The latest politically correct dogma, promulgated by cult of masscomm secular primates, is that race is now revealed as the ultimate definer of radical ideology. Therefore, whites who don’t vote for blacks before they’d vote for whites are racists.
Left out of that fractured logic — and not by accident — is the heretical notion that anyone would ever vote for a candidate because of what kind of person that candidate is, regardless of race.
When everything didn’t follow those rules of leftist illogic in the recent Democratic Party presidential primary in Pennsylvania, the politically correct leftist media were thrown into a profound psychological funk.
It was, after all, a Democratic, not a Republican, primary. It was supposed to have been a neat, tidy showcase of politically correct leftist dogma alive and well and performing like an obedient automaton.
But, horrors! Something went haywire. More voters in that Democratic primary voted for Hillary Clinton (a white) than voted for Barack Obama (a black who is, therefore, viewed by the left as inevitably the next president of the United States).
When clockwork goes cuckoo, there must be some explanation. It would be unthinkable to let it stand unexplained, and thus possibly not corrected in time for the next Democratic primary, in Indiana. Somebody had to do some serious explaining — and fast.
So, ever ready to enlighten, The New York Times mounted up and rode to the rescue of the leftist cause. The very next day after the eye-popping results were confirmed (white beats black by almost 54 percent to 45 percent), there appeared a Times article under the missed-the-point headline “For Obama, a Struggle to Win Over Key Blocs.”
Translation: Could it really be possible? White America is not yet ready to elect a black president?
The writer of the article, entitled to a day off with a chiropractor, wrote himself into a beaut of a pretzel.
He saw two specters looming on Obama’s (and, thus, the left’s) horizon. One, “voters opposing him simply because he is black.” Two, “Democrats who will not support him because they do not think a black man can win a general election.”
Obviously, it does not even occur to leftists that most American voters, of whatever political affiliation, might have no trouble voting for a black candidate . . . provided it was a black candidate they felt was qualified to be president.
Does the left really believe that white voters vote for a white candidate whose beliefs, character, and qualifications they cannot abide . . . so long as that candidate is white? Ridiculous.
Another serious subliminal subscript to the left’s illogic is the vicious assumption that blacks will vote for any candidate, no matter how unqualified, so long as that candidate is black.
One of these days a majority of black voters may wake up to the fact that white leftists, now in control of the Democratic Party, have for decades been using blacks disgracefully, insulting their intelligence and independence by assuming the party can count on their voting as a block, no matter what.
Until then, who is guilty of blindly acquiescing in racism? Who is guilty of cynically promoting racism?
John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents, is a regular columnist for Newsmax.com.
Read John Perry's columns here.