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 comments126 - RJ
"Give me an example of racism expressed against moderate Black folks (because I think you threw that in there rather gratuitously)."
Uh, Colin Powell is a moderate. And he's been accused of being Bush's "house slave"...
127 - P6
Man, you should have held out for a minute before telling folks you were describing the NOI.
128 - RJ
"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."
He rose to the number four spot like a rocket. And he left Congress shortly thereafter.
I don't remember him ever suggesting that he left public office because he couldn't ever rise higher. Cite?
129 - andy marsh
P6 - it's not just the way Rice is portrayed in those political cartoons. It's the message that goes along with it. Using terms like "Aunt Jemima" and "Uncle Tom" and "house nigga" are racist! Period end of sentence. If someone used them to describe you, tell me you would not be offended?
And the fact that those terms have been used to describe Rice and Powell is racist. and the fact that NO civil rights groups jumped up and defended both of them is wrong. Granted they have since this thread started. But this thread started long after these attacks started. Both Rice and Powell have been attacked by liberal media for years.
Politics should have nothing at all to do with the argument.
130 - P6
Andy, I'm not even going to consider defending someone I think is working against my interests.
Because racism…excuse me, racial bigotry…affects Black and white folks so differently, white folks need to pick up their end of it the same way we Black folks are told we must. If white Conservatives are concerned about white people saying bad things about Black Conservatives, I say it is on white Conservatives to do something about it. NOT Black folks, nor our institutions.
If it's so wrong I should see all the complaints…ALL of them…directed at those who made the statements. Not at those you want to corner politically.
True.
ALL the Conservative complaints against civil rights organizations (not against Ted Rall, mind you) started long after the cartoons were published.
What took y'all so long, if it's all that deep?
And Jackson has been attacked by conservative media for years. What's your point?
They will continue to be attacked. I will continue to attack them. But honestly, how many attacks have you seen that are actually about their race? I'm not talking frippery like what this thread is complaining about.
Why do Conservatives expect Black people and our institutions to defend folks who support those we feel are working against us? Isn't the assumption that we must as racist as anything you'd care to accuse the NAACP of? Aren't you working against the colorblind society Conservatives claim to champion?
131 - RJ
"If white Conservatives are concerned about white people saying bad things about Black Conservatives, I say it is on white Conservatives to do something about it. NOT Black folks, nor our institutions."
This, frankly, makes no sense.
It's not "bad things" some people have said about Ms. Rice or Mr. Powell (both of whom are black). It's ANTI-BLACK things.
And any group that claims to be pro-black should denounce such racist attacks. This is NOT an ideological issue.
132 - ed
people seem to forget that 80% of black people in america vote democratic. an overwhelming majority of minorities of americans do the same. when people bad mouth leftists, they always seem to assume that they're talking about urban, agnostic (or worse) white socialists. the truth is, the democratic party is multi-ethnic. when people call the left racist or anti-semetic, they are speaking about 80% of the jewish population, 80% of the black population, at least 60% of the hispanic population, the majority of women in this country. that's a lot of folks to make silly assumptions about. the truth is, the democratic party is a minority party made up of our country's citizen minorities. sure there are some fools in the tent, but overall, we are a diverse group defending our interests against an overwhelmingly white, wealthy, male Republican party.
133 - P6
Oh?
Such as?
134 - andy marsh
how about aunt jemima uncle tom and house nigger...that bad enough???opr anti black enough???
probably not...but as I said before, if someone used those terms to describe you they would be bad enough...
and the conservative media does go after Jackson, but they never use racial slurs to do it. Because we know that the naacp and every other civil rights group would be screaming and doing it right away, not waiting for ever.
And lastly P6 - I wouldn't expect you to defend Powells' or Rices' politics, but if you truly are concerned with racism then I do expect you to defend them against hate no matter what side of the poilitical aisle it's coming from.
135 - P6
1: They were addressed. You guys keep coming back to "problems" that are a non-issue.
2: They are not anti-Black. They are anti-Rice and anti-Powell. When these two are lauded, no one says it applies to the whole Black race. I don't assume flattery gets distributed so I don't assume the insults are. Nor the responsibility…which, given the stuff I could point to, you should all recognize as a Good Thing©.
Is it that you guys know something about how general such comments are when coming from white folks that I don't? Because see, I'll call a sell-out a hanky-head in a heartbeat and I KNOW I'm not talking about all Black folks.
