Racism and the White House

Re “White House strives to keep focus off race,” Sept. 17, and “It’s not all black and white,” Editorial, Sept. 18

Could it be there is a deeper meaning to President Obama’s drop in the polls? While the pundits are attributing this change to numerous factors, former President Carter’s statements cannot be ignored.

Suddenly it seems Obama is criticized at every turn; after a mere eight months in office, he can’t do anything correctly. Even a “pep talk” to schoolchildren is touted as “indoctrination.”

I suggest that Obama is under attack because he is not just the president but because he is an African American.

Our 44th president ran on a platform of inclusion, yet some continue to believe the White House is no place for a black man.

Obama is the 44th president of the United States. Speaking against him (rather than disagreeing with him) should be deemed unconstitutional and unpatriotic. We need his leadership, not divisive rhetoric from a disgruntled group of bigots.

Linda Robertson

Oakland

::

I agree with Carter’s concern that much of the growing opposition to Obama is because of his race. Except for two points.

I think he’s wrong to presume that it’s caused by the belief of many white people that African Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. Instead, the cause is quite the opposite. It’s the feared reality that there are blacks who are qualified to lead.

And Republicans, with their worry that to improve the well-being of the working class we must impede the greed of the wealthy class, will use any device that hinders the opposition. Divide, dilute and nullify; straight versus gay, antiabortion versus choice, guns versus civility. And now they’re adding the race card -- not caring what it might do to our country. I’m deeply concerned.

J.B. Thomas

Arroyo Grande

The same people who have eagerly bought into the lies about Obama’s place of birth, his religious faith and political ideology are now trying to convince us that they’re not racists. But the sad fact is, Carter is probably right.

The ravings of many of the so-called tea-baggers can only be driven by deep-seated bigotry. These people scream that they want their country back because they don’t think Obama is even a legitimate American citizen.

This is not about policy or big government. This is about the ugly specter of racism emerging from the depths of the Republican Party, and the longer that party remains in denial about that, the sooner this country is going to have a one-party system.

John Johnson

Encino

::

Carter’s astonishing statement that animosity toward Obama is based on the fact that he is black is patently false. Animosity is directed at his appointments, policies and agenda.

His appointments include an attorney general who has politicized the Justice Department. A top advisor resigned under fire, although his animosity toward the U.S. was well known before his appointment.

And Obama’s vision of the future, with a healthcare reform “plan” that must rely for funding on “cutting waste and fraud” and a “stimulus” bill that hasn’t done much stimulating, is downright scary.

W. Sauvageot

Tustin

::

Carter’s unsubstantiated statement that “an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man” is irresponsible.

No doubt racism is alive and will be for a long time, particularly if the likes of Carter continue to feed it in this manner. He may actually believe what he said, but he should know better than to take that approach in a public forum.

He exemplifies the pervasive liberal arrogance that implies that they alone are morally pure and the rest are either uninformed or too stupid to be taken seriously.

Scott Perley

Irvine