White Guilt And The Black Guy In The White’s House

Last night Sean Hannity referred to the IRS mess as the “IRS enemies-list scandal.” The only thing you can say about that particular phrasing is that the man who said it is, well, nuts. He’s nuts with Obama-hate. He and other Republicans will not rest until they turn Barack Obama into a darker version, literally and figuratively, of a White House-fleeing Richard Nixon.

And speaking of nuts and Obama-hate, yesterday Rush Limbaugh, speaking of all the non-scandals going on, said,

The real danger to me, though, is not one or two rogue employees at the IRS or the NSA or the CIA. The real danger is having a rogue administration. And we do, I think. This is the primary challenge that we face.

Yes, that’s nutty. But not as nutty as something else Limbaugh presented to millions of right-wing worshipers:

obama regime

In his IQ-draining monologue, Limbaugh advanced his long-held and long-articulated theory of how it is that Barack Obama is able to remain relatively popular and get away with all these scandals and governmental malfeasance and socialist destruction:

White guilt.  Race…In addition to everything else in the Limbaugh Theorem, the fact that there is so much guilt, white guilt that’s behind the election of Obama, that that same white guilt is simply not gonna show up and hold him responsible.  Not you and I.  I mean, we voted against Obama, so we don’t have white guilt, but there’s a lot of white voters that voted for Obama simply because of racial reasons, hoping to get rid of racism or wanting people know they weren’t racists or whatever, but it’s all oriented towards how Shelby Steele has described it, and I think brilliantly, white guilt. 

…It’s why he’s not going to be held responsible for anything.  The whole reason for his existence — and he’s exploiting it, by the way, and knows it — is that enough people in this country feel so guilty over slavery and the civil rights violations that whatever is necessary to assuage that, they will do. 

I mentioned to you two weeks ago, maybe longer, that, in my view — and I’d like to be wrong about this — but I can’t foresee any circumstance where the first African-American president be removed from office.  Can you tell me who in the Congress is gonna make that move?  Give me a member of the House of Representatives that is gonna make that move and then be joined by enough other members to make it a reality?  Tell me who’s gonna do it?  Nobody’s gonna do it.  And why aren’t they gonna do it?  If it were ever justified, if it were ever something that were truly constitutionally justified, still not gonna happen because of race. 

There you have it. Barack Obama is able to destroy America because there are too many white people out there paralyzed with guilt over how their ancestors treated black folks. If we white folks could only get rid of our white guilt the way Rush Limbaugh has, we would see the world as he sees it.

Enlightening commentary from the most popular pundit in conservative media, a man whom Republicans dare not challenge.



  1. King Beauregard

     /  June 11, 2013

    Personally, I voted for Obama because I’m scared of Michelle Obama. Because there’s nothing more dangerous than a black woman whose man has just been disrespected … and ESPECIALLY if she’s hungry from not having eaten ribs recently.


    • What you said, King B. Or fried chicken, maybe.


    • That reminded me of an old “All in the Family” episode where Archie Bunker was trying to discourage the Jeffersons, African-Americans, from moving into his neighborhood. He said something like, “There ain’t a chicken shack or rib joint in the entire neighborhood.” To which Lionel Jefferson, pretending to confirm Archie Bunkers racism, said,

      No ribs? Lawd almighty, what is we gonna do?

      What a great show that was.



  2. ansonburlingame

     /  June 11, 2013


    The only time I see what Rush is up to, currently, is reading your blog. I also stopped watching pundits on Fox after they grossly miscalled the election, putting hope in place of good judgment. But so what.

    The Obama Presidency is not about his RACE. It is about his ideas, his vision if you will. He looks for things that I reject as being good for all Americans. He slants his policies far too much towards his chosen slices of Americans. You do to but you already know such views, coming from me.

    Yes you can accuse SOME in the GOP of doing the same thing. You and yours even tried that approach to Rommey. Must have worked as your side won. But you sure failed to convince me that Rommey was a “bad man” just like Rush and his followers fail to convince me that Obama is a “bad man”, much less a scary negro, which is ridiculous.

    By the way, where did the term “scary negro” come from. Is that one of your originals or did it originate somewhere else?



    • Anson,

      I invented the term “Scary Negro” as shorthand for my description of white angst related to the browning of America, which seems to scare so many white folks who have had their way culturally and who now find it slipping away from them. Pat Buchanan typifies this type of person.

      And no the entire Obama presidency isn’t about race, but part of it is for both historical and cultural reasons.

      And I profoundly disagree with this statement you made about Obama:

      He looks for things that I reject as being good for all Americans.

      Huh? What on earth could you possibly mean by “all Americans,” if you think what Obama is trying to do is not good for them? The only possible class of Americans that you could claim that Obama has not been “good” to is that slice of Americans who make a lot of money and who had their taxes increased by about 4 points or so. That’s some sacrifice, Anson. I submit that, despite that modest tax increase, that Obama has still been good to them. Have you seen the stock market lately?

      If by your comment you are referencing the health care law, then you have a strange concept of “all Americans,” since the point of the law was to bring health care to Americans who don’t have it now.

      I can’t think of anything else you might mean by that comment, but it is one of those generalizations that I bet you can’t defend.



%d bloggers like this: