Cain Rebuts Freeman’s Raaaaacism

Posted on | September 25, 2011 | 27 Comments

by Smitty (via Lucianne)

The Republican presidential candidate called the Oscar-winning actor’s eyebrow-raising remarks “short-sighted” on Friday. “Most of the people that are criticizing the Tea Partiers about having a racist element, they have never been to a Tea Party,” Cain told Fox News.
Freeman, who endorsed Obama in 2007, created a firestorm when he told CNN’s Piers Morgan earlier this week that conservative opposition to the President has enflamed racism in America. He added the Tea Partiers have the mentality of “Screw the country, we’re going to do whatever we can to get this black man out of here…It is a racist thing.”
Despite the criticism, Cain said he wasn’t offended by Freeman’s comments. “Name calling is something that is going to continue in this because they don’t know how to stop this movement and this movement is making a big difference in politics,” said Cain, the former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza.

One applauds Cain’s de-escalatory approach. It seems that since the Left hasn’t got leg #1 to stand on in terms of logically consistent arguments, the Left instead defaults to trying to push the hormones off the cliff.

Wasn’t there a candidate once who was supposed to have fixed all this? United the country? Applied balm to the wounds?

In other Raaaaacism Industrial Complex news, Salon offers some William J. Stuntz:

. . .the last half of the twentieth century saw America’s criminal justice system unravel. Signs of the unraveling are everywhere. The nation’s record- shattering prison population has grown out of control. Still more so the African American portion of that prison population: for black males, a term in the nearest penitentiary has become an ordinary life experience, a horrifying truth that wasn’t true a mere generation ago.

and (formatting mine):

There are three keys to the system’s dysfunction, each of which has deep historical roots but all of which took hold in the last sixty years.
First, the rule of law collapsed. To a degree that had not been true in America’s past, official discretion rather than legal doctrine or juries’ judgments came to define criminal justice outcomes.
Second, discrimination against both black suspects and black crime victims grew steadily worse — oddly, in an age of rising legal protection for civil rights. Today, black drug offenders are punished in great numbers, even as white drug offenders are usually ignored. (As is usually the case with respect to American crime statistics, Latinos fall in between, but generally closer to the white population than to the black one.) At the same time, blacks victimized by violent felonies regularly see violence go unpunished; the story is different in most white neighborhoods.
The third trend is the least familiar: a kind of pendulum justice took hold in the twentieth century’s second half, as America’s justice system first saw a sharp decline in the prison population — in the midst of a record-setting crime wave — then saw that population rise steeply. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the United States had one of the most lenient justice systems in the world. By century’s end, that justice system was the harshest in the history of democratic government.

Yeah, I don’t remember this rising wave of anarchy, either. I just wish that there was a ‘propaganda’ section to contain this sort of tripe, or that it at least be positioned near the Danielle Steele where it belongs.

For a brief counterargument, consider that the economic destruction of America has led to an over-Federalization of crime. And I’m not just throwing Holder under the bus here. As Federal over-reach has sucked the economic vitality out of the country, State and local law enforcement has been made less meaningful.

However, one suspects that Stuntz’s task may be to exacerbate problems, instead of working to minimize them.

Thanks to AiPolitics on Twitter:

It would be very interesting to know who got to Morgan Freeman with the 30 pieces of silver.

Update: to Ann Althouse, on Herman Cain, regarding the straw poll performance:

Is this just a message to Perry and Romney or are we supposed to believe that a man who has never held political office could serve as the President of the United States?

Dude, given the miserable performance of this Administration, never having held office is very arguably a feature.
Update II: Cain also rocking Legal Insurrection straw poll.

Category: Celebrities, Herman Cain

Comments

27 Responses to “Cain Rebuts Freeman’s Raaaaacism”

A.Men
September 25th, 2011 @ 1:17 pm

Same old racism — Morgan Freeman. How many millions did Morgan make in Hollywood because his his color?
Joe
September 25th, 2011 @ 1:27 pm

I remember when Freeman suggested that the best way to deal with racism was to stop talking about it. What changed Morgan, what changed?

