I find it fascinating that some blacks aren't defended by the civil rights establishment or other advocacy groups if they do not happen to hew to a designated set of political positions, as if taking political positions outside of this designated dogma somehow renders them fair game for racism. It's rather astonishing and breathtakingly hypocritical, as pointed out by Project 21, "the national leadership network of conservative African-Americans":Over the past few months, and peaking this week with her appointment, cartoonists have been using Dr. Rice's race as a point of ridicule. Demeaning political cartoons by Pat Oliphant and Jeff Danziger accentuate Dr. Rice's black features and feature her speaking in rural southern dialect. Garry Trudeau called her "Brown Sugar" in his "Doonesbury" comic strip. Earlier this year, cartoonist Ted Rall questioned Dr. Rice's race in a comic suggesting she was President Bush's "house nigga" and needed "racial re-education."…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Scoota Rey
Err...
You just put up three consectutive comments. Is that because no one is responding to you? Do you need someone to talk to?
77 - Eric Olsen
right again RJ, as I said the triumphalism is wholly unearned
78 - RJ
"You forgot books."
Name *one* you've written that actually got published...
79 - Scoota Rey
I take that back.
80 - Peter Duncan
RJ,
Maybe she deserves to be called a name and maybe she doesn't. I think the point we all need to bear in mind is that name-calling detracts from the argument or debate. You see, we are suppose to be discussing the merits of the blog and not the personal short-comings of the person. Myaybe she made a mistake and maybe she didn't. Still two wrongs don't make it right. Kindly refrain from name calling and stick to the points of the debate.
I suppose I will get blasted for what I am about to say but here goes anyway....Ms Diva, you are a enormusously bright individual and I will concede that you are much brighter than me...especially in the area of constitutional law. And although I may not be as bright I still have an valid opinion. The purpose of such a site is to share 'different' opinion and perhaps educated another thru what you write. We are all on equal footing in this regard. I mean, each opinion is to be valued equally among the readers. As I have already stated, you are a gifted person, however what the mighty Mac giveth she most certainly taketh away! In almost all of your post, you state your arguments (sometimes very eloquently) and end your post with some sort of demeaning comment against your detractors. JUst my opinion but I think you would carry the day in more argument/debates if you just refrained from sharing some of the hurtful comments and stuck to the well reasoned points we all know you are capable.
Peter
PS. The discussion about your lips gets me hot!
81 - Eric Olsen
Peter, an excellent demonstration of the technique I was suggesting, but not holding my breath to see enacted by said party, in #70.
I refuse to not believe in miracles
82 - Newman
Anyone who takes Mac Diva and P6 seriously and wastes time trying to reason with them deserves the ignorant and ridiculous charges they throw. If you don't follow their line of what it is to be black, deafness falls. End of story. Please don't waste good brain cells on this sort.
Mr. Murdock, thanks for coming onto the board, but what you have to say will be mocked regardless. Best wishes to you.
83 - Eric Olsen
thanks Newman, I try to take everyone seriously
84 - P6
Newman:
What charge did I throw? Where have I made a statement about what it means to be Black?
Please, don't misrepresent me because the conversation has you riled.
85 - Mac Diva
Peter, you are an incredibly naive person. What Leroy, Delroy, or McCoy proved, if anything, is that what we've said about Project 21 is true. He came in here, did a little puppet dance, saying nothing of substance on any topic.
• He acknowledged that the group is white-controlled and always has been.
•He did not refute the funding from far Right or the support of ludicrous causes dear only in the hearts and minds of white reactionaries.
•Only two of the board of directors of the three front groups they work behind are black. No contradiction there either.
•He did not refute that the connections back to eugenics, the anti-environmentalism movement and the flat tax movement are solid.
I would hate to see you on a jury, Peter. You are the kind of person who would think a very bad witness was telling the truth because he was wearing a nice suit. Deroy Murdock is a token opinion writer for a few Right Wing rags. The views he expresses over and over again are mimicries of the most extremist of white reactionaries. That is why he will remain the lawn jockey of such sites.
As for Eric Olsen's complete meltdown on this thread, if anyone has any doubts this person is not concerned about a woman of color being treated with respect -- the supposed basis for why he wrote the entry -- all that person needs to do is review the abuse he has directed at me.
