Is Al Sharpton president of the United States? Or just attorney general?
I ask because it’s not clear where the rabble-rousing rev’s agenda ends and White House policy begins. These days, they are one and the same.
President Obama erased the final distinction Friday by describing the Florida shooting case exclusively in racial terms. Obama’s headline-grabbing statement that “Trayvon Martin could have been me” and his attempt to justify black anger were straight out of Sharpton’s playbook.
If the president felt the need to say something about race duty required him to emphasize the facts instead of endorsing racial manipulation.
Don’t get me wrong — a personal speech on race from the first black president could be a game-changer in the right context. But this one suffered a fatal flaw — it ignored the fact that race played absolutely no role in the trial, including in lawyer statements, the evidence, testimony and the jury’s unanimous verdict of not guilty. Even the FBI found no evidence of racism by defendant George Zimmerman.
If Obama felt the need to say something, duty required him to emphasize the facts instead of endorsing racial manipulation. Sadly, though, his remarks follow a recent pattern where he and Sharpton sing from the same page. Both distorted the case to paint a broad picture of blacks as victims of white racism and ignored Zimmerman’s half-Latino family.
Obama gives personal, expansive response to Zimmerman trial
Is Pres. Obama easing or stoking racial tension in America?
Were President Obama's comments risky?
Obama's risky admission -- after Zimmerman case America must do better on race
Soul Food -- finding peace after the Zimmerman verdict
100 Cities Hold Rallies For Trayvon Martin
To continue reading Michael Goodwin's column in the New York Post, click here.
Michael Goodwin is a Fox News contributor and New York Post columnist.