Another post that no one will comment on is coming, I can feel the subject matter congealing as I type…
136 - P6
Ah.
The next topic.
137 - Steve S
I think the question that needs to be asked is "Is it possible for a member of a minority community to adopt an ideology that is harmful to that community, without some form of bias present against his/her own community?"
To me, the answer is no.
Cobra hit the nail on the head with a sledgehammer. Everybody loves Rice/Powell because they support anti-minority Republican ideology and not because they are independent, personal responsibility loving individuals.
Back when slaves came to this country in ships, there were Africans who sold their own kind to the white man. These individuals showed signs of entrepreneurship, independence, believed in God and most likely were against homosexuality and drug use.
There are conservative ideologies that I like, stronger borders, etc. but I will not sell out my own family, condemning us to second class citizenship because I believe in strong borders or the right to bear arms. Do Powell and Rice condemn affirmative action as being anti-white, as many Republicans claim it is? Do Powell and Rice both think that EVERY person on welfare is a free loader, as many Republicans claim?
Maybe yes, maybe no. Maybe they are independent entrepreneurs, maybe they are intelligent, etc. AND maybe they are for affirmative action and welfare reform, while keeping welfare in place, etc. BUT it is my belief that IT IS NOT POSSIBLE to adopt an 'over-all' ideology that is harmful to your own community, without some form of internalized racism/homophobia/gender-bias (insert appropriate minority slant here).
Again, the question that should be asked here is "Is it possible for a member of a minority community to adopt an ideology that is harmful to that community, without some form of bias present against his/her own community?"
138 - andy marsh
So P6 - using racist titles is ok if it fits? Hankyhead is ok, if it's someone that you disagree with politically?
I'm just trying to clarify here. Racism is ok if you don't agree with a persons politics. That's what I got from your last comment.
139 - P6
Andy, I haven't seen racism in this situation. I've seen characatures. That's all.
140 - dwshelf
Because racism…excuse me, racial bigotry…affects Black and white folks so differently,
If you're going to use this as the premise used to derive some greater conclusion, I suggest it needs some support.
I see no evidence whatsoever that either Ms. Rice nor Mr. Powell have been affected in the slightest by anyting we're discussing here.
No more than GW Bush has been affected by claims he's a latter day Hitler.
More general than "racial bigotry", what we see is the use of slurs to make political arguments. Surely "Hitler" is in the same zone as "Uncle Tom".
And yet, we see all of Bush, Powell, and Rice apparently totally unaffected. Despite the fact that some are black, some white.
141 - Cobra
Andy Marsh writes:
>>>and the conservative media does go after Jackson, but they never use racial slurs to do it. Because we know that the naacp and every other civil rights group would be screaming and doing it right away, not waiting for ever.<<<
How many times have you heard Rush Limbaugh insult African-American public figures by emphasizing ethnic language colloquialisms and speach patterns? How many times have we heard Sean Hannity use the term "DNC Plantation", an obvious attempt to paint blacks who vote for democrats as SLAVES. We've heard Bob Grant describe blacks as "savages," and those are just the FAMOUS talkies. Conservative commentators are often condescending, patronizing and dismissive of ANY African American speaker not sanctioned by the Manhattan Institute, Hoover Institute, Cato, or Heritage Foundation. For them, you either sell out or get the hell out.
RJ writes:
>>>I don't remember him ever suggesting that he left public office because he couldn't ever rise higher. Cite?"
You won't get a direct quote from Watts on that, because then his TV appearences and book sales will decline, but take a look at this:
>>>Watts, Angered by DeLay, Threatened to Quit Post
Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla) (AP)
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 4, 1999; Page A12
House Republican Conference Chairman J.C. Watts (Okla.) briefly threatened to resign last week over what he considered Majority Whip Tom DeLay's efforts to usurp his responsibilities.
As the fourth-ranking Republican in the House, Watts is charged with overseeing the GOP's effort to forge a unified public message. But during a recent GOP caucus meeting, DeLay (Tex.) distributed talking points to Republican members -- so angering Watts that he told House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) in a private meeting that he was considering relinquishing his post, according to several sources"
And so he did. Take a look at this.
>>>He also occasionally complained that he was not included enough in leadership decisions.
