Negrophobia

I read but don't normally blog William Jacobson's Saturday Night Card Game. But last night's was something else: "Saturday Night Card Game (The “Negrophobia” card is played)." The "Negrophobia" card is played at Balloon Juice, "The Modern Negrophobists reaction to the President’s speech…" It's really disgusting, the cartoon and the ideas behind it in the contemporary context. But the commenters are running with it, for example:

The modern negrophobist would demand the would be rescuer bring him a large rock so he could sink more quickly.

That cartoon warms my heart. I especially like the way the artist depicted the bigot as some sort of weasel/human hybrid.

I don't even know what to say. These people are simply not my countrymen. The sentiment is analogous to the kind of anti-Semitism found in caricatured drawings of long-nosed money-grubbing Jews. In other words, it's eliminationist.

I haven't finished listening to it, but Dennis Prager, in a clip at Blazing Cat Fur, indicates that progressive ideology is so removed from the basic values of this country as to be functionally anti-American. See: "Dennis Prager's Top 10 Ways Liberalism Makes America Worse." Balloon Juice demonstrates the point 1000s of times over.

'I Think You Would Have to Be Racist to Even Think He Was Talking About Barack Obama'

If you've seen the Ed Schultz segment, just scroll forward to 1:20 minutes.

Via Hot Air.

Michelle Malkin: 'Smacking Down Progressives of Pallor'

A superb beating.



Head over there and read the whole thing:

Video c/o The Other McCain, "I Would Very Much Like to Say That Janeane Garofalo Has Lost Her Mind …"

Black Flash Mobs

Some news agencies refuse to report the racial identity of those committing flash mob violence around the country, and political correctness prohibits a frank discussion of the issue among civic leaders and national policy makers. Seriously. Roland Martin on CNN's bumbling and blathering about "no matter if it's black or white," blah, blah. Freakin' asshat black criminal apologist. These are black mobs dick! Yet another example of how progressivism is kicking this country to the curb. See Ward Connerly, "Flash Mob Racism":

Earlier this year, the Justice Department of the Obama administration announced its objective to aggressively monitor the police departments of major urban cities. The purpose of this effort is to determine whether such departments are involved in racial profiling of blacks and Latinos and whether they are engaged in police brutality. Since that announcement, events have unfolded in some of those cities that reveal how misplaced that policy initiative actually is.



In Chicago, the District of Columbia, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, a group of “flash mobs” have unmercifully terrorized residents of those communities – attacking citizens, breaking windows of business establishments and stealing merchandise, and committing other random acts of violence. In each instance, the mobs have been overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, black youth. This fact has accounted for the failure of most of the news media to report either the events themselves or the racial background of the perpetrators. Several news sources have readily admitted that it is their practice not to mention the racial identity of those involved in criminal activity. Jim Stingl, a columnist for the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, recently wrote, “This newspaper normally avoids mentioning the race of people involved in crimes, unless it’s part of a description to help apprehend someone at large.”



Philadelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter is not afflicted with the same disease of political correctness as many in the media. In a recent 30-minute sermon delivered from the pulpit of his Baptist church, Nutter confronted the culture that many of us believe drives the behavior of these individuals when he said, “You have damaged your own race…Take those God-darn hoodies down, especially in the summer. Pull your pants up and buy a belt ‘cause no one wants to see your underwear or the crack of your butt.’’



“If you walk into somebody’s office with your hair uncombed and a pick in the back, and your shoes untied, and your pants half down, tattoos up and down your arms and on your neck, and you wonder why somebody won’t hire you? They don’t hire you ‘cause you look like you’re crazy,” the mayor said.



Mayor Nutter is correct. When we have young people burglarizing stores and neighborhoods and beating up bystanders without provocation, there is obviously a widespread cultural problem in the group committing these acts. That reality must be faced and the thugs responsible for these acts should not be ignored or coddled. They and their parents, if there are parents in the households, should be held accountable for their behavior.

It's racist violence. Black racist mobs attacking whites. See, "Teen girl gang assaults woman in brazen daylight attack outside Philadelphia City Hall." (At Memeorandum.) And also, "More flash mob mayhem for DC-area as band of female looters storms convenience store."

The Democrat Party Has Always Been the Party of Racism

Andrew Klavan (via Self Evident Truths):

Wal-Mart Wins Supreme Court Sex Discrimination Case

This is huge.

