Friday, May 8, 2009

Mainstream Bigotry and Racism on the Democratic-Left

I've long documented the most vile bigotry and racism on the left end of the dial. During the 2008 primaries, we witnessed some of the most disgusting racism and sexism in decades. And across the blogosphere, the most reprehensible racial slurs and bigoted attacks on conservatives are considered fair game, penetrating social "commentary," and biting "satire."

Take TBogg's post yesterday, for example, and his Sambo logo above.

If any conservative blogger or columnist were to post a black Sambo eating a watermelon the entire netroots would erupt in feigned outrage at the modern day lynching. But it's standard operating procedure on the left. Michael Steele was
attacked as Sambo himself. And recall Jane Hamsher's blackface attack on Senator Joseph Lieberman. And via Memeorandum, Roy Erdoso's literally got a post up this morning entitled "Black Comedy," calling out Red State's outstanding post which hammers President Barack Obama's shameful hypocrisy and malign neglect for black kids in D.C.'s school voucher program.

The truth is that leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities, they care about the advancement of their own power.

Remember the hardline radical street protests against Proposition 8 last November? They were largely organized by a white gay elite that
systematically denigrates and repudiates the political and social programs of poor inner-city blacks. And on the street, blacks were attacked with racial epithets, and statewide the black community was excoriated for joining forces with the "evil" Mormon sponsors of the initiative.

And don't forget the recent smears of bigotry and racism against patriotic Americans who marched by the hundreds of thousands on April 15th to protest Democratic spending and taxing programs. In a representative slur, Janeane Garofalo attacked traditional Americans as "
racist rednecks."

But, of course, the nihilists endlessly deny leftist bigotry and intolerance, for example, at my Garofalo post, where
Repsac3 suggested that "No single individual is representative of the whole group." So true, that's why you have to link around to show just how common leftist bigotgry is today. What we find is that genuine, widespread, and MAINSTREAM bigotry in contemporary American politics is on the radical left end of the spectrum. See more of this at American Nihilist, "Impending Arrival of BlackState."

Note too
yesterday's leftist bigotry in Matthew Yglesias' slur against heterosexuals as "breeders." In response, Yglesias demonstrates his pure hypocrisy by attacking those who dare raise the question of his bigotry as "the humorless right."

So it's just barrel of laughs for those on the collectivist left. Posting
Sambo logos to attack conservative arguments against Democratic anti-opportunity policies is just "humor." That's right, it's just fun and games when Keith Olbermann gives huzzahs and high-fives in support of Janeane Garofalo's disgusting racism (see "Olby and Garofalo salute Michael Steele’s racial “self-loathing”").

And of course I'd be remiss not to include Daily Kos in this roundup, where we can still find the rabidly anti-Semitic essay, "
Eulogy before the Inevitability of Self-Destruction: The Decline and Death of Israel."

Don't forget that Kos and his friends on the bigoted left are "
the mainstream of Democratic Party."

No wonder Senator Lindsay Graham exclaimed this week that "
if we’re going to let the bloggers run the country, then the country’s best days are behind us."

Hat Tip:
Memeorandum.

93 comments:

Tim said...

Donald, once again you do disappoint.

Michael Savage, one of your fellow travelers, has an audience of 8 million plus a week. Now, if you add up all of the links that you just posted, and multiplied by 10, you would probably not have the audience that Michael Savage has. Remember, this is a man who is now banned from entering the United Kingdom because of his hate speech.

So, if we look at numbers -- because that is what "mainstream" actually means, then you lose.

And Michael Savage wins. Because, once again, you have pulled the old "don't look here, look over there - that's the real problem" trick.

It's tired. It's lame. I'm not buying.

Because I saw those videos of your friends wishing for Barack Obama to be "stopped." I've seen the hate that your fellow travelers exhibited at their "tea parties." I saw the racist signs.

Did you?

Donald Douglas said...

Ah, Tim, that's called a dodge. You've ignored all of the evidence at the post. Savage is not "mainstream." Olbermann, on the other hand, beats CNN in the ratings. Go figure?

Besides, Britain has banned Savage from entering the country along with Islamic terrorists?

Imagine that? I'm sure Bill Ayers has a standing invitation to visit the U.K.

Denounce your own side, Tim. You people are bigots...

Sigivald said...

"Michael Savage is icky so who cares about hypocrisy and racism on the left" is kinda exactly making his point, Tim.

You saw racist signs at Tea Parties?

Well, since lots of people took pictures of the parties, perhaps you could linky-linky with the Interwebs Hyperlinks?

Because none of the pictures I've seen had any racist content.

(And I like the nice double-standard!

"The mainstream is what counts"

vs.

"Oh, I swear I saw a racist sign at a tea party, despite all the pictures not showing any. That proves they're racist and stuff. Because the mainstream isn't what counts."

The common thread here appears to be "whatever standard suits to vilify my political enemies is the one to apply at the moment".)

Isn't it ironic that, given as I can't stand Michael Savage and I didn't support the Tea Parties, your quality of opposition makes me more sympathetic to both?

Tim said...

Donald, you talk about the advancement of power very vaguely, because it's a straw man, with no substance. For starters. The left is not bigoted, but there are lapses in taste, I'll give you that. But to tar the entire left as racist is as stupid as me tagging the entire right as the same. It's not part of our DNA. Unless, you are suggesting we are too stoopid to know when we are being racist. Whatever man.

And why do you NOT call out your own side? You give them a passing glance, but you never actually show it.

You are being disingenuous here. The reason I get angry is that you know you are too.

Tim said...

Here:

One for those who missed it when I posted it weeks ago. Click on the first set of pictures.

Dennis said...

Only to a race hustler like Time would most of those photographs be racist. The Left is and has always been the true racists, bigots, hetero-phobes, anti-religionists, sexists, et al.

Anonymous said...

"The truth is that leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities, they care about the advancement of their own power."

Um...

You do realize that the Democrats are, on average, the party of minorities?

That is, you do realize that it doesn't make much sense to paint liberals as a bunch of white guys (like the Republicans!) who don't care about minorities when the Democrats are members of those minority groups? Right?

Don't project.

Anonymous said...

'Note too yesterday's leftist bigotry in Matthew Yglesias' slur against heterosexuals as "breeders."'

Also, you do realize, right, that Yglesias is himself a "breeder"?

Tim said...

Dennis: You obviously don't get it, so I won't belabor a point. The left isn't anti-religionist because, surprise surprise, most are religious. Our point is keep religion out of our government, like it was intended. And sexist? Right, because we all know it was the era's conservatives who were pushing for suffrage?! It was the era's conservatives marching for civil rights??!

You honestly have no clue. Seriously dude. Surprised you can even type.

doubled said...

All I can say Tim is , WOW. If these are examples of right wing hatred and/or racism that keep you up at night:

Obama's plan = White Slavery
How will I pay for this?
1-20-13 Obama's last day
The fed caused the econ crisis

then you need professional help.
Which of these signs even comes close to a racist thought? Or is it that just being critical of the O! in and of inself is racist?