The congressman, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, recently expressed concern that President Bush did not communicate with him about the administration's plan to kill the Crusader artillery system. The $11 billion weapon was to be assembled in Elgin and training conducted at Fort Sill, in Watts' district."
http://www.kccall.com/news/2002/0705/Front_Page/008.html
And here:
>>>It was frustration. Watts sees himself as a policy guy. He made repeated efforts to increase his role in forming Republican policy, and repeatedly he fell short.
After rising like a meteor to the No. 4 spot in the House GOP leadership, Watts hoped he could move up. The conference chairman is in charge of forming the Republicans' message to the press and the public. While Watts has mixed reviews in that regard, the general consensus is that, for a Republican, he did a good job. Certainly, the media has a harder time demonizing congressional Republicans today than they did in 1998. Watts is partly to thank for that.
But he wanted more. When Majority Leader Dick Armey (Tex.) announced he was retiring, Watts made an almost spastic run for his post and the whip spot being vacated by Tom DeLay (Tex.). Neither of those efforts went anywhere. Soon afterwards, he tried to reshape the conference role so that he would have more say in policy issues.
Watts was stuck at No. 4, and so time with the family seemed a lot more appealing."
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-carney070202.asp
So there you go. Although JC Watts was faithful to GOP, he was sliced into a eunuch by party leaders who really didn't want him to do anything except "token-up" at rallies and conventions. Is this the model of the GOP Big Tent?
Back to the thread at hand on the cartoonists' depiction of Condi. Speaking as a free lance cartoonist myself, Condi Rice is FAIR GAME. In fact, I think they're taking it easy on her. It comes with the territory of the position.
In fact, I've got my pencils going on her right now, and I'm not as "forgiving" as most..
--Cobra
142 - andy marsh
I don't listen to rush...personally, I don't think you should either!
143 - dwshelf
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.
When we're in a long term trend, history doesn't hold any examples.
Most conservative white males would be proud to vote for a black woman who thought largely like them. So would black women conservatives. Hispanic conservatives.
It's true, our experience with Ms. Rice is that of an excellent lieutenant. But during these four years, we've seen a bit of the real Ms. Rice shine though. We've seen her on her feet in real time, a master. We'll see more of this with her as Sec of State. Imagine her appearing as the American Margaret Thatcher.
There's no doubt that most of the hard core left would never vote for her. But there's a whole lot of people in the center who would. Many successful blacks in particular would vote for their first Republican, ever. So would others personally torn between statism vs self reliance. And not just a few people of all races would vote for a black woman simply to be voting for a black woman; these are life long Democrats.
Contrast to Hillary. Not only is there a hard core on the right who will never vote for her, she alienates the middle. There is no huge demographic segment ripe for the picking. No life long Republicans would vote for Hillary.
144 - P6
dwshelf:
Which is why I find all the complaints totally disingenuous.
This is simply being used as a lash against folk people want to corner politically. That's all. Normally I keep coming back to the central topic but I think I'll indulge in a little drift.
There is no greater conclusion applicable. You should read this thread. Some choice quotes (and I'm not picking on you, Eric; in fact I think these quotes are proof we can communicate):
Eric:Reverse it: I, a reasonably well-educated white man from an upper-middle class background, identify much more with a black person of similar socio-economic status and/or background than with an uneducated, poor white person. I can't imagine the circumstances - short of race war - where that identification would change.
P6: It's not a matter of identifying on the basis of class or common experiences created by being in the particular race box one is in. Because, you see, Black culture was largely shaped by a centuries old race war. The one circumstance under which you can imagine identifying more with a poor white person than a rich Black one, is the very circumstance that is the dominant influence in our history.
Think about that. Twice.
P6: Again I ask: can you honestly say, to this day, that the USofA acknowledges Black Americans as full members? And if you think so, survey the cultural landscape and tell me how Black Americans will know this.
Eric: Unfortunately, we cannot alter the past, only deal with its legacy as best we can.
P6: No doubt. But understand that you and I are dealing with different aspects of that legacy.
What problems does racism cause you, a reasonably well-educated white male from a fairly upper middle class background?
What problems does racism cause me, a 6'2" 185 lb Black male, self-educated, no degree, had to work up from messenger to Assistant VP at a bank, father a farmer, mother a laborer that eventually got a nice safe civil service job?
Feel me?
That last is critical. What you (assuming you're white) react to and cal racism is not what I react to and call racism. And that's why I say you guys being concerned about racism coming a white guy just ain't my problem. It's yours.
