Dear Larry: Can you explain what is going on regarding racial politics? I have noticed there is marked decline in the charges of racism.
A few months ago, the media were abuzz with white and minority politicians calling anyone, especially tea partyers, racist. The tea party was accused of being anti-minority and racist because it had ideas that were different from Democrats' ideas.
Minority politicians and liberal columnists were saying the same things. Article after article reported on these statements, and I actually refused to watch network television or open the newspaper because my young children were asking questions that were embarrassing to the country and me. I didn't have any good answers, and my children are too smart to be fooled or lied to.
This all was happening several months ago. It seems to me things have calmed down.
Do you share my observation? If so, what do you think is the reason? — Concerned Mom
Dear Concerned: I agree with your observation. People are not so quick to scream racism because the masses finally are getting the nerve to speak out against the charges. The accused are demanding proof, and the accusers are unable to provide plausible responses.
For example, a few months back, a black congressman accused a tea partyer of saying some racist words. But not only were the charges denied but also there was a huge reaction against the politician when he could not give the required proof. In the past, people just accepted the charges and gave in.
When unfounded charges are allowed to win, it encourages others to use the same tactics. In my opinion, things are changing.
People are starting to fight back because they are beginning to realize this country is not as racist as many liberals claim.
Since the election of Barack Obama, a black president, people have been thinking about what more we can do as a country to prove we are putting racism behind us. The continual frivolous charges of racism being thrown around are beginning to fall on deaf ears.
Politicians are starting to get the message that frivolous charges no longer are working for them and even bring about backlash. This backlash is giving people second thoughts concerning their votes.
Dear Larry: I cannot stop thinking about the advice you gave a few weeks ago about absentee fathers. You never addressed the widow issue.
I am a single mom raising two boys, and your column suggests that I am incapable of doing this because I have sons whom eventually I will not be able to control and who eventually will get in trouble with the law and possibly physically hurt me.
This implies to me that you are suggesting I run out and replace my husband, whom I still love and miss dearly. I cannot imagine myself ever being with another man. He was an outstanding husband and father. He was a wonderful example for our two sons before cancer took him away from us.
I usually agree with you, but your response suggests that you think it is best for me to run out and find a man to beat my sons.
Are you convinced that widows cannot successfully raise their sons to be outstanding citizens on their own? — Anna
Dear Anna: Please accept my deep sympathy for the loss of your beloved husband. No, I do not suggest that you find a replacement husband. Many times, replacements do more harm than good to women and their sons.
My advice was to make people understand the difficulty single mothers have in raising sons. I come from a family with eight boys, and I know the problems. It is difficult, but not impossible. It takes a strong, dedicated mother. It is not for the fainthearted.
To find out more about Larry G. Meeks and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
11 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Look at the New York City "soda tax" as an example. The (white) mayor wants a tax on soda, candy, ice cream, chips, and pretzels. Cries rang out that this tax would be unfair on minorities because they (allegedly) drink more soda and eat more junk.
Whether the last part is true or not, I don't know. But this was another example of a ridiculous claim.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Roger
Fri Dec 3, 2010 10:46 PM
|
|
|
|
Morgan Freeman - one of America's most famous black actors - recently gave a "60 Minutes" interview with Mike Wallace, a famous white journalist. When asked what the US could do to improve race relations, Freeman said simply, "Stop talking about it." Wallace acted as if he couldn't believe what he'd heard, to which Freeman repeated, "Stop talking about it." You can Google this if you don't believe me, but I found it really interesting. And Freeman was right. What possibly is to be gained by continuing to "talk" about the issue and lament America's past racial sins? Continuing to beat the issue has acted only to stir the pot - which keeps minorities feeling victimized and angry, and keeps whites feeling like some minority is going to overreact at any moment to some perceived slight, and ruin someone's career. I also think Larry is correct - the charge is now dying down because people are unwilling to take it lying down anymore, and this seems to me like a positive change. When Obama first got elected and this was the charge whenever he was criticized, I remember thinking, "And here I thought we'd finally be done with that crap now that we've finally got a black president." (It bothered me a lot that the previous administration got no credit at all for the first black Secretary of State or the first Hispanic Attorney General.) This nonsense has gone on way too long, and I'm hoping maybe this current decade will be the one in which America finally puts spurious racism allegations behind it for good.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Matt
Sat Dec 4, 2010 12:01 AM
|
|
|
|
LW2: A widowed woman doesn't have to run out and find a "replacement husband" just to help raise her sons. She could just as easily enlist the help of some other male. Do the boys have an uncle, a grandfather, a family friend, or someone else who can step in and mentor them on how to be men of character? (That really is the issue at hand, I think.) It's amazing that so many people - letter-writers and comment posters alike - misunderstood what Larry said about single mothers. Didn't he explain his views over two or three different columns? Amazing. Sometimes people only hear what they want to hear.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Matt
Sat Dec 4, 2010 12:05 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Matt
In the past few weeks, Larry has repeatedly described the successful single mothers who wrote in as rare exceptions to the rule, and in so many words. Framed that way, I can understand why readers would have taken issue with his remarks. There's not much room for misinterpretation. I think his statement that single parenting is difficult but not impossible and not for the faint of heart strikes me as a little more fair to the single mothers who are able to pull it off. At least it leaves room for the possibility that it can be done, while reminding people of how decidedly challenging it is. It's also less insulting to single mothers than simply saying they lack the physical characteristics to intimidate their sons into being productive adults.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Jon
Sat Dec 4, 2010 11:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Concerned mom wrote "The tea party was accused of being anti-minority and racist because it had ideas that were different from Democrats' ideas".
