Rhymes With Right

February 27, 2009

The Arrogance Of The White Liberal

Excuse me, but upon what possible basis does a white liberal presume to define the appropriate political and social beliefs for an African-American, and to declare an African-American as Â“self-hatingÂ” if he or she fails to hold to the proper views as defined by that white liberal?

That is the question IÂ’d like to ask racist white liberals Janeane Garofalo and Keith Olbermann after their disgusting performance on OlbermannÂ’s hate television show yesterday. After these two hacks engage in psychological profiling of women who like (or, even worse, date) Rush Limbaugh, they decide to trash GOP Chairman Michael Steele for the high crime of being a black Republican.

JANEANE GAROFALO: She dated him, so either she suffers from Stockholm Syndrome Â– a lot like Michael Steele, whoÂ’s the black guy in the Republican party who suffers from Stockholm Syndrome, which means you try and curry favor with the oppressor.
KEITH OLBERMANN: Yes, you talk about self-loathing.
GAROFALO: Yeah, and thereÂ’s, any female or person of color in the Republican party is struggling with Stockholm Syndrome.

Excuse me? Where did that homely little troll of a woman come up with Michael Steele in that context? It seems almost a little too convenient that she just happens to have a black man immediately in mind to insult for not hewing to her white liberal notion of what proper political beliefs and voting behavior is for a black man. And Olbermann is all too ready to pile on, because the fact that any black man would fail to hold political views congruent with his own is inconceivable unless they are suffering from some psychological disorder. Interestingly enough, neither of these individuals has anything approaching the sort of education or credentials necessary to make such a diagnosis Â– but hey, as white liberals they are better than the rest of us and are only making such statements about Chairman Steele for his own good and that of any confused black folks who might believe that they are permitted to think for themselves or hold deviant views.

Really, it seems to me that an independent thinking black man like Michael Steele is the polar opposite of the sort of person who has Stockholm Syndrome. After all, such individuals are prone to seeking approval from their more powerful captors. Steel does not do that Â– indeed, he rebels against ersatz superiors like Garofalo and Olbermann. On the other hand, I can think of a prominent African-American liberal politico who does appear to crave the approval of white liberal elitists like Janeane and KeithÂ…

UPDATE: Over at Gay patriot, there is a great post on this same topic -- from the perspective of one who is often accused of hating himself because he dares to hew to the conservative values of the GOP.

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 478 words, total size 4 kb.

February 25, 2009

Race-Baiters Play Â“Pillage The RodeoÂ” Again

Anyone familiar with life in Houston knows that one of the top charitable organizations in town is the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo. They put on a great show every year, and raise lots of money for scholarships and educational programs. Most of the work is done by volunteers, and you reach the board through DECADES of volunteer activity.

That isnÂ’t good enough for some members of the race ho and poverty pimp community, who want to make sure that their hand-picked Â“minority representativesÂ” get on the board without those years of service and that their preferred minority contractors get a piece of the pie without giving the lowest bids.

State Sen. Mario Gallegos said he will be filing a bill Friday that would require the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo to contract with more minority-owned businesses, include minorities on its board and comply with open records requests.
Gallegos said he and other minority leaders urged action on the same issues during a meeting last week with rodeo officials but were told that the rodeo could not address their demands Â— it has a show to put on starting next week.
Â“ItÂ’s time they break the good ole boy system and start doing whatÂ’s right, period,Â” said Johnny Mata, the former head of the local chapter of League of United Latin American Citizens, who attended the meeting. Â“I am a firm believer that we can meet halfway.Â”
Gallegos, a Houston Democrat, said he is filing the bill because rodeo officials refused to go forward with non-binding mediation overseen by a U.S. Department of Justice division that works to settle minority-related disputes.
Â“They just told the DOJ they thought it was pointless,Â” Gallegos said. Â“I want to know what they do with their money. They are the largest cash cow in Houston.Â”
The rodeo generates more than $80 million in revenues annually.

And thatÂ’s what it really comes down to Â– the money, the disposition of which is already easily tracked through publicly available reports filed pursuant to their non-profit status. LetÂ’s call this what it really is Â– a race-based shakedown. It is one that is tried virtually every year.

Hey, Johnny Mata -- let's make the board of LULAC reflect the ethnic composition of Harris County, open all of its records in the same fashion as the rodeo, and guarantee that its contracts are properly distributed based upon the ethnic spoils system you want to impose upon the rodeo.

And as for Mario Gallegos Â– why donÂ’t you sneak off, get drunk and beat one of your mistress again.

And regardless Â– leave the rodeo alone.

Posted by: Greg at 12:57 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 449 words, total size 3 kb.

February 24, 2009

Who Does The NAACP Really Represent

Apparently not African-Americans.

Throughout the Prop 8 fight last year, the California NAACP was a strong ally for marriage equality. Yesterday, the national NAACP came out strongly against Prop 8, as well.

Remember -- a majority of African-American voters supported Prop 8 last fall. Indeed, the sane thing has been true in every state where the people have been permitted to take a stand on gay marriage -- African-Americans have supported traditional marriage of one man and one woman. So who does the NAACP really represent?

