Hi Edmond. I’m not saying every flip-flop by a politician is the result of racism. I’m saying Lindsey Graham is an example of how whiteness works, how power works. There are many pieces online about what has happened to Lindsey Graham. Don’t you agree? That means the public feels like something unique is going on with him. The public is saying these are not ordinary flip flops, the public seems to feel like he has changed in an unusual way. I’m saying — this is familiar. I suggest the privilege of being next to power, and in this case it is a white power, explains Graham. Whiteness to me can look like Lindsey Graham. It is a paradox; it contradicts itself; it is irrational but says it is rational, it is a shape shifter, it is a contortionist, it is moody, it is fragile, and it is untenable without shifting. The process to make what we see now in Graham is similar to the process to make whiteness — privilege, public recognition, affirmation from the powerful, alignment with the powerful, and duties with a vested interest to defend its position and privilege. Graham is the buffer for Trump the way white citizens are for elites. If all sorts of analysis can go out about Graham, why is this one, the one that points to whiteness, nonsense? Utter nonsense? If the Salon and the editor of Talking Points Memo can say Graham has daddy issues and a psychological need, why can’t I point to what Du Bois said about the public and psychological wage of whiteness? If pundits all over have said that Graham is servile before Trump, why can’t I compare him to a field hand and whites who looked up to plantation owners? Anyway, I appreciate your comment because I’m sure others may think the same and this gives me an opportunity to clarify.