Today on Blogcritics
Home » Eric Holder’s Demagoguery, Legislation Writing Chimps, the Not-So-Magic Negro and the Monkey That Became President

Eric Holder’s Demagoguery, Legislation Writing Chimps, the Not-So-Magic Negro and the Monkey That Became President

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

In his official capacity as Attorney General, Eric Holder made a speech to Justice Department employees, saying:

Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards. …

We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race. …

It is an issue we have never been at ease with and, given our nation’s history, this is in some ways understandable. If we are to make progress in this area, we must feel comfortable enough with one another and tolerant enough of each other to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.

This is an exceptionally stupid, wrong and dishonest thing to say on every level, though it’s a common refrain of left wingers such as Mr. Holder. We have black history month, and school children know more about Jefferson holding slaves than about him founding the country. We’ve talked and talked and talked.

On top of which, we’ve got black folk working at every level of society. We’ve had two black secretaries of state. A black dude running the Justice Department just can’t have too much there to bitch about. What do we have to do to prove we’re cool? You want we should elect an affirmative action candidate for president, someone not vaguely qualified or experienced for the job mostly just because he’s black? That would be risking grave danger and damage to the nation just to prove a stupid point, wouldn’t it? God, I hope we’d never be that foolish.

What left wingers generally mean by saying that we haven’t talked enough about race is not that we should have an open, honest discussion of our observations and perspectives on racial issues. It’s that Whitey should feel more guilty and seek penance of being lectured to by self-righteous liberals — and of course giving over yet more of our money.

But this very crew has gone very far to in fact actively stifle any honest racial dialogue, certainly in any kind of workplace. You may commit the thought crime of noticing sometimes unflattering racial behavior patterns because Holder doesn’t have the technology to decode your internal thoughts yet. But you damn well know better than to discuss them aloud at work or in any polite company. Black folk might get a little more slack this way typically in the modern American workplace, but no white guy with bills to pay dare have any opinion other than the Correct Liberal Truth on anything that could be remotely purposely arbitrarily construed as racial.

Sean Delonas chimp cartoonWhich brings us to the Sean Delonas cartoon in the New York Post this same week, tying an out of control chimp to out of control legislators. Week’s news in review: A chimpanzee went crazy and violent and the police shot it. Also, the Democrats in Congress and the White House went crazy and violent with not just the U.S. Constitution but any possible kind of good sense, passing a trillionish dollar “stimulus” spending bill.

Delonas put the two events together, which I frankly find a little offensive. That was just a poor little chimp who got his wires crossed and unfortunately had to be put down. But that chimp never did anything so wicked as knowingly mortgaging our grandkids future to throw inhumanly large sums of money at their interest groups as did Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, and President Obama.

On top of which, a million monkeys typing for a million years could never have produced something as stupid and destructive or, Lord knows, as expensive as this legislative abomination. But that’s freedom of speech and a difference of opinion, and I reckon I’ll let that pass.

But wait — turns out that the Sean Delonas is guilty. Sean Delonas stands guilty of failing to anticipate the worst, ugly, stupid way that professional grievance mongers could conceivably purposely misconstrue his work.

Turns out, the chimp stood specifically for President Obama — a black dude being compared to a monkey — and shot dead! So it turns out that Delonas’ point was to say that we should kill the monkey President. Hot damn, Al Sharpton’s back in business! Cue the Aerosmith, “I’m back Back in the saddle again.”

Given the point of criticizing the stimulus bill, at least you can’t accuse Delonas of saying that the monkey was niggardly.

It takes a pretty evil mind to even think to twist the cartoon that way, and an even more considerably evil one to make public accusations against a mild mannered cartoonist that way. This is character assassination of the gravest order.

Of course, this again gives the lie to Holder and general liberal protests about wanting honest racial dialogue. Delonas wasn’t even thinking about any racial statement of even a mild kind, and he’s now known for advocating the assassination of the monkey president. And the New York Post editorial staff are co-conspirators. Why, they ran this cartoon in their paper the same day they ran a picture of President Obama! How much clearer could this be?

I’m sorry, did you say you noticed some difference in ethnic behavior patterns between different races in your workplace? Hold on while I hit record — now say that again.

Actually, I’d be pleased to get rid of this cheesy Marxist college professor. I’ve long dreamed of a real monkey president. Me and Tom T. Hall’s dream candidate would certainly not be monkeying with the books like President Obama. To paraphrase Tom T., would you rather have a monkey up in Washington, DC, or have the not-so-Magic Negro making monkeys out of you and me?