At New York Times, "Justices Rule for Wal-Mart in Bias Case."

And at Althouse, "'The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a massive sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart on behalf of women who work there'":

I hope the GOP candidates for President are smart and articulate enough to use this case in their argument against electing the Democratic President to a second term.

Word.

High-Tech Lynching: Progressives Attack Clarence Thomas Alleged Ethics Breach Because He's a Black Conservative

It's one of the greatest apostasies from progressivism. To be black and conservative is to reject everything about the politics of racial grievance and victimology. And for 20 years we've seen Clarence Thomas bear the brunt of the left's attack on black conservatism at the Supreme Court. I mentioned it today, the story at New York Times, "Friendship of Justice and Magnate Puts Focus on Ethics." And I linked Althouse, but folks need to go over there again, because she hammers the progressive hypocrisy: "The NYT goes after Clarence Thomas over 'an unusual, and ethically sensitive, friendship'."

And here comes the Soros-funded Think Progresss, "Justices Have Been Forced To Resign For Doing What Clarence Thomas Has Done":

Justice Clarence Thomas is an ethics problem in a black robe.

And he's being subjected to a high-tech attack in a white robe.

Despicable, but it's the progressive left we're talking about, so there you go. Just terrible people.

Via Memeorandum.

The Racist 2012 Republican Field?

So far both Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul have been attacked as racist. Check Matthew Yglesias, "Newt Gingrich Proposes Reviving “Poll Tests” of the Sort Outlawed in the Civil Rights Era." He did nothing of the sort, but Yglesias cites race-monger Ta-Nehisi "Don't Spell My Name Wrong" Coates as an authority. It's just a warm-up. The entire GOP field will be attacked as "racist," pretty much for just running against Barack Obama. He's black. How dare you??!!

Via Memeorandum (with some bonus dolt-douche thrown in).

Ron Paul Wouldn't Have Voted for the Civil Rights Act

And Scott Lemieux uses that wholly unsurprising revelation to slur Robert Stacy McCain as racist? Well, yeah.

Lame-ieux links to Robert's essay, "Whatever Happened to AuH2O?" And Robert mentions Rand Paul's controversy over the Civil Rights Act back in May 2010, where Rachel Maddow saw an opportunity and squeezed it for all the racism juice she could get out of it. I wrote at the times, in "Rand Paul on Rachel Maddow: 'IDEOLOGICAL EXTREMISM = RACISM'":

Paul wants government out of enforcing behaving among individuals, consumers, and places of business in the economy. We are 46 years since the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and it certainly seems difficult --- given the crises of that era --- to envision progress in eradicating that kind of Jim Crow racism in the absence of federal intervention.

I actually had a lot more to say, but basically I doubt any libertarian argument can carry the day on that issue, and I recall Ace of Spades making a really in-depth repudiation of the kind of libertarianism favoring private discrimination. See: "A Little History For Rand Paul."

That said, I know Robert Stacy McCain pretty well. He's a helluva lot smarter than Scotty Lame-ieux. But colorblind fairness (which is how I've come to see Robert's interaction with people) means nothing when progressives break out the long knives. It's pretty awful, but that's the way thing are nowadays.

RELATED: "Burlyce Sherrell Logan Returns to the University of North Texas."

Burlyce Sherrell Logan Returns to the University of North Texas

She's interviewed at New York Times, "A College Degree, 55 Years and an Era in the Making."

Burlyce Sherrell Logan, now 73, faced horrendous, racist attacks when she attended the university back in 1956:

“One day I was walking across campus, going to another building, and I saw a bunch of placards out,” she said. “I thought someone was going for office.” She recalled that she started reading the signs and they said, “ ‘Jungle bunnies go home,’ ‘Africans go home,’ ‘Burrheads go home.’ And I was totally shocked, but I had noticed there were a bunch of kids ganging up behind me. And I don’t know what made me do this, but I just started knee-slapping laughing, and I couldn’t stop. I think they think I went crazy, and they all ran away.”

She quit as bad grades piled up; moved west; married, divorced and remarried; raised three children; worked as a banker and a secretary. Then, in 2006, Ms. Logan returned to a changed university, now with 36,000 students — about a third of them black, Hispanic or Asian. It took 55 years, but she has earned a bachelor’s degree, her only worry whether her cranky 73-year-old knees can carry her up the steps and across the stage to collect a diploma that is as much about a life journey as any academic achievement.

