Showing posts with label race baiter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label race baiter. Show all posts

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Race Cards Flying While The DNC Plays Theatre


It is clear that the left thinks that conservatives are winning the national argument on Obamacare. Exhibit One is how the left is throwing race cards with wild abandon in an attempt to stop further debate and delegitimize those protesting Obamacare. On a related note, there is the DNC's incredibly hypocritical bit of political theatre - an offer to Michael Steele to sign a joint statement of "civility" - designed both to highlight a supposed lack of civility on the right and to set the right up for a beating on this issue in the future.

The picture at the top of the page is Jesse Jackson, Jr holding a flip-open cam-corder. Rep. Clyburn and others of the Congressional Black Caucus marched through the protests in an effort to solicit any sort of racial remarks. Jackson was one of two members of their little group recording every second of their march. And yet not a single one of the fifteen claimed racial epitaphs were recorded, nor was anything resembling an intentional spitting. Indeed, not a shred of evidence has been produced from any source supporting the claims.

That has not stopped veteran race card tosser Colbert King of the Washington Post, whose editorial, In the faces of Tea Party shouters, images of hate and history, is as scurrilous a piece as I've ever read. King tells us that "[t]he angry faces at Tea Party rallies are eerily familiar," then draws direct parallels between the racist yahoos protesting against civil rights in the 50's and 60's to those protesting Obamacare today. His logic is impeccable, at least by progressive standards:

People attacking civil rights protestors in the 50's had angry white faces = racism.

People attacking civil rights protestors in the 60's had angry white faces = racism.

People protesting Obamacare at the Capitol had angry white faces = racism.

Besides his fatuous logic, King also demonstrates intermittent memory loss. King, fails to mention that the incidents in the 50's and 60's involved angry white DEMOCRATS. His memory returns when he mentions David Duke prominently as a Republican, but it fails him again when he speaks of association with the KKK. Sure, he remembers that Duke was a former member of the KKK, but he completely forgets that the only former member of the KKK in office today is a Democrat. He also forgets that George Wallace was a Democrat.

Eventually, Mr. King gives his assessment as to why there were all of the "angry white faces" at the Capitol Hill. Not surprisingly, Mr. King tells us that it had nothing to do with concern over the massive growth of government and spending our nation into penury:

Tea Party members, as with their forerunners who showed up at the University of Alabama and Central High School, behave as they do because they have been culturally conditioned to believe they are entitled to do whatever they want, and to whomever they want, because they are the "real Americans," while all who don't think or look like them are not.

And they are consequential. Without folks like them, there would be no Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity or Pat Buchanan. There would never have been a George Corley Wallace, the Alabama governor dubbed by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Diane McWhorter in a 2008 Slate article as "the godfather, avatar of a national uprising against the three G's of government, Godlessness, and gun control."

Hence, an explanation for the familiarity of faces: today's Tea Party adherents are George Wallace legacies.

They, like Wallace's followers, smolder with anger. They fear they are being driven from their rightful place in America.

Rightful place in America? Is King too blinded by his vile reverse racism to see that what the Tea Partiers fear is that America itself is being driven from its rightful place? That has nothing to do with racism - and indeed, it is hardly just whites who feel that way. But that is a debate that Mr. King clearly has no desire in which to engage. Indeed, it is one he wants to prevent from occurring. I look forward to the day when scurrilous race baiters like King are scourged and driven from the public square by public outcry. There is no reason King should not be treated precisely like Don Imus was for his racially charged remarks a few years ago. King should be out on his ass looking for a job more appropriate to his level of intellectual honesty and sophistication, perhaps as an unpaid diarist for Kos.

Leonard Pitts, Jr., another race baiter, has written similarly at Freep. You can read his piece here - and an exceptional reply from BlogProf here.

On a related note, the DNC made a highly publicized offer to the RNC chairman, Michael Steele, to sign a joint statement of "civility." Steele refused to do so - which was the right response. But he did so without comment, which was absolutely the wrong thing to do. Steele's should have responded with something akin to:

I can't sign your joint statement of civility because everything I have seen over the past several years leads me to believe that you are making your offer in bad faith. Now I could be wrong about that and, thus, let me make a proposal. In order for me to believe that you are making your offer in good faith, I need to see you first demonstrate it by denouncing the many acts of uncivil behavior you have ignored in the past few years, including specifically:

- The mob who vandalized GOP headquarters in North Carolina in 2004 and who left behind numerous obscenities scrawled across the walls.

- The drive by shooting of Bush Cheney headquarters in Knoxville, TN in 2004

- The seemingly omnipresent calls for the death of President Bush and comparisons of him to Hitler at virtually every left wing rally from 2004 to 2008.

- The matter of voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers. Even if the Obama Justice Dept. refuses to prosecute the case, you can and should denounce it.

- The beating of Kenneth Gladney by union goons who also called him a "nigger."

And on that topic, there is of course no place for racism or sexism in America today on either the right - nor the left. In order to restore civility, it is equally as important that you, in good faith, first denounce:

- Rev. Jerimiah Wright for his vile reverse racism.