No, it's not. Hitler is dead. Uncle Tom is not.
145 - dwshelf
That last is critical. What you (assuming you're white) react to and cal racism is not what I react to and call racism. And that's why I say you guys being concerned about racism coming a white guy just ain't my problem. It's yours.
p6, I agree, I don't know exactly what "racism" is or means. I see it used in so many different, and contradictory ways.
But slurs I understand a little better. Slurs are only coincidentally racial. The general nature of a slur-based political argument is:
-ridicule the person; show that the person is different in an undesired way from the speaker and, hopefully, the audience.
-suggest that the audience should join in the ridicule
-thus, the person's political views are discredited.
Now when the slur is a racial slur, do we have racism? I don't know.
I do know we have a very weak argument with no power over even ordinarily intelligent people.
146 - TheCO
This is actually a fairly simple question to answer, and for the most part the answer is: No this is not racism.
It stems from a piece of Americana that is a distorted legacy of the past: The belief that all blacks are sharing the same experiences, and think in the same ways. In short its the belief that the African American race is a monolith. This is false. Just after the Civil War, even up through the sixties this would have made sense. Today its truly insane to hold to this belief. Do you really think Condelezza Rice, Michael Jackson, and the kid who delivers pizza's in Compton grew up the same way?
147 - P6
Then white Conservatives should either deal with the argument or leave it alone.
Dealing with the argument is NOT a matter of pointing at Black folks to detail how we're supposed to react, or ask why we didn't do something about it all.
Reality check, people. Black folks ain't the ones who run this puppy. We are not the ones that set the agendas. If we were, things would look considerably different.
148 - dwshelf
p6, near as I can tell, we agree completely. I don't expect or desire anyone to stop political cartoonists from using slurs.
149 - Dorian
About race as it applies to political groups - I would first say that every party has it factions of racists. That said, I grew up being ambivalent about race and only grew up to notice race mainly due to the actions of liberals. It was predominately liberals who wanted to talk ad nauseam about how enlightened they were and how screwed up everyone else was when it came to race. They held up their race banter as “clever” proof of their open-mindedness as if to say “look at me, I’m not noticing the color of this persons skin. I’m not racist”. They’re like the white “friend” that constantly reminds you “I never think about the fact that you’re black”. The constant chatter is, in a sense, proof that they do think about race constantly. They are drawing lines and drawing attention to these lines. When a black person wins a congressional seat the talk is “good for him he’s black but he made it anyway, let’s hold him up as a shining beacon of how we don’t notice race ”.
Ted Rall and company, unofficial advocates for the liberals, know what racism is all about - they’re racist to the core. When they’re given license to play the race card they can’t wait to use it. And it exposes how they feel about ALL blacks when they attack particular blacks they way they did.
150 - dwshelf
They’re like the white “friend” that constantly reminds you “I never think about the fact that you’re black”. The constant chatter is, in a sense, proof that they do think about race constantly. They are drawing lines and drawing attention to these lines.
One might suggest that such people are exposed to input? That they are not, in any sense, "the enemy".
We're not all born with extraordinary social skills. Most of us improve with, no surprise, social interaction.
151 - P6
dwshelf:
I picked up that we would agree, at least this far. Now, do you still agree with the basis of this thread, that civil rights groups are somehow negligent in their response to…whoever they haven't yet upbraided?
Dorian:
You've demonstrated this isn't about Black people at all. Thank you, no shit, for the honest response.
152 - SFC Ski
Well, I don't want to go into the "we were so poor" sketch, but I'd like to answer P6's question; "What problems does racism cause you...?"
One problem is that I feel I have to constantly prove I am not a racist. Let me clarify; I am a white male in the military, in a position of authority. AS you can imagine, not everyone likes the orders I sometimes have to give them, and I do sometimes wonder if a minority Soldier thinks they are being singled out for a detail, or not being promoted simply because they are a member of a minorty?(Am I acting like the master with a slave or a Sergeant telling a Private to get teh job done, if you know what I mean?). With superiors who are minority members there is also at times a brief but palpable moment when that superior gives me an order and looks to see if I have problems taking orders from a minority. (Hell no, I asay "Roger that, sir/m'am" and move out smartly). I wouldn't say I am overly sensitive about it, but I am conscious of this tension, if that is the proper word.