I think I am starting to understand how people can say Rush Limbaugh / Savage / Hannity are reprehensible but Al Sharpton , Michael Moore , Ted Rall, Murtha are not. To be a liberal / progressive/ democrat is to never have to be sorry or explain your dastardliness ever. Because it 'isn't in the DNA' as you so eloquently put it. Arrogance in spades.

Trish said...

Um, Tim, where was the racism in any of those signs? None that I saw were racist! And, I was at tea parties here in PA, and none of those signs were racist.
They were ALL about power and its abuses, about taking away our freedoms, and about spending and its abuses.
You are desperate to prove something that is plain and simply, not true!

cursed said...

Donald. I place little value on your opinons, but I have to give you credit for writting well.

Rusty Walker said...

I don’t think that Donald is saying that every democrat is a racist, so I think you intentionally miss his point. It has been the Republicans that have consistently supported civil rights from Lincoln’s time, as compared to the democrats who over the past 160 years systematically have passed every form of racist, Jim Crow legislation throughout history, and often argued against the African American best interests. Even the history books, written by so many leftist academics whitewashed the Civil War conflict that was really between Abolitionist Republicans who wished to ban slavery and Democrats that wished to retain it. In the 1960s it was the democrats that resisted civil rights, as Kennedy dragged his feet, and democrats in congress who slowed efforts at 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and argued against Nixon’s 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act. It was George W. Bush who appointed the highest posts African Americans ever held: first black U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, first black female U. S. Secretary of State. The point being, that in order to obfuscate our real message of liberty, democrats resort to the same old hateful and baseless name calling.

Tim said...

Doubled: Not sure if the photo gallery was working, but the captions were still there. But I will enlighten you:

"The American Taxpayers Are The Jews For Obama's Oven"

"Our Tax $ Given To Hamas To Kill Christians, Jews and Americans, Thanks Mr. O"

"No Taxes. Obama Loves Taxes. Bankrupt USA. Loves Baby Killing"

"Barack Hussein Obama The New face Of Hitler"

A black figure that resembles President Obama is portrayed slitting the throat of Uncle Sam.

A car size sign blames Presidents Obama, Clinton and W. Bush for abortion, sodomy, socialism, and the so-called New Word Order

"Impeach Osama Obama AKA Hussein"

Seriously? These people are despicable. And I don't agree with the ones who indoctrinate their children, as young as 6 or 7, into their cause. It's scary.

doubled said...

If you want some real hate to get eworked up over, here it is :

http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/leftist_protesters_attack_rnc_delegates_80_year_old/

Tim said...

Rusty: Your facts are a bit rusty. It was President Johnson who pushed for civil rights, and it was a guy named Martin Luther King Jr. who helped pave the way. Kennedy, given more time, would have moved forward.

I would call neither of those Republicans.

The values of the Republican party have shifted over the years, just like the Democratic party has. Today's party has very little to do with Lincoln. Sorry.

Tim said...

Try this linkRemember, it's a photo gallery. You have to click on the little triangle to see all 10.

Donald Douglas said...

Tim says:

"The left is not bigoted, but there are lapses in taste ... "

Oh, just a few lapses here and there. You must have been asleep during the Democratic primaries!

doubled said...

Tim worries: Seriously? These people are despicable. And I don't agree with the ones who indoctrinate their children, as young as 6 or 7, into their cause. It's scary.

Ah , but don't worry , the education system is working non-stop to counteract this vile problem. My 2nd graders school has Obama is the best President ever posters on every wall, even the gym. I am sure they slam conservative thought as dangerous every chance they get. For example, do today's youth have even the foggiest idea of the supply demand curve's consequences? That most choices in this world require the balancing of opportunity costs. But the new reality is that if we only would put the 'right' people in charge (no conservatives/ libertarians need apply) , everyone will get what they want.

Perhaps we should all be teaching our children to THINK , and not what to think, but alas , I guees that is a lone thought in the wilderness there days.

doubled said...

I should teach myself to type and spellcheck as well!

Tim said...

Donald: If you want me to shut up on this subject (I'm sure you do) then please do me a favor...

Where is the outcry from the offended parties, i.e. every minority, every Jew, etc.

And you don't count.

Now, if someone can look at those posters on display at your "non-racist, non-partisan" tea parties and say they are not racist in the least...

Samantha West said...

Tim Honey, Get your head out of your arse!

"It was President Johnson who pushed for civil rights, "

Yes, and all he was trying to do was to shut people up. He didn't give one red cent about civil rights.

As well, you didn't attend a Tea Party, I did. There was nothing vile or angry or bigoted or hateful about it.

Tim - How old are you?

Rob Crawford said...

If I were a lefty, I'd state that those despicable signs were clearly carried by infiltrators.

Since I'm not, I'll state, "Yes, some lunatics showed up at a public rally. They're despicable and I'd rather they didn't associate themselves with me."

And then I'll ask what that has to do with the reality that Democrats fight strenuously against anything that might improve the lot of blacks, particularly in regards to education. And what it has to do with the almost reflexive use of racist imagery by lefties when dealing with any conservative who isn't a white.

I suspect Tim's response would, again, be to ignore the issue and wave wildly in the direction of Savage (who I abhor).

Tim said...

Old enough to have read Martin Luther King's biography and know that he gave full props to Johnson.

And old enough to hope to god that my kids don't grow up conservative.

Donald Douglas said...

"How old are you?"

Interesting question, Samanatha. Tim's a grown man, but he reasons like an illiterate child. This post in not about a few tea partyers with politically incorrect signs. We can go to the top levels of the Democratic Party, including former President Bill Clinton, to find the most vile racism in American politics today. All the top netroots blogs, including Andrew Sullivan, who is read by Barack Obama in the White House, practice sick anti-Semitism and disgusting anti-traditionalist and anti-"Christianist" bigotry.

It's gotten really bad in this country. Lindsay Graham is right.

Tim said...

Donald: You tried to define mainstream based on a few blogs and political sites. You're clueless Donald, when it comes to definitions. You tried to paint tea parties as lily-white, non-partisan rallies. I respectfully disagree. Did I need to attend one to know? Of course not. I know how people on the right "think." These things will escalate too...the next round I guarantee you the next generation of hate will be out in force.

You seriously, almost phobically, have no clue as to where your thinking leads Donald. It leads to extremism, which is what I would clearly classify you as. You are not mainstream my friend.

Let's equate: Leftist extremism reaching its logical conclusion means gays can get married! A freedom, liberty and justice for all. Not just heteros. Imagine that?

Donald, the only reason I visit here is to see how intellectually vapid the right, your right, can sink. It's pretty low, but I've seen worse. And I've seen worse comments on some of the blogs you support.

Jeanine Garofalo as some sort of spokesperson? Who appears on one show, as opposed to a hatemonger who is syndicated EVERY DAY across the USA? Are you seriously effing with us?

Dismiss Michael Savage all you want. But he has big numbers, Miss Garofalo does not.

And again, please show me how Obama is actually racist. And why isn't he pissed at himself if he is.

You debase reason and intellect sometimes.

Donald Douglas said...

"You debase reason and intellect sometimes."

Ah, I'll take it from someone who know whereof he speaks.

The problem, of course, is we're not talking about a "few blogs and political sites."

We're talking about who you are and what your movement represents, and right now it's about your prevarication and evasion on the main themes of this post. You're giving a pass to the entrenched bigotry and racism of your own party.