About Gadfly

  • Doug Hunter

    I also forgot the option b under choice 1 which is to blame blacks, but put it all on culture and not genetics (the Dave Nalle answer). This isn’t really a solution though as it just begs further questions of how this culture arose and what propagates it. If it was created in response to majority actions then you’re right back to choice #2.

  • Cindy

    Re #548


    See my posts at #90, 91, 93, 95 on
    Institutionalized Racism

  • Doug Hunter

    Institutionalized racism is a fantasy invented by a black panther to fill the gap and explain continued black underperformance in context of the decrease in overt racism. Even if you fall for the lie it’s a misnomer to label what is described as racism. It’s more of the unfortunate side effects of being poor and has nothing to do with skin pigmentation.

  • Hope and Change?

    I checked your “proof and references”…Like I said when called upon to document real examples of so called white prefrence we find no real data…just “it feels like”…”everybody knows”..or some academic bullshit conducted with biased samples by some affirmative action professor (aka King Barry)…blah..blah…NO HARD PROOF.

    So Cindy “splain” to me the role of affirmative action in sports?

  • Hope and Change?

    So if basketball would be “dumbed down” by using racial quotas…forcing less talented players to play based upon a point system for race….why cant we admit that forced diversity of quotas actually “dumbs down” the educational system..

  • Cindy


    I gave you proof. The points used at the university were clear. They benefited groups that are white.

    I’m not sure what you need. Do you think that there is going to be a program actually called “affirmative action for white people”?

    (I must say though–I’d much rather argue with you than insult you :-)

  • Hope and Change?

    Cindy..sorry but you are in fantasy land..there are no such programs! Just by saying it over and over again doesnt make it true!!

    What about sports???

  • Doug Hunter

    “I gave you proof.”

    Not really. There is nothing racist about a rural student point. If so, then every ‘urban’ or ‘inner city’ program must be called racist. I’m not sure your mind is ready to grasp the similarities though.

  • Cindy

    Sports? Not really my thing. I think sports are boring. I hate to be bored.

  • Hope and Change?

    Cindy so you admit that you are a racist???

    What about the short white guy guy who grew up in the affulent suburbs who never had the opportunity to roam the inner streets dodging bullets, not going to school and shooting hoops all day!

    How can we descriminate against him. His whole life he wanted to be in the NBA! And just because he is white he will never realize his dream!.. ohhhh the humanity!

    Cindy..if I didnt know you are sounding just like a left wing hypocrit….who voted for Barry just because he is black ….well… er….um….you know… half black

  • Hope and Change?

    Cindy..if I didnt know you better are beginning to sound like a left wing hypocrit….who voted for Barry just because he is black ….well… er….um….you know… half black

  • Cindy

    Well H&C, I’m afraid there’s no sense arguing with that analysis.

  • Cindy


    Just in case you missed my subtle implication in comment #562. I figured I would give you a diagram.

    Sports? I think sports are boring. (me)

    Cindy so you admit that you are a racist??? (you)

  • Cobra

    See Cindy? The merry-go-round starts again.

    None of the individuals who just posted had the guts to answer the two key questions:

    “Are you an integrationist, or a segregationist?

    Do you believe that “races” should remain sacrosanct, or mix to the point where the concept is completely irrelevant within three generations?”

    Oh no. They’d rather frame the issue into statistical mudslinging, and avoid the heart of the matter…that race is a social construct.

    Al Barger had the courage to finally answer those questions. I don’t agree with many things Al Barger says, but at least he addressed the issue, which led to a deeper, more complex, and more courageous conversation.

    Cindy, you answered part of the question earlier as well. This isn’t a pass/fail examination. People should have the guts to stand for what they believe in openly.


  • Hope and Change?

    Cobra..why are you afraid to compete fairly with white folks?

    Can you answer the qustion – Is it nature or nuture?

    Nature – are some minorty groups genetically predisposed with a lower intellect, or

    Nuture – is it that some minorty cultures dont value family life, marriage, good nutrution, eduction, work, drug free lifestyles, etc. and therefor cannot function normally?

    Well….which one is your excuse for needing to dumb down the system so you can compete?

    Stragge…you refuse to answer the sports question?

  • Cindy

    I say definitely ‘nuture’…at least in some cases.

  • Cobra

    Answer my questions first, H & C.

