't just a liberal but a Massachusetts liberal. He wasn't just a Massachusetts liberal, but one whose campaign speeches could put a crowd to sleep. And yet, among white voters in Louisiana, Kerry did 10 points better than his successor: the more handsome, the more electrifying candidate who said he said he was fired up and ready to go.
Would the pro-Kerry, anti-Obama voters admit that racism played a role in their curious voting pattern? Probably not. The overwhelming majority would cite some other reason. But unless we believe that the only racists left are the ones who identify themselves as racists, we should believe that race played a role in Obama's poorer showing at the Louisiana polls.
Throughout the country and throughout the South, Republicans have done everything they can do to whip up resentment toward the president. Maybe that's why when Landrieu said that race has played a role in Louisiania's disapproval of Obama, Republicans were the hit dogs who hollered. But only the most partisan Democrats would believe that racism is endemic to the Republican Party.
When David Duke got 55 percent of the white vote during his 1991 gubernatorial run, he didn't just attract Republicans. There also were so-called blue-collar Democrats who crossed party lines to give their support to the Klansman. Are we to believe that in the intervening years all of Duke's supporters have died, moved away, stopped voting or turned their hearts away from racism?
Isn't it more reasonable to believe that a good percentage of those persuaded by Duke's racist rhetoric are around today?
Anybody who has complained about racism since January 2009 has likely heard, "But Obama is president!" That response implies that America can't simultaneously have a race problem and a black as man president. It's faulty logic, for sure, but let's say that America's electing Obama twice does prove that our country has moved beyond race. What does it mean that Louisiana has rejected him so soundly?
Mary Landrieu's comments about Obama and race followed by phony Republican outrage: Jarvis DeBerry | NOLA.com