And note how you argued earlier, "and you don't count."

Really. Since when did I not count. Since when did the views of an anti-racist, equal opportunity black man with a multiracial family not count.

I would say that I represent the future of this great nation, of inclusion, diversity and tolerance. And you with your lilly-white family have not a leg to stand on in calling me an extremist.

You have no class, sir, with all the due respect that can possibly be afforded to someone of your denialist nihilist licentiousness and intolerance of difference.

Spuds Looper said...

DOWN WITH COONS!!!!

Martin said...

Man, this Tim is a piece of work, isn't he?

First of all, he can read minds. He "knows" how the Right thinks, so even though the pictures he links showing "racist" signage show no such thing, he "knows" how these people "think" and therefore their non-racist signs are "racist."

And, oh yes, he's *guaranteeing* everyone that the real hate, which he couldn't find, try as he might, at the Tea Parties just past will appear next time, leaving us wondering how come it didn't appear on the 4/15. But hey, he's telepath, so we should just trust him!

BTW, Leftist extremism leads Castro's Cuba, Stalin's Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Jong Il's North Korea. Bader-Meinhof, Red Brigades, Weathermen, ALF, ELF, etc. were/are all pretty much extremists on the Left. Already, Leftists in Academia have created environments where speech and even thought is proscribed with real punitive consequences for expressing contrary views. Heck, Berkeley is now mandating that home-owners install monitoring devices so Government bureaucrats can monitor their energy usage.

I could go on. Left-Wing extremism goes beyond just gays getting married. History has shown it in shattered lives, serfdom, broken economies and misery all around except for the politically connected.

And by the way, Tim is wrong when he says the GOP had nothing to do with the passage of the Civil Rights Acts. 19 of the 20 Senators who filibustered the Civil Rights Act were Democrats, and all but 1 of those 19 remained Democrats (they didn't become Republicans per the popular myth) until they retired (or were defeated like Al Gore Snr.) from the Senate, and died.

Another fun fact; Everett Dirksen, the Senate Republican Leader, was the principal author of the Senate version of the bill and he received the NAACP Leadership Award for it in 1964. LBJ himself publicly acknowledged and thanked Republicans as key to the bill's passage.

And yes, these were *Conservative* Republicans ... the same folks who got the 19th Amendment passed made Coolidge their President, and the same people who voted for the Civil Rights Acts called "Mr. Conservative" himself, Robert A. Taft, their Leader just a few years before. Heck, Barry Goldwater - Reagan's forerunner, desegregated the AZ National Guard two years before Harry S Truman followed suit at the national level.

PS: Keith Olbermann is as much, if not more of a "hatemonger" as Michael Savage.

We all know that Leftists always define dissent from their views as "hate". That's basically the entirety of the debating MO - just scream "Racist!" "Sexist!" "Homophobia!" and the all purpose catch-all of "Hate!!!" and hope that their target is intimidated by all the caterwauling.

Tim just shows us how that mindset works.

Anonymous said...

TBogg posting that image is not racist, it's pointing to racism. Are you really too stupid to recognize that? What you're saying is the equivalent of saying that a black guy who did a blog post saying that he got called a "ni**er" today is a racist for saying "ni**er."

That's the kind of stupid that makes you're children hate you later in life.

Martin said...

Anonymous @30:

Yep ... and if it were a Conservative (white or black) who published that, will that excuse (or any excuse) fly? Tim would leaping up and down and screaming "Racism!" until he soils himself.

It's your type of hypocrisy and stupid that ends up with your kids in jail.

PS: "you're children" should be "your children."

sharon said...

Great post, Donald. Remember: when they use racist imagery, it's just telling the truth. When we call them on their racism, we're racists.

repsac3 said...

As often happens with Donald, he "misunderstands" what others write, and then uses his mistaken impression to attack (or occasionally "defend") pretty much the opposite of what the other person said.

Rather than taking the single snippet Donald quoted, please read my whole comment:

---

"It's as foolish to say that everyone on the left is as offensive as Garafalo, as it is to say that everyone on the right is as offensive as the ten teabagger photos to which Tim links.

Judging any group by the weakest, most foolish, or most offensive members never makes sense... ...whether on the right or on the left.

No single individual is representative of the whole group. Highlighting one racist sign-holder or TV rant only speaks to the words and deeds of that one person, much as some seem to wish it were otherwise. (There's a word for those who would tar everyone in a given group with the most unappealing traits of a small number of that group's members...)"
---

The idea that one can look to individual talking heads, protesters, or bloggers, and then indict a whole group based on the actions of these relatively few individuals is both factually and ethically wrong.
The only person responsible for bad words or deeds are the individuals who speak or perform them. "The left" (or "women," or "actresses," or "tattooed people," or "short folks") are no more responsible for the words of Janeane Garofalo than "the right" (or "men," or "jews," or "radio performers," or "guys who wear hats") are responsible for the words of Michael Weiner. Pretending otherwise is foolish. The same goes for sign-holders, bloggers, protesters, and pretty much whatever else you've got. One can play tit for tat all day... For every offensive thing on one side there is likely one on the other, and there will always be someone to say "That's not so bad... This one from your side is far worse."

I understand why Donald and those like him on the left and on the right play this game; their attacks don't work without a substantial "other" to blame and attack as "the enemy." But blaming "most" or "all" for the actions of "a few" who claim to be members of a particular group is exactly how the sweeping generalizations, the stereotyping, and eventually, the bigotry starts.

There is no mainstream bigotry and racism in either political party, though there are some who claim to be loyal Democrats or loyal Republicans who say and do racist things. Claiming that these individuals accurately represent their party, or that either party is inherently racist is not borne out by the facts, and a damned cynical & sad way to think about one's fellow Americans besides.

TBogg was making a point in posting the Sambo sign. Donald was, too. But he'll tell you that his posting of the Sambo sign on "American Power" is noble, while Tbogg posting it on his blog was offensive.

I guess it's for each person to make up his own mind, but it sure looks like the same sign on both posts, to me... If it's wrong to post it in one place, ...

As to whether there'll be a backlash from "the entire netroots" if some conservative posted this sign, I guess we'll find out, now that Professor Douglas has taken that plunge...

So far, not even Tim has called Donald out for "racism," much to the chagrin of poor Martin...

Tim said...

Donald: I said you don't count, because you've already been counted. We hear you loud and clear. Ad nauseam.

Now, show me some others. That was my point.

OK Martin, you take Hitler and Mussolini on your team...We square now?

Martin said...

1. Knowing Lefty identity politics, Donald being black (like me) has them in a pickle.

2. That TBogg (a white Lefty) posted it first and that Donald is pointing at it also has them in a pickle.

Either way, because of 1 and 2, my hypothetical about Tim shrieking doesn't apply here. What I am saying is that if some random Righty site were to post the Sambo (which is actually a real name in West Africa) graphic up, even if only to demonstrate something, Tim would be here citing it as evidence of typical mainstream Righties being racists.

Capiche? Or should I type slower?

Tim said...

Martin: It depends on how it was used. Tbogg used it to make a point, and used Randy Newman lyrics too. So what?