    I’ve only been asking them since Comment #161.

    Don’t be a coward. Prove to me you have a pair.

    After you do that, I’ll deal with yours.


  • Hope and Change?

    I believe people should screw who the want and live wherever they want…no one should force or deny people to intermiz or stay with their own kind.

    OK answer the questions…Cobra…how come a so-called Proud Black Man like yourself…is so afrain of competing fairly with white folk?

    (Cindy I thought you would be Sams Club today….I heard there is a big sale Depends, lard and Oreo cookies…)

  • Cindy

    lol you’re insults are getting better H&C :-)

  • Al Barger

    Hope & Change- I appreciate many of your sharp questions, but you should try to play nice. The Sams Club stuff wasn’t necessary.

    But Cobra, let me ask respectfully a related question. Do you agree with me that affirmative action programs are inherently and by definition racist? Do you support this kind of institutionalized racism?

  • Dr Dreadful

    You probably already realize this, Cobra, but there literally is no point in arguing with H&C.

    His ignorance and lack of understanding – his #560 being an absolutely spectacular example – is apparently boundless.

  • Cobra

    H & C writes:

    “I believe people should screw who the want and live wherever they want…no one should force or deny people to intermiz or stay with their own kind.”

    That’s an interesting answer. You dodge the questions by making a general non-committal comment that doesn’t explicitly state what you believe in. You’re essentially just agreeing with what is presently enforced by law. In other words…

    You copped out on the answer. You behaved cowardly. From what you DID write, one can surmise that you support “voluntary self-segregation”, which makes you H & C, a “Segregationist”. Given your past posts on this blog regarding African-Americans, that’s not surprising to me at all.

    H & C asks:

    “Cobra..why are you afraid to compete fairly with white folks?

    Even Al Barger says, “Life isn’t fair”. So why would I expect “fair” treatment in a nation with a dubious racial history like America? A self-defined Segregationist like yourself would should know better than to ask that question. I’m not afraid of competing with anybody. I’m also not oblivious to the existance of racial discrimination in America. The American table I’m sitting at plays with marked cards, with bottom dealing, and card counting by players who got their big stacks through theft, murder, slavery and Jim Crow, so don’t look cross at me for playing an angle.

    H&C writes:

    “Can you answer the qustion – Is it nature or nuture?”

    Science, not Cobra, but SCIENCE says that race is a social construct. You already seem to deny American History, and anti-minority discrimination in America. Don’t tell me you’re denying science, too?

    H&C writes in his follow up loaded, slanted, poorly designed gotcha question:

    “Nature – are some minorty groups genetically predisposed with a lower intellect, or

    Nuture – is it that some minorty cultures dont value family life, marriage, good nutrution, eduction, work, drug free lifestyles, etc. and therefor cannot function normally?

    Well….which one is your excuse for needing to dumb down the system so you can compete?”

    Science states that race is a social construct. Science in the last genome map of the United States tells me that upwards of 80 million Whites have African DNA running through their blood. In other words, H&C, you could be more “black” than I am genetically, which make your questions self-depricating.

    Putting that reality aside, H&C, if you want me to play in a rigged game, I’d be a fool not to take any advantage or leverage I can.

    I play to win.

    Al Barger writes:

    ” Do you agree with me that affirmative action programs are inherently and by definition racist? Do you support this kind of institutionalized racism?”

    Part 1. No. The primarily beneficiary of Affirmative Action is the White woman.

    Part 2. I support Affirmative Action BECAUSE America was founded on, and still to some extent, Institutional Racism. I could dump a whole load of data on you right about here, but I’ve found that most people still won’t accept it.
    But Princeton Sociologist Devah Pager has done extensive research on hiring, and discovered:

    “The results of these studies were startling. Among those with no criminal record, white applicants were more than twice as likely to receive a callback relative to equally qualified black applicants. Even more troubling, whites with a felony conviction fared just as well, if not better, than a black applicant with a clean background.”

    Stacked deck, Brother Al. Rigged Game. Tilted table.

    But remember Al, I didn’t create the “game”. I’m just a player in it.

    And I play to win.


  • Al Barger

    Cobra- Now YOU are dodging my simple question: Will you agree that affirmative action is inherently and by definition racist? Or if you prefer, is affirmative action inherently and by definition racist and sexist?

    Now, you might have points of argument for why you think we should have institutionalized racism to supposedly make life more “fair” by making up for blah, blah, blah. But do you deny that giving quotas or preferential treatment through affirmative action is racist?

