Thursday, February 22, 2018
Perspective

Conservative media blows a dog whistle

As someone who has just written a book on how modern media use race-baiting to attract and keep audiences, watching Tuesday's election results felt like seeing the world prove ideas I have been chewing on for more than a year.

The central concept of my book Race-Baiter — that most people will reject overtly prejudiced ideas and stereotypical "code words" if you just discuss them openly — seemed to play itself out in the election returns, as voters not only chose to re-elect a black president, but sent a record number of women to Congress and embraced laws allowing gay marriage.

And this was not long after conservatives used anti-gay marriage legislation to try drawing voters to the polls.

As always, Fox News pundit Bill O'Reilly neatly articulated the fears and attitude of his audience Tuesday, even before news anchors were comfortable calling the election for President Barack Obama.

"It's a changing country," O'Reilly noted Tuesday. "The demographics are changing. It's not a traditional America anymore. And there are 50 percent of the voting public who want stuff. They want things. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it. And he ran on it."

And Fox News' biggest star wasn't done accusing people who aren't traditional Americans for derailing the country.

"Whereby 20 years ago, President Obama would have been roundly defeated by an establishment candidate like Mitt Romney, the white establishment is now the minority," O'Reilly added. "(It's) a tremendous Hispanic vote for President Obama. Overwhelming black vote for President Obama. And women will probably break President Obama's way. People feel that they are entitled to things, and which candidate between the two is going to give them things?"

This, of course, is a longstanding stereotype leveled against Democrats in general and this black president in particular.

As I note in my book, this concept powered Newt Gingrich's dismissive "food stamp president" line in referring to the president, evoking fears that a black president secretly wants to hand free government assistance to people of color who "want stuff" from the government without working.

It also robs Obama of any credit for his own success. The president isn't depicted as a politician talented enough to win re-election despite a sluggish economy and nagging unemployment numbers.

In O'Reilly's world, Obama was elected because women and people of color want to be given things, marginalizing the "white establishment" in the process.

Surprisingly, radio host Rush Limbaugh was more subtle in delivering a similar message Wednesday, using the word "traditional" to describe what was rejected by voters Tuesday.

"Romney presented a picture. ... This is very frightening stuff to me. He presented a picture of the traditional view, the traditional roots, the traditional way things work in this country," Limbaugh said. "And part of his campaign ... there was an assumption, I think, that that's what most people were looking for and wanted a return to."

He added: "For many of us, the country's at a point where it's never been in our lifetimes economically. We figured we had one chance to stop this direction and reverse it, take it back to the traditional path of American greatness. It was rejected. That America is not desired. That America is not wanted."

But what does Limbaugh mean by the "traditional path of American greatness?" Later, he said "Mitt Romney and his family would have been the essence of exactly what this country needs. ... Romney's recipe was the old standby: American route to success, hard work. That gets sneered at. I'm sorry. In a country of children where the option is Santa Claus or work, what wins?"

But I've never understood why conservatives like Limbaugh would hold up Romney, born in wealth as the son of an auto executive and former governor, yet ignore the child of a single mother, eventually raised by his grandparents who worked from humble beginnings to become president of the Harvard Law Review, a state senator, U.S. senator and then two-term president.

Why isn't that a story of taking the American route to success through hard work? Why is it assumed that, somehow, Obama didn't earn the achievements he's made?

Welcome to the world of code words. But this time around, they didn't quite work so well.

Not enough women were distracted from the harsh words about rape and abortion advanced by some GOP candidates. Not enough Hispanics were distracted from the hard-line stance on immigration advocated by many conservatives.

And lots of people talked about what the code words meant when they heard them.

One email to me from a reader Wednesday criticized the massive black vote for Obama Tuesday, estimated at more than 90 percent, saying if white people had done the same, there would be accusations of racism. But according to a Factcheck.org analysis from 2008, Democrat John Kerry got 88 percent of the black vote in 2004, Democrat Al Gore got 90 percent of the black vote in 2000 and Democrat Lyndon Johnson got 94 percent of the black vote in 1964, after signing the Civil Rights Act ending segregation.