Read the whole thing.

Ms. Logan is not bitter. Times have changed, and she's appreciative of the second chance and wise to the social transformations since 1956. That's apparently not enough for the racial grievance masters at The Root:

I wonder if some are in too much of a hurry to close the door on past injustice without exploring the history first. At a time when there is a disturbing rumble about race under the surface of so many of our discussions, we need to hear the survivors' tales. America has changed since 1956, or even 1976. It wouldn't hurt to remind America of the enormous psychic and emotional price that African Americans paid to simply exercise their rights.

Oh no. Wouldn't want to close the door on the last deep wellspring of radical left-wing power. Americans want to move forward and provide citizens with equal opportunity, and, unfortunately, more often than not, what's holding folks back is the Democrat stranglehold on inner-city political and educational institutions, not to mention the culture of anti-intellectualism that's gripped those trapped in the black underclass. But The Root says don't "close the door on past injustice ..." It's all we've got left!

The Paranoid Style: The Persistence of Conspiracy Theories in American Politics

An interesting piece from Kate Zernike at the New York Times. An excerpt:

The fact that many Americans — and many Republicans in particular — have told pollsters that they doubt the president’s citizenship is less surprising when you consider the sizable percentages of Americans who subscribe to other conspiracy theories, said Robert Alan Goldberg, a history professor at the University of Utah and the author of “Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America.”

Eighty percent of Americans, he said, believe that President Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy, rather than a lone gunman, as a government commission affirmed. Thirty percent believe that the government covered up aliens’ landing in Roswell, N.M., and a third of American blacks believe that government scientists created AIDS as a weapon of black genocide. Sept. 11, of course, has inspired conspiracy theories — it was plotted, variously, by “the Jews,” the Bush administration or Saddam Hussein.

By definition, Professor Goldberg said, a conspiracy theory is a belief that cunning forces are seeking to bend history to their will, provoking terror attacks or economic calamity to move the world in the direction they wish.

“I look at this birther conspiracy as a typical example,” he said. “This is far beyond the issue of whether this is a legitimate president. The real issue for them is this belief that this is a ploy by this hidden group to get power, to move Americans toward socialism or globalism or multiculturalism using Barack Obama as a pawn.”

RTWT at the link.

Kung Fu Fighting Composer Rejects Allegations of RAAAAACISM!!

You can't make this stuff up!

Blazing Cat Fur has the background, and at London's Daily Mail, "Racist? My song's just a blend of East and West, says Kung Fu Fighting composer":

Yesterday the song’s writer and original performer Carl Douglas described the decision to arrest Mr Ledger as ‘political correctness gone mad’ because the song was not racist.

‘The arrest is a little unbelievable because there’s no racism in the song,’ Douglas, who is now 68, said. ‘It’s very strange indeed. ‘I’m very proud of the song. Everyone told me that a fusion of the west and east couldn’t work and I said “no, it can”. I have cousins that are Chinese in Jamaica, so I knew it could work.’

He said he has met thousands of Chinese fans of the hit and had even been asked to perform it at the Olympics in Beijing.

Great News! Firedoglake Launches Benefactor Membership Program!

Hey, act now!



In addition to the phenomenal benefits listed below, benefactors will enjoy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to own their very own 8 1/2" x 14" glossy Sarah Palin F-Me Pumps photograph dribbled with T-Bogg's spooge!

For as little as $45/year, you get:



✓ Personalized membership card



✓ Discounts from progressive partners



✓ Invitations to members-only planning sessions



✓ Access to exclusive FDL chats & discussions

And don't miss Hammering Jane Hamsher's solicitation essay, where she indicates that FDL is going after the NPR model of membership and philanthropy journalism --- and hey, Jane's definitely got a good start on catching NPR in the anti-Semitism department (yay!, no more Joe Liebermans!). So what are you waiting for?!! You too can be part of the elite club of progressives slamming "racist" tea partiers as inbred stupid f#&kety f#&ks! Go progs! Sign up today!

National Palestinian Radio

Bare Naked Islam has the perfect headline, "NPR executive caught on tape bashing Christians and Jews, praising Muslims."

