Who’s Racist Again?

I recently had the privilege of conducting a course for Prager University entitled, “Who Are the Racists: Conservatives or Liberals?” in which I argue against the notion that conservatives and conservative policies are racist. I also detail- while discussing affirmative action and voter-id laws- that in fact, the preoccupation with race and condescending views of blacks are held predominately by the Left. I regard this as evidence that- at the very least- the Left, including many of their positions are racist.

And as luck would have it, several recent examples involving Democrat politicians and potential politicians prove my case. The midterm elections are a week away and Democrats are hoping for the best but expecting- and already lamenting- the worst. They anticipate that voter turnout will be low, and have admitted that black turnout – or lack thereof- decides the Democrats’ political fate. Faced with the growing prospect of losing seats in the House of Representatives and losing majority control of the Senate, Democrats have resorted to… being Democrats. In these cases, they’re ginning up racial fears among black voters to manipulate- excuse me, motivate- blacks into voting for them, saving their political hides.

Of course this is nothing new for Democrats. They do it well and they do it often. Earlier this year, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Steve Israel said some of his fellow Republican congressmen were racist and the GOP base was “animated by racism.”

Last year, Florida Democrat Rep. Alan Grayson distributed a fundraising flier that had a burning “t”- a symbol of the KKK, saying, “Now you know what the ‘T’ stands for.”

During the presidential election in 2014, Vice President Joe Biden- while speaking at a campaign rally attended primarily by blacks- said, “We got a real clear picture of what they all value… Look at what they value and look at their budget and what they’re proposing. Romney wants to let the — he said in the first hundred days he’s going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, ‘unchain Wall Street.’ They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

A sitting vice president of the United States had the temerity to lie like this, publicly, as a way to frighten black voters to the polls to re-elect Barack Obama- and Biden himself, by extension.

Subsequently it’s no surprise that Democrats will manipulate and use racial fears as a political tool to facilitate their elections and re-elections. Recently, to jumpstart interest among black voters, Democrats and Democrat supporters have either played the race card or released several racially despicable political advertisements in multiple states, hoping to scare blacks into action- rewarding undeserving Democrat candidates with political victories.

For example in Maryland, black gubernatorial candidate Anthony Brown- with the help of the Maryland Democratic Party- mailed out multiple versions of pamphlets attempting to connect Brown’s political race to Ferguson, Mo, poll taxes, and to the 1963 March on Washington. An alternate version of this pamphlet has an old photo of white protestors near a poster suggesting that blacks “go back to Africa.” Rather than run on the merits of his candidacy, Brown prefers a mixture of racial fear mongering, racial empathy and racial solidarity.

brown, bs

brown, bs 2

A Democrat.

One of the more disgraceful, racially provoking attempts to frighten and lure blacks to the polls is a flyer distributed by the Georgia Democratic Party invoking the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri. The emotionally-manipulating flyer details the shooting of Brown- whose “body [was] left in a pool of blood in the street for four hours”- by officer Darren Wilson. The flyer then notes the racial demographics of Ferguson- 67 percent black, juxtaposing it against the racial makeup of the mayor, city council and the police force being predominately white. The flyer then asks, “What are you going to do about it?”

demflyer3 Georgia

Really?

To be sure, Ferguson has nothing to do with Georgia’s elections. Period.

Further, the two people who this ad is intending to benefit- the Democrat nominee for Senate, Michelle Nunn, and Democrat gubernatorial candidate Jason Carter, grandson of former president Jimmy Carter- are both… white. Thus the Georgia Democrat Party wants blacks to do in Georgia what they reject in Ferguson.

Gotcha.

More to the point, the flyer is reprehensible because it uses the images of two black children holding signs that read, “don’t shoot,” referring to motto “hands up; don’t shoot” used by Ferguson protestors falsely attributed to Michael Brown in his encounter with officer Wilson. It also uses a photo, presumably of a Ferguson protestor, of a person on his/her knees with hands raised- again in the ‘hands up; don’t shoot’ mold with the caption “Vote; it’s up to you to make change happen.” Again, that the Democrat party in Georgia views this as acceptable- improperly connecting Ferguson to Georgia while inappropriately playing on racial fears to generate needed black turnout- is a clear indication of their anything goes, ends-justifying-the-means mentality. Rather than supporting the merits of Democrat policies past and present, and the candidates that hold them, the Georgia Democrat Party would rather employ scare tactics of the lowest sort- in this case, making the election about race/racial discrimination rather than the substance of the candidates.

demflyer1 Georgia

demflyer2 Georgia

These are Democrats, not conservatives.