As for his Eric Olsen's latest slur, saying I am "drooling," implying idiocy, let's look at it closely. I know I am one of the brightest, best writers ever to set foot in the out house Blogcritics often is. His response to that is try to convince people I am stupid. (A word often used in the emails I receive from other people referring to Olsen himself, by the way). Olsen has a problem with bright people, period. That is probably because he knows he is of very modest ability himself, but cannot accept it. Instead, lawyers are not lawyers, writers are not writers, film makers are not film makers, but, a disc jockey is . . . God! In his imagination. He regularly clashes with the bright white male contributors to the site. Some of them avoid participating in comments for that reason. I particularly set him off because he thinks he is superior to me based on race and gender. Having known plenty of men with small ability and big egos, that does not surprise me.
The reason I have taken time to refute someone who will never be able to hold a conversation about this, or most topics, on a level of informed discourse, is that I will not sit still and let disinformation be spread about civil rights topics.
But, since I am a generous person, let me restate my adversary's points in closing my rebuttal:
•Condoleezza Rice should not be referred to in ways thar reference her gender and race because it is insulting to do so.
•A woman of color who has been one of the best contributors to Blogcritics should be referred to in ways thar reference her gender and race because it is not insulting to do so. Among terms, Olsen and his companions have used are 'cunt,' 'whore,' 'bitch,' 'dimwit,' and 'drooling.'
I rest my case.
86 - Eric Olsen
I agree: this thread speaks for itself
87 - MGA
Miguel Estrada was also the victim of this kind of racism. The Democratic memos said he was very dangerous because he had no record and was Hispanic, and "we don't want to make another mistake like Clarence Thomas." If a Republican had said something like that about a black Democrat -- "we don't want to make another mistake like Thurgood Marshall" -- the Jesse Jacksons of this world would be shrill with fury and the mainstream media would be up in arms.
88 - tvd
The subject was racism toward Condi Rice, not Project 21. Not Delroy Murdock. Not other writers on Blogcritics.
"I find it fascinating that some blacks aren't defended by the civil rights establishment or other advocacy groups if they do not happen to hew to a designated set of political positions, as if taking political positions outside of this designated dogma somehow renders them fair game for racism."---Eric Olsen
True? False? Discuss.
89 - praxis9
The very idea of condemning blacks who do not see liberal policies as "enlightened" as suffering from "false-consciousness" is, I think, Orwellian. Liberals claim to be defenders of freedom but seek to have everyone accept their definition of self-interest? And anyone who doesn't see their self-interest as being synonymous with the party is a class traitor? This is not only Orwellian, it's patently Stalinist.
90 - Neo
The the people over at the NAACP wonder why President George W. Bush has no time for them. By their own actions and inactions, they have made themselves irrelevant.
91 - Dan
It seems obvious. The liberal monopolization of minorities is predicated on the myth that white racism is responsible for any and every negative circumstance that befalls minorities. The attainment of positions of power by unabashedly conservative minorities like Dr. Rice, dispells that myth. Ugliness ensues.
92 - Section9
People who oppose Rice's ascent to State have no problem with racist charicatures used against her precisely because they oppose her politics. One shouldn't expect partisan stooges like Kweise Mfume to come to her defense, either. As to Project 21, it's a small organization that has very little voice within the larger black community.
Rice is an exception to the larger Stalinism that characterizes black politics. Her convictions are a denial of black America's Soviet style politics and a refusal to accept the General Line of black liberalism. If they could, black liberals would Leon Trotsky the woman, airbrushing her from history.
When black liberals condemn Project 21, for instance, they do so because Project 21 deviates from the General Line. The fact that P21 has white members and gets money from corporations is only an excuse.
One of the greatest lies that has been peddled by black liberals and the black intelligentsia is that the black community is politically diverse. Of course, in reality, to understand the black leadership today, one should look at Soviet Politics of, say, the 1930's. Naturally, the Blood Purges are only metaphorical, but the intent remains: people like Condi Rice are simply not tolerated by both the Inner Party and the Outer Party. The notion of an "enlightened self-interest" within the black community is a laughable falsehood designed to mask conformity on the part of the "broad masses" with the black leadership. It would be in the "enlightened self-interest" of black Americans to put their vote up to the highest bidder. However, the notion that the Democratic Party (the same party that controlled a series of one party regimes in the American south that practiced state terrorism against black citizens up to 1964, at least) is the sole agent for black progress is an essential ingredient to the national success of white Democrats. As such, lip service is allowed to be paid by black Democrats to the notion that the larger white party must be held to account, but serious deviationism is never tolerated by the larger party.
