Carter’s Racism Charge Sparks War of Words

Former President Jimmy Carter’s view that some of the recent protests against President Obama, including the “You Lie!” outburst by Representative Joe Wilson last week, are “based on racism,” has fueled a new war of words over this already charged issue.

The former president first weighed in on Tuesday during a question-and-answer session at the Carter Center in Atlanta. Mr. Carter responded to a question about Mr. Wilson’s eruption by saying that he did believe it was laced with racism. Coupling the Wilson remark with the images in recent weeks of angry demonstrators wielding signs depicting Mr. Obama as a Nazi or as Adolf Hitler, Mr. Carter said: “There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president.”

He lamented the tone of disrespect toward the current president, adding: “Those kind of things are not just casual outcomes of a sincere debate on whether we should have a national program on health care. It’s deeper than that.”

Mr. Carter’s criticisms drew a sharp response from Michael Steele, the African-American chairman of the Republican party, who called the remarks an “outrage.” In a statement, Mr. Steele said: “President Carter is flat out wrong. This isn’t about race. It is about policy. This is a pathetic distraction by Democrats to shift attention away from the president’s wildly unpopular government-run health care plan that the American people simply oppose. Injecting race into the debate over critical issues facing American families doesn’t create jobs, reform our health care system or reduce the growing deficit. It only divides Americans rather than uniting us to find solutions to challenges facing our nation.”

Mr. Steele called on President Obama to reject the former president’s assessment. A White House spokesman declined to comment directly on Mr. Carter’s views, citing remarks made by Robert Gibbs, the press secretary, on television this past Sunday that Mr. Obama did not believe the protests or opposition were based on the color of the president’s skin.

By stepping into the debate in such an explicit way, Mr. Carter used labels that the White House and others have clearly tried to avoid in the wake of Mr. Wilson’s remarks and last weekend’s angry demonstration on the Washington Mall. White House aides and some lawmakers had earlier deflected or dismissed questions centered on whether a racially tinged prism was underfoot, in what seemed a concerted effort to try to stay above the fray.

In a television interview on Sunday, Mr. Wilson, who was officially rebuked by the House on Tuesday, dismissed suggestions that his actions were racially motivated. One of his sons sprung to his defense after Mr. Carter’s remarks were publicized, saying his father didn’t have a “racist bone” in his body.

Meanwhile, Mr. Carter elaborated on his answer in a separate interview with NBC anchor Brian Williams. In the interview, which was taped for an upcoming feature timed for Mr. Carter’s 85th birthday and released on Tuesday, the former president drew on his Georgia roots and further added fuel to the fire.

“I live in the South and I’ve seen the South come a long way,” he said. But, “I think it’s bubbled up to the surface because of a belief among many white people not just in the south but around the country … that African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It’s an abominable circumstance and grieves me and concerns me very deeply.”

Mr. Wilson’s son, Alan, an Iraq veteran who is running for state attorney general, was widely quoted defending his father in the wake of the Carter criticism: “He doesn’t even laugh at distasteful jokes. I won’t comment on former President Carter, because I don’t know President Carter. But I know my dad, and it’s just not in him.”

“It’s unfortunate people make that jump,” Alan Wilson continued. “People can disagree — and appropriately disagree — on issues of substance, but when they make the jump to race it’s absolutely ludicrous. My brothers and I were raised by our parents to respect everyone regardless of background or race.”

In response to a request for comment, Bill Burton, the White House deputy press secretary, wouldn’t address Mr. Carter’s remarks directly. Instead, he referred us back to those made by Mr. Gibbs on Sunday. “I don’t think the president believes that people are upset because of the color of his skin. I think people are upset because on Monday we celebrate the anniversary of the Lehman Brothers collapse that caused a financial catastrophe unlike anything we’ve ever seen.” Mr. Gibbs counseled that everyone needed to take a deep breath to defuse the hot rhetoric bandied about.

Other prominent officials however, like Representative James Clyburn, the Democratic majority whip from Mr. Wilson’s home state, have publicly implored the White House to directly confront what they view as an unseemly element aimed at, in Mr. Clyburn’s words “delegitimizing” the president. Don’t let it fester, he warned.

Many have argued otherwise, noting that it would be a treacherous road for the president to level a charge of racism at opposition, in part because his detractors — as they did during his election campaign — would likely retort that he’s playing the race card. (In the wake of Mr. Carter’s remarks, that’s exactly what Mr. Steele did, accusing Democrats of employing the race card.)

Instead, for now, White House aides and some lawmakers seem to be working from a different playbook. Along with Mr. Gibbs’s response on Sunday, take a look at these two takes — articulated in separate, unrelated venues on Tuesday.

No. 1, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was asked at his daily briefing whether he agreed with members of the Congressional Black Caucus that racism played a role in Mr. Wilson’s comments. He first indicated that he didn’t see a racial connotation in those remarks. But pressed about the angry protests and asked what else might underlie the vituperative reactions, Mr. Hoyer offered a lengthy digression on Mr. Obama’s election popularity, the expectations carried with it, and the economic downturn that accompanied his rise to the White House. Then, Mr. Hoyer said: “Americans are fearful right now. And they are angry at what has happened to their country and those they hold responsible for what has happened.”

No. 2, Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, used similar words in an interview with Anne Kornblut of The Washington Post. Ms. Dunn said she didn’t believe the protests were racially motivated. “I think that is less a part of it than some other people might think,” Ms. Dunn was quoted as saying. “If you look at the history of this country, you see that in times of great stress and change, there are people who are concerned, who are threatened, there are people who are scared.”

Nearly all agree that the level of hostility aimed at Mr. Obama runs extremely high. Mr. Hoyer termed it unusually harsh. Some attribute part of the volume to the 24/7, Web-and-cable news driven world that we live in. Mr. Hoyer also noted policy divisions, including those who are also angered by how their tax dollars are being used, given the bank and auto bailouts by the government.

But he added: “Now to the extent that Mr. Obama’s race plays a role in this, it is difficult for me to assess. I have said what I said, that I hope that that’s not the case.”