Another repugnant example of Democrats racially manipulating blacks is in North Carolina. Democrat nominee Kay Hagan is in a close race with Republican nominee Thom Tillis to be the next U.S. Senator from North Carolina. To persuade blacks to vote for Hagan, flyers were distributed to black churchgoers that contained a picture of blacks being lynched with the inscription “Kay Hagan doesn’t win! Obama’s impeachment will begin!”

lynching photo

The flyer in Georgia is no doubt intentionally disingenuous and inappropriate. But this flyer is not only misleading, it’s disgusting. A group calling themselves Concerned Citizens of Cumberland County is responsible for the ad. I suspect that the members of this group aren’t conservatives.

It’s just a hunch.

Though Hagan claims no knowledge of this group saying, “I don’t know anything about the group or flier. We don’t coordinate with outside groups,” she hasn’t to my knowledge, denounced the flier as repulsive nor shamed the group for creating and distributing the flier. Hagan also hasn’t distanced herself from it either, which directly impugns her character. A person who doesn’t immediately condemn tactics like this is unfit and undeserving to be leader anywhere, especially in the U.S. Senate.

Another Democrat.

More still, a Democrat political action committee (PAC) linked to former aides of Sen. Harry Reid, has created an ad in support of Hagan’s campaign, that- among other things- blames her opponent for the Trayvon Martin shooting.

More Democrats.

I could do this all day. It should be more than obvious that Democrats are the ones preoccupied with race- who will use any tactic that emotionally manipulates blacks, racially inciting them to the polls and hoping for a political payoff. The charge that conservatives are racist is a very bad joke when compared to the outright, shameless attempt of Democrat politicians and their supporters to play various versions of the race card in an attempt to achieve and maintain political power.

But what is breathtakingly shameful is that Democrats are trying to link conservatives to the disgraceful, racist history of the Democrat party as proof that conservatives, today, are racist. It was the Democrat party that legislated Jim Crow segregation with its accompanying poll taxes and other intentions to suppress the black vote. It was Democrats who engaged in and approved of lynching. It was Democrats who created, and supported the KKK- up to and including having had a former Klansman, Robert Byrd, in the U.S. Senate up until four years ago. Blacks marched on Washington because it was Democrats who prevented them for accessing and experiencing equal access and socio-economic opportunity.

Democrats were and still are the racists that blacks need to be concerned with, not conservatives.

That this has to even be said is indicative of how effective Democrats have been in slandering and vilifying conservatives and how utterly ineffective conservatives have been in not only defending themselves against such baseless charges, but demonstrating how the Democrats repeatedly use race as an instrument of manipulation to solidify and maintain political power and influence.

It’s always and everywhere, at the expense of blacks.

To be sure, racism exists above and apart from politics.  As long as we’re on this side of heaven, racism will always exist.  However, the Left and the policies that those on the left support are by far, more racist and condescending to blacks than even the mere charges of racism that’s projected onto conservatives.

* Update.

Yet another Democrat has joined in the raced-based, fear mongering and political manipulation for votes, strategy.  Mary Landrieu told Chuck Todd that among other things, the South is an inhospitable place for blacks or women. This is definitely a curious statement considering that Landrieu herself has been elected numerous times during her 30-plus year career in… Louisiana. It’s also curious that the her state has an Indian American, Bobby Jindal, as governor. And what about the all the black mayors Louisiana has? How do inhospitable people continually vote for the very people that they take umbrage with?

Again, this charade is stupid, it’s based on lies and it’s immoral. If the substance of Democrat politicians and their policy positions had any political or intellectual capital whatsoever, or had net benefits to the states in which they’re from or the country at large, these sorry politicians would be trying to defend the merits of what they’ve accomplished over the last several years.  But they aren’t.  They’re trying to appeal to blacks through the lens of “racism” which is a very clear and tacit admission that not only do the policies they support stink, but they have failed and will continue to fail.  Which is why they’re silent in regards to them.

America, we can do better.

*Update no. 2.

Even more Democrats have joined in the cynical, race-baiting, exploitation of blacks in ever more transparent and cynical efforts to scare blacks to the polls on Tuesday.

Alabama mailer, racist

In Alabama, fliers were distributed in black communities that tied lack of voting to land “being given to extremist groups to honor klansmen.”  Again, the Democrats are trying to tie the KKK- long known to be part of Democrat political history- to Republicans.

This reeks of desperation.

If this is all that Democrats have, as I said above, doesn’t this acknowledge that there’s no real reason to vote Democrat?