    I will again affirm the wisdom of a late friend, who always told her children, “Life isn’t fair, and you don’t always get your turn.” This applies to pretty much EVERYONE whose name isn’t Kennedy or Bush of whatever pigmentation.

  • Hope and Change?

    [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]

    Marked cards? Jim Crow? Institutional Racism…. what a bunch politically correct bullshit

  • Hope and Change?


    So Cobra wants to bend the rules for blacks when it comes to jobs…but not in sports?

    Hmmmm so in football we want the best, the fastest and most agile….but in the rest of life you want to base your decision on someones skin color and not the merits of the person…hmmmm…

    Dr, I dont have a white guilt trip…[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]

  • Cobra

    Al Barger writes:

    “Cobra- Now YOU are dodging my simple question: Will you agree that affirmative action is inherently and by definition racist? Or if you prefer, is affirmative action inherently and by definition racist and sexist?

    This was my exact answer:

    “Part 1. No. The primarily beneficiary of Affirmative Action is the White woman.”

    Al, I gave a direct answer to your question…“NO.” That’s not the answer you wanted to hear, but it’s the answer you got. Ask yourself a question…if a program helps Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans and White Women, where’s the “racism” at?

    Al Barger writes:

    ” But do you deny that giving quotas or preferential treatment through affirmative action is racist?”

    First, quotas are illegal. As I said before, Affirmative Action deals with race, ethnicity and gender, so it’s not by definition, “racist.” If you present me with an America that is NOT racist, ethnically discriminatory and sexist, then I’d be happy to disavow Affirmative Action.

    Al Barger writes:

    “Life isn’t fair, and you don’t always get your turn.”

    If that’s the attitude you want others to live by, what possible problem could you have with Affirmative Action?

    H&C writes:

    “Dr, I dont have a white guilt trip…[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]

    You’re posting these plaintive wails online in hopes that the Limbaugh-wing of the GOP Cybercorps will chirp up to support you, or get a rise out of any minorities or liberals online.

    The only thing you have rising in me is the volume of my laughter.


  • Al Barger

    Cobra- I apologize. Actually, “no” is an answer- it’s just an absolutely and unquestionably factually incorrect answer. The whole point of affirmative action is to give someone preference specifically for their race (or gender). That is purposely judging someone by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character.

    That is the very definition of racism. That’s not ambiguous.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Cobra’s right, I’m afraid, H&C. You don’t debate. You either don’t have an interest in doing so or don’t have the ability.

    When someone makes a point you can’t refute or don’t understand you either
    (a) pretend they said what you would like them to have said, rather than what they actually did say
    (b) pretend they didn’t say it at all
    (c) repeat their words back to them with certain phrases changed, or
    (d) resort to insults.

    It’s quite a repertoire, but it won’t get you a passing grade in forensics.

    For the record, I’m not a huge fan of affirmative action. But it does depend how you go about it. In an ideal world, everyone would get a fair go. But, as the study Cindy cited bears out, that doesn’t always happen when it comes to your skin color. I don’t see that there’s a great deal of harm, therefore, in devising some sort of hiring method that compensates for this bias.

    I’ve encountered hiring processes which try to remove interviewer bias, by asking each interviewee the exact same questions and scoring them based on certain things the employer is looking for in their answers. The problem with that is that you might just end up with the person who’s good at tests but doesn’t shine so much in the real world.

    As for sports, I suggest that perhaps there is affirmative action there. Team owners, scouts and coaches have their prejudices and preconceptions just like everyone else. If they share the popular perception that African-Americans are good at football and basketball, then they’ll sign up more African-Americans.

    There isn’t the perception that African-Americans are good at hockey (even though it can be argued that they invented the modern game) and – well, whaddaya know?

  • roger nowosielski


    To get anywhere here, I’m afraid you’re gonna have to narrow the discussion down to few voices and few points. You won’t convince everyone, so why not let go. There’s Cindy’s comment, for one, some of mine I made earlier, Doc’s – even Barger’s to a point – so why not run with these and see whether we can make some headway on these; otherwise, it’ll be constant back & forth, and I have no interest in this.

    Let’s start with what you call “voluntary segregation,” then “affirmative action,” perhaps. I’ve already expressed my view of the first earlier and now (is it because of the other voices?) you seem to have backtracked.

    Shall we do it?


