So you’ve probably heard now that comedian Jackie Mason, 1. isn’t dead, and 2. kicked off a little tiff by referring to President Obama as a schvartze. It probably just would have gone down as another Michael Richards incident, if not for the fact that when Mason was mobbed by reporters he wasn’t cowed in the slightest. He dug in, stood his ground, and pointed out that comedians like Chris Rock hurl racial epithets at whites all the time and never have to answer for it. At that point what would otherwise have been an embarrassing situation involving an old man stuck in his ways became something much, much more potent, valid social commentary. I’m sorry to say that unless more people have balls like Mason, this will not set a trend.

Already we’re seeing that the hypersensitivity about race that pervades our society is stifling another time honored tradition, incisive criticism about our president and his policies. Whoever said politics is a full contact sport was a keen observer not just of how campaigns are conducted, but of the savagery of political commentary stretching not just back to the birth of our republic, but to the birth of socially poignant writing. Aristophanes wrote plays almost 3000 years ago which accused politicians of being homosexuals, diplomats of being profiteers, informants of being greedy good for nothings (though he does find a creative use for one in The Acharnians), and the masses as easily deceived. We’ve certainly been equally as mean and scathing in our own depictions of our politicians, comparing them to pigs, cavemen, and yes, even apes.

Which brings me to tying it all together. Recently the New York Post ran a cartoon comparing the administration’s economic policy to the chimp that went crazy and tore a woman’s face off. Had this been a president Clinton, no big deal. Had it been Bush, it would have been trite and overdone (impossible to count the number of times when Bush was called a chimp). The problem is, it was about Obama. And so the fit hit the shan. The Post was mobbed by people decrying it as “racist.” They were badgered into giving an apology, and with great reluctance they did. Scant were the voices suggesting that maybe this special social consideration we give in our exact phrasing when dealing with people of color really ought to have a limit. Scant were the voices saying that limit is reached when people have valid points to make about the governance of our nation, irrespective of the color of the skin of our president. Somebody said “chimp” while we have a black president, so there was no time for serious thought about incisive critique when there’s placards to make and marches to be done.

And so, I fear the Post is just the first of many valid critics that will be shut down or overridden because we’ve decided the personal protections of racial sensitivity shield one even at the detriment of public discourse. I’d like to think that men of principle will take a stand, but the truth is Jackie Mason will probably be the exception and not the rule. Jackie’s got principles, but I think he’s standing his ground on this one more because he’s old and just doesn’t give a s**t anymore. The rest, who actually have something to lose, will mute themselves and retract. Electing a black president was supposed to be a positive thing for this country, but so far all I see is that the satirist will be muted, the cartoonist more hesitant to draw. Things that need to be said will go unsaid. That’s not a positive thing to happen on the watch of the first black president. And, frankly, if our hypersensitivity about race will continue to override the basic need in a free society of the critic and satirist to attack policy, then I don’t mind standing up and saying that Barack Obama should be our last black president. No more till we have no qualms about criticizing the man in some terms that might be seen as mean.