L.A. Times: Hey, Did We Mention That You Romney Voters are ALL Racists

Sandy Banks of the L.A. Times has figured out why anyone would vote against Barack Obama. Why, they are all racists, of course. Oh, you don’t use “the N word,” she tells us, but we know what you Romney voters really think.

Banks dropped all pretense of logic or fairness in her November 4 piece going right for the throat and claiming that the nation’s “kumbaya era” is over merely because a white man dared run against Barack Obama for the office of President of the United States.

Like all these hate-filled screeds that cast any non-Obama voter as a racist, Banks doesn’t bother trying to actually explain how a nation that elected a black man for president could suddenly, at the drop of a hat, revert to pre-civil rights oppression, she just states it straight as if it is obvious fact.

This has been the single most disgusting attack against Romney voters and, if Obama loses his bid for reelection, be prepared to see every last left-winger on TV and in the commentariat claim that the only reason Obama lost is because the country is filled with hood-wearing, Jim-Crow-loving, racists.

Banks notes that she and her “reporter” friends hear from people “on the campaign trail” who explain to them why they are voting for Romney this time.

When those flag-waving voters are asked what they mean, their take on the president makes it clear: He’s Kenyan-born, he’s a closet Muslim, he has European-socialist tendencies.

But, even those claims, she says, are lies fostered by Romney voters. Such voters, Banks says, are using Obama’s failure over the economy, his failures in foreign policy, and his bowing and scraping to our enemies as a “proxy” to hide their racist hearts.

No one is using the N-word these days. The “foreign” label is its proxy — a signal that Obama is the “other” in a nation trying to come to grips with seismic economic changes and unsettling demographic shifts.

Banks goes on to use that boring, pervasive idea popular among her fellows that code words explain how racism is as bad in America todayas its ever been. She can’t find any overt racism, of course, so she has to pretend she can read between the lines to find it.

This is the racebaiter’s oldest trick. As race relations improved in America — now to the point where but a relative few care much about race — the chiefs of the racebaiting industry have to employ mind reading exercises and plumb wild-eyed inference to “find” their racism so that they can continue to make money off of it.

Banks also issues one of the biggest hypocrisies I’ve seen in an article of this nature for sometime.

Banks tries to pretend that the solid, near 100% support that blacks have for left-wing Democrats somehow can’t be an exercise in racism. In fact, she tries to pretend that the near solid black vote for Democrats doesn’t even exist. How does she say that? Because we had Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas.

Obama’s race does indeed mobilize black voters; his vision coincides with our interests. But black voters don’t always lean black. Ask Clarence Thomas or Herman Cain about that.

Sorry, Mz Banks, but if whites voting in the majority for Romney is somehow an example of racism, there is no logical way to claim that blacks voting as a block for Obama isn’t racist.

Naturally, Banks uses that lie of a poll disgorged from the Associated Press last week to “prove” that racism is worse now than ever in America.

What we have here is someone that longs for real racism to return to America, a person using the failed Obama presidency as fodder to reignite it. Like all racebaiters, Sandy Banks wants the worst of racism to return in America so that she can continue to make money off the hate.

Not So Funny In Philadelphia
VIDEO: African American Ohioan Explains Why She's Voting for Romney
  • jim_m

    LAT: Romney voters are Raaaaacist!!

    “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

  • GarandFan

    Banks is rather ignorant as a “reporter”. Isn’t she aware that ‘the race card’ has expired?


    • jim_m

      Actually you used an exclamation point. There is a difference.

    • Your utterly predictable and mindless opinion has been recorded, and will be ignored in the order in which it was received.

    • 914

      Prince= IDIOT! PERIOD!

  • Hank_M

    Banks column is only the beginning.

    Banks and other libs can’t seem to grasp that Obama has been in over his head from the day he entered politics. There is nothing, absolutely nothing in his political career that can be listed as a worthwhile accomplishment except for winning the Presidency. And that was accomplished by a perfect storm of events; incredible media assistance/bias, Bush fatigue, a weak weak campaign by McCain, and a national hope to put racial division behind us.

    I see she has the typical excuses for Obama’s impending defeat.
    She blames Repubs but fails to consider the 1st 2 years of the presidency when the dems controlled everything.

    And of course, racism. She states that “Racial animosity has actually increased in the last four years.” Look no farther than Barrack Obama for the reason for that.
    He’s been the most divisive President we’ve seen in decades.

    She states that “The “foreign” label is its proxy — a signal that Obama is the “other” in [our] nation…” Puhleeze. It’s Obama himself that ran ads that said,
    “Mitt Romney. Not one of us.”

    Thankfully Sandy Banks isn’t a racist.
    After all, some of her best friends are white.

  • jim_m

    The argument seems to go like this

  • 914

    That’s right!

    And I gladly pulled the lever against Hope and Change =Tyranny and misery. You can bet if Herman Cain was the GOP nominee they would still play the expired card. When you’ve got nothing you got nothing to lose.

    • I’ll just reiterate for the peanut gallery that when the issue is whether a black man is “authentic,” one might take into account whether his ancestors were victims of American slavery, as Cain’s were, or perpetrators, as Obama’s were.

  • JWH

    Inaccurate headline. The linked piece is a column, representing the opinion of one writer, not the official opinion of the LA Times.

    Note: A number of papers carry an array of views in their opinion pages. None really represents the official view of that paper.

  • We tried electing a black man, but spurious allegations of womanizing put Herman Cain’s campaign out of order.

  • GiantPotatoMan


    So wait, Romney voters are racist? LOL

  • By coincidence, I’ve recently been reading some books about the Bad Old Days of race relations in this country. Having some otherwise unemployable soft-science wackademics level the charge of Unconscious Racism at modern society does not impress me.