    PS to the comments editor: The italics took over.

  • Cobra

    Roger writes:

    “Let’s start with what you call “voluntary segregation,” then “affirmative action,” perhaps. I’ve already expressed my view of the first earlier and now (is it because of the other voices?) you seem to have backtracked.

    Shall we do it?”

    I don’t feel like I’ve backtracked, but perhaps some could get that impression when I delve into detail.

    When I’m asked questions on subjects such as Affirmative Action, or some other related topic on race, I wanted to give frank, prompt and direct answers..which was my bone of contention for most of this blog thread. If I don’t extend the same courtesy that I demand of others in conversation or debate, the conversation becomes one-sided and not trustworthy.

    For example, Ruvy made a comment on Black men and white women dating in Minnesota that I thought was inaccurate. I provided context, factual analysis and added counter points so the reader wouldn’t be left with the impression that my silence was tacit approval or agreement.

    The Affirmative Action discussion is inevitable, but I feel that proponents tend to get mired in statistics slinging, and not the heart of the issue, IMHO. I think I got my points across pretty succinctly in that case.

    My bottom line is that segregation is at the heart of all of these topics. Race is a social construct. It’s the theme I keep going back to.

    Americans want to have their cake and eat it too.

    Roger, take a look at Dave’s statement here:

    “That stuff is all nice, Cobra, but what actually matters is perception. What matters is that the black kid who is growing up today can look around and see positive black role models and know from their example that he is not inferior or looked down on by society as a whole. If he encounters some small prejudice in his life this will help him understand that it’s a flaw in the individual who he’s dealing with, not society as a whole.”

    Now, I’m not going to jump on Dave for this, because the theory he puts forth here actually has something we can build upon. Let’s dig down together here…


    When Dave says “perception”, we have to understand that the human mind drinks everything in, and not just the messages and images we’d like it to. For example, I couldn’t conjure up “more positive role models” for black kids (or kids in general) than President Obama & his family. How many touchstone issues there? Academic achievement? Outstanding. Ambition? Off the charts.Marriage and Family values? Awe-inspiring. Repeated emphasis on education and rebuke of old stereotypes such as “acting white?” They’ve got it all–virtually EVERYTHING that “mainstream society” has argued that minority groups “need to do” to be accepted and embraced into American Society the Obamas have excelled in.

    But the perception of the black kid seeing the Obama family is also going to be shaped by the vitriolic verbal attacks on the Obamas by primarily White conservatives and reactionaries. Legitimate criticism on policy, voting record, statements and philosophy is absolutely justified. Hell, even I don’t agree with everything President Obama has said or done. But ask yourself, Dave…

    If a black kid were to look online at his or her computer tonight, whether in his or her dormroom, at the library, or at home…comes across this blog, and reads the headline of this blog thread:

    “Eric Holder’s Demagoguery, Legislation Writing Chimps, the Not-So-Magic Negro and the Monkey That Became President”

    Or the New York Post Cartoon…

    Or this cartoon from the Mayor of Los Alamitos,CA.

    Or questions about his citizenship…
    Or claims that he’s a terrorist…
    Or claims that he’s the anti-christ…
    Or watching grown White men crying,(not tears of joy) at the prospect of an Obama election…

    What do you think his or her “perception” will be?
    That Black kid most likely already KNOWS the economic and social disparities that I listed as racial progress metrics; he or she is living them. That Black kid probably already knows Whites who have “voluntarily self-segregated” themselves right out his or her neighborhood. Perhaps the only real life interaction with White adults now revolves around teachers, utility & service workers or law enforcement– mostly commerce or authoritarian relationships.

    The message is loud and clear. It doesn’t matter what you accomplish, you’re still Black, and you’re considered LESS.

    Dave, I agree with you that positive Black role models around all children are essential. I would add that positive role models of ALL socially constructed races and ethnicities are important, but if we’re “voluntarily self-segregated” how will this phenomena manifest itself?


  • Andrew Yu-Jen Wang

    Speaking of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:

    Eric Holder is a racial-minority individual, and in his heart and mind he inevitably does not endorse hate crimes committed by George W. Bush.

    George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).

    George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.

    And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.

    Many people know what Bush did.

    And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.

    Bush was absolute evil.

    Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.

    Bush is a psychological prisoner.

    Bush has a lot to worry about.

    Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.

    In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.

    Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
    B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
    Messiah College, Grantham, PA
    Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

    I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.