Right deviationism from the General Line cannot be allowed. Stalin understood this; today's "black leaders" understand this as well. Conservatives, black or white, should quite whining about these manifestations of intellectual laziness and moral corruption on the part of white liberals and their intellectual toadies in the black community and be about the business of fostering a conservative insurgency within the larger black society. As long as the stooges for the power structure that controls the Democratic Party lead the black community, no change will come to that community politically. They will continue to be marginalized by both major parties.
Condoleezza Rice will be attacked because she is conservative, Republican, and believes in the values of free markets at home and unrelenting war against Islamic Fascism abroad. She's a big girl, and her critics will find that she can take care of herself. Besides, she and other black conservatives represent the future of black politics in America. While a vast majority of young black voters went to Kerry this year, just as many were willing to entertain the idea of a more independent politics. As a Republican, one cannot ask for too much at one time. However, it is helpful to recall Lenin's short explanation of the NEP: "Two steps forward, one step back."
93 - Dorian
Powell and Rice have transgressed by stepping outside of some imaginary box - a construct of the liberal mindset that allows them to classify “good” blacks and “bad” blacks. Both Powell and Rice are intelligent, hardworking, likeable individuals and both are very successful. So what’s inside the box?
94 - Natalie Davis
Rice and Powell -- likeable? Oh my God! Successful? By whose definition? Intelligent? According to what curriculum?
Rice and Powell are ... Let's just say they need infinite prayers. This has nothing to do with their melanin levels and everything to do with their willingness to go along with violent, greedy policies. Those who toss pigmentationist slurs at them -- including Belafonte -- are bigoted, fascist-minded fools who have missed the point. Who cares what they look like? The fruits of their horrible labors endanger the entire planet and ultimately will poison ALL humankind. Powell and Rice -- just like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et all -- have done unspeakable things, have endorsed and allowed unforgiveable actions, and have earned blood-stained hands. All of them should be judged for their crimes against humanity equally, as they are all equal in the eyes of the Creator and in the eyes of anyone with sense.
95 - ech
Mac Diva wrote:"Eighty-eight percent of people who voted for Bush are white."
Given that 80% of the population is "exclusively white" according to the census bureau, this means that he got a pretty good chunk of minority votes.
96 - RJ
"I know I am one of the brightest, best writers ever to set foot in the out house Blogcritics often is."
RETCH
97 - RJ
"Rice and Powell -- likeable? Oh my God!"
Read the latest polls. Most Americans like both of them, especially Powell.
"Successful? By whose definition?"
Uh, by the definition that, if you make it into a US President's cabinet, you've pretty much fucking made it in life?
"Intelligent? According to what curriculum?"
One suspects that they are more intelligent than about 90% of humanity. Otherwise, they would not have risen to such high positions of power.
98 - RJ
"in the eyes of anyone with sense"
IOW: Pacifists like me...
99 - thecentralcommittee
Deroy Murdock:
You're not getting paid?! Then you my friend are a slave. A slave to the modern day plantation owners at Project 21.
Oh, you are getting paid? Then you my friend are a sellout and your politics are not sincere.
100 - RJ
How about this:
Deroy Murdock is a free thinker. He supports those who he agrees with.
GASP! Could it be? A black man who is his own person, rather than a cog in the wheel of the NAACP?
The Horror!
101 - george
This is one of those issues that is being settled as we speak. The most important thing, whether the Democrats like it or not, is that we have a black Secretary of State (and she achieved this office as a Republican).
The Republicans are picking up votes from all minority groups, including African Americans, and there does seem to be a cultural shift here that makes me wonder whether the so called rednecks of the red states haven't been paying more attention to the reality of racial equality in the United States than the Party that is fixated on hyping and wallowing in victim politics.
What one senses about the Democrats (and beware, it can happen to any political party) is a certain desperation that is causing them to be offensive to everyone - to patronise blacks over this issue, for example, and so further alienate this constituency.