I read Ed Morrissey's account earlier today. He covers most of the bases and suggests that the discussion on public/private funding is the key moment of the tape. The tea party racism stuff is typically boring, although the section on the need for more progressive elites is pretty good. But by far the most damning sections are those in which Ron Schiller is shown nodding approvingly as actors Ibrahim Kasaam and Amir Malik roll off a litany of anti-Semitic statements. And not only does Schiller remain nonplussed, he laughs at NPR's designation as "National Palestinian Radio," and vigorously defends NPR as untainted by "Zionist" influence. Meryl Yourish responds:

So the Jews Zionists control the media, except at NPR, and this guy, who has a Jewish last name, is only too happy to agree with undercover citizen journalists posing as Muslims offering $5 million to NPR. So, Ron Schiller — are you Jewish? Because if you are, that makes your actions even more offensive.

Yeah. It's pretty bad, but typical for the Israel-hating left. The fact that NPR executives are meeting with a (fake) pro-Sharia outreach group claiming ties to the Muslim Brotherhood is mind-boggling, but again, par for the course. See Washington Times, "NPR seeks funding from Sharia backers."

See also The Blaze, "NPR Issues New Statement: Exec Put on ‘Leave’ & We Need Public Funding." And Memeorandum.

Updates coming ...

Cantor Rips National Public Radio: 'Taxpayer Dollars Should No Longer Be Appropriated to NPR'

I'll post the video later, but here's this from The Daily Caller, "Republicans tee off on NPR after latest O’Keefe video":

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Virginia Republican, ripped National Public Radio (NPR) on Tuesday after NPR foundation’s nonprofit president Ron Schiller was caught on video saying the radio network and most of its member stations would survive without federal funding.



“As we continue to identify ways to cut spending and save valuable resources, this disturbing video makes clear that taxpayer dollars should no longer be appropriated to NPR,” Cantor said in an e-mail to TheDC. “Not only have top public broadcasting executives finally admitted that they do not need taxpayer dollars to survive, it is also clear that without federal funds, public broadcasting stations self-admittedly would become eligible for more private dollars on top of the multi-million dollar donations these organizations already receive.”



The NPR and public broadcasting defunding debate has heated up as of late, and the new video conservative activist James O’Keefe released emboldens their cause. Congressman Doug Lamborn, Colorado Republican, told TheDC “it’s amazing, the attitude that these guys have,” and their “arrogance and condescension” is “just amazing.”

The initial exposé is here: "NPR executives caught on tape bashing conservatives and Tea Party, touting liberals" (via Memeorandum). Also at POWIP, "Latest O’Keefe Sting: NPR Exec Ron Schiller."



Expect updates. Meanwhile, John Cole doubles down on the racist allegations.

Twenty Years After Rodney King Beating: Video Ushered Police Into YouTube World

At Los Angeles Times, "LAPD's Change in Focus":

In the wake of the videotaped police attack on motorist Rodney King, the department has learned to embrace video scrutiny.

It was shortly after midnight, 20 years ago Thursday, when George Holliday awoke to the sounds of police sirens outside his Lake View Terrace apartment. Grabbing his clunky Sony Handycam, he stepped out on his balcony and changed the Los Angeles Police Department forever.

The nine minutes of grainy video footage he captured of Los Angeles police beating Rodney King helped to spur dramatic reforms in a department that many felt operated with impunity. The video played a central role in the criminal trial of four officers, whose not-guilty verdicts in 1992 triggered days of rioting in Los Angeles in which more than 50 people died.

The simple existence of the video was something unusual in itself. Relatively few people then had video cameras, Holliday did — and had the wherewithal to turn it on.

"It was just coincidence," Holliday reflected in an interview a decade ago. "Or luck."

Today, things are far different and the tape that so tainted the LAPD has a clear legacy in how officers think about their jobs. Police now work in a YouTube world in which cellphones double as cameras, news helicopters transmit close-up footage of unfolding police pursuits, and surveillance cameras capture arrests or shootings. Police officials are increasingly recording their officers. Compared to the cops who beat King, officers these days hit the streets with a new reality ingrained in their minds: Someone is always watching.

"Early on in their training, I always tell them, 'I don't care if you're in a bathroom taking care of your personal business…. Whatever you do, assume it will be caught on video,' " said Sgt. Heather Fungaroli, who supervises recruits at the LAPD's academy. "We tell them if they're doing the right thing then they have no reason to worry."

More at the link.