Morgan Freeman has issues of his own. Not that such issues are a black or white thing. Woody Allen had similar issues.
Chris Smith
September 25th, 2011 @ 1:39 pm

Cain is also rocking the Legal Insurrection straw poll.
Lady Liberty 1885
September 25th, 2011 @ 1:56 pm

I have great respect for Mr. Cain. Many seem to think he doesn’t have breadth of experience in all areas, but he has the core of what this country needs to get back on track. I have no doubt he would surround himself with the right people to help him in other areas.
garfman
September 25th, 2011 @ 2:26 pm

Is anyone besides me basking in the rich glorious irony of
simultaneously being reported in the headlines one black man (Freeman) accusing
white people of wanting another black man (Obama) out of office because he is
black, while white people are rallying behind another black man (Cain) to
possible win the GOP primary to possibly be the black man to replace the other
black man currently in the oval office?
The irony is further solidified by the fact that Morgan Freeman is
unwittingly referring to the same white people that I am. This is philosophically and mathematically
impossible. They are in-fact mutually
exclusive. You can not want one person
to be gone because he is black if you are willing to replace him with a
different person who is black. To a
conservative I may be stating the obvious—but look how virally the left really
believes this racism mantra. The truth
is simple—I want Obama gone because he is liberal and I would support Cain if
he wins the primary because he is conservative.
Period. Imagine the demographic
implications if we had two black men as candidates for the two parties in
2012. We would see clearly that the 96%
of voting blacks that voted for Obama in 2008 had nothing to do with him being
black. They voted for him because of his
liberal policy positions. On the
contrary, it was whites that put aside their ideology and in some measure voted
for Obama because of exactly that he was black.
Certainly Cain would siphon 10 to 15 percent more of the black vote but
the large percentage will still go to Obama as blacks have been conditioned for
50 years to vote for the party that continues to hold them back. Racism is much more an emotional ruse than it
is a reality.
Christy Waters
September 25th, 2011 @ 2:41 pm

Calling someone a racist is like calling them a paper clip. The term means nothing. Its impact was stripped away long ago, thanks in part, to paddyrolling race pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, both of whom have the intellect of a paper clip.

I always figured Morgan Freeman to be an intelligent man, though. Never thought HE’D have a paper clip rattling around in his head.
Walla Walla TEA Party Patriots
September 25th, 2011 @ 3:19 pm

Manual track back:

“Herman Cain rebutts Morgan Freeman in particular, and the Left in general”
Worlds Collide! Freeman, Cain, and Freedom of Spending « Temple of Mut
September 25th, 2011 @ 11:27 am

[…] Therefore, I would like to thank the good citizens of Florida for selecting Herman Cain during their straw poll the very same day. Selecting a black American, who is a savvy businessman as well as an energized patriot, was exactly the right way to refute this vile lie that the Hollywood glitterati are trying to promote. Via the Other McCain, Cain offered this response to Freeman — “Name calling is something that is going to continue in this because they don’t know how to stop…. […]
daveinboca
September 25th, 2011 @ 3:37 pm

Morgan Freeman is step-n-fetchit compared to Herman Cain, who actually founded a successful business instead of playing Uncle Toms driving Miss Daisy around.

I find that The Onion has a lot more credibility than the financially failing Salon.
ThePaganTemple
September 25th, 2011 @ 4:07 pm

You know what’s ironic about this? Morgan Freeman plays Herman Cain in almost all his movies. A wise, elderly black man whom everybody likes and respects. Only with Cain, its not an act. If Cain was to win the presidency, one of the most important acts of his first term, I predict, would be in the numerous federal employees who would be given their walking papers, and the numerous others who will be turned away. The only question remaining will be, for every four federal employees Cain fires, will he replace them with three, two, or one?
Tennwriter
September 25th, 2011 @ 4:37 pm

If he’s talking about the 70’s as a rising tide of anarchy, then yeah. There was a reason Eastwood and Bronson were so popular.

As to Blacks getting victimized in crimes a lot, that’s true. Its because no one is willing to brave the cries of ‘raaaaacism’ to actually put a stop to black on black crimes.

The rich will insure they get protected, but as believers in law and order for all, as Conservatives, we need to demand sufficient police presence in the ghettoes to stop most of the crime. And when the Left cries ‘raaaaacism’ we need to tell them to take a hike, loser.