- All of those on the left who have slimed Clarence Thomas because of his skin color, including most recently the authors and editors of The Root, who nominated Justice Thomas as one of the twenty "Black Folks We'd Like To Remove From Black History," along with a rogues gallery of cannibals and criminals. And, surprise, the editor in Chief of the Root is Henry Louis Gates, Jr. who also needs to be denounced for creating a racial incident out of a police response to reports of a burglary at his house.

- All who make scurrilous attempts to delegitimize policy arguments by playing the race card, including Colbert King for his attempt to smear the entire Tea Party movement as racists in the Washington Post today.

- All attempts by the left to label speech they disagree with as "hate speech," despite the lack of any identifiable "hatred" in such speech. Indeed, I think you need to accompany this acknowledgment with an apology to Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

- All efforts by the left to silence opposing speech, particularly on campuses across America.

- The horrendous sexism aimed at Sarah Palin that has been on-going since she appeared on the national scene two years ago.

- The ridiculous claims, repeated by the DNC, that the RNC was soliciting violence with their "fire Pelosi" campaign and a chart that showed Pelosi against a background of fire. Or likewise, Sarah Palin's chart showing gun targets over those jurisdictions that she thinks the right should target in the upcoming elections. This is incredibly disingenuous twisting.

To sum up, DNC, I will be more than happy to sign your joint statement of civility, if you will merely first play catch-up and prove your good faith by denouncing, individually, each of the uncivil acts above. My concern is, based on all of your prior acts, that you would apply an extreme double standard as to what constitutes civility on our relative parts - making your current request to sign a joint statement on "civility" not but the most hypocritical of ploys. But I look forward to be proven wrong. Indeed, can we set up a joint press conference for you to make your denunciations, after which we can hold a signing ceremony?

That is what Mr. Steele should have said. It is time to put these low rent, intellectually dishonest bastards on the defensive and keep them there.

Read More...

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

What Does It Mean When A World Class Race Baiter Accuses The Right Of Race Baiting? - A Golden Opportunity


[T]he assault on Sotomayor isn't about her skills as a jurist. This is classic race-based politics from the Republican right.

Jesse Jackson, Sotomayor Critics Just Race-Baiting, Chicago Sun Times, 3 June 2009

American voters say 55 - 36 percent that affirmative action should be abolished, and disagree 71 - 19 percent with Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayer's [sic] ruling in the New Haven firefighters' case, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Jammie Wearing Fool, quoting from a Quinnipiac poll, 3 June 2009

The irony here is just too good not to sit back and revel in it. So what does it mean when Jesse Jackson, our nation's historical race-baiter in chief, calls Republican criticism of Supreme Court Justice nominee Sonya Sotomayer "race baiting?" Given the incredible clarity of Sotomayer's statements, given that she recently summarily disposed of a reverse racism claim, and given the "historic significance" of Obama's election, it means that we have a golden opportunity to expose and severely retard one of the most destructive political forces our nation has ever seen - the identity politics of the far left.
__________________________________________________

Jesse Jackson and the entire left wing are all playing the race card in response to Republican charges that Sotomayor evinced reverse racism. None are attempting to actually address Sotomayer's words - that by virtue of her sex and nationality, she arrives at "better" judgments than a white man. Nor are they trying to defend those words in light of her summary adjudication of the New Haven Firefighter's case. One simply cannot defend all of that with the even a patina of intellectual honesty on the the grounds that it is anything other than reverse racism. And indeed, their silence on these two points is deafening. Instead, what we get from Jackson and the left - Bob Herbert and Charles Blow being but two other recent examples - are a series of ad hominem attacks on the people who are criticizing Sotomayor. Their abuse of the race card in this instance is just too blatant and obvious.

This actually could be a watershed event. Not because Sotomayor's nomination is going to be derailed - its not and, indeed, it should not be. She should instead be made into a permanent symbol of far left's identity politics and reverse racism. Nothing else will create, in any more stark terms, a picture of the politics of the far left and all that is wrong with it. Further, it does so at a time when, if the above Quinnipiac poll is accurate, tolerance for reverse racism, victim politics and government mandated inequality seems very much to be on the wain. And indeed, there are many intelligent voices providing the grounds for an end to these evils, Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell being two of the most notable.

The election of Obama was historic and meaningful. Obama expressly held out the promise of a post-racial America, but the reality has shown the opposite. He clearly has no intention of doing away with the victim politics of his base. But no matter - the mere fact of Obama's election has apparently soothed enough white guilt over slavery and the racism that remained in slavery's wake that tolerance for the left's victim politics is approaching a historic nadir. If this is exploited honestly and intelligently, it could well be that Obama's election comes to be both the high water mark of the marxian politics of the far left and, at the same time, the cause of its demise. Oh, but irony is such a wonderfully fickle thing.

At any rate, Republicans should be doing little else during the Sotomayor hearings and the run up to them except discussing the evils of reverse racism and affirmative action. And if they are really smart, they will trot out Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell and provide them with a national platform to discuss these issues. Indeed, let's see if we can set up a debate on this issue between Hanson and Sowell and, say, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Jesse Jackson. That's one I'd pay to see.








Read More...