Folks will tell different stories about this, but Rodney King resisted arrest. Was the police reaction excessive? Perhaps, although a federal court trial found otherwise, and the rest is history. I was more shocked by the Los Angeles riots than by the alleged police brutality in the beating. Of course, maybe I'm not in a good position to truly understand it, not being an oppressed minority, and all that, or a conflicted middle-class white feminist struggling to overcome her racial privilege, like Melissa McEwan:

Twenty years later, it's still the same victim-blaming I was hearing about Rodney King, even as he sat in a wheelchair convalescing from his physical injuries. (He has nightmares to this day, and, while currently sober, has struggled with alcoholism.) Twenty years later, same old shit.

But, twenty years on, I am a different person than I was then. Working through my privilege is an ongoing process—it always will be—but what happened to Rodney King was so much more difficult for me to understand and culturally contextualize then, and it's not just because I was a teenager; it's because I was a privileged white teenager who hadn't yet begun in any meaningful way to examine her privilege.

Somehow that sounds inauthentic to me, but that's progressives for you --- they're all FUBAR all the time.

RELATED: At CNN, "Rodney King, 20 Years Later." (At Memeorandum.)

Race Minstrels? My Reply to Chauncey DeVega

I read Chauncey DeVega's sick racist screed earlier: "Black History Month is Herman Cain Playing the Race Minstrel for CPAC." The piece is puerile yet vicious, and while it's tempting to ignore such rants as typical race-baiting of the progressive left, there was something that went above and beyond in this case. Disparaging Herman Cain as a "monkey in the window" is the kind of language one might expect from KKK members in the 1960s. But here this is coming from an author who's bio shows a body of publications in some of the left's most prominent progressive outlets. Thus, DeVega's racism is a perfect window into the deep disturbing psychologies of the Obama-Democrat cult of racial exploitation. It's a spectacle, and the critical reaction has been quite forceful. See David Weigel, for example, "Herman Cain Shall Overcome."

What's especially noteworthy to me is how DeVega's attacks form a broadside against the entire black conservative establishment. Herman Cain was the immediate target, but he served as the initial race "mascot" for DeVega's slurs against the whole GOP infrastructure. The piece was so provocative even Alternet thought a disclaimer was warranted in introducing DeVega's follow up, "On Chauncey DeVega's Herman Cain Post." I doubt this was the editors' intentions, but I appreciate the acknowledgment that a racist screed of this magnitude has nevertheless evinced little outrage on the left:

We understand that some are offended by DeVega's choice of words. We note, however, that most of the consternation generated by DeVega's post has come from right-wing supporters of Cain who have focused on the language of his post and not the substance of his claim that Cain lends cover to reactionary right-wing forces.

One of most widely understood aspects of Obama-era poltics is the left's endless resort to the race card as the last hope of any kind of political viability. Perhaps it serves as a dog whistle to racial victimologists on the left, but progressive racism hasn't served Democrats well over the last couple years. So you'd think Alternet would repudiate its own author. Instead they've doubled-down, as Confederate Yankee snarks: "Alternet Doubles Down on Bigoted Accusation that Black Conservatives are Race Traitors."

The entire concept of a group owing fealty to a specific political party due to their genetic makeup is entirely offensive to any thinking person, but that is precisely the argument Chauncey DeVega made earlier this week, and one that leftist web site AlterNet and its writer continue to support.

In my original post, I referred to Herman Cain and other black conservatives as "race minstrels" and "mascots" for the White conservative imagination. I stand by this observation.

DeVega's vivid bigotry is his own cross to bear. what is less clear is why Alternet is tolerant of such myopic rhetoric.

Confederate Yankee block quotes the precise passage that convinced me to respond to DeVega. I'm not only one of those "other black conservatives," but I stood with both Hermain Cain and Allen West at CPAC. The opportunity to do so was the high point of the conference.



