WE ALL know the story about the Boy Who Cried Wolf, falsely claiming several times that he had been attacked. Finally, when the danger was real, no one believed him. And he ended up as an hors d'oeuvre.
If they're not careful, the race-baiters among us might also find themselves on a canapé tray, and I pity the person who gets stuck nibbling on Maureen Dowd. As appetizers go, she's more sour than sweet.
The New York Times' institutional redhead seems still to be having trouble coming up with original ideas after her brush with plagiarism this summer, so she's had to riffle through her bag of tricks to find the deck of race cards.
On Sunday, the Pulitzer Princess accused South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson of being a racist, likening his "You lie!" cry to the rebel yell of a bigot who couldn't deal with being "lectured to" by a black man. Making as good a use of stereotypes as "The Sopranos," Dowd implied that this white Southerner was less upset about "illegals" getting free health care than about the fact that his manhood was being challenged by the "First Boy."
And Miss Scarlett-O'Hair-a wasn't the only one making that parallel.
Take Jimmy Carter. (Please!) The ex-president has read our minds and discovered that we who have qualms about the president's specific policies and performance, and express those opinions, are motivated by racism, and not sensible doubts (or even mere hysteria).
This is par for the course. Ever since Barack Obama emerged as a serious contender for the Oval Office, many supporters have tried to turn every criticism into a racial Rorschach test.
Instead of looking at the substance of the attack, many Obama supporters have first considered whether it has a racial angle. In some cases, it clearly does, as with the yahoos who believe our president is a terrorist-sympathizing Muslim because of his funny first name. (By that reasoning, Abraham Lincoln was a Jew.)
But in way too many other cases, the Maureen Dowds and Jimmy Carters keep stretching it to offensive levels. (CONTINUES HERE)