Donald, once again, successfully created a straw man and we are all tearing our hair out calling each other racist. I don't think we are, nor does my "lilly white family." My point, though, is that Donald's thinking leads to very extreme viewpoints, that don't for the oxygen of dissent. He merely takes a view, slams it in our faces, and denounces myself and repsac as some kind of immoral idiots.

Again, my biggest complaint here is the laziness that is brought to the table, and served cold.

That was good Donald. You made me laugh once again.

Martin said...

Tim,

Nazi = National Socialist Workers Party.

Couple that with the fact that much of Nazi Germany's (and Fascist Italy's) fiscal/economic and social welfare policies (Government having controlling stakes in private firms, setting wage caps, "Universal" healthcare, etc.) are pretty much indistinguishable from what the triumvirate of Obama, Reid and Pelosi have planned for the nation ...

In other words, Hitler and his National Socialists are on your team - they've always been on your team. Enjoy.

Bob Trombetta said...

Right wingers are masters of projection (which I'll explain is a fancy Freudian term for basically saying "I know you are, but what am I?". From crying over the possibility that Obama might use his national security powers to abrogate your rights (Bush) to complaining about the government recklessly spending trillions of dollars (Bush, in Iraq), to this racism claptrap, you people show the insight and self-awareness of a rock. I'll believe that right wingers genuinely care about racism the day a pig flies out of Glenn Beck's ass right on TV.

Martin said...

Tim: I wasn't born yesterday.

There's absolutely no way you would be quite so charitable if a Righty site had this picture on its front page. There would be no explanation, no reason, no excuse that any on the Left would accept for it.

And as for Donald's thinking leading to "extreme viewpoints that don't [allow?] for the oxygen of dissent" ... please define "extreme" - Lefties enjoy throwing that word around almost as much as "Hate."

And since I notice that you're still here, I would say that Donald is clearly open to "dissent", dontcha think?

Martin said...

Bob:

And yet, not one American has come forward to claim that Bush had violated his/her Civil Rights. Not one. Weird, huh? Unless you're counting all those silly celebrities complaining that they've lost all their civil liberties because their anti-war movies failed at the box office.

And may I point out, that, unlike Obama, Bush never attempted to classify his domestic opposition and critics as terrorists i.e. DHS report.

PS: I'll believe the Democratic Party actually cares about racism the day it tells the Teachers Unions to take a hike. I think three pigs will fly out of Beck's rear end before that happens.

Lesley said...

Silly idiots on the right...TBogg's visuals mock YOU.

Do keep up (if you can read).

Tim said...

Martin: No, I'm not stupid either.

"While [Nazism] incorporated elements from both left and right-wing politics, the Nazis formed most of their alliances on the right." [Wikipedia, a liberal publication no doubt]

The allegiances to state and state power were tantamount to the ideology of Nazism. Something Bushco tried, and failed ultimately. And since when are skinheads and neo-Nazi thugs considered left wing?

Here, and in Europe, they are defined by their hatred of all things non-white.

Thomas said...

Wow.

It's Donald's thinking that leads to "extremism"?

You're serious here?

Because the thinking that leads to extremism is the one that's been on display in America for about a century now. It's progressivism that has led us to the extremism we're saturated in now.

"Extreme" is the government's running car companies. "Extreme" is taxation that commandeers massive blocs of human beings' income. "Extreme" is legislation such as No Child Left Behind. "Extreme" is single-payer health care.

Hell, "extreme" is seatbelt laws, and smoking bans, and political correctness, and campaign-finance regulations.

It's your ideology, Tim, that leads to extremism. Check it out: We're here. We're living the extremism, in an America that's not recognizably America anymore. Your ideology has destroyed the revolutionary American experiment in individual liberty.

Your progressivism has led to extremism, just as the people you call "conservatives" have been warning for decades. It might be a brand of extremism you happen to like, but it's extremism nevertheless.

I suspect you're incapable of seeing it as such. You can't, or won't, make the link between your ideology and the destruction of freedom.

And I know this comment won't do a thing to change your mind. You will briskly note my allegation that progressivism has destroyed freedom, and you will move on along, content to holler for "universal health care" or whatever utopia shows up next on the to-do list, and blithely roll on down the extremist path, clueless about where you're actually taking us all.

Donald Douglas said...

Repsac3:

"There is no mainstream bigotry and racism in either political party, though there are some who claim to be loyal Democrats or loyal Republicans who say and do racist things."

Actually, all the evidence in this post proves you wrong, starting with the very first link to the Geraldine Ferraro controversy, just one case of racist and sexist allegations during the Democratic primaries. Even former President Bill Clinton called Barack Obama a "Jesse Jackson" candidate, which was widely ridiculed in the press as appealing to crude racial stereotypes.

Democrats will do anything get power, including attack people as racist if it serves their purposes. This is what this post is about. You are just feeding the flames with you own posting on this, or Dr Hussein "ARLON" Biobrain's.

Anonymous said...

There's absolutely no way you would be quite so charitable if a Righty site had this picture on its front page.Comment on a Righty site with 'this picture' on its front page. Hmm.

R. Stanton Scott said...

Professor Douglas proposes an interesting hypothesis here: that leftist bigots make up the more diverse political party in America--the one supported by minority groups. Let's take a look at his evidence.

First, he characterizes American voters choosing a candidate based on race or gender as "some of the most disgusting racism and sexism in decades." By this logic, voters show hatred for other groups by choosing a candidate they resemble. OK.

Next, Professor Douglas points out TBoggs use of an old Samuel Perkel Sambo Brand Watermelon logo to dress up a post about RedState's appeal to blacks that they really ought to consider joining the GOP. While the logo itself might offend some people, there is no reason to think that TBogg used it to stereotype black people in the way Los Alamitos Mayor Dean Grose used his "watermelon white house" photo in his "no Easter egg hunt this year" email.

The Professor cites a Washington Times report that liberals pelted Michael Steele with Oreos at a rally in 2005. Later reports showed that the Times reporter never actually saw the incident, and Steele himself said later that he was never hit with Oreos and the incident had been exaggerated.

Dr. Douglas thinks Roy Edroso is a racist for making fun of silly Republican attempts to recruit African-Americans without actually supporting policies they might think wise. He thinks white gays are racist because they work for their own marriage freedom before taking action on behalf of poor blacks. He links to Pam Spaulding's post demanding an apology from activists who used epithets against black supporters of Proposition 8 as evidence that Pam Spaulding hates black people, and he uses an LA Times article about a meeting of African American groups to discuss Proposition 8 to claim that someone "excoriated" them, though the article says nothing of the kind.

As evidence that the Left characterizes Tea Partiers as "racist rednecks" Dr. Douglas cites Janeane Garafolo calling out the racist rhetoric in a video shown on Kieth Olberman's show.

In the Professor's world, Heterosexual Matt Yglesias discriminates against himself by using the term "breeder" to describe heterosexuals, and a frank discussion of the history of Israel and its prospects for survival qualifies as antisemitic.

This is a pretty poor collection of evidence, Professor. Do you actually read the posts at the end of all these links, or do you think that piling up a bunch of them will make your case, like your undergrads load up on useless footnotes in search of an A?

Do you blog so prolifically because you know that these evidentiary techniques won't pass peer review for academic publishing?

