08.08.10
Your hard-earned tax dollars going directly to corrupt race hustlers
. . . and Charlie Rangel is at the center of it. No surprise there.
07.30.10
Then there’s this aspect of the Sherrod saga
Their scamming of the USDA for big bucks for 86,000 black farmers (um, there are really only 40,000, but no matter) in the 1990s. How outrageous is that? Accusing the Clinton-era USDA of systemic discrimination? And just what is at the bottom of the department subsequently hiring this woman who had just bilked it?
07.27.10
Shirley Sherrod’s husband
Whooeee, does this guy ever get ripe with the Marxist liberation rhetoric.
07.21.10
Shirley Sherrod – latest developments and latest thoughts
It all just gets more tangled. How to, shall we say, put this Sherrod lady in context? If her speech was “moving and heartfelt,” as Rich Lowry sees it, when heard in full, does that automatically make her a person of impeccable sense and integrity? As I say in the post below, she is still motivated by the left’s real crowbar by which it pries apart a free society’s framework: class envy.
So we all, including BN, must now acknowledge that the portion of the clip Brietbart posted on the Net gives no indication as to how she was going to conclude her story.
This is not to deny any single word that she did utter, and she uttered some humdingers.
Shirley Sherrod and the matter of context
So it turns out that she related the story of the white farmer to show how she had evolved. Two things about that: 1.) She knew she would get knowing nods and chuckles from her NAACP audience by relating how she initially felt about the white farmer. Hardly an affirmation of the group’s having moved beyond racial suspicion and stereotyping. 2.) What she evolved from racial preconceptions to was class envy – the haves and have-nots way of seeing the world.
07.20.10
That tiresome race issue just won’t go off somewhere and die like it needs to
You know that post from a couple of days ago, asking what department in the FHer regime is the most sinister? My nomination that day was Justice, but now I’m thinking it may be Agriculture, for its employment of a monster like Shirley Sherrod. Of course, there’s her racism. Then there’s the obvious disdain for the occupational field of farming dripping from her remarks. Then there’s the reinforcement of the notion that, even though actual farming is for squares and crackers, there are some real cool bureaucratic jobs to be had on the government gravy train, from which you never get laid off and in which you can push those square cracker farmers around.
You know, this morning as I was giving the Real Clear Politics line-up a once-over, I saw a column title for a piece by lefty writer Eugene Robinson along the lines of “Tea Partiers Must Do More To Repudiate Racists Within Their Ranks.” I can’t remember the exact wording, but I checked it out because I was intrigued to see what kind of substantiation he would provide that the movement has racism in it. Turns out his big evidence is some California talk-show host named Mark Williams who posted a mock letter from Ben Jealous to Abraham Lincoln on his website. Hell, I’d never heard of Mark Williams, and I’m pretty knowledgable about players in the world of right-of-center punditry. Was the letter in over-the-top poor taste? You bet. Does it provide substantiation for the claim that Williams may harbor racist sentiments? Absolutely. Was he expelled pronto from the Tea Party Federation? Of course.
So, Mr. Robinson, what else ya got?
Another thing that needs to be pointed out is that Williams is a commentator. He is not in a position to affect the livelihoods of hardworking people who make possible the nation’s food supply.
Memo to yay-hoos who inevitably are going to be a small element within the tea-party movement: Shut up and grow up.
Memo to all Freedom-Haters in the employ of the federal government: Your goose is cooked. We’re going to oust every last one of you and reverse all your policies. Oh, yes.
07.13.10
Because you can’t keep an America-loather out of her environment, even if going there seems ill-advised
Hey, just passin’ along ABC News’s headline for this story: “Michelle Obama addresses NAACP before vote on resolution on “racist” elements in tea party movement.”
Real unifiers, these people.
04.19.10
When they start dissing Zo, BN gets involved
As I’ve said a few times recently, I’m really trying to keep my take on our national divide rooted in ideas and principles. This is, after all, a struggle for the understanding of the efficacy of free-market economics, a streetwise foreign policy, and the restoration of a culture based on decency, dignity, common sense and acknowledgement of God’s centrality. Getting mired in distractions takes time we don’t have. Plus, as we skirt the edges of a “teacher-he-called-me-a-name-first” level of struggle, we run the real risk of losing sight of that decency, dignity and common sense we want to have informing our culture.
Still, it’s getting to where one can’t avoid addressing the juvenile, vulgar and supremely disingenuous – and occasionally violent – level to which the left has taken this conflict. There were Bill Clinton’s disgusting insinuations about tea-party-ism boiling over into Oklahoma City-style anarchy. There was the savage beating of the Bobby Jindal campaign stafffer and her boyfriend in the French Quarter. Just today, I ran across a truly idiotic column by effete east-coast simpering pointy-head E.J. Dionne that I won’t even bother to link to; you can probably accurately guess its content. Tea-partiers are “privileged” and mainly concerned with protecting their “privileges.”
But now comes Charles Blow, one of the New York Times’s simpering pointy-heads, giving the most dismissive account of a Texas tea party you can imagine. He has the gall to try to denigrate the motives and effectiveness of AlfonZo Rachel, who has more character, insight, common sense and ability to communicate plain truth than Blow could cultivate if he lived another thousand years.
There really are two universes occupying the geographic space occupied by the United States of America. They cannot coexist for long.
02.05.10
The twenty-first century gets weirder by the minute – today’s edition
Only FHer off-the-chart goofballs could make a political correctness issue – to the point of poisoning the atmosphere with implications of racist caricature – out of foods that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. actually immensely enjoyed.
01.12.10
Let’s move the discussion back to his hard-left policies
The Las Vegas Review-Journal has pretty much my take on the Harry Reid “Negro dialect” dustup. It did its damage. Now it’s time to get back to his totalitarian plans for taxes, health care and the environment.
08.21.08
Wish I had more of ‘em myself
In one way, I’d love to see the how-many-homes brouhaha go to its obvious conclusion – The Chicago Marxist’s Tony Rezko problem. In another way, though, I find this kind of fracas so embarrassing that I’d like to see it die a quick death.
As was my position in my post about who took how much campaign money from oil companies, I think it’s important to shift the terms of the debate. In that post, I said oil was beautiful, a thing to be celebrated. Similarly, I think the main point ought to be how wonderful it is to have many homes, how exquisitely blessed we are to live in a society so free that our economy affords us such opportunities.
It’s imperative that when the Freedom Haters trot out an assumption about the shamefulness of something that is, on the contrary, patently wonderful, we instantly and loudly say so. We must understand that they are trying to set us up to regard these things disparagingly, so it will be easier for them to deprive us of them once they have seized the entire means of production and obliterated every last individual’s imagination, ambition and basic zest for life.
