Super Bowl Racial Politics

With all the media hype that leads up to the Super Bowl every year, you know there is going to be some type of politicization surrounding the big game, and of course, this year was no exception. Michelle Malkin has the goods on the Prudential Ad that the NY Times claims is directly linked to the war in Iraq. Of course it's just a ridiculous accusation to push their ongoing political agenda.

What I find to be the most polarizing and politically repugnant use of the game is the race card. Yes the race card. Of all the media hubbub surrounding the Super Bowl, the one aspect that gained more attention than any other was the fact that it was the first time in history that both teams are led by black head coaches. Is this a great accomplishment? Of course, it's always a tremendous accomplishment for anyone to make it to the Super Bowl. However, when we as a society say that it is of greater significance and importance for one race to accomplish something than it is for another, this does nothing but breed racial disparity and inequality. In this day and age there are not very many people who actually believe there is a fundamental difference between a human being based solely on his color. When the media constantly brings up differences between us and what we've accomplished it creates a resentment that makes us focus on what we don't have, instead of what we have been blessed with.

I read an article online last week where a 'racial studies professor' at a state university in New York commented about the Super Bowl coaches, "this is a great day for the 'black community'". What the hell is the black community? What if I made the comment that this is a great day for the 'white community' because both quarterbacks in the Super Bowl are white? Well, I would be called a bigot, a racist, every name in the book. Why? because I'm not a 'minority.' Double standards. That's what it comes down to.

So back to the commercials. A plethora of 'black history month' commercials abounded during the Super Bowl. What is 'black history', or for that matter, what is 'white history'? History is not separated based upon race, color, or creed, only upon the actual events that happened at a certain time, in a certain place, to a certain amount of people. To place all those with dark skin under one heading does a huge disservice to them, just as it would to place all those with light skin under a separate heading.

We've got to stop beating the dead horse of affirming those based upon their race, and not upon their accomplishments. If we want justice and equality for all then we must end the racism of giving favor to those people who were disparaged against generations ago and reward them only for their successes today. Only then will there be true freedom and justice for all.

Mary Katharine Ham has a great piece today about all this.

"Minorities are getting lower grades than other students. Lower the standards! Minorities aren't getting into colleges at the same rates as other students. Give them special race-based admissions programs! Minorities need help. Give them expensive social programs of questionable efficacy!

The liberal solution to these problems has never been one that grants minorities the dignity of achieving success. In fact, it assumes they are incapable of achieving it without extensive help from liberal government programs."

And there you have it. Exactly what I've been trying to say!