Just asking.

Martin said...

Nazi = National Socialist Workers Party.

Bush tried what? Don't just throw something out like a typical Lefty and expect to be taken seriously - it's as if you said something that just made sense or came close to resembling reality.

And as for "state power", by the way, which Party wants to grow Government? Take over vast sectors of the economy, including health? Replace private employees with government bureaucrats?

The Left's determination to grow state power knows no bounds. Don't put that on the Right. We're on the opposite side of that issue.

And finally, racists abound on both Left and Right, in case you didn't know. Racism is neither Left nor Right. Hitler's racism did not make him Left or Right. Stalin was a racist. Castro is a racist. Some of the staunchest Labour constituencies in the UK are as racist as they come.

PS: I once saw an interview with a Neo-Nazi in the UK. One of his demands? A Government takeover of the car industry.

Donald Douglas said...

R. Stanton Scott:

" ... leftist bigots make up the more diverse political party in America ... "

Well, yeah.

It's like I said at the post, "The truth is that leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities, they care about the advancement of their own power."

And your selectively dumb attempt at rebutting this post just proves the point.

But hey, put me down with the "Whack Jobs" at your blogroll.

(And aren't you going to call me a "racist." That's what you folks do.)

Martin said...

RScott:

And TBogg simply could not have done it without the Sambo cartoon huh? He simply had to have it to dress it up, right? While (ironically) accusing RedState of racism ...

If it were the other way ...

Sadly, No! Research Labs said...

So wait. We call Thomas Sowell "Double Stuf" on Thursday, comme il faut, and then on Friday we come over here totally innocently, as though whistling with our thumbs hooked in our suspenders, only to find that you're trying to squeeze another drop or two of juice from that dried-up, three-year-old husk of a Jane Hamsher thing?

That's it; we quit the Internet.

[cue 'Lara's Theme' from Dr. Zhivago]

Dave said...

"The truth is that leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities, they care about the advancement of their own power."

Exactly right, and once the dems manage to arrange things so that our illegal invaders from south of the border can vote in our national elections, watch just how fast the dems throw blacks and gays under the bus.

-Dave

cowalker said...

From the original RedState letter to "American Blacks:"

"Sometimes the very best act of friendship I could do is tell you that the person you think is your best friend actually works against you behind your back, laughing at you, mocking your hardships, secure in the knowledge that you need him too much to ever leave him.

"Sometimes — no, actually always — the true friend is the one who tells you what you don’t want to hear. The one who does not indulge you, the one who will neither promise you nor give you candy and other bennies. Instead he tells you to sit down and eat your green beans and spinach — and if you want that nice car, then quit whining, get an education, earn a good job, and earn that nice car."

I think the first paragraph was really meant for "American Anti-abortionists." Because that paragraph certainly describes how the Republican Party has treated them.

If Republicans really don't understand how insulting it is to address all "American Blacks" as though they were children who can be bribed with candy and who didn't know enough to eat their vegetables, they will certainly continue to repel black voters. If Republicans really don't get that it's extremely insulting to address all "American Blacks" as freeloaders whose highest goal is to get free cars, well, I just don't know what to say. How can anyone be that tone deaf?

It's as though Republicans wrote a letter to women telling them that they didn't really know what was good for them--they should listen to Republicans tell them what is good for them. And just for good measure they make it clear that they know all a woman wants is lots of classy shoes.

Tim said...

Damn, R.S. Scott just slammed that argument. Like Kobe.

Again, weak sauce of an argument Donald. You did not pwn it. Sorry dude.

Tomorrow is another day.

Donald Douglas said...

Actually, R.S. Scott did no such thing. He cherry picked:

"He thinks white gays are racist because they work for their own marriage freedom before taking action on behalf of poor blacks."

Actually, black GAY activists attacked homosexual whites as throwing blacks under the bus, and he omits the racist epithets hurled at blacks in the initial protests.

R.S. Scott, as well, checked the links but didn't read down, for example, at Michelle Malkin's:

"Michael Steele is an Uncle Tom and a Sambo. Here’s the despicable photo that left-wing bigot blogger Steve Gilliard (proving that blacks can be vicious racists, too) published and only removed after conservative bloggers blew the whistle."

No, it's not another day, Tim. The more penetrating the posts, the harder the pushback, as you can see here.

Tim said...

Yeah Donald, that's the same Malkin piece that was proved to be false with the Oreo cookie story, as he clearly referenced. Nice try.

Donald Douglas said...

I don't cite the Oreo allegations, duh.

Tim: I'm surprised you'd let an idiot like R.S. Scott do your thinking for you. He cherry picked his views.

You're prevaricating. Bigots, all of you.

repsac3 said...

"Bigots, all of you."

...he said, shaking his fist angrily at the cats fighting in his neighbor's yard."

Please let me know if you intend to misapply and generally misuse the word "bigot" as much as you have the word "nihilist."

If so, I'm going to need to start another blog.

R. Stanton Scott said...

Calling me names and characterizing a point-by-point attack on your evidence as "cherry-picking" strikes me as a weak response to my suggestion that it does not support your hypothesis.

Even your response to my "cherry-picking" falls flat. Pointing out that you referred to the "Sambo" claim in the Malkin post doesn't help you much, since the link there goes nowhere. And you do think that "white gays are racist because they work for their own marriage freedom before taking action on behalf of poor blacks," or you would not claim that "a white gay elite" "systematically denigrates and repudiates the political and social programs of poor inner-city blacks."

In the end, all you really have here are a bunch of links that don't really say what you claim, and examples of liberals pointing out racist incidents. None of this really supports the claim that the Democratic Party consists of bigots, or that liberals generally hold prejudiced views of minority groups. In the end, your post amounts to "I'm not, you are!"

How did you earn a doctorate without getting a better grip on the use and interpretation of social science evidence? If this is all you got, it explains why you work at a community college and don't publish much.

Your claim of prevalent leftist bigotry is so transparently false that you can't possibly believe it unless you are willfully ignorant or just plain stupid. Repeating the claim is a perfect example of "speaking and removing all doubt."

So yes, you make the "Whack-job" cut.

Martin said...

RScott: Hah ... a liberal complaining about name-calling? By the standards liberals insist on enforcing upon conservatives, mostly consisting of impugning motives (e.g. cowalker up-thread), TBogg posting that image up shows the respect he has for the black community, i.e. not much. He's a racist, or maybe the word phrase is "racially insensitive?"

Tim: Fact is that Steele found Oreos strewn about on the ground at a venue where he was giving a speech. In other words, the only exaggeration is saying that liberals *threw* Oreos at him. i.e. At best, they spread Oreos on the ground to send the odious "Uncle Tom" message, at worst they did throw the Oreos and, being liberals, they missed.

Donald Douglas said...

"Even your response to my "cherry-picking" falls flat."

Well, actually, not, R.S. Scott. Malkin has the photo of Steele in blackface, hello? The link is broken as the bigoted leftists got hammered and took it down.

As for white gays, funny how you don't mention Jasmyn Cannick?

