By Arturo Mora, Kansas City Star Midwest Voices columnist 2009

Pat BuchananPat BuchananConservative commentator Pat Buchanan thinks the Republican path to victory is to paint Democrats as favoring minorities. Despite the most optimistic claims that all is well now, race is a sensitive issue Americans continue to struggle with. The last thing this country needs is a resurgence of the politics of racial bitterness.

For the second straight day, yesterday on the Rachel Maddow Show, Buchanan spewed his venom. He claimed Republicans missed a major opportunity during the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings to make the point that she was an “affirmative action nominee,” and Democrats back affirmative action policies that hurt whites, especially white males.

Putting aside that the man is an ideological dinosaur likely to be ignored by party leaders, this would be unfortunate trip back in political time. The late conservative guru Lee Atwater himself acknowledged—after the horse had left the barn, of course—both the moral and political failings of seeking to divide and conquer Americans by pitting race against race.

What is the value to American society of that approach? Yes, the races have differences of opinion—and not just between them, pretty often within them too. There’s no reason to encourage ugliness where calm would work better.

Buchanan makes several false arguments, though some of the feelings he cites are understandable. Unlike Buchanan, who only touched on white resentments, President Obama, in a speech on race last summer, discussed how all sides have issues with how they are treated.

I can understand how the Ricci/New Haven firefighters case mentioned by Buchanan would bother some who feel denied a fair shot at jobs when fair minority hiring is also involved. There’s not an easy answer to that one.

I won’t even argue with Buchanan’s contention that Obama most likely wanted a female Supreme Court Justice, and a Latina if possible. I’ve pointed out before (read here) why I think there are good reasons for that.

Does that mean she’s not qualified, as Buchanan claims? Buchanan is flip in shrugging off her long and distinguished judicial career and educational background, making the ridiculous claim that Ivy League schools throw around summa cum laude’s like so many candies.

Let’s be clear, I’m not calling Buchanan a racist, but that is a commonly made racist or sexist assumption about minorities and women. He and those who think like him put an automatic stigma on all minorities or women, by painting all their achievements as the result of affirmative action.

In a sense that’s true, but only in that it was affirmative action that overturned centuries of often unspoken but insidious discrimination against minorities and women in hiring.

Despite many abuses—and the New Haven case may reflect one of those, I don’t know—does anyone doubt the overall value to our society of these changes? Are we not stronger when all sectors are fully participating?

I also don’t quite get the confusing claims of discrimination from a vocal minority of white males. Do you not see the makeup of the Senate, or of most corporate executive officers? White males still hold preponderant power and wealth in this nation, that’s a fact. Why the whining?

There are unfair advantages on all sides. Many have their favorite anecdote—often passed down as conservative talking points—about affirmative action abuse.

But minorities and women have many stories of their own, from over two centuries. And there is a sort of natural affirmative action that results from power and wealth passed on from generation to generation, and from hiring manager to buddies.

Buchanan’s most disturbing argument is that white men have made this country, so they should get all the benefits.

“White men were 100% of the people that wrote the Constitution, 100% of the people that signed the Declaration of Independence, 100% of the people who died at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, probably close to 100% of the people who died at Normandy. This has been a country built basically by white folks, who were 90% of the nation in 1960 when I was growing up and the other 10% were African-Americans who had been discriminated against.”

Good for him for at least admitting that last part. But what he seems to be saying is forget about all those others who worked in the background in those instances. Forget the role of minorities and women in forging this nation, it was all because of the white men who held power. Shame, Mr. Buchanan, shame.

Race is one of those false wedge issues that pit people of common interests against each other, with those in power reaping the most benefit. I hope Republicans are not so desperate for a comeback that they’d actually listen to his warped advice.