Another flier in Milwaukee shows a picture of three black men- Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Dontre Hamilton- who were killed by police officers (sans Martin), with the caption reading “Don’t let anyone silence your voice. Vote Nov. 4th.”

Milwaukee flier, racist

Wow. No words.

But as PJMedia says this is particularly troubling and misleading because,

All of this comes against a background of rising chaos in the inner city: killings have risen sharply, along with all of the urban pathologies which feed and fuel them: drug and alcohol dependency, homelessness, joblessness, a failing school system (the only one in the state of Wisconsin to receive a failing grade from the state Department Public Instruction), and so on.

The reason that this particular flyer, which obviously seeks to portray the Democrats as the saviors of the urban community, is a perversion of reality in Milwaukee in particular is revealed by one simple fact: The last Republican mayor of Milwaukee left office in 1908. Since then, the city has had a succession of Democratic mayors, broken only by the times that Socialist mayors have been elected (the last of these, Frank P. Zeidler, left office in 1960). So, even if the Socialists were benign in the city’s history, the Democrats have owned Milwaukee, and with Milwaukee, all of Milwaukee’s ills, for an unbroken 54 years and counting.”

Pitiful.

*Update no.3. 

What would race-baiting be without Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-NY) thoughtless input. The morally-corrupt tax cheat who’s been charged by the House of Representatives’ ethics committee with numerous ethical violations, weighed in on the gubernatorial race in New York. True to form, Rangel accused Republicans of not only hate, but racists who still believe slavery continues (it does, actually- in Africa).  Rangel said, “They [Republicans] don’t disagree — they hate. They think if you didn’t come from Europe 30 years ago, you didn’t even make it. Some of them believe that slavery isn’t over, and they think they won the Civil War.”

What? Can anyone decipher Rangel’s verbal, intellectual, ahistorical mishmash? Only a dumbed down society can elect and re-elect a charlatan like this. Rangel is who he is- rotten to the core, but this is a very poor reflection of the New Yorkers who re-elected him after knowing about his lies, tax cheating and corrupt politicking.

No wonder people demonstrate such cynicism and apathy with politics and politicians.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Who’s Racist Again?

  1. Matt October 31, 2014 / 9:04 am

    I fully agree with you, but how to change it? Blacks as a whole being taken for granted, black men headed for some kind of catastrophe, and men in general being vilified the world over, doesn’t have a very good outlook for us. What would you do to change it? And how is your message received among those who hear it?

    Like

    • derryckg October 31, 2014 / 12:06 pm

      Matt-

      I would like to see the time and energy put toward constructive strategies that target and alleviate the pathologies that have afflicted blacks for two generations. Part of that begins with the recognition that Democrat social policies have been entirely destructive to blacks- individuals, families and communities. Now, we see these policies affecting and rotting the core of America as well.

      Yet, Democrats will continue using racial and emotional manipulation until it no longer works to maintain political power. And in power they will advocate more of the same policies that have wrought havoc on the very same people they utterly depend maintain control.

      That said, I can’t let blacks off the hook either. They have actively and in many cases, eagerly participated in their own destruction by voting for politicians and policies that stand in contrast to their own best interests. This being the case, blacks need to sincerely admit that they have been wrong. Wrong for thinking Democrats cared about them, wrong about thinking conservatives are racist, wrong in thinking that government is the solution to every problem faced and realize that it’s because of government their communities resemble Third World countries. They need to acknowledge that- as they participated in their own cultural and political decline, they can also affect change- to control what is under their control, to alleviate the socio-economic suffering that besets them. So, for example, blacks don’t need government to increase their marriage rates, to reduce the 73% illegitimacy rate, to commodify fatherhood and husbandhood among black males, to increase high school graduation rates by prioritizing education- such as school choice and vouchers as a means to uplift (which means not supporting Democrats who’re funded by teacher’s unions who support and deliver substandard education); re-embracing religious values and morality, comporting themselves to the standards of their peers; re-stigmatizing self-destructive behaviors, reducing the disproportionate participation in drug use and violent crimes that leads to the disproportionate representation in incarceration rates… all of these things have VERY little to do with government and everything to do with self-control, self-determination and moral responsibility. (I wrote a piece called “Blacks Must Speak Outside the Language of Race” that goes into this.)

      Specifically though, as it relates to political involvement, I’ve advocated a Second Emancipation. The Second Emancipation is when blacks coordinate a mass exodus out of the Democrat party to claim political Independence- literally and figuratively. They shake off the shackles of the Democrat party and register as Independents. It forces both parties- the Democrats who have taken their electoral loyalty for granted- and the Republicans who’ve written blacks off based upon the same loyalty that has gotten blacks nothing in return- to work for the black vote by crafting policies and legislation that are beneficial for blacks as Americans, not simply because they’re … black.

