New York Times Editorial, "President Obama’s Anguish": Once Again, It's All About the One

You see, it's all about our Narcissist-in-Chief.

After the tragedy involving the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, President Obama, a Constitutional lawyer, went on record as saying:

"But my main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness it deserves, and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened."

Had I been a defense attorney for George Zimmerman, and if he had been convicted, I would have claimed that Obama's statement was the basis for a mistrial.

Yesterday, Obama doubled down on his earlier remarks:

"You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is: Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago."

Why doesn't this ring true? As a teenager, Obama attended the Punahou School, a top private school in Honolulu. From the Punahou School, he went on to Columbia University and Harvard Law School. After becoming the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review, Obama received a fellowship from the University of Chicago Law School to write "Dreams from My Father." And from there, eight years in the Illinois Senate, a "nifty" real estate deal with Tony Rezko, four years as a US Senator, and then two terms as president of the United States.

Bottom line, Obama was always on an entirely different trajectory from that of Trayvon Martin.

In a prior editorial entitled "Trayvon Martin’s Legacy" (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.co.il/2013/07/new-york-times-editorial-trayvon.html), The New York Times went on record as saying, "Mr. Zimmerman’s conviction might have provided an emotional catharsis." Regrettably, however, for the Times, the purpose of criminal trials is not to provide "emotional catharsis." Rather, criminal trials by jury are intended to determine guilt or innocence on the basis of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Today, in a editorial entitled "President Obama’s Anguish" (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/20/opinion/president-obamas-anguish.html), The New York Times gushes over Obama's speech yesterday:

"President Obama did something Friday that he hardly ever does — and no other president could ever have done. He addressed the racial fault lines in the country by laying bare his personal anguish and experience in an effort to help white Americans understand why African-Americans reacted with frustration and anger to the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin.

. . . .

He said there are 'very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store' or 'the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off.'

'That,' he said, 'includes me.'

. . . .

Mr. Obama called on the Justice Department to work with local and state law enforcement to reduce mistrust in the policing system, including ending racial profiling."

Excuse my naivete, but where was there any evidence during the trial of underlying racism on the part of George Zimmerman?

And if we're about to end racial profiling, let's also put an end to all profiling. When persons are passing through airport security, let's undertake added security checks on a purely random basis, even if this means frisking ninety-year-olds in wheelchairs. Heck, what a relief for someone like me! I'm often dishevelled and not always clean-shaven. (There's a reason why, when I do an occasional TV commercial, I'm often cast as the bad guy.) And back in the 1980s when I was at college, my handlebar mustache somehow fit the "hijacker profile," and inevitably, while waiting for a flight, my name was called over the public address system for a pat-down. "What, not again . . ." You should have seen how other passengers cast wary glances at me; however, this never led to violence.

Yes, there is still much racism in America, and there is a proclivity to violence. But while racism was not demonstrated by the prosecution in the trial of George Zimmerman, President Obama insisted on explaining away the violent response to the Zimmerman verdict by alluding to racism, and in so doing, he again added fuel to the fire.

This was not the occasion for President Obama to go grandstanding. There is always a need to address and confront racism, but this was neither the time nor place. Timing is everything.

The New York Times editorial concludes:

"It is a great thing for this country to have a president who could do what Mr. Obama did on Friday."

Rubbish.