If the Persians three thousand years ago had a saying that they could send a naked girl on a horse with a bag of gold down the King’s Road and have her and the gold arrive at the other end unmolested, then, pray tell, why can’t a cute chick in jogging pants jog very far from our nation’s capital without getting molested? Hmmm? Are we that less capable than the Persian kings?
Larry
September 25th, 2011 @ 5:24 pm

Honkies for Herman 2012

http://goo.gl/i9qvo
Adjoran
September 25th, 2011 @ 6:51 pm

Seen Treacher over there the last few days? The DC crew has gone all South Park in confronting criticism.
Adjoran
September 25th, 2011 @ 6:52 pm

Crackers for Cain!
Adjoran
September 25th, 2011 @ 6:56 pm

Althouse questions whether a “man who has never held public office” is qualified . . . she voted for Obama, whose experience consisted of being a back-bench lazy good-for-nothing in the Illinois Senate, voting “present” at least 130 times, and four years in the US Senate during which he amassed the worst attendance record in history. His last two years, he was seldom even in town, spending so much of his time running for President that even Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd had better attendance records in their own last two years in office, and both of them were dying and in the hospital much of that time.

So THAT is “qualification” but running businesses successfully – without ever once voting “present” – is not?

For a law professor, she isn’t very bright.
Joe
September 25th, 2011 @ 8:50 pm

Maybe he is getting soft in the head. I thought he was great on Sixty Minutes. Now he is just an idiot.

Perhaps he is tired.
Joe
September 25th, 2011 @ 8:51 pm

Kooky for Coco-Cain.
Owl22
September 25th, 2011 @ 9:12 pm

So Cain feels his Muslim hating bigotry is just fine. Go figure.
Bob Belvedere
September 25th, 2011 @ 10:10 pm

Bang-on. To be a successful CEO, as my father [a successful CEO], always says, you have to be willing to hire people to work under you who are smarter than you in particular areas.
Bob Belvedere
September 25th, 2011 @ 10:14 pm

Sadly, the charge still resonates with that mushy middle who shouldn’t be voting because they won’t take the time to study the issues, but who do vote.

I’m happy to see, though, that more and more people are starting to realize the charge is scurrelious.
Bob Belvedere
September 25th, 2011 @ 10:21 pm

I agree with your sentiment, Dave, but, please don’t defame Stepin Fetchit [aka: Lincoln Perry].

He outsmarted the moguls. From Wikipedia:

Perry parlayed the Fetchit persona into a successful film career, eventually becoming a millionaire, the first black actor in history to do so. He was also the first black actor to receive a screen credit.

Along with Bob Hope and Bing Crosby, he bought up tons of land in the Hollywood area and became rich [sadly, he did lose it all, apparently by gambling it away].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepin_Fetchit
Bob Belvedere
September 25th, 2011 @ 10:25 pm

If Cain is the real-life President Mr. Freeman portrays, does that mean we’re going to be hit by an comet!!!
Bob Belvedere
September 25th, 2011 @ 10:26 pm

What about Ike? Or Grant [who was a damn fine President, despite what the Bolshe tell you].
Anonymous
September 26th, 2011 @ 12:46 am

To recognize a threat isn’t bigotry. Nor is Cain’s mind twisted.
JeffS
September 26th, 2011 @ 2:06 am

Cain’s mind is most certainly not twisted. But Owl22’s mind most certainly is twisted.
Monday Round Up | Students4Palin
September 26th, 2011 @ 7:11 am

[…] only goal is to get the “black man” out of office. Just after winning the straw poll Mr. Cain responded to Freeman’s comments, saying: “Name calling is something that is going to continue in this because they don’t know how to […]
daveinboca
September 26th, 2011 @ 12:28 pm

Interesting, Bob, although I thought that the maid in Gone With The Wind had the first screen credit for a black actress. Cain was also Chair of the Kansas City Fed Reserve Branch, which gives him public service chops the half-term ringer Senator from Illinois never had—-serious economic background. I recall running into Sen Fitzgerald, Obungler’s predecessor, at a filling station in Illinois outside Chicago and my wife [who worked for Sarbanes as an LA] talked to him for a few minutes [he was still serving in DC as Illinois’ senator]. He told her that politics in the Chicagoland area was a “dirty business” and that he was planning not to run again. Sadly, he was true to his word, as he was independently wealthy and a clean pol in the sewer of Illinois political life. He is independently wealthy and wanted to enjoy life instead of fending off crooks involved in various RICO scams that serve as everyday Chicagoland politics.