In case they've forgotten, the Dems need to represent policies that a majority of the American people will support. The Dems are acting like Americas blacks are still picking cotton in Georgia.
102 - Paul Gaddis
If RIce and Powel had been in Clinton's cabinet( you know the one that 'Looked like America') and these same charactures had been used, We would see Jesse et al rise up in total indignation! How DARE those evil, racists make fun of the beautiful, natural features of a proud child of Africa. Who raised themselves out of poverty while struggled with racism to attain offices that no Republican would have EVER allowed them to achieve.
But, since it is Republican, they get to be smeared and will damn well LIKE IT!
I dont know who these Project 21 people are, it does not matter.
103 - dwshelf
What we're observing is that racism is defined, subconsciously, as only applying to those who haven't much succeeded in life. A successful person is expected to take it as part of the territory. Bad words no power over such a person, such that no protection is required.
104 - P6
dwshelf:
You're precisely right.
You know, it's "racist" to not support Dr. Rice because she's a Republican...
Wait a minute...being Republican has nothing to do with race. Let me start again.
You know, it's racist to oppose Dr. Rice because you disagree strongly with he opinion...
Wait a minute. Her opinion has nothing to do with race...
I got it!
If you're Black, the only reason you can oppose Dr. Rice is because they are Black and Republican!
What small-minded…
But please, continue with the delusions that make you comfortable.
105 - Eric Olsen
I am very pleased to see the train of thought return to my original focus, which was the blatant racism with which Powell and Rice have been attacked by "liberals" and why racism expressed against black conservatives (and moderates) is somehow different or excusable to the civil rights establishment.
Although I very much disagree with Natalie's assessment of the individuals involved, she does see the issue for what it is: individuals being attacked for who they are and what they believe, not what they do.
106 - P6
And the proper response to this:
…is "Mr. Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Ms. Kettle."
Section9 is almost right while being totally wrong:
This assumes both parties are interested in the people who vote, not just the vote as a gesture. And it makes no sense to support a political party whose platform militates against what you perceive as your interests. Does it?
I don't see the Religious Right changing their interests to match the Republican Party's, I see them working to change the party.
Those who Section9 mention left the party because of that change. Therefore it is NOT the same party and those who make that claim are either unknowledgeable or equivocating.
When one party denies the need to address issues that specifically affect you, you are not inclined to see them as essential to your cause.
Republicans accusing the Democratic Party of lip service after the moderate face on the Republican Convention, after they trotted out all the Black Conservatives to say how the Republican Party is going to change after the Trent Lott Mess and did not a damn thing, Running Alan Keyes because "he can say things we can't"…
It is to laugh.
107 - dwshelf
p6, I suppose Condoleezza Rice has no problem if someone doesn't "support" her, regardless of how they come to that position.
Now surely expressing such disapproval in disparaging racial terms communicates that the speaker is incapable of constructing a coherent statement of disapproval.
The question regards a lack of defense by the usual crowd. My observation is that people who succeed in life don't get much sympathy regarding being the target of bad words. Pretty well independent of race.
There may well be a political factor, as observed by Eric Olson, but this doesn't explain the entire phenomenom.
108 - P6
Eric:
Two things
1: Give me an example of racism expressed against Black conservatives that has not been rejected by the civil rights establishment.
2: Give me an example of racism expressed against moderate Black folks (because I think you threw that in there rather gratuitously).
109 - P6
dwshelf:
That depends.
We're talking editorial cartoons here, fer chrissake. Can't we get a grip? Don't we have enough issues without making up new ones?
110 - P6
I just realized, I should have put a
tag after saying "you're right" to dwshelf. That's going to be misinterpreted, and it's my fault.
111 - dick
Mac Diva,
You really need to check into your sources. After all, Margaret Sanger is one of the patron saints of the liberals and she without a doubt was totally in favor of eugenics. In fact, eugenics was one of her prime reasons for supporting abortion on demand.
What you are doing is trying to obfuscate the whole point of the conservative black organization. After all, George Soros tried to bring down the British monetary system. Does that mean that the Democratic party and the organizations George Soros supported are trying to bring down the British monetary system? The same logic applies as to your point.
112 - Eric Olsen
P6, I am calling Powell a moderate, because all in all he is.
