. . .I am sick and tired of being embarrassed by elected Republican officials who have no sensitivity for issues that alienate whole segments of our population. Republican leaders who consort with the Council of Conservative Citizens, highlight stump speeches at Bob Jones University, reminisce about segregationist campaigns, and sympathize with the bigoted views — and the very real possibility that others in our party affiliate with the Free Congress Foundation and groups with similar offensive ideology — perpetuate broad public opinion that Republicans harbor racist and bigoted ideals.
. . .Black Republicans are expected to provide window dressing and cover to prove that this is not a racist party, yet our own leadership continues to act otherwise. People judge people by their experience of them, and by their actions, and when those actions do not match their words, actions become the more honest means by which to measure a person.
He was fed up with being told to fetch and carry by white Republicans at party functions, anyway.
Unfortunately, that is the reality of the contemporary GOP. Republicans are in no position to cast aspersions of racism at anyone.
That brings us back to Project 21, the primary water carrier for this disinformation. As I've previously blogged in regard to the similar (perhaps same) African American Republican Leadership Council, the front group is funded and controlled by some of the most conservative forces in American politics. The Olin and Bradley Foundations have both supported the eugenics movement. Bradley is the financier of Charles Murray, the infamous author of The Bell Curve.
Olsen, a Bush supporter, apparently does not care that he is promoting the views of conservative whites claiming to represent black public opinion. Indeed, he may prefer it that way. But, it does matter. If politically aware African-Americans were appalled with John Sylvester for voicing his opinion, they would say so. The fact that conservative whites are the ones complaining — through their black mouthpieces — speaks volumes. It says that white conservatives perceive blacks as tools to be used by whites. It also says they believe legitimate African-American public opinion should be ignored while their pretense of representing blacks should be taken seriously.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Eric Olsen
interesting "expose": 1. I didn't take credit for anything, I linked to and quoted a press release from Project 21. I don't know who "Scott Hogense(o)n"(spelled both ways in post) is.
2. One might think a lawyer would be careful to stick to the facts rather than rather blatantly elide from one organization (Project 21), to which I referred in my article, to another, separate organization, African American Republican Leadership Council, defined above as "similar," and apparently as "similar" it is not a breech of logic to then tar Project 21 with the alleged sins and guilt by association of the African American Republican Leadership Council.
In what way are these organizations similar? Who gets to define this? May I define the JDL and CAIR as "similar" because they are both "Middle Eastern advocacy groups"?
Unfortunately, all the rest is smokescreen and misdirection, naming organizations and individuals who have nothing to do with Project 21 or the National Center for Public Policy Research.
And I would very much enjoy seeing you tell either Colin Powell or Dr. Rice to their faces that they arrived at their positions through "tokenism" - are you saying they have not earned their positions through individual merit, that they have only achieved what they have achieved due to racial preferences? Does this mean only minority liberals can achieve anything through individual merit?
I will ask again since the question has been utterly ignored: is it okay to use blatant racist terms and symbols to attack individuals who happen to be Republican or conservative? If so, why?
2 - Mac Diva
Eric Olsen, I specifically asked that you not participate in this thread. It does not need a disc jockey.
To persons genuinely interested in the matter of Right Wing front groups:
As my links suggest, there is little or no difference between the titles attached to the small set of African-Americans used by Right Wing front groups. The same people are involved over and over again. In fact, the front groups are totally controlled by Right Wing whites and most of their members are white conservatives. Black faces are usually put forth for public events to give the impression of black participation. Equally important, the funds invariably come from the same sources -- Right Wing foundations.
Josh Benton has written about the topic of interconnectedness at Alternet. He also does a good job of getting to the root of why the players are involved -- money. I did not quote from that piece for reasons of length, but I encourage anyone who cares about these front groups to read it.
There are also other entries about Project 21 at Silver Rights. I've been observing the group since it became visible about two years ago. I might expand on what I've written here in regard to its links to the tobacco industry.
3 - RJ
"Limbaugh, possibly a believer in 'scientific' racism"
Well, you're "possibly" the anti-Christ. What's your point?
"implied that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb, who is black, does not belong in a thinking position. You know the reasoning: Black people are stupid and stupid people should not be quarterbacks."
He said no such thing. He suggested that McNabb was over-rated. That's all.
4 - Eric Olsen
not a single discrepancy addressed:
"These groups are all the same because I say they are"
"Anything and/or anyone associated with one group is thereby associated with them all ... because I say so"
"Do not dare have the temerity to question, disagree, or otherwise call into question anything I have to say ... because I say so"
"It's only racism if I say it is and I only say it is if the target is not Republican or conservative"
"All minority Republicans and/or conservatives are either stupid, paid off, disingenuous, illegitimate, evil, duped, or all of the above"
5 - RJ
"Eric Olsen, I specifically asked that you not participate in this thread."