Let's hear it right from her:

"There's nothing a white gay person can tell me when it comes to how I as a black lesbian should talk to my community about this issue. If and when I choose to, I know how to say what needs to be said. Many black gays just haven't been convinced that this movement for marriage is about anything more than the white gays who fund it (and who, we often find, are just as racist and clueless when it comes to blacks as they claim blacks are homophobic).

Yep, looks like Cannick suppports my thesis just fine, thank you very much.

You're a hack, R.S. Scott. I've got leftists pinned down and your trying squirm out from underneath hopelessly. The "bad links" is a red herring. From Bill Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro, to white gay activsit, to Janeane Garofalo and Keith Olbermann, don't to Jane Hamsher, Kos, and TBogg, all of you are playing racial double standards.

Yes, it's bigoted. Just keep pushing back and clicking on those "bogus" links and making personal, ad hominem attacks against my academic legitimacy. That'll put up a big enough smokescreen to distract from your party's diabolical record.

R. Stanton Scott said...

Dr. Douglas:

You started the ad hominem stuff, Professor, not me. If you want to push back at detractors that way, fine, but don't be surprised when that prompts others to tell you what they really think. If you can't take it, try to avoid dishing it out.

Your claim that bigotry is "standard operating procedure on the left" and that "leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities" is a breathtakingly stupid one. To support it, you need solid evidence showing clear racist actions by liberals on a broad scale, not just the opinion of one black lesbian, the posting of a racist logo by a liberal in a post accusing the other side of racism (in a post where you do the same!). You might try to show that liberals belong to hate groups, or political groups that try to keep voting and other rights out of minorities hands. Maybe examples of liberal groups using racist language or strategy to win political campaigns, or raise money.

If you look for this, however, you will find that it is conservative groups who show these signs.

The point remains that the few data points you use just don't get you there. This is shoddy social science; your evidence would barely get you through a high school debate, and you know it.

I don't need to attack your "academic legitimacy" because you do it yourself every time you publish one of these silly posts. Like many right-wingers, you sound like that nutty drunk guy at the end of the bar:

"I'm not the racist! It's those damn dirty liberals who hate minorities! One of them used a watermelon logo in a blog post! I heard a black lesbian say that white gays are racist! Besides, if they really cared about minorities they would stop trying to help them and let them learn personal responsibility!"

Or something.

It might also help your "academic legitimacy" if you had something on JSTOR besides a five-page essay in PS: Political Science and Politics about how you couldn't get a single interview out of 30 applications for university positions. It is what it is, Professor.

Man, you are a real hoot.

Anonymous said...

Come on everybody, lay off of Tim. This is America and he is entitled to his opinion.
Unfortunately he was taught not to judge people on the content of their character but to judge on the color of their skin.

Donald Douglas said...

"To support it, you need solid evidence showing clear racist actions by liberals on a broad scale, not just the opinion of one black lesbian..."

Actually, I don't need a lesson in methodology, sir. This isn't a Ph.D. disseration, and I'm not resorting to ad hominems. Blog posts aren't "social science," so you're promoting an ecological fallacy.

But that's all you're about, sir. Fallacies. You don't address my argument, but instead attack my credentials as if that's a form of argumentation. Had you begun with Cannick's comment you might have been on solid ground in terms of honesty, but you didn't and you're not.

You're a troll who can't stand the mirror turned up at you. It's not just one single case, and you ignore the preponderance of evidence at this page, and I have no need nor intention to provide any more. "It is what it is." From Bill Clinton on down, we saw the most mean-spirited bigotry in the Democratic Party all last year. Even here you ignore all the additional examples that disprove your thesis.

But keep clicking around for those bogus links to back up your own denialism, R.S. And the name calling is real bright. "Dr. Donald "Dumb Nigger" Douglas." That's real good, man. Classy.

P.S. My publication record is irrelevant to this discussion or this blog. I'm proud of teaching at community college, and your attacks on my publishing just show you've got nothing else to add, not to mention contempt for what I do and who I teach. I'm clearly threatening to you, and you'll do whatever you can to delegitimize my moral clarity.

I'm a teaching professor, and it's clear you have a problem with that.

In any case, I've written along these lines. See, "You're a Professor, Really?".

It's a stupid, dishonest line of attack, for stupid, dishonest people. You're in character, R.S. Keep it up.

Bozak said...

I can't speak for Donald, maybe the point he was making was not that all democrats are racists, that it was the democrat political structure is racist.
Of course there have been many many people on the left that have helped, and even sacrificed for the betterment of others, as have those on the right.
The problem lies with the elected democrats (AND republicans), they only have two goals, power & wealth and will do anything to get/keep it.
 
I believe the democrat political structure is racist. I don't mean racist as in "we hate blacks," racist as in not adopting policies that help as opposed to policies that enable the democrats to keep power.
 
Education is an arm of the democrat party, as proven by the saying, follow the money. Which party profits off contributions from teacher unions. Why are "black" schools so underfunded and failing to educate black children at such an alarming rate compared to white schools in the same school district. I live in L.A, grew up in the san fernando valley. Why does "white" el camino high school win so many decathlons while only miles across the valley san fernando high school is watching generations of kids drop out, to say nothing about the overall appearance/upkeep of the school.
Just in the last week or two, the democrats eliminated school vouchers for children in washington dc, a program that has proven to benefit the poor. The less education one has the more one is dependent on the government for their basic needs. Not racist, just keeping people needing the democrats to provide for them.
If you want proof of the failing government schools, take note of how many elected democrat officials send their kids to private school.
 
Abortion. The dirty secret about planned parenthood is that is was founded by an eugenist that gave speeches to the kkk, Blacks, @13% of the population account for @38% of the abortions. 85% of planned parenthood clinics are in minority neighborhoods. Of course, any time a republican talks about any kind of welfare reform the liberal media puts up pictures of black families to paint the republican party as racists, except the facts prove there are many many more white people on welfare than blacks. Considering there are many many poor whites, why re the majority of clinics in minority neighborhoods.
 
Privatizing social security, the democrats are against it. Who does it hurt the most? The average life span for a black male is 65, the same age social security kicks in. Considering his age it is doubtful he has any minor children and with the tragic breakdown of the black family, he doesn't have a wife either. So all the money he paid into the system gets given to, statistically speaking, a white female. If SS was privatized, or even a portion of it, the 64 year black man could pass along the money he busted his butt for to his kid for maybe the first home purchase in his family. Or a grandkid for college.
 
Even the rich & famous democrats do it... I commend George Clooney for giving his money to help blacks in Darfur. Instead of flying across the globe (global warming?) for a photo op of him helping, couldn't he have simply driven 20 miles south of his beverly hills mansion and helped some black families in compton?
 
What democrat policies have actually helped blacks/minorities get ahead? Any answers?

Max B. said...

"The truth is that leftists don't care about the advancement of minorities, they care about the advancement of their own power."

the vast majority of "leftists" are, in fact, minorities, making both of those goals, well, the same goal.

R. Stanton Scott said...

I challenged your evidence, not your publication record or your academic position, until you responded to my critique by characterizing my rebuttal as "selectively dumb" and later calling me an "idiot." You used an ad hominem attack, Professor, where someone more confident in his thesis would clarify his evidence and expand upon it.

I'm neither an idiot nor a hack, and we both know that.