And I am referring to the incidents cited above, although I am very pleased to hear the NAACP has condemned the Sylvester speech and he has apologized.
113 - P6
And he was attacked in racist fashion with no response from the civil rights organizations when?
WHich makes the thread about a non-issue, doesn't it?
114 - Cobra
http://www.thecobraslair.com/images/GOP-CHESS.gif
I find it interesting that white conservatives have taken it upon themselves to "educate" African-Americans about what they should consider "racist."
I laugh at them, of course. There is big money to be made in the "Tommin'" industry, and if you want to crack the big time as a minority in talk radio, cable news, or editorials, self-flaggelation is the way to go! Look at JC Watts? Tom Delay's GOP Congress' glass ceiling kept him in the number 4 slot with no prayer of advancing, so he quit. But he remains loyal to the GOP in books and television appearences, well...because he can sell more books and get more television appearances.
In my view, Condi Rice is just another elitist, self-centered bourgeosie. Nothing to celebrate there.
--Cobra
115 - Dorian
Natalie,
“The fruits of their horrible labors endanger the entire planet and ultimately will poison ALL humankind. Powell and Rice -- just like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et all -- have done unspeakable things, have endorsed and allowed unforgiveable actions, and have earned blood-stained hands…”
So we should have waited to share these “sins” with the UN perhaps, who were engaged in great “sins” of their own, starving those poor Iraqi children with their doomed sanctions while even making a few bucks on the side. Hands become blood-stained in both the commission of “violence acts” and sitting on your hands while violence prevails around you. If you’re going to play the self-righteous hipster there can be no meaningful discussion. I see a sliding scale of righteous indignation tipped irrevocably away from Bush and company merely for the political loss they represent. The world will go on, not in spite of, but especially with “evil” people such as Bush, Rice, Powell and others doing the dirty work needed toward a long-term greater good
116 - P6
The political loss is a correlation, not a cause. At least among the vast majority of us who are merely voters.
117 - Cobra
http://www.thecobraslair.com/images/recruitment-posterNAT.gif
Dorian,
There's some good reading material on how much Halliburton under Dick Cheney made on the UN Oil for Food program here:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_01/02.03E.Hallib.Iraq.htm
And if you think that is some "lefty screed site", try this one:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/24/80648.shtml
Now as far as "greater good" is concerned, exactly who is going to benefit from this Iraq War fiasco? Not the tens of thousands(some estimates over 100,000) dead Iraqis. Certainly not the devastated Iraqi families of UNCOUNTED WOUNDED and maimed. Certainly not our THOUSANDS of CASUALTIES in our own millitary, some of whom were earning less than Walmart door greeters.
Exactly who, besides the multinational corporations poised to rape Iraq through neo-con economic colonialism is thankful for this disaster?
Condi Rice, who is the first Secretary of State to have an Oil Tanker named after her, has sure seen her fortunes rise. Hell, maybe if another terrorist attack had occured on her watch, she might have surplanted Cheney as V.P. on the ticket.
--Cobra
118 - Dorian
Sorry about the digression but here goes.
Halliburton is a straw man. Mr. Cheney is the Vice President of the United States not the CEO of Halliburton. He cannot profit from Halliburton success unless your willing (and I’m sure you are) to make him out a greater villain than he is for simply having been a CEO. If Halliburton is involved in an inordinate amount of government business its because it has the experience and size needed to get to job done properly, and as with any large company it has its share of internal problems.
The war in Iraq cannot be viewed in terms of the casualties only (and the jury is still out on the actual numbers although 100,000 is an excessive number). If you want to do a tit-for-tat comparison however consider that the regime plus the sanctions were killing people at a rate greater than the collation collateral deaths. Now the regime no longer exists and the coalition forces will eventually be gone. Most of those dying in Iraq now are insurgents (a.k.a terrorists). Iraq is in the process of being transformed from a major destabilizing influence in the Mid East to a stabilizing force. Don’t even get me started about the WMDs. If the intelligence said they were there then we had to act on the available intelligence. Even the liberal idol Clinton said he would have done the same thing as Bush given the circumstances. Altogether we’ve probably saved millions of lives, long-term, in the Middle East. At the same time other barbarous dictatorships are taking notice that the U.S. no longer tolerates tyrants taking refuge in diplomatic frivolity and impotence.