Fortunately, I can count on one hand the amount of times there has ever been a real or perceived problem in my workplace due to race. Not that there aren't racial issues in the military, there are, but I can say
that they few in my experience, and we have some of the best mechanisms in place to address and rectify them.
153 - dwshelf
Now, do you still agree with the basis of this thread, that civil rights groups are somehow negligent in their response to…whoever they haven't yet upbraided?
I agree with that too.
Would you agree that slurs are not a threat to one's happiness or success, regardless of the race or politics of the target?
154 - dwshelf
Sorry, p6. I read that again, I meant to say that I agreed with you. Civil rights organizations have no duty to protect people from slurs.
155 - Scoota Rey
It seems that you people have a lot to say about this, but, what are you going to do about it? We can go typing our brains out (if that's possible...err...you know what I mean), but if no one takes a stand, then these 154 (now 155) comments are utterly futile.
156 - dwshelf
Scoota Rey, what would you like to see happen?
Do you see where any harm has been done?
157 - P6
SFC Ski:
I think you (and Dorian) have described THE race issue for white folks. And for the record, I have no doubt Dorian's experiences are exactly as he described. But that's not a race issue, that's a power relationship issue. It just so happens the white folks he was dealing with used Black folks as a cudgel…and Black folks were the recipients of the blow-back when we didn't do a damn thing to deserve it.
This was white folks flexing on white folks. It's ALWAYS been white folks flexing on white folks. And the sole soultion to race problems Conservatives offer address white folks' concerns--not to be blamed for racism--and specifically exclude any effort to address Black folks' problem with race--which is to avoid its impact.
That's one major reason Black Conservatives are Black Conservatives© instead of conservative Black people.
Scoota Rey, these guys seem to be listening. That's a start. That's all it is, a start on a generation-long project that got deflected by power games. But that's more than I had last month.
158 - P6
dwshelf, may I say it has been a pleasure working the conversation with you.
159 - Cobra
Dwshelf writes:
>>>Most conservative white males would be proud to vote for a black woman who thought largely like them. So would black women conservatives. Hispanic conservatives."
I respectfully disagree. We've seen this in action several times in recent history with the Alan Keyes experiment. Keyes, an arch-conservative who would make Pat Buchanan look like a "Soul Train" line dancer, gets EMBARRASSINGLY low vote counts in any race he enters, despite getting more free media and propaganda exposure of his rhetoric.
Again...the Red State South, in states like Alabama, where they voted to KEEP the language of SEGREGATION in State legislation this year is a "Rice State?" Separate Proms Georgia? The white NASCAR dads in South Carolina are going to embrace a multi-degreed, single black female intellectual? Like I said...
She wouldn't make it out of the primaries.
More editorial cartoons are needed. I don't see why reality television programs should be the only medium where outspoken black women can be scrutinized.
--Cobra
160 - andy marsh
Cobra - do you really believe that most conservatives think like Alan Keyes or Pat Buchanan? Maybe most ultra-conservatives, but not most normal people!
161 - Mike Kole
Cobra- I agree with dwshelf that most white conservatives would vote for black or hispanic conservatives. The Keyes example is a poor one, because conservative voters shy from a completely unwound whack-job, as Keyes has become. JC Watts was an apt example, because the voters keep electing him. The leadership that keeps him 4th is distinct from the voters.
What frustrates white conservatives is not so much black voters but black leadership. If black voters are liberals and then voting Democrat, who could bemoan them? But the NAACP is the Association for the Advancement of Colored People, not for the Advancement of Liberal Ideology, nor for the Advancement of the Democratic Party. When black conservatives such as Condoleeza Rice advance, white conservatives do expect the NAACP to rah-rah that advancement.
That disappointment would probably fade if these white conservatives took a less literal interpretation of NAACP's name, but who would bemoan them that? Or, NAACP could just play it straight and come out and say that it is a liberal organization and end the controversy for once and for all.
162 - P6
andy:
Conservatives keep voting for people who hold their position.
What are we supposed to think?
Mike:
Do you want a LIST of who does bemoan us?
Again, white folks flexing on white folks.
I'd really prefer not to be a tool in y'all's power struggles.
Actually, I'd prefer a fair shot at participating in them struggles.
Conceptually I'd prefer it. Brothers get shot...
Okay, that was cynical as hell, but I ain't had coffee yet.
