Michelle Malkin on Ted Rall:…

Even as many on the left rush to defend the NCAA decision to ban the scourge of "hostile and offensive" Native-American nicknames and mascots (against the will of the overwhelming majority of Native Americans, mind -- but no ma…

A fantasy speech by Condi at the NAACP, complaining about the Dem Party supporter Ted Rall calling her a “House Nigga”. And the NAACP raising no objection.
Then listing some House Nigga positions — finally calling the NAACP leaders Dem Party House Niggas [and walking out.]

I don’t have a cause and to that end, despite being a manual laborer for 9 years, I have managed to learn 3 languages, volunteer almost a full year of time to disaster relief, housing on an indian reservation, some botanical gradens, and a human rights organization. I’m working on 2 masters now in Int’l Relations and Pub Admin so maybe I can one day pretend I am a rich white elitist who ‘just wants to help’.

Forced to choose, I’d say equality and freedom are vague enough causes to support, but I don’t believe they can be solely achieved at the barrel of a gun.

Et toi, KJC, what’s your ’cause’?

You can’t say the same about the 50’s. Although there had long been desire for redress of past wrongs through advancement among colored people, such was not preordained and one may assume influential non-colored people could play a part. If a white elitist was at some time president of the organization, does that negate its assistance in the general progress? The assumption that NAACP played a marginal role in the opportunities of today might need another look.

-”You are playing with a hypothetical distraction that isn’t applicable. We (the U.S.) put Iraqis in power, not a bunch of cud-chewing rednecks.”-KJC

Not talking about rednecks, talking about white elitists who use high-minded ideas (or other methods) to effect transformation. Hypotheticals help partisans to examine the situation when the shoe is on the other foot.

I suppose we all, each and every one of us, live in slightly different “realities.” Reality is shaped by experiences and we obviously all have different ones. My reality is different from yours and a (say) typical Black person’s reality is different from a White person’s.

There are shared, communal experiences, realities that overlap. One anecdotal experience piles on top of another and pretty soon, you have the shared reality of a particular group of people.
So if you, as a White person do not encounter racism (again, defined here as a belief in inherent racial superiority/inferiority), then your reality will be different from those who DO experience it.

I don’t think anyone on the planet knows for SURE exactly how many racists there are in the Republican party. Mebbe it was really only Strom Thurmond. Or mebbe there’s a good deal more. I don’t think any rational, half-way optimistic person would think it’s a majority of the Republican party — I mean, c’mawn, 51% of you hate VMs? One out of two? That’s crazytalk. Or at least so we presume.

On the other side, I don’t know there’s much doubt that Louis Farakhan (sp) votes Democrat. He and his group came about in REACTION TO the Strom Thurmonds of the world and overzealously defend Black pride to the point of racism. Is their brand of racism somehow BETTER than Strom’s?

Perhaps. Mayhaps not. But at least a Black person knows that on one side there are those violently opposed to his joining and on another there are those willing to (violently?) defend him. It’s a pretty simple choice, people.

But how many party racists is too many? 1%? 10%? Should the bar be set at 25%? Who the hell knows for sure. Not sure there’s a scientific way to determine the exact number.

At any rate, it’s not enough to be willing to open the flap to your tent, you have to go out and evangelize. Go out and spread the gospel. LIVE the gospel. Preach, brother, because the infidels already have a religion. Get out among the people and do good works. You can’t make converts by mailing out invites from behind gated lawns.

Amen.

The foundation of this premise is the belief that a “significant sub group” exists within that group that hates these members, and the belief that this does not exist withint both political parties.

If the left ever admitted the possibility that Republican policies are not motivated by racism, it would force them to examine their own policies, their effects, and THEIR motivations. They simply cannot let that happen, so they treat Republican racism as an axiom.

Lookit, it isn’t about just any old difference of opinion on a particular subject.

In any sufficiently large group, there are sub-groups who disagree with the majority.
There are Republicans who’re just aok with gay rights and abortion. There are Democrats who want to try school vouchers. There is a range of opinion in each party on any particular subject.

The ISSUE is why would any normal human being align himself with a group that has a significant sub-group that hates them.

Ordinarily, it doesn’t make much sense unless you consider delusion or warped self-interest.

Th-th-that’s all, folks.

Mfume calls black democrats puppets of the teachers union

Perhaps a heathly debate would ensue or more likely, Mfume’s tenure would soon end.

btw isn’t it African-American?

I’ll give you credit for one thing, you went off point enough that I almost missed this. I went off point myself.

Would my opinion be the same? Hell yes. Help Iraqis by treating them as incapable of making it, or teach them how to make it?

What’s your pick? We have introduced democracy, and I hope it sticks. Should they have just stayed down?