At any rate, it's no ecological fallacy to ask for evidence supporting a social science claim, wherever made, if made by a college professor.

Of course, blogs are not dissertations, and this is not social science, but you identify yourself as a professor and characterize your blog as "Commentary and analysis on American politics, culture, and national identity, U.S. foreign policy and international relations, and the state of education - from a neoconservative perspective!" This gives your your readers an expectation of a higher evidentiary standard in your analysis--you are quoted elsewhere as a professor, not a simple nut with a blog, like me. When you don't provide it, it makes those who haven't consumed the Kool-aid (or the tea, I guess) think it's not there.

So your credentials are indeed pertinent to discussions here because by identifying yourself as a professor you establish expertise. Readers may infer from your position that you know what you are talking about.

They would, of course, be wrong.

So if all you got is "dumb," "idiot," "hack," "troll," and putting words ("dumb nigger") in my mouth, then I guess we're done, at least for now.

And by the way, I have no problem with teaching professors--used to be one, in fact--but you seem to be pretty touchy about something you claim pride in.

Donald Douglas said...

"I challenged your evidence, not your publication record or your academic position, until you responded to my critique by characterizing my rebuttal as "selectively dumb" and later calling me an 'idiot.'

So, turnabout is fair play? Makes sense when the cuts are so deep.

No problem, R.S., but you're wrong here:

" ... your credentials are indeed pertinent to discussions here because by identifying yourself as a professor you establish expertise ..."

This is simply a lame justification for a personal attack. Yes, you're a hack, R.S., and I think you're an idiot, but that's my opinion, not a "social science claim."

You simply prove my point with your prevarication and evasion of the prerponderance of evidence right here, at this post, that you and your leftist allies are in fact bigots. QED.

Now, time to move on, big boy. I must say I'm impressed with your tenacity, in any case.

Doctor Biobrain said...

Wait, you're citing my "BlackState" post, which was a complete parody of the moronic "Dems are racists trying to keep black people down" point you're trying to make here, as a way of showing that we're racists trying to keep black people down?? Really???

Wow, Donald. I'll never cease to be amazed at how dumb you'll get just to make a dumb point. I'm praying for you, Donald. I'm not religious, so I don't know who I'm praying to, but I'm praying for you all the same. You need all the help you can get.

Argonaut said...

My lefty friends, it's time we admit the truth. We are indeed racist power-hungry scum. Everything DD says is true but, and it's a big but, what he doesn't know is that now we have control of the CIA, FBI, ATF and Raptor we are making lists. After the next election when we have the Senate over the 60 vote barrier, we can begin the Purification Project for Amerika (PUPA). Black helicopers to Rikers, bullet trains to Mexico, expand Gitmo to cover all of Cuba - we need lots of space for undesirables. First to go will be the soft, diversity-loving, big-tent Republicans, especially the ones smart enough to use the intertubes.

Perhaps I've said too much.

Donald Douglas said...

Dr. Hussein "Arlon" Biobrain:

I've long been praying for you, for your soul. Your blogging is diabolical "satire," and that's being charitable.

Ben JB said...

Donald,
I don't support attacks on your teaching/publishing record, but I think I've mentioned before that if you're really interested in argumentation, I'd advise you to avoid all ad hominem attacks (whether attacks or merely ripostes in response to other attacks) and, frankly, most adjectives.

I don't think you're right, but I want to hear what you have to say--and it's not always easy to get through your writing since most of your posts tend to attack some mythical monolithic liberal-nihilist movement.

(Seriously: write a post, then go through and highlight all the adjectives--how many of them are necessary for your argument and how many are there just to set the tone of outrage? Take out all the outrage-markers--since you're interested in argumentation and disdain irrationality, according to your blogger info.)

Donald Douglas said...

Come on, Ben ... where would I be without "the tone of outrage"?

Go to another blog if you want pantywaist obeisance to the nihilist left-wing agenda. I call 'em as I see him ...

Ben JB said...

Donald,
Your blogger profile states "I also abhor irrationalism in argumentation"--and yet you defend your outrage as being part of what makes this blog a bulwark against liberalism?

I can give you one or the other, but not both: you either (1) argue the facts--and leave outrage by the wayside--or you (2) oppose liberals with every ounce of outrage you have--and leave argumentation by the wayside.

Tim said...

And Donald, what we've exposed here is that you need an eye examination. Your attempts to smear everyone who does not hold your pinhole-size viewpoints are pretty tiresome. You got seriously exposed here, as your points were addressed, and your response was to insert the "N" word into the argument. That was crass and lazy my friend.

But I do love seeing your outrage. It is pretty funny. And I'm glad to have ignited this little firestorm. I'm sure stuff needed to be said, but still not sure you made much of an argument, in your cherry picking and generalizations. In some respects, I'm amazed so much was said, but so little gained.

I give this one a C-.

R. Stanton Scott said...

Professor, you are just killin' me. What a riot.

Well, I didn't get through twenty years as a combat soldier without learning tenacity.

And you have nothing near a "preponderance of evidence" here--you saying it don't make it so. If you don't recognize that you have brought the reputation of political science academia down a notch.

Donald Douglas said...

"You got seriously exposed here ..."

I got nothing of the sort, Tim. Not one of you has rebutted the major points of this post, and instead you've resorted to personal attacks, especially R.S. Scott.

Leftists are hypocrtical bigots. Plain as day ... why do you think the pushback is so intense?

Ben JB said...

Hi Donald,
I'm going to agree with you on one thing: this post has gotten some attention (or as you put it, "pushback").

But do you--as a poli sci teacher--really think that opposition is the best way to judge success?

Thomas said...

The broader point here isn't that "the left is racist." It's that the right is not -- at least not based on the sort of evidence that's commonly presented to prove such.

In other words, the revelation you should be having here is not, "Oh, man, my side has a bunch of racists." I mean, Christ, of course not. The revelation should be: "Wow, a lot of the stuff we hold up to tar others as racist is actually weak sauce. This post demonstrates that non-racist people use the very sort of language and imagery I have fingered elsewhere to impugn people as racist. I now realize I shouldn't do that. As the post has shown, clearly this language and imagery aren't de facto proof that someone is racist."

That is the simple lesson you should be drawing from all this.

Listen: We're not going to let you continue controlling language as you have. Enough is enough. Those who cherish liberty have finally started to suss you people out. It has taken decades, but they have finally grasped your game at the level where it counts. And their energies are about to come at you full-bore.

Your "progressivism" has made its headway via your manipulation of language and culture. And it's going to stop. I suspect you're not even aware of what's happening behind you right now, as American society's real liberals regroup with an energy that is unlike any you want to imagine. But the more perceptive of you would be wise to turn around and start figuring it out.

Your days of trying to choreograph the lives of other human beings are coming to an end.

Doctor Biobrain said...

Whew! I'm starting a post on the idiocy of this post and decided to click through the first link, to see what this supposed "most disgusting racism and sexism in decades" was, and got a bit worried when I saw that Publius wrote that. He was one of my favorite bloggers until he joined a group blog and I stopped reading him, and I got concerned that such a smart guy could have gotten so stupid. And then I realized my mistake: This isn't Publius. This jackass stole Publius' name, which was already taken by a liberal named Publius. Whew!