119 - dwshelf
We're talking editorial cartoons here, fer chrissake. Can't we get a grip? Don't we have enough issues without making up new ones?
I think it's commendable to ridicule bad arguments regardless of the medium where they are published.
A cartoonist who focuses on a racial feature to make a political point is highly likely to be making a ridiculous argument.
But I'll say it again: it says something negative about the cartoonist. The target can choose to leave it go at that. Or to ridicule the argument. There's no requirement to silence the dolts of life. Going off like a roman candle says "I announce that this argument has power over me".
I suspect neither Rice nor Powell feel any such power. For what it's worth p6, I also doubt you feel such power, so I'm not going to feel sorry for you either.
120 - P6
I haven't seen go unresponded to. I've seen them focus on racial features to make the characature recognizable.
And the "Color Purple" reference to Dr. Rice wasn't racial as much as literary.
121 - urthshu
This is one of the most offensive threads I've read here. "Handkerchief heads"? WTF?
Eric:
Don't delete any of it- leave the trail. Since MD is throwing a fit because you didn't source HER, having more things to source is always good for the full, hateful picture.
122 - dwshelf
p6, well, so I had to go check out the cartoons for myself.
Maybe we agree.
I hope everyone would be able to survive this kind of argument. They were weak arguments. They each did contain a low blow which would never see the light of day if the target were liberal.
But it's a gnat attack. We're discussing powerful people here. People wno don't need pity or protection.
I'm sure you didn't hear it here first, but Condoleezza Rice has an excellent chance to be the first woman president. Elections are won in the middle. Rice would have a far greater center crossover than she would have a defection on the right. Far greater. Contrast to Hillary.
123 - P6
Fine. No need to push you over the edge our first conversation. I got 3+ more years to do that. But I do have to say this:
is nonsense (that I've heard elsewhere, yes). It's as much nonsense as the talk of Powell running a few years back. Rice is the ONLY candidate for President Hillary could beat.
124 - Cobra
You people are DELUSIONAL. Condi Rice...President???!? Exactly which social group is going to run out and vote for Condi Rice? She'd NEVER get out of the primaries. White conservative males have NEVER consciously chose to put a minority in the ultimate leadership position, much less a minority female. If you disagree, please cite me an historical example. Hell, Rush Limbaugh lost his mind over a black QUARTERBACK. We're talking the President of the United States. The only reason white conservatives are cooking up Rice right now is because she is obediant, and in lock step with the Bush, as opposed to Colin Powell, who openly disagreed with Bush and his neo-con kabal in the Iraq War and on Affirmative Action. If she pulled a Powell and went leaking quotes to Bob Woodward, or outing the Iranian Nuke missile program without the Presidential nod, Kristol, Krauthammer, Fox News and Limbaugh would have her out to the woodshed the next day. And if you don't believe me, find me a FLATTERING right winged article about Powell in the past two months.
Dorian,
Dick Cheney DID PROFIT ALREADY. It's PAST TENSE. Dick Cheney was in bed with Saddam Hussein and, oh my...the FRENCH, through subsidiaries during his tenure as CEO. To me...that's FAR worse than Whitewater, but I know it's IMPOSSIBLE for some conservatives to hold their heroes to any reasonable behavioral standards. And if you think that Iraq is "stable" or will be stable in the near future, that ain't just kool-aid you're drinking.
Now as far as this thread's love affair with black "conservatives" goes,
have I got a good group for you:
They promote family values, and are vehemently opposed to gay marriage and homosexuality. They believe in discipline, personal accountabillity and attonement, as well as entreprenuership. They are against the feminist movement, drug and alcohol use, fornication, interracial marriage,(a big plus in those Southern red states) and believe that God and moral values should be the central factor in one's life.
You right wingers should be running and embracing these folks...but you won't, because I've just described the Nation of Islam--black conservatives who have NO AFFILIATION, DEBT or SERVICE to rich white right winged overlords.
So don't give me this NONSENSE about you folks lovin' "black conservatives." This is one African-American from the MAJORITY who thinks you're all hilarious.
--Cobra
125 - RJ
"Give me an example of racism expressed against Black conservatives that has not been rejected by the civil rights establishment."
Uh, have you read the post that leads to this comments section?