Ohhh...Ms. Diva thinks she can tell white boy Mr. Olsen what to do with his own site.
How cute...
6 - Mac Diva
I believe I have made this material understandable to any person of normal intelligence. The links further substantiate it. Persons wanting to delve deeper can follow up the links. For example, one can go to Media Transparency and check the funding for these front groups, though both I and Josh Benton have already done so. Or one can look at up personnel and see the same names repeated. And, so on. The bottom line will be the same: Project 21 and other front groups are phony creations put forth to advance the views of the white far Right.
7 - Eric Olsen
Both Powell and Rice have benefitted from conservative affirmative action throughout their careers
And as a result they deserve whatever racial slurs come their way, deserve to be isolated from - and ostracized by - all right-thinking black folk.
8 - alethinos59
Mac Diva thanks for the post... You bring up some interesting connections. I believe that Powell/Rice both earned their positions in life. There is little doubt of that. I have a good deal of respect, overall, for Powell.
However I think the rare appearence of non-whites in the republican party might be just as attributable to those particular people having thoughts and ambitions (stress ambitions here) that radically differ from other minorities...
That these folk are used by the republican machine is not in doubt. But then the democrats use people too...
God save us from partisan politics!
9 - Mac Diva
I've read just about everything written about Condoleezza Rice and I believe I understand her pretty well. Rice's objective has been to achieve what the South Africans used to refer to as 'honorary white' status. By that they meant the person was allowed to participate in some activities reserved for whites under apartheid. (Just about everything was reserved to whites under apartheid.) of course, the role was contingent on serving the interests of the apartheid government. It also allowed the recipient to convince him or herself she was no longer black, coloured or Asian. A delusion, obviously. But, believing that is important to the kind of person who wants to be 'honorary white.'
Rice, from childhood, was very self-centered. Other people aren't really there for her. So, I believe it has been relatively easy for her to 'shed' African-Americans. I don't believe she cares what people think of her -- unless the people are white, wealthy and conservative. All this lamenting about 'poor Condi' is pretty pointless. She is the rare person who has achieved exactly what she wanted.
10 - Eric Olsen
Assuming every word of the above to be true - and I have no reason to think it is - this then apparently renders her a legitimate target of racist attacks. That pretty much answers my original question: racism is okay if it is practiced against those with whom we disagree politically.
11 - Mac Diva
(Scratching head.) You have approved racist attacks on me, Eric. When did you become opposed to them? In fact just minutes ago, on the other thread, your cats' paw, RJ Elliott, called me a 'bitch' and an 'ass' again, and you ignored it. But, you have time to throw fits over someone you will likely never have any direct contact with being called 'Aunt Jemima.'
. . .Oh, I think I get it. Racist attacks on me = good. Racist attacks on Condoleezza Rice = bad.* That probably makes sense. . .to you.
Not that there have been any racist attacks on her that I am aware of.
12 - Eric Olsen
1) he defined the terms, he did not attach them to anyone in particular or I would have deleted them, as I have every other time
2) how are those terms racist? If and when they have been used they have been addressed at an individual AS an individual, not at a person who is a member of any particular race
3) this is your typical modus operandi: any criticism of you is de facto "racist" because you are a person of color, rather than simply being a criticism of you.
Likewise, should I interpret every criticism of me as an attack on white people, or just as criticism of me? Being neither paranoid nor a martyr, I choose to assume the latter.
13 - Mac Diva
It was quite clear who RJ Elliott meant the words 'ass' and 'bitch' to apply to. It was also clear that he was using a racial slur when he referred to Bill Maher having "jungle fever" last week. His assailing of black basketball players in an entry the other day also left no doubt why he is/was a participant in Gene Expression. Apparently, you are the last person on the site not to see RJ Elliott for what he is.
14 - Eric Olsen
I and many others responded to the "jungle fever" statement by saying it carried an unfortunate connotation, he apologized and said he meant nothing by it. It was clearly not used as a "racial slur."
His attack on insane thug players attacking insane thug fans in the stands was just that, there was no racial implication to be found. If I am to understand this line of reasoning, no white person can ever criticize the behavior of any black (brown, yellow, purple?) person without being a racist. Can black people criticize the behavior of any white people without being racist, or is that different?
How about people just treat people as people and judge them accordingly without bringing race into it unless race is a direct part of the equation?