At this point I'm simply in contempt. No doubt DeVega speaks volumes for progressives, given the left's silence in light of these allegations. And the reason is obvious: People like Herman Cain, Allen West and myself stand for conservative principles. We demand both equal opportunity and equal respect. We want a country that values individual initiative and guarantees that people of all backgrounds can pursue their dreams of happiness to the best of their abilities. The nation's founders laid the vision. Herman Cain, Allen West and others are living it. The question for me is how any confident, intelligent and morally upstanding black American could possibly endorse that kind of outrageous racist sentiment in this day and age. Perhaps it's just retail race-card politics. But when folks like DeVega demonstrate an encyclopedic knowledge of Jim Crow stereotypes and attack rhetoric, it's quite revealing of the extent that America has not yet overcome. Progressives are holding this country back. It's the color of your skin that matters, whether you identify with and belong to group consciousness organizations, rather than identify with American individualism and liberty. It's pretty easy for me to choose up sides. The patriotic thing is to stand with those who fight to destroy racial classes and hierarchies. Indeed, the pathologies espoused by the likes of DeVega are beyond revolting, but un-American. I reject the poltics of the progressive plantation, and I join in might with other upstanding blacks working for a better future.



More from Matt Welch, "Onward and Upward with Racial Tolerance" (via Mememorandum).

The Obligatory Haley Barbour Racial Revisionism Racism Post

I doubt this is the kind of attention the folks at Weekly Standard had in mind. But readers should at least visit the scene of the alleged crime: "The Boy from Yazoo City." Folks might get a kick out this passage, for example:

What role Yazoo City’s segregationist past might play in Barbour’s presidential campaign is hard to say. It could become an issue, particularly for Washington political reporters who enjoy moralizing about race and public education while sending their own children to progressive schools like Sidwell Friends and St. Albans, where applicants of color are discreetly screened and their numbers carefully regulated.

Exactly.



(The Obamas send their girls to Sidwell, but progressives are hypocrites like that.)



Reading the whole thing provides the context. Governor Barbour grew up in a time of changing racial norms and in his experience of segregation in the South wasn't "all that bad." But such thoughts are verboten nowadays, remember? And faster than you can say "post-racial America," the progressive left — the kind of folks who don't think twice about getting their kids out of crime-ridden, dilapidated inner city schools — have launched a campaign of racist allegations against Barbour. Of course, cries of racism are all that progressives have left — something conservatives have pointed out repeatedly during the Obama interregnum. But with the 2012 pre-primary season picking up, we should be preparing for a bumper crop of left-wing racist allegations.



Now, I'm not sure, but it looks like the Barbour smear got going at Talking Points Memo, for example, "Barbour Praises Civil Rights-Era White Supremacist Citizens Councils." The lead accuser investigator there, Eric Kleefeld, contacted the governor's office and got a statement (which of course lends credibility to the allegations): "Barbour Spokesman: Mississippi Gov. Is Not Racist." And Kleefield follows up with some additional research: "Flashback: Citizens Councils Touted 'Racial Integrity,' 'Christian Love and Segregation'."



At Daily Kos the meme was that Barbour's statements were revisionist:

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour has a strategy for beating Sarah Palin to the teabaggers' support in the 2012 primaries. Digby calls it his "Southern Strategy," consisting of a the dogwhistle message that "racism in America was always overblown with the implication being that those who complain about it have always been whiners."

And at Hufffington Post, former George Soros protégé Amanda Terkel chimed in with how Haley's account was at odds with the professional left's academic establishment and racial grievance organizations: "Haley Barbour's Account of Civil Rights Era in Mississippi Assailed By NAACP, Historians."



Then of course we've had current Soros tool Matthew Yglesias holding forth non stop, and he's got a piece headlining right now at Memeorandum: "Haley Barbour's Affection for the White Supremacist Citizens' Council." And notice this follow-up piece from Yglesias: "Barbour Has a History of Citizens’ Council Trouble."



So, as you can see, the left's meme has gone from situating Barbour's personal recollections as an attempt at GOP racial revisionism to a full frontal attack on the governor as a Klan-style white supremacist. Michelle Goldberg provides the flourishing touch, at The Daily Beast, "Is Haley Barbour a Racist?":

Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi, chairman of the Republican Governors Association, and likely presidential candidate, has fond memories of his native Yazoo County during the days of Jim Crow. “I just don’t remember it as being that bad,” he says in a Weekly Standard piece this week. He praises the Citizens Councils—“an organization of town leaders”—for keeping the peace and keeping out the KKK. Writer Andrew Ferguson takes Barbour at his word, arguing that if Barbour’s segregationist roots become an issue in his presidential campaign, it will be because of “Washington political reporters who enjoy moralizing about race and public education while sending their own children to progressive schools like Sidwell Friends and St. Albans.”