The NAACP isn't the Nation Association for the Advancement of 'Couple-of People. These two "advancements" have done nothing to advance "Colored People" in general.
163 - andy marsh
P6 - have alan keyes or pat buchanan ever actually been elected to anything?
164 - andy marsh
I guess what I'm getting from this whole string here is if the supposed racism is not offensive to most then it's not really racism. It's only racism if one particular person views it as such and it better not be a conservative who views it that way because then it's just a bullshit argument. Sort of like when I said if you don't like it here then leave. The response I got back was Oh, go back to africa??? It wasn't what I said, but it was the way someone wanted to perceive it. The fact that I'm white and the "offended" person is a psycho had everything to do with it.
It's only racism if a black person is offended by it. People like me can't possibly identify racism because I've never had to experience it. I guess I can use this as an excuse the next time someone calls me a racist. How the hell was I supposed to know? I'm white!
165 - Eric Olsen
as you may have noticed, I largely took the weekend off - I am very pleased to see the form this discussion has maintained, maybe we really are heading in the right direction.
At this point my primary remaining concern relating to the original topic is the concept of "Uncle Tom" or "Tommin'" - what does this mean exactly? Why is this term so much more freely used by liberals against conservatives than the other way around? Is it a political issue? Can one be a conservative black without being an Uncle Tom?
If we wish for race to no longer be such a powerful social determinant, why is there still the notion of "betraying one's race"? What does that mean?
166 - andy marsh
I actually have enjoyed this conversation. It's amazing that I am allowed to discuss racism without being called a racist!
167 - P6
That's what happens when it becomes clear Black folks opinions are being seriously considered.
It takes time to get to that point though. There's SO much…like, race is so unavoidably large a part of the life of every Black person who contacts white folks regularly that the idea of colorblindness is BLATANTLY stupid. And I'm drifting…
168 - P6
You're overfocusing on the personal. On the personal tip, the rule is the same as with white folks…learn from experience.
169 - P6
Eric, politics is sea foam.
Consider your local police department: a heterogenous group of people facing a basically hostile world of which circumstances decree they see mostly the seamy side of.
Extrapolate.
170 - dwshelf
Does anyone really see Condoleezza Rice as being much like Buchanan and Keyes?
171 - P6
I don't feel I've ever heard her opinion.
I know she faithfully repeats the words and supports the policies of someone I think is very much like Buchanan and Keyes.
172 - P6
Don't tell me you see no similarity between Bush's positions and policies and those supported by Keyes and Buchanan. They just support the positions with different arguments.
173 - andy marsh
So now Keyes and Buchanan are mainstream conservatives? Damn, I hate it when I keep reading all the wrong stuff! I need to find these X-file kinda places that the rest of the world must be reading!
It only makes sense though, I mean look at all the votes these two got running on that typical right wing platform!
Even with his name in the wrong place on the FL ballot Buchanan couldn't get 5% of the vote!
And lastly, we're back to the real issue. Dr. Rice doesn't spew the liberal message, so she must not be spewing her own message. How could a black female that grew up in Alabama in the '60's possibly believe that conservative politics could be a good thing?
174 - Cobra
Eric writes:
>>>At this point my primary remaining concern relating to the original topic is the concept of "Uncle Tom" or "Tommin'" - what does this mean exactly? Why is this term so much more freely used by liberals against conservatives than the other way around? Is it a political issue? Can one be a conservative black without being an Uncle Tom?"
I think you're missing the main point some of us are trying to make. P6 puts it in the correctly when he says it's about white people flexing on other whites.
Of course one can be a conservative black without being an Uncle Tom. I presented the Nation of Islam as the most blatant example of a group of blacks who maintain conservative beliefs who aren't: being sponsored, supported, receiving grants from, seeking approval from, currying favor for, or showing indefatigable, hound dog loyal support for pro-white male socio, economic and political causes.
Also, most Bible believing black church services on Sunday morning will give you more examples, Eric.
Lastly, you need to examine a belief system that would lead you to believe that "conservative black" is synonymous with "loyal RNC operative."
--Cobra
175 - dwshelf
Can one be a conservative black without being an Uncle Tom?
Can one be a successful black without being called an Uncle Tom? (where success is in business rather than purely as an entertainer or athlete)
After all, such success typically requires dropping feelings of hostility or fear toward other people because of their white race.
By the definition of some, dropping feelings of racial hostility and fear is the essence of Tommin.