And Donald, you seriously think that black people preferring a black person and women preferring a woman was the "worst racism and sexism in decades"?? Really?? What does it say that most folks thought a black or woman president was impossible? Isn't that racism and sexism of the highest order? And hey, most Republicans are white and they voted for a white guy in the election, does that make them all racist? I wouldn't say so, but by your logic, they are. Why do you hate white people so much, Donald? (That's a joke, btw.)

Beyond that, while it can be argued that this is racism or sexism, there are better explanations for it. But the "worst" racism and sexism? Surely you overstate your case. Honestly Donald, I don't think you're a dumb person, but you sure do write a lot of dumb things for a supposedly smart guy. I sure do hope you pull back from the ledge sooner than later.

At best, conservatives are heading to oblivion, and at worst, rebellion. They need intellectuals to show them the way. Be that guy, Donald. Stop obeying the whims of the mob and start taking some leadership. And no, that doesn't involve writing jackass stupid stuff accusing Democrats of racism against black people and black people of being racist against everyone else. Apparently, even black Democrats are racist against blacks. Again, you can continue with the mob if you like, or you can be the conservative intellectual you always wanted to be. Your choice.

Donald Douglas said...

R.S. Scott:

"And you have nothing near a "preponderance of evidence" here-- you saying it don't make it so."

Actually, it doesn't matter what "evidence" I have or have not presented. You've never addressed any of it in any case.

You've imputed things to me I did not say and you've attacked claims I have not made. I never said a word about "Oreos." You brought that in to evade the key point - that leftists had smeared Steele with blackface. You also suggest that I make an empirical "social science" claim that all Democrats are bigoted and racist. I do not. My post simply asserts that bigotry and racism is common on the left, as demonstrated by all the examples here. You do not contest the examples, you contest the links as not "supporting my claims." But you've only mentioned unrelated points at the links or non-functioning ones, while ignoring key examples that make you look like a fool, or even a bigot, yourself (Jasmyn Cannick).

Moreover, this is a blog of "commentary and analysis" on the issues, not a blog on "research and publication" in political science. You're holding me to standard of blogging that no one does in the blogosphere, not even top political scientists who blog. In other words, you're tying to compare a blog post to a peer reviewed research manusrcript. Which, as anyone can see, is why you look like a blithering idiot.

And as you're claiming to be a has-been professor, I can see why you "used to be" one - you're not a very clear thinker ... that is, you're someone who can't differentiate between what is essentially an "op-ed" in a newspaper and a peer-reviewed article in an academic journal. My community college freshmen don't seem to have that problem.

In other words, you're not too smart. And the reason you're attacking me ad hominem is (1) you don't like what I have to say about your bigoted allies on the left, and (2) you've got nothing else. You sifted through to find a couple of dead links, in addition to distorting not only what I said, but what the sources said at the links provided, in support of an unhinged interpretation of the absence of leftists intolerance that's nothing shorting of truly clinical denial.

Frankly, you're nothing to me, sir. Well, actually, you're a dirty dishonest troll who tries to talk tough but comes off shooting blanks.

My exchange at this post with you is done. You're free to join other comment threads, but you've made a big enough ass out of yourself here already, and I've done enough troll feeding for the day.

Your attacks, in any case, are totally unoriginal. I get it all the time, but thankfully from people much more skilled at debate and argumentation than you.

Next case ...

Doctor Biobrain said...

Here you go, Donald. My response to this post:
Everyone's Racist, But the RacistsA serious piece of advice, I strongly recommend that you not attempt a rebuttal. You're in over your head and won't understand a damn thing I wrote, so you'll just embarrass yourself further. But that's never stopped you before, so go ahead and do what you like. And if you do try a rebuttal, please attempt to understand what I wrote before doing so. Not that you've ever bothered in the past, but there's always a first for everything.

Anonymous said...

This guy "Tim" is a blithering leftist idiot. Stop trying to argue with a fool.

Anonymous said...

Time the ignorant idiot boob...the tea parties were NOT RACIST YOU FOOL!

Acanthus said...

Sad. All that patronizing rage at Black America because D.C. ended its school voucher program. You don't give a damn about the black kids in that program. You got angry because you couldn't use blacks as a front to sell the voucher idea to whites. We know that, and that sort of attitude is just one of the reasons we tend not to vote for Republicans.

Donald Douglas said...

Acanthus...

Yeah. Right.

Acanthus said...

Yes, exactly right.

Rich Casebolt said...

I think that what is confusing Tim et. al. is that they believe what they perceive as KKK-style hate as the only motivator for bigotry ...

... and are blind to the thought that elitist condescension is also a motivator for bigotry, as well as its enabler ...

... all the way from dismissing as "humor" what they would declare "racist" were it to come from a conservative source ...

... to fostering a culture of dependence -- reinforced by public education systems that rival the automakers as examples of how corrosive today's unions can be to efficient and effective operations -- that kept minorities mired in poverty across generations.

Then again, they DO try to impose their elitism upon the whole nation ... so perhaps they are more "equal opportunity" than we're giving them credit for ... perhaps they're bigotry is less Bull Connor, and more Leona Helmsley?

(... and Tim, I too want our government to keep faith at arm's length from itself .. including the faith in human perceptual ability you possess. Until you work with me to take away the "non-diety" loophole when it comes to expressing the tenets of your faith in our public institutions -- or better yet, lower the Wall of Separation to level the playing field of faith -- we will be at loggerheads.)

Anonymous said...

Scintillating last comment there, Donald. Feel free to use "I know you are but what am I" for your next, if you haven't already.

R. Stanton Scott said...

Wow. Just...wow.

Robert said...

Professor,

thank you for your blog and the opportunity to read your insights. I was directed to this site by a link elsewhere and I will take this opportunity to read more of your works.

Acanthus,

you sir, are a bigot. There is no other way to put it for someone that only sees things in racist terms. You look at people as tools to use for your betterment. That you project those beliefs on to others is only so you can feel comfortable with your own belief systems.

People have the right to strive for their own success and not be held down in chains of poverty. The current corrupt educational system that is in lockstep with the Democratic Party (teacher's unions), is all about keeping students in failing schools so long as the union contributes to the Party's coffers. These schools do not educate. They do not teach either knowledge or discipline. They are holding pens for a future underclass that is desired by the political elite.

It repulses me that anyone would restrict the ability of someone to gain knowledge and the ability to think for themselves. Then again, if they did such things, they'd likely come to the conclusion that submitting your life to government for a few meager comforts is just life in chains of a different sort.

And we can't have that now, can we?

Donald Douglas said...

Thanks for commenting, Robert!

Anonymous said...

I know that I am late with this but I just have to comment on the pictures. I am a black female and I don't see anything racist in those pictures. Unless the definition/perception of racism has changed, I don't see anything racist at all in those signs. I found a couple to be offensive, but race has nothing to do with it. Not one of those signs made me feel as though I was being hated because of my race. And none of the signs indicated that I was inferior because of my race. Maybe folks are confusing racism with political and philosophical differences.

Bob Belvedere said...

Professor: Well done, sir, well done.

Quoted from and linked to at:
http://www.thecampofthesaints.com/2009.07.12_arch.html#1247530085759