The piece is an exquisite example of the conservative racial two-step: a blatant expression of racism, followed by aggrieved wailing at the mere thought of being called a racist. It proves that Barbour is either dishonest or so blindly ignorant that one can scarcely imagine how he’s managed a successful political career.

Hold on.



All Barbour said was "I just don’t remember it as being that bad."



That's racist? Hardly, but anything involving old-school private social organizations in the South is a potential mother load for the progressives. We'll see how this plays out thoughout the day. Meanwhile, at the Seattle Times, "Civil-rights days not so bad, recalls Mississippi governor," and New York Times, "Discussing Civil Rights Era, a Governor Is Criticized."



RELATED: "Doing a ‘Macaca’ on Haley Barbour."

Who's Bashing Whom? UCLA's Kent Wong Attacks 'Racist' Opposition to DREAM Act With Racist Attacks on 'Old White Men'

This is perfect.

Which clip will the MFM show? The one on top, where Professor Kent Wong, Director of UCLA's Center for Labor Research and Education, lauds immigrant students for working hard toward their dream of education and opportunity in America, or the one at bottom, where he excoriates the racist "old white men" in the U.S. Senate, to wild cheers from the crowd. And note at the second clip all this talk about "displacing millions of Americans ... in their jobs, seats in college, and elections." That's a classic summary statement on the neo-communist left's reconquista revolutionary agenda:

"We will win the dream act soon -- very soon," he exclaimed. "When that day comes, we will celebrate with millions and millions of people of people across this country who are standing with you tonight. Who stand for justice, who stand for democracy and equal opportunities for all."

"When that day happens, the young people of the DREAM Act movement, will go on to accomplish and do great things with your lives," he said. "You will go on to become lawyers, teachers, doctors and members of the US congress to replace those old white men... You are the hope and future of this country. You are hope and future of your generation."

If Dream Act Amnesty passes, millions of Americans will be DISPLACED and REPLACED in their jobs, seats in college, and elections.

RELATED: At Michelle's, "Operation Buck Up: Stop the DREAM Act illegal alien student bailout."

Added: Michelle's got more, "Video: UCLA open-borders prof/SEIU lawyer urges “DREAM”-ers to replace those “old white guys”."

Barrett Brown Cross-Posts Lame Response to R.S. McCain at Sick and Evil Little Green Footballs

There's little advantage for me in posting on Barrett Brown's cross-posting of a hit piece against Robert Stacy McCain to Little Green Footballs. That's because while Barrett is likely to respond, I'm not sure if he can link to my blog from Little Green Footballs (since Charles Johnson often refuses links to enemies). And it's definitely no linkage at Ordinary Gentlemen, which is home to sleaze-blogger E.D. Kain. It's okay actually, since I often refuse to throw links to those who're unworthy --- the lying dirtbag RepRacist3 comes to mind. But in this case the stakes are fairly high. Barrett Brown has threatened Robert Stacy McCain with a libel suit. I sometimes communicate with Barrett Brown, and of course I'm a long-time blog buddy to Robert, so I thought I'd just throw out a few thoughts for the heck of it. Maybe there's some utility in this as an excursion in the blogospheric politics of flame wars.

I do link to Ordinary Gentlemen, as folks will recall. It's hilarious when E.D. Kain checks out my blog while analyzing his stats. E.D.'s ashamed to this day of once being the proprietor of a boldly neoconservative webzine known as NeoConstant. He got tired of it just as the ideological winds were shifting toward the Democrats in 2008. Long-time readers will recall that in response to my series of essays on E.D.'s craven ideological and moral machinations, he launched a campaign of workplace harassment at my college. I had bestowed upon him the "Conor Friedersdorf Wannabe Award for Faux-Conservative Punditry!", and no doubt that didn't sit too well. (See, "Sleaze-Blogger E.D. Kain Reaches Pinnacle of 'Conservative' Blogosphere! Simultaneously Linked by Andrew Sullivan and Charles Johnson!") And while I often hear folks still refer to E.D. as a libertarian-minded conservative, the truth is he's a dyed-in-the-wool progressive. He finally gave up the ghost at Balloon Juice a few months back, "Why I am Not a Conservative." E.D.'s obviously on a search for acceptance --- by someone, anyone, no matter how deeply immoral and without possibility of redemption. It's pretty bad.

