The newest racial spoils system by the Stealthy Prez

Senator Stealth becomes President Stealth. Stanley Kurtz wrote a very insightful article in National Review late last year "Senator Stealth: How to Advance Radical Causes When No One's Looking," regarding Barack Obama’s practice as an Illinois state senator of quietly implanting language in legislation that had the potential of having serious ramifications.

These were stealth maneuvers; he did not trumpet or advertise his intentions or the implications of his actions. They were often incremental and flew under the radar screen.  He has vastly more powers now, and his practices remain the same. He is sneaking into legislation - or has his minions and fellow travelers in Congress do so - bits and pieces of language that has serious implications for America.

Needless to say, they shift our nation to the left and do so in  a very underhanded way. This belies his claim to transparency. Wonder why these bills, be it the stimulus bills, or the health care reform bills, are so gargantuan? There are plenty of places to bury minefields. Even tiny bits of language can have large consequences (Obama did pontificate on the importance of words during the campaign
) and the peril is even greater when he speeds the legislation to passage by creating a sense of crisis and bullying Congressmen to obey his dictates.

The latest example: the House version of ObamaCare may give rise to a  new racial spoils system in American education, according to Linda Chavez writing in the New York Post and others who have noted the latest stealth attack:

Among the provisions in the House version are special set-asides aimed at training "underrepresented" minorities in health-care professions. The idea is that some minority groups -- but not all -- will be better served if their doctors share their racial and ethnic background. It's an idea that has been floating around for years.

ObamaCare will push more institutions to adopt racial preferences by giving preference to those that have, in the words of the Democratic House legislation, a "demonstrated record" of "training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds." And notice the term "underrepresented minorities." They may as well have put up a sign "Asians need not apply."

Other provisions in the Democrats' bill would provide for "maintaining, collecting and presenting federal data on race and ethnicity," in order to "facilitate and coordinate identification and monitoring . . . of health disparities to inform program and policy efforts to reduce such disparities."

We've seen these efforts before in the context of employment and education. Their end result is always a form of bean-counting that leads to racial quotas -- which is bad medicine and won't improve health care for anyone.

Obama-the post-racial candidate? Nah. How about his choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, who, on his first day in office, declared America a "nation of cowards" on race and made clear his goal as head of the Justice Department would use his powers to investigate charges of racism in the workplace? Does that sound post-racial to you?

Did his comments about Professor Gates sound post-racial?

Do his massive transfer of wealth programs smack of racism in a different form? How about his complaints that America has harmed any number of Third World nations, though we barely have a colonial past compared to the European nations Obama extols? Is that redolent of racism, given that Third World nations harp on America as being a racist nation? Does that sound post-racial to you?

Does his pick for the Supreme Court,  Sonia Sotomoayor-with her preference for rewarding minorities jobs at the expense of qualified whites-sound post-racial to you?

Barack Obama called Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr. his "moral compass" and "confidant" , despite Wright's sermons preaching anti-white racism-and compounded the immorality by choosing to raise his daughters in that church, listening to that tripe. Sound post-racial to you?
   

He disparaged his own grandmother's concern (prejudice?) about an African-American by calling her a "typical white person" who would fear black people because of racism. Sound post-racial to you.

What is more dangerous than picking people to administer and enforce the laws is picking provisions to insert in language that has the force of federal law.

Don't tell us words don't matter-that was Barack Obama's refrain last year. He was right-words do matter-especially when they are snuck into federal legislation.


 

 


Senator Stealth becomes President Stealth. Stanley Kurtz wrote a very insightful article in National Review late last year "Senator Stealth: How to Advance Radical Causes When No One's Looking," regarding Barack Obama’s practice as an Illinois state senator of quietly implanting language in legislation that had the potential of having serious ramifications.

These were stealth maneuvers; he did not trumpet or advertise his intentions or the implications of his actions. They were often incremental and flew under the radar screen.  He has vastly more powers now, and his practices remain the same. He is sneaking into legislation - or has his minions and fellow travelers in Congress do so - bits and pieces of language that has serious implications for America.

Needless to say, they shift our nation to the left and do so in  a very underhanded way. This belies his claim to transparency. Wonder why these bills, be it the stimulus bills, or the health care reform bills, are so gargantuan? There are plenty of places to bury minefields. Even tiny bits of language can have large consequences (Obama did pontificate on the importance of words during the campaign
) and the peril is even greater when he speeds the legislation to passage by creating a sense of crisis and bullying Congressmen to obey his dictates.

The latest example: the House version of ObamaCare may give rise to a  new racial spoils system in American education, according to Linda Chavez writing in the New York Post and others who have noted the latest stealth attack:

Among the provisions in the House version are special set-asides aimed at training "underrepresented" minorities in health-care professions. The idea is that some minority groups -- but not all -- will be better served if their doctors share their racial and ethnic background. It's an idea that has been floating around for years.

ObamaCare will push more institutions to adopt racial preferences by giving preference to those that have, in the words of the Democratic House legislation, a "demonstrated record" of "training individuals who are from underrepresented minority groups or disadvantaged backgrounds." And notice the term "underrepresented minorities." They may as well have put up a sign "Asians need not apply."

Other provisions in the Democrats' bill would provide for "maintaining, collecting and presenting federal data on race and ethnicity," in order to "facilitate and coordinate identification and monitoring . . . of health disparities to inform program and policy efforts to reduce such disparities."

We've seen these efforts before in the context of employment and education. Their end result is always a form of bean-counting that leads to racial quotas -- which is bad medicine and won't improve health care for anyone.

Obama-the post-racial candidate? Nah. How about his choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, who, on his first day in office, declared America a "nation of cowards" on race and made clear his goal as head of the Justice Department would use his powers to investigate charges of racism in the workplace? Does that sound post-racial to you?

Did his comments about Professor Gates sound post-racial?

Do his massive transfer of wealth programs smack of racism in a different form? How about his complaints that America has harmed any number of Third World nations, though we barely have a colonial past compared to the European nations Obama extols? Is that redolent of racism, given that Third World nations harp on America as being a racist nation? Does that sound post-racial to you?

Does his pick for the Supreme Court,  Sonia Sotomoayor-with her preference for rewarding minorities jobs at the expense of qualified whites-sound post-racial to you?

Barack Obama called Pastor Jeremiah Wright, Jr. his "moral compass" and "confidant" , despite Wright's sermons preaching anti-white racism-and compounded the immorality by choosing to raise his daughters in that church, listening to that tripe. Sound post-racial to you?
 

 

He disparaged his own grandmother's concern (prejudice?) about an African-American by calling her a "typical white person" who would fear black people because of racism. Sound post-racial to you.

What is more dangerous than picking people to administer and enforce the laws is picking provisions to insert in language that has the force of federal law.

Don't tell us words don't matter-that was Barack Obama's refrain last year. He was right-words do matter-especially when they are snuck into federal legislation.