Actually the reasons people saw racism in the tea party were was because of people holding signs in tea party rallies with the N word on them, shouting racial slurs in public, and a revelation about some tea party affiliations with the Ku Klux Klan.
If the tea party is cleaning up its act, good for them.There''s nothing inherently racist about the group. There are many good people involved in it, and if they are throwing out the racist elements, three cheers for them. But please stop rewriting history.
Comment: #5
Posted by: sarah morrow
Sun Dec 5, 2010 8:55 AM
|
|
|
|
Why is it always about single mothers? What about single fathers? Why can't you just say single PARENTS have it tough?
Sexism is just as bad as racism.
Comment: #6
Posted by: jjlm
Sun Dec 5, 2010 9:17 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: jjlm
Point taken. It is very difficult for any single parent, male or female, to raise a child. But I think the mothers are focused on more often not because of sexism, but simply because the numbers show there are more of them raising children than single dads. Unfortunately it's much easier for the father to jump ship and claim the child isn't his, than for the mother to bail. Nine months of mom carrying the child is ample time for the father to make himself scarce. But no disrespect intended to the dads who step up and raise their kids alone, because as you point out they do exist. It was also single mothers who had written to Larry in the past few weeks as opposed to fathers, so the comments and columns naturally gravitated in that direction.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Jon
Sun Dec 5, 2010 9:11 PM
|
|
|
|
@sara morrow: The supposed "tea partiers" with the N-word on their signs turned out to be "plants" put there by the their opposition to discredit the Tea Party movement. In every instance I heard about, such individuals were shouted at by other TP's and asked to leave. As to the shouting of racial epithets or supposed links to the KKK, I'm sure you're ready and willing to provide examples.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Matt
Sun Dec 5, 2010 11:10 PM
|
|
|
|
I live in Central Florida and I can assure you that most of the people in my area who are known to me and who are members of the "tea party" and are HIGHLY racist. The tea party has an enormous presence in the south and the south didn't stop being racist just because the tea party started making the news. I have heard nearly EVERY republican I am acquainted with use the "N" word when referring to our president. Those signs were no "plants', they reflect the sentiments --no matter how disgusting--of a large portion of our population. How Larry Meeks, a black man, can defend them boggles the mind.
Comment: #9
Posted by: N
Mon Dec 6, 2010 4:36 AM
|
|
|
|
@N. I suspect you're sadly mistaken - or lying. The TP movement is about smaller government and lower taxes, not race. These are fiscal and economic issues that transcend racial boundaries because they affect all racial groups. In fact, up to 20% of the movement isn't even white. That fewer minorities have chosen to participate is their decision...not because anyone has told them they aren't welcome. If an ounce of what you said were the truth, the media and the Democrats (but I repeat myself) would have been ALL OVER IT. They looked high and low for any evidence of racism and found nothing. The closest they came was some black congressman who claimed to have been spit-on as they walked past the demonstrators - and naturally the camera following the congressman not only failed to "see" any spitting, the accuser later refused to follow-up on his own allegations. The media and its handlers among the Democrats were desperate to damage the Tea Party movement's momentum, knowing that it was funding any number of conservative candidates in House & Senate races all over the country. They feared that TP-backed candidates were going to give their darlings a clobbering in the midterms - and rightly feared that because that is exactly what happened. Racism, my foot. Stop making stuff up.
Comment: #10
Posted by: Matt
Mon Dec 6, 2010 11:34 PM
|
|
|
|
Matt, I know many people in the Tea Party are decent, honest folks. But some are not.
Personally I find some Tea party values positive, and some repellant. The stand for smaller government and sticking to a budget, I support. The stupidity and irrationality of many of the most vocal proponents of the party, I don't. The Tea Partiers who disrupted meetings of people trying to solve health care problems in this country, months ago (which I saw with my own eyes), and screamed crazy, irrational, bizarre things when asked why (which I heard with my own ears) are another matter. (I expect you'll accuse me of lying, like you did the poster above, but I'm not). I find it strange that you are blind to the dark side of a movement with such mixed potential.
You're obviously an intelligent man but I hope some day you'll be able to see a more accurate picture of the world, beyond the corporate worldview reinforced every night on Fox news and the other outlets of our mostly-conservative media in this country. You could be helping change things in a positive way, if you could take off your blinders.
Comment: #11
Posted by: sarah morrow
Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:15 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