And that's why E.D. refuses to link me at Ordinary Gentlemen. I've hammered him mercilessly. The truth hurts, seriously. And ignoring me is his way of admitting he's a tool of the even cheapest sleazeballs higher up the blogging chain, like RAWMUSLGLUTES and husky über narcissist Charles Johnson.

Anyway, I'm perplexed that Barrett Brown has decided to go all out with the cross-post to Little Green Footballs, linked here and here. (And the Confederate illustration appears only at LGF, although Ordinary Gentlemen is not above those kinds of base smears.) Barrett's post is the basis for his accusation of libel against Robert. And folks can read the latter's original post here: "Narcissism, Isolation and Trolls." And Robert's response to the libel threat is here: "Nothing Says ‘Merry Christmas’ ..." All of this entails a lot of reading, and frankly I don't really see where Barrett's case for libel can be found. Robert's a judicious blogger, and having made a living as an established journalist I'd expect he knows how to avoid litigation. But here's a quote in any case, for a flavor:

Brown pretends to disprove my skeptical remarks about his characterization of Vanity Fair reporter Michael Hastings as his “colleague.” What I wrote was that, in using this term in his YouTube video lecture to National Review editor Rich Lowry, Brown was “expressing a collegiality that probably exists mainly in Brown’s mind.”

The jury will please note the word “probably” in that sentence. Of course I could not know the extent of Brown’s acquaintance with Hastings, despite Brown’s having written sundry things about that relationship, for we have already established that by his own admission Brown perpetrates falsehoods on the Internet. (See defense Exhibit B.)

Given Brown’s confessed use of online deception (his phony “alter-ego,” etc.), his mere assertion as to any particular state of affairs — e.g., an alleged professional relationship with Michael Hastings — proves nothing, as an admitted liar has no credibility. Therefore, skepticism toward such an assertion by Brown was entirely warranted. And what does Brown say of his relationship with Hastings?

We talked on the phone several times and exchanged some number of e-mails . . .

Brown does not say, “We’re best buds,” or “We hung out and had beers together.” No, it’s e-mails and phone calls. By that standard, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’ve got a whole crapload of “colleagues,” including several members of Congress. But you’ll notice that, so far as we can tell from Exhibit A, Brown and Hastings have never met in person, thus sustaining my assertion, in the blog post that the plaintiff claims is libelous, that “while Brown and Hastings were both True/Slant contributors, it wasn’t like they were hanging out around the office coffee machine, swapping stories.”

My credibility once more vindicated, I next call to your attention this statement by Brown:

. . . the rest can be confirmed by Andrew Sullivan, with whom I discussed the events after he linked to my piece.

Andrew Sullivan. Andrew Sullivan? Does the plaintiff really wish to bring to this honorable court’s attention his professional collaboration with Andrew Sullivan? Your honor, the defense would like to introduce at this time Exhibit C, showing that this same Andrew Sullivan has a criminal record for possession of illegal drugs. We also introduce Exhibit D, a blog post from Ace of Spades HQ, containing certain relevant information about Suliivan’s other behaviors, although there is perhaps no need to discuss this information at this time.

So far, then, we have established that Barrett Brown is a confessed drunkard, by his own admission “arrogant and narcissistic,” a deceptive Internet “troll” who is friends with others who engage in similar deceptive activity online, and an associate of a criminal drug abuser, Andrew Sullivan.

Given all this, your honor, it is the belief of the defense that Barrett Brown is a person of such infamous ill-repute that any negative comments made about him on the Internet could not possibly be considered defamatory.

I'm now going back over Barrett's response, and I see that he's quick to engage in race-baiting allegations against Robert and the latter's ties to the Sons of Confederate Veterans, ad nauseum. And Barrett has a book coming out on all of this as well, with an entire chapter devoted to McCain, Hot, Fat, and Clouded: The Amazing and Amusing Failures of America's Chattering Class. (In recalling this I'm understanding why Robert has something to be pissed about.)

And for a flashback, here's Barrett Brown attacking me as dishonest earlier this year. I later updated a post he criticized (don't remember which one), so I guess this is mostly of entertainment value at this point, if that. Related: "Barrett Brown Doesn't Read Well."

Footnote: For the origins of the "sick and evil" reference to LGF, see "Ace of Spades Smacks Charles Johnson in a Post Every New* Blogger Should Read."