Of course, Maddow’s remark, in context, an affectionate comment about how the presidency has aged Barack Obama, wasn’t a racist jab, but this is really not about her. It’s about the right trying to obtain a permission slip to call the President “boy.”
To be clear, I am not saying that the term “boy king” is an affectionate one. It isn’t. The earlier context makes clear Maddow’s intent, but it was a clumsy ad lib, one that she probably wouldn’t make again, and one that ought to address when she gets the chance.
Newsbusters‘ Jack Coleman is obviously being sarcastic when he calls Maddow a “closet racist,” his real point being to draw an equivalence between this clip, in which
Breitbart bloggers also wonder, alternately, if Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh could get away with this. Their premise obviously depends on the impossibility that Limbaugh would ever make an affectionate reference of any kind about Obama. It’s a silly question, even if you accept the premise, because Limbaugh “gets away with” far worse.
That’s part of the white privilege of never having to be racially demeaned by being called “boy.” It’s easy to tell someone to stop being so sensitive about something you’ll never have to experience.
Additionally, there will always be plenty of other white privilege deniers who will worship you for doing it, while even decent conservatives either turn a blind eye, or defend you, for fear of being drummed out of the club. It’s certainly a lot easier than actually paying attention to what you’re saying. There’s no consequence for race-baiting in conservative America, unless you’re wearing a white sheet and screaming the n-word, and even then, only if there’s video.
That’s the part that sickens me the most, people that I actually like, and respect, pretending they don’t know the difference between Maddow’s remark, and the historically demeaning
This post has been updated since publication.