I must disagree with Jimmy Paul’s column published in The Daily Orange on March 8, titled ‘Obama guilty of playing race card in response to political criticism.’ It is reasonable for President Barack Obama to say that racism is a factor in the opposition to his presidency, although I will concede to Mr. Paul that there are many policy complaints that are far more to blame.

The policy disagreements Mr. Paul cites, however, are frequently overblown and require ignoring evidence about the actual political landscape. Contrary to Mr. Paul’s accusations, Obama does not demonize the Tea Party and has hardly brought about a ‘sharp left turn.’ To support his accusation of ‘demonization,’ Paul quotes Obama as saying that his opponents are motivated by ‘anti-immigrant sentiment.’ This comment is not inflammatory — it’s a completely accurate assessment of the stated views of some of his outspoken opponents and has nothing to do with race.

As for the ‘sharp left turn,’ though Obama is liberal in his rhetoric, actions speak louder than words. His enacted policies have been very conservative relative to those of our presidents going back to Franklin D. Roosevelt. His health care bill is very similar to one introduced by a group of Republican senators in 1993, including Iowa’s Chuck Grassley, a fierce opponent of ‘Obamacare.’ Was Grassley a socialist in 1993, according to Republicans? Obama has also extended many of George W. Bush’s worst policies, and his appointees have repeatedly dismissed lawsuits against clearly unconstitutional actions by the Bush administration. This is hardly radical liberalism.

Obama’s enacted policies have nothing to do with socialism and, although authoritarian, also stop far short of dictatorship that conservative pundits stoke fear about. He is no Joseph Stalin, but he is perhaps Richard Nixon with charisma. So why do conservatives oppose him? Are they racist? I agree with Mr. Paul on this one: as a general rule, no. But there are influential conservatives, including most recently Mike Huckabee, who claim that Obama is foreign, suggesting a more subtle race-influenced nativism rather than outright racism. Why do they believe he’s foreign despite all the evidence to the contrary? He doesn’t look like what they think of when they think ‘American,’ therefore they suspect he isn’t one. It is perfectly fine to say Republicans criticize Obama on the issues without bringing race into it at all. But when, according to recent polls, a majority of Republicans now believe with absolutely no evidence that he was born in Kenya, what else are we to assume but that they are at least somewhat racially motivated?

There is one other option I can think of that has nothing to do with race. A majority of Republicans approved of the policies I mentioned above until the moment a Democrat entered office. I suspect that they agree with many of Obama’s policies, but can’t bring themselves to support a Democrat. So a few cling to absurd reasons to oppose him through accusations that he’s a foreigner or a spy or a Nazi. And that’s not racism or nativism, it’s just partisan loyalty creating denial about Obama’s real policies.

Paul Wiele

Senior psychology major

Published on March 8, 2011 at 12:00 pm