In the opinion piece, now being referred to as "The Asterisk Editorial", the Journal Sentinel editorial staff wrote that "In losing a woman, the court with Alito would feature seven white men, one white woman and a black man, who deserves an asterisk because he arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America."
This comment has resulted in tremendously platitudinal backlash, with right-wing hypocrites throwing around terms like "thinly veiled Liberal racism" and recalling old strawman phrases like "acting white". But such claims are intellectually dishonest in the context of this editorial, and come down to a simple strategy: The right-wing is playing the race card again. And this time, like usual, they're laying a 2 of clubs and calling it an ace of hearts.
The notion that there is a black way of thinking that is expressly liberal in nature is strongly denounced by Project 21 members.
"Agree or disagree with Justice Thomas -- his personal journey from poverty in Pinpoint, Georgia to academic achievement at Yale Law School to high-level service in several federal positions and on the nation's highest court -- is an admirable example of personal dedication and success, not an asterisk," said Project 21 member Deroy Murdock.
Let's see if their objection to the editorial holds water...
- An NBC/WSJ poll in October showed that only TWO PERCENT of blacks approved of the President's job performance. This would seem to be a somewhat Liberal lean. Just slightly left of center. What?!? I'm just sayin...
- Recent SurveyUSA polling of blacks in Wisconsin and around the country shows that they are overwhelmingly Pro-Choice on the issue of abortion. In fact, 86% of blacks polled in the state say that the government should stay out of regluating abortion. 62% of blacks in the state say that the government should stay out of regulating gay marriage, and another 14% say the states should make that decision.
- Recent SurveyUSA polling of blacks in WIsconsin shows that 80% believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction [AHEM, under entirely Conservative rule that primarily mirrors the beliefs of one Clarence Thomas].
With the facts in hand, I'll go one step farther: Clarence Thomas absolutely does not f**king represent the views of mainstream black America. Clarence Thomas is so far from mainstream black America that he's not even in a dried up river bed compared to the main stream.
But perhaps the most offensive commentary of all is this blatantly over the top tripe from a local talk show host, who takes a downright orwellian stand against plain and simple facts in a Wisconsin Policy Research Institute article.
The New Plantation Mentality
By Charles Sykes
This week it became official: it is now acceptable to use racially-charged slurs against African-Americans . . . as long as they are conservative.
In other words, Clarence Thomas doesn't count as black, because he doesn't think or behave like a black person is supposed to -- a not-so-distance echo of the schoolyard jibe that a successful minority student was "acting white."
the message was the same: you cannot be both conservative and black. And any black who exercises independent thought and breaks with the left can be subjected to the crudest of racial slurs, stereotypes, and reductionism. The message: Deviate and we will turn on you.
Thus the dark side of diversity: group identity trumps individual identity. If you are a minority, you will be judged not by the content of your character, but by the color of your skin and your willingness to be "representative" of its dominant ideology. Under this logic, had the president appointed Janice Rogers Brown, she would not have counted either as a woman or a black, although she is both. Under the "asterisk" test, minorities only count if they stay on the liberal plantation.
The left's contempt for conservative minorities is, of course, not new. But it has seldom been stated so bluntly and openly and it comes at a time when the acceptable bigotry of the left is increasingly on display.
Racially-charged slurs? Contempt? Reductionism? A Liberal Plantation?
All of these ad hominem attacks because the newspaper made a truthful, defensible statement: "[Clarence Thomas] arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America."
Truth is truth, regardless of how many race cards are laid on the table by right-wing hypocrites.
Making a statement that most blacks lean to the left on political issues is a "racially-charged slur"? Implying that Clarence Thomas is to the right of most black Americans is "Reductionism"?
At its core, the original statement was an ideological one, and it continues to be a purely ideological debate.
Right-wingers are not offended on this issue because of any real racism. Rather, they are offended at receiving another reminder of just how badly their message has failed to resound in mainstream black America.
And to a winger like Limbaugh or Hannity or Sykes or the writers of the WSJ Opinion Page, that's the biggest insult that could ever be thrown at a black man or woman:
"You, sir or ma'am, don't think like a Conservative."
Oh dear God the humanity. Somebody call the thought police. Oh forget it - they are already all over this story.
KEYWORDS: Milwaukee, Racism, Conservatives, Hypocrisy
Sign up for a Complimentary Member Account... Join the community! It's fast. And it'll allow you to take advantage of all this site's great features!
|< Is it about to be blown open? | Senator MBNA Breaks Ranks on Alito >|