Posted by: Greg at 03:27 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.

February 20, 2009

OMG! I Agree With Ted Rall!

I generally view him as an idiot espousing left-wing hate and anti-Americanism in his cartoons. But he does make a salient point as an editorial cartoonist about the Chip Cartoon.

Ted Rall, president of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists, doesn't think Wednesday's New York Post editorial cartoon was penned by a racist. But he does think it was a "misfire," a "cheap form of editorial cartooning" that fails to carry any real commentary or message and is common in major publications today.

The cartoon wasnÂ’t very good Â– but it wasnÂ’t at all racist.

Indeed, IÂ’d argue that the uproar tells us more about those outraged than it does about those responsible for the cartoon and its publication.

And interestingly enough, a lot of cartoonists are feeling the heat over how to draw Obama.

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.

February 19, 2009

About The Chimp Cartoon

By now almost everyone has seen the cartoon from the New York Post and heard of the controversy surrounding it.

I wonÂ’t defend it Â– I think it is in poor taste.

Because there is a seriously injured woman fighting to recover after the real chimp attack Â– not because of any slight, real or imagined, to Barack Obama.

Let me explain.

1) Barack Obama and his administration didnÂ’t write the stimulus bill Â– it was a product of an all-Democrat team assembled by Pelosi and Reid to write the bill. Thus the comment from the cop cannot legitimately be taken as referring to President Obama.

2) Even if Barack Obama had personally written every word of the stimulus bill, I would not find the uses of the chimp imagery to be inappropriate. Such imagery was directed against George W. Bush for eight years without a word of complaint from any liberal that I ever encountered. If it was acceptable for President 43, then President 44 is an equally legitimate target of such barbs.

3) Barack Obama is President of the United States. He happens to be black. He is not the African-American President. We degrade the office, the man, and his accomplishments if we give Obama a special pass or special protection from certain criticism or certain imagery that would be otherwise acceptable if directed against a President of another race.

Now let me take matters a step further. The cartoon itself is not an act of racism Â– and more to the point is certainly not an act of intentional racism. The reality is that the chimp imagery is, lamentably, topical due to the Connecticut chimp attack of earlier this week. It is not as if someone up and decided to put a chimp in a cartoon for no apparent reason. Similarly, this isnÂ’t a call for an assassination because the chimp in the cartoon was shot and killed Â– it was a direct play on the tragic events just a few days before in which the crazed primate was shot and killed.

Should the cartoon have run? IÂ’d argue that the best answer is a negative one. It isnÂ’t funny. It is subject to misinterpretation because it is not clear. It is insensitive to the seriously injured victim. But in the end it just isnÂ’t racist.

Or if it is, it is certainly less racist than these two noted cartoons about a prominent African-American in public life who was the subject of indisputably racist treatment in editorial cartoons which was met with silence by the same folks who are righteously outraged when they perceive a slight directed at Barack Obama.

oliphant_rice[1].gif

Now am I ignoring that there has been a lamentable history of depicting blacks as apes and chimps? Not at all Â– but IÂ’m also not ignoring the fact that when we place this cartoon in context there is little reason to argue that ObamaÂ’s race was the (or even a) motivating factor in the cartoon (especially since I donÂ’t believe is even intended to reference Obama). And rest assured that when and if I see actual racism directed at Barack Obama, IÂ’ll condemn it. But in the (probably apocryphal) words of one Sigmund Freud, Â“sometimes a cigar is just a cigarÂ” Â– and I think this one is merely a cigar.

By the way, I would like to note two recent ways in which I have used a chimp reference in relation to Barack Obama Â– both times to draw parallels to the sort of disdainful treatment received by George W. Bush during his time in office. In a couple of instances, to parody the deranged ravings of too many Leftists who for eight years have referred to the former president as Â“Chimpy McHitlerBurtionÂ” or some variation thereof, I have referred to Obama as Â“Chimpy al-Hussein bin-OsamaÂ” in a satirical fashion. Similarly, I asked a couple of pointed questions Â– one of which related to the classification of George W. Bush as a chimp by liberals Â– in this post about the desire of ObamaÂ’s handlers have the capacity to electronically feed the President answers during press conferences:

>Even George W. Bush could competently deal with the media. Apparently Barack Obama cannot do so. In light of that, IÂ’d like to know who the real dummy is, which one really operates at the level of a trained chimp? After all, Bush may not have been as pretty as Barack or have been a polished orator behind a teleprompter, but at least he could answer questions from reporters without being programmed by someone else.

Again, the chimp reference is not racial slur Â– it is set forth to offer a comparison to eight years of derogatory references to the intelligence and abilities of George W. Bush, who could answer press questions unaided despite lacking ObamaÂ’s oratorical gifts and alleged soaring intellect. In no way did race even enter my thought process.

Posted by: Greg at 12:19 PM | Comments (33) | Add Comment
Post contains 832 words, total size 6 kb.