Barry's Rules?

In which a conservative/libertarian responds to last week's guest commentary.

by Michael Washburn

If Barack Obama wins in November, some readers of this newspaper will be ecstatic. They, and many millions of others, can't get enough of the man's persona and promise.

I'll certainly hand it to Obama for defeating the erstwhile Biggest Name in Democratic Politics. But Obama is disturbingly, even dangerously, wrong on several issues. David Faris did not address them in his article [Slant, "After the Landslide," June 12, 2008].

Obama will interfere with law enforcement and endanger homeland security. Imagine that you are a commercial airline pilot. One day, you notice that several men waiting at the gate to board your plane are whispering to each other and looking around nervously. Your impulse might be to report them or bar them from getting on the plane, but if they are Middle Eastern, you'll be committing a serious infraction. It's known as racial profiling, and Obama has pledged to eliminate it. Under the current definition, any scrutiny of suspicious behavior by members of a given minority can be considered racial profiling, even if you feel that you would do the same thing were the suspects of another race.

Obama says that he plans to focus on curbing racial profiling by federal agencies and state and local police. This will make it harder to arrest drug dealers on the street and others whose behavior sometimes fits a recognizable pattern, not to mention the effect on FBI agents looking for terrorists. If they question or arrest members of one group at a higher rate than another group, then — evidence aside — they'll be violating Obama's federal ban on profiling.

Obama's approach to issues of race and discrimination is outmoded. We already have an overly litigious corporate culture, in which people sue their employers or former employers for all kinds of frivolous reasons. A restaurant in Myrtle Beach, S.C., should never have had to settle in 2005 because they did not maintain business hours that visiting black bikers found convenient. Anheuser-Busch should never have had to shell out $125,000 to a black former employee who was fired for absenteeism. Yet Obama wants to strengthen antidiscrimination laws, encouraging more lawsuits.

The department's sin? It required applicants to take a basic math test, and only 59 percent of black applicants passed, compared to 85 percent of whites. The test was simple. (Sample question: On Tuesday, Officer Jones worked the 3-11 p.m. shift. At 10:55 p.m. he was called to the scene of an accident where he remained until 1:30 a.m. How long past his regular shift did Officer Jones work?) In a sane society, the focus would be on improving the preparedness of applicants. But this is Obama's way, and we're likely to see more.

Obama's rhetoric smacks of socialism. He loves to talk about "going after" business, but America was supposed to be a place where people could pursue their dreams and visions, even if some of us might not like them. We give tolerance and get it. If we don't like what a CEO or corporation is doing, we can choose to spend or invest our money elsewhere. I personally may believe that racial integration, recycling, fair pay and other things are good, but I would never dream of using the power of the state to force my whims on others. Obama will.

Views expressed in Slant are not necessarily those of City Paper. To reply to this Slant or submit one of your own, e-mail bhoward@citypaper.net.