And what the hell is this Gene Expression that you wave around like a magic wand? How do you know who is or who is not a participant? Is this something you have to actually do something to be a "part of" or is it just a way of thinking that you can see with special x-ray goggles?
I have seen and heard this accusation so many times and it just occurred to me I have no idea what it even is.
15 - Mac Diva
It is a blog for people who are adherents to 'scientific' racism. They believe 'races' are hierarchical, with blacks at the bottom and whites at the top. RJ Elliott has quoted material from the belief system on many occassions. (His obsession with race and genitalia comes from Phillippe Rushton, a discredited psychologist and the godfather of 'scientific' racists everywhere, including Gene Expression.) At least a half-dozen of your friends here are or have been participants in Gene Expression. One of the people who is invested in the belief system invited a vocal 'scientific' racist, David Yeagley, to express himself here at Blogcritics. Yeagley had done something not atypical of the mindset -- depict a black person, Janet Jackson, as a gorilla. But, let me guess. You don't recall that, either.
16 - Eric Olsen
1) How do you know these people have participated in this site? Do you have proof, and if so, what is it?
2) I recall very vividly the Yeagley affair and what I recall most vividly is the UNIVERSAL condemnation he and the person who "invited" him to Blogcritics received.
A trip to the thread is rather starkly revealing of the response the writers and readers of this site gave to someone comparing a black woman to a gorilla: he was reviled in the very strongest terms and chased away with the very strongest condemnation ringing down the alley.
17 - Mac Diva
As I said, you have friends who express 'scientific' racist views and/or are members of that movement. I am not a member. Neither am I your friend. Therefore, they would make better sources for you. I suggest you address further inquiry to them.
18 - Eric Olsen
so there is no proof, got it, I will go back to ignoring the claim
19 - cur3t
"...limbaugh suggested that mcnabb was overrated. that's all."
bobby (rj)...since you're obviously an expert on the intentions of your role model, rush limbaugh, two questions:
1) when limbaugh became irate with a black caller a few years ago, what exactly did he mean when he told the caller to "...take the bone out of your nose..." ??
and 2) has limbaugh ever received more than a slap on the wrists for illegally purchasing black market narcotics??
20 - RJ
Eric:
Gene Expression is a blog by, IIRC, a bunch of college kids who are science majors. (I believe there are a few "minority" bloggers in their group blog, FWIW.)
They express politically-incorrect opinions based upon scientific data. Think "The Bell Curve" as a blog.
Anyway, I used to read their blog, like two years ago. And I have NEVER been a "participant." That's a flat-out lie by a well-known liar.
I read a lot of blogs. I read Atrios. I read Instapundit. I read Andrew Sullivan. I read Mickey Kaus. I read ScrappleFace (haha). I read Lileks. I read Kos. And many more.
Point being, I read a lot of shit, from a lot of different sources. And any attempt to attach my name to Gene Expression is about as honest as attaching my name to Atrios or Drudge.
In other words, it's bullshit.
But, bullshit is what we have come to expect from a certain BlogCritic, no?
21 - Eric Olsen
at times, especially lately, yes
22 - Eric Olsen
and thanks for the explanation
23 - Mac Diva
I asked the Eric Olsen not to participate on this thread because I wanted to have an intelligent discussion about free speech and civil rights. I foresaw that his presence, and that of his companions, would reduce the level of the discourse to the only standard they are capable of, well below knowledgeable discussion. My intuition has proven correct.
I am going to pull together a package about Right Wing front organizations that use people of color, along with some other bloggers. We will place it at some central location so that it will be readily available when discussions of groups such as Project 21 come up. Though these people are deservedly obscure, I believe it will be useful to make comprehensive information available for the occassional interest of readers, especially people who care about civil rights.
I know that intelligent people are not supporters of bigots understand that the 'scientific' racism movement is despicable. I am not surprised that Eric Olsen is not among those who share that opinion.
24 - Eric Olsen
Hear this loud and clear: I have tolerated your emotionally unstable, psychologically disturbed disruptions of this site for well over a year.
I have defended your contributions to the site and character in the face of almost daily calls for your removal based upon constant rule violations, personal insults, unfounded accusations, hysterical ranting, and inability to get along with anyone who does not kiss your ass.
Do not EVER again use my name in a post or in a comment on this site. If you do, you will be no longer be welcome. Period.
I would not put up with the manner in which you have addressed me recently from ANYONE, least of all an anti-social, reality-challenged, wildly deluded, unpleasant, rude, anonymous fool.
25 - cur3t
hey mac diva -
how 'bout those steelers, huh? they're goin' all the way this year! i mean super bowl, baby!