  • Clavos

    Messiah College, Grantham, PA

    They’ve already named a college for the Stimulator.

    What happened to the tradition of not naming things for living people?

  • Ike Hunley

    [Edited] Eric Holder should have added a nation of liars. Americans usually lie about racism. I have dealt with racism at vaious places I have worked at for 35 years.

  • Al Barger

    Ike- I do so tire of the ceaseless use of the word “racist” in ever expanding, undefined and unprovable contexts. Depending on how you broadly you want to define the word, pretty much absolutely EVERYONE is some kind of “racist.”

    For starters, there are notable actual differences between different ethnic and racial groups. It’s one thing to call someone a “racist” if they are just determined to think the worst and hate on anyone who is some and such race.

    On the other hand, noticing that some groups in your workplace have better work habits and attendance is not racism – it’s pattern recognition. Which is not to say anything about your workplace experiences – but then neither did you. What exactly is this horrible “racism” that we’re all supposedly lying about?

  • Silas Kain

    Where have you gone, Brother Al Barger? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you… woo woo woo….

  • Al Barger

    Brother Silas! I’ve missed you too, but (speaking of racism) I’ve been busy uncovering the Eastern Conspiracy.


  • Bliffle

    The kind of racist hokum promised by an article headline like this:

    “…Not-So-Magic Negro and the Monkey That Became President”

    induces me to skip over it. I did the same thing at leftist sites which prated about GWB being “a chimp”.

    The title of this article is even worse.

    Apparently Al either doesn’t understand that this kind of thing tends to cast him as a racist, or he thinks he has some noble purpose that permits him to express childish slurs.

  • Al Barger

    Howdy Bliffle, long time no see. You say “doesn’t understand that this kind of thing tends to cast him as a racist.” No, that’s not it. It would be more the point that I understand perfectly well that some left wingers and race baiters happily intimidate people into silence with the threat of accusations of “racism” like this.

    I recognize this and mock such attempts at bullying. That would be part of the point. I laugh at such things, at least as regards me. I invite anyone to read the actual article and make their own conclusions. If someone reads the story and wants to decide that I’m “racist,” they’re welcome to hold that opinion – as I am welcome to hold the opinion that they’re idiots.

    And I notice how convenient it is that the headline is enough for you to know that my story is “racist hokum” and denounce it publicly as such without having to read it or respond to the content of the article.

    Do you really think that the denunciation of a random anonymous internet commenter who is proud not to have read the story would or should mean anything at all?

  • Bliffle


    You aren’t mocking anything except yourself.

    I read your article: it’s racist hokum. I would think you’d be embarrassed.

    All your hair-splitting and dodging is futile against anyone with half a brain, and I have 3/4 of a brain.

  • Al Barger

    Bliffle- Do please unpack this charge for me. In what way is my article “racist”? Don’t just call me names – explain what exactly I’m saying that is wrong.

  • Ruvy

    Liberal line-drawers rarely explain the sin, Senator Barger. They point the finger and howl – like monkeys. They are just like the Catholics who ran the Inquisition. You’re guilty, and no matter what you say will not expunge the guilt. You’re a racist, that’s all there is to it. Just like I’m a Christ-killer. There’s no getting out of it for me, and no getting out of it for you.

    Oh, before you even think of answering, Brother Al, according to Cobra, I’m being monitored by the Feds, so anyone who answers me will also be monitored. Be aware – and be afraid!

  • Jordan Richardson

    You’re a racist, that’s all there is to it. Just like I’m a Christ-killer.

    Probably the dumbest comparison I’ve ever seen.

    Barger, you say “absolutely EVERYONE is some kind of racist.” So what’s your beef, then? So what if your article is racist? Isn’t everyone?

  • Al Barger

    Jordan- By the broadest and most asinine definition as applied by some modern liberal types, everyone is a racist. In this point, basically having any opinion differentiating any ethnic group in any way from any other – thus denying the party line that we all voted on that everyone is exactly the same – is “racist.” I am a racist among other reasons, for example, for noticing that Asian kids are typically better students than most other ethnic groups.

    Stuff on about that level is enough to get you labeled a “racist.” If simple pattern recognition is “racist,” then sure, I’m a racist. Of course, the people hollering about racism are generally rather more racist than me – obsessing on race. It’s just that they have the correct racism: white man bad (unless they get absolution by voting Democrat and wearing sackcloth and ashes), dark people good.