The Factcheck.org piece said black people mostly voted Republican after the Civil War, when GOP legend Abraham Lincoln ended slavery. It wasn't until Franklin Delano Roosevelt's time, when Democrats' opposition to allowing black people to participate in the political process eased, that African-Americans began to vote Democratic in presidential elections.

This piece indicates the black vote isn't about skin color. It's about choosing a leader sensitive to the issues facing black people: equal civil rights, equal participation in society and freedom from institutional racism.

Another email from a reader who seemed to be a white person concluded, "My values and my opinion about what is best for our country going forward is now in the minority."

But given that Obama only got just over 50 percent of the popular vote, I'm not sure that's entirely true.

What is true: O'Reilly and Limbaugh's "traditional" voters now have to really share power with other groups who have a different vision for how government should help all Americans.

Welcome to the world of real equality, where the dog whistles and code words don't work anymore.

Comments
PolitiFact: Donald Trump falsely says he never denied Russian meddling

PolitiFact: Donald Trump falsely says he never denied Russian meddling

The indictments of 13 Russians detailing how they used Facebook and Twitter to undercut Hillary Clinton and promote President Donald Trump spurred a flurry of tweets from Trump over the Presidents Day weekend."I never said Russia did not meddle in th...
Published: 02/22/18
PolitiFact: The facts behind Donald Trumpís exaggerations on immigration, MS-13 and crime

PolitiFact: The facts behind Donald Trumpís exaggerations on immigration, MS-13 and crime

President Donald Trump has linked illegal immigration to the violence of the MS-13 gang, claiming "open borders" have caused the deaths of many people in the United States.During his State of the Union speech, Trump highlighted the 2016 killings of t...
Published: 02/15/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: Diplomacy, not fire and fury

Perspective: Diplomacy, not fire and fury

President Donald Trump infamously used the expression "fire and fury" to threaten North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. Then, at the United Nations, he vowed to "totally destroy North Korea." These words would be considered criminal if uttered by ordina...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: Trust the polls, not the pundits

Perspective: Trust the polls, not the pundits

Itís not easy being a pollster these days. When I started in 1984, two out of three people we reached on the then-universal landline said they were happy to take a poll. "Shh! Someone is calling me from New York and asking me important questions. I w...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: The future of globalism

Perspective: The future of globalism

Oh my, were we naive. The Cold War ended with a sort of whimper and we looked forward to making the world safe for democracy and perhaps even for a more compassionate capitalism. We understood that increasingly extreme inequities in wealth are diffic...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18

Column: The Trump administration is starting to pay attention to Africa

President Donald Trumpís first policy statement about Africa took place at the United Nations last September when he hosted a lunch for African heads of state. He correctly identified two major internal conflicts in South Sudan and the Democratic Rep...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: A national security strategy of coming to terms with competition

Perspective: A national security strategy of coming to terms with competition

The Trump administration, in a series of required national security documents, has signaled a dramatic departure from the Bush and Obama administrationsí visions of the U.S. role in the international order.The National Security Strategy (NSS) and the...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: We need to prepare for instability in North Korea

Perspective: We need to prepare for instability in North Korea

North Korea has been a top foreign policy priority since President Donald Trump settled into the Oval Office. The president has repeatedly expressed his intention to "solve" the North Korean crisis, emphasizing that all policy options ó including mil...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18
Perspective: St. Petersburg Conference on World Affairs will bring the world home to you

Perspective: St. Petersburg Conference on World Affairs will bring the world home to you

Editorís note: In advance of this weekís sixth annual St. Petersburg Conference on World Affairs, several of the experts who will participate have written essays for todayís Perspective about key areas of concern, among them North Korea, national sec...
Published: 02/12/18
Updated: 02/16/18

Perspective: Why do poor Americans eat so unhealthfully? Because junk food is the only indulgence they can afford

By Priya Fielding-SinghThe verdict is in: Food deserts donít drive nutritional disparities in the United States the way we thought. Over the past decade, study after study has shown that differences in access to healthful food canít fully explain why...
Published: 02/08/18
Updated: 02/09/18