    My beef is the dishonesty and malice in all this. Typically at this point in American history, charges of racism are simply a tactic of intimidation. Leftists very often knowingly use this asinine broad definition of “racism” to say or imply that anyone who expresses any substantially differing opinion on any broadly racial issue are wicked Klansman, ignorant and full of hate. It’s a cheesy, dishonest little package deal – a false equation.

    “Racism” is the mark of Cain. If you can slap that mark on someone, then they are wicked and bad. They are discredited and to be shunned. “Ewww” as Dawn Olsen expressed it at the front of this comment thread.

    So then, I insist that the word “racist” either be de-stigmatized as essentially meaningless, or returned to a meaningful usage.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Barger, you are what is known generally as a “race baiter.”

    From Wikipedia for lack of a better source at the moment:

    Race baiting is an act of using racially derisive language, actions or other forms of communication, to anger, intimidate or incite a person or groups of people, or to make those persons behave in ways that are inimical, and often harmful to their personal or group interests.

    Note that the generally associated definition of racism is that racial “differences” produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. This is no left or right wing definition and it really doesn’t matter whether or not you find something “wrong” with it.

    Racism has no connotations of good or bad inherently by this definition. It is not to suggest institutional racism, either, nor that people be denied certain rights due to race or, conversely, given certain rights due to race.

    So you’re asking people what’s “wrong” with an article like this or a suggestion like “Asians are good at math,” but that’s not an issue that can be answered objectively. What’s racist about it is that you are making judgments on ethnicity. Whether that’s right or wrong is a matter of personal opinion, but there’s no question whatsoever that the statement is racist.

    In any event, for whatever reason, I don’t think you’re a bad person nor do I think you mean a particularly negative connotation by the material located here or elsewhere. I do think you are a race baiter, as I said before, and I do think you say racist things like many of us do from time to time. I think you use those things as bait, as I mentioned, and to incite others to respond.

    In terms of “charges of racism” in American history, I don’t believe that we are in a position to judge. That there was and largely is institutional racism in America and around the world is a fact. It goes without saying. That people play the race card also goes without saying. We live in sensitive times because the institutional racism is NOT distant history in the United States. It is anything but. Many living grandfathers were unable to vote and have equal rights, for example.

    The word “racism” is not meaningless, but it must be clarified for sake of discussion: you shouldn’t judge or characterize based on race because it is intellectualy lazy to generalize in any way, but it isn’t always negative when you do.

  • Al Barger

    Jordan- I suppose I’m baiting somebody, but it’s not people of other races. I have no intention or desire to agitate anyone because of their race.

    It would be more accurate to call me a “liberal baiter.” I do intend to provoke the hateful and dishonest kind of liberals to show their true colors, and to just plain fluster them in their pat little self-righteous worldviews.

    Also, you claim that the fact that there “largely is institutional racism in America” is a fact that is so obvious that it goes without saying. I do not in fact recognize this as a fact. I understand some sensitivity in that Jim Crow was only going through its death throes in my lifetime, but it’s been pretty well dead for about 40 years now.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Ah, but Al you are agitating people because of race. Even though you aren’t doing it based on their particular race, you’re using the conception of race and racism to agitate and provoke. Generally this is an effective way to raise awareness of issues, as some of the best thought-provoking comedy and commentary comes as the result of similar ground. Unfortunately for you, something very significant is lost in the translation and delivery and most people tend to miss what you claim your intent is.

    In terms of institutional racism in the United States, go have a look at the textbooks in many black schools. Check the dates on them and see how outdated they are. Check out who gets grants, scholarships and school money first, too. I bet it isn’t the African-American schools.

    Also, the response to AIDS in ethnic communities is another example of institutional racism in our modern world.

    The 2002 case of Assem Bayaa in Los Angeles at the airport is another case of racism in America, as the ongoing use of racial profiling by police officers across the United States.

    And it’s not just in the United States, either. There are examples around the world, even in Canada with our rather disturbing history with the Chinese and the head tax. Only recently was this apologized for and properly dealt with.

    We needn’t look to the gross examples of Jim Crow or the KKK to find examples of institutional racism. It happens every single day around the world. It is a sad reality of a world that still cannot look beyond the concept of race.

    Institutional racism has not been “pretty well dead for about 40 years now.”

  • Jordan Richardson

    This page from ERASE offers more information (specifically on housing, but click the other links if you wish) on institutional racism occurring today.