      It has to start somewhere.

      As for the reception- of course I receive the ‘he thinks racism doesn’t exist’ and ‘this is why people like him are called Uncle Tom’- type comments. But actually, the majority of the people- a significant number, thank God, happen to be black- who take the time to comment or email have been very receptive to what I’m saying and have not only encouraged me to speak out more, but have lamented that there aren’t more blacks who have larger pulpits, saying these same things. So that’s definitely encouraging.

      Like

  2. ahnyerkeester November 2, 2014 / 8:02 am

    Derryck, I appreciate your diligence on this. Political campaigning as a whole is miserable but some of these examples are really bad.

    I have to say, I found your class at Praeger U more informative than this post related to it and I have a question if you don’t mind.

    While I agree that Democratic policies, either intentionally or unintentionally, are worse for African Americans, I can hear some of the push back against your video. You seem to admit at one point in the video that affirmative action was necessary when first instituted but that it has run its course. The critic in the back of my head asked, “What about institutional discrimination? Is that gone?” My impression is that there are still some pockets of institutional discrimination but by and large it is rare. At the same time, how would you justify removing quotas when it appears that minorities still have a hard time getting into college for some reason? I believe you answered that in the video but I was wondering if you could connect the dots for me just to make sure we’re seeing the same thing.

    Thank you.

    Like

    • derryckg November 3, 2014 / 11:26 am

      ahnyerkeester-

      When you say “institutional discrimination” what specifically are you referring? What institution? Surely, I will assume, that you don’t mean a pervasive, society-wide racism akin to Jim Crow or even jim Crow light?

      I would argue that (aside from fully knowing your definition of institutional discrimination) that, frankly, for the most part, it’s gone.

      You wrote, “At the same time, how would you justify removing quotas when it appears that minorities still have a hard time getting into college for some reason?”

      This I think is obvious. Affirmative action, the way it’s currently practiced, is a symbolic effort that people participate in and/or support, to appear as if they’re against vestiges of racial discrimination. I say symbolic because in the end, it causes more damage than the ills it’s been sold to cure. Second, it’s a feeble effort on the back end of a problem rather than confronting and solving issues at the beginning.

      The reason minorities, specifically blacks, still have difficulty with college admissions is because over 94% of black children receive substandard, government run education that does very little to properly educate black- particularly poor- children. Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom, in their book “No Excuses” elaborate the fact that black high school graduates have the same writing and arithmetic proficiency and competency as the average white, eight grade graduate. High school graduates with middle school proficiency aren’t equipped for college, period. They’re certainly not equipped for acceptance or admission to first-rate colleges and universities. So quotas that accept blacks who have lower grade point averages and lower SAT scores do a disservice to blacks because eventually, these blacks realize they can’t keep up and drop out. What good is a quota when the large majority under that quota system, fail? So aside from feeling good about supporting affirmative action on the front end, how many pay attention to or even know the results of their seemingly good intentions?

      Many people aren’t aware of the fact that after California passed prop 209 which amended the state constitution to outlawed race and ethnicity as considerations or qualifications for public education (among other things), black admission rates dropped at a number of universities. People cried racism, discrimination, etc. But what they didn’t say, was that black graduation rates increased substantially because, as it happens, black students began matching themselves to institutions that reflected their ability to succeed. Those blacks still admitted to upper echelon institutions, say UCLA, had abilities more akin to their peers. So black admissions at UCLA declined, but admissions to UC Santa Cruz increased. And so did graduation rates at both, and many more in between.

      If people were concerned about increasing the admissions and acceptance rates of blacks into college, they would support a reformation and redemption of the way we educate our children. Affirmative action quotas don’t mean anything; educated children, especially black children, who’re- at the very least- proficient at their grade level when they graduate high school have a solid foundation for upward academic and economic mobility. But until we get serious about the quality of public education, remove the teachers unions domination and perpetuation of the status quo, increase the availability of school vouchers and school choice to give parents greater say in who/how their children are educated, blacks, from an eternal standpoint, will continue to be severely undereducated and quotas will continue to facilitate unacceptable college dropout rates.

      Like

      • ahnyerkeester November 3, 2014 / 11:54 am

        Thank you Derryck. As I assumed, we agree on the problems. I live and minister in LA County and from what I’ve seen, our schools are failing not only blacks, but the poor in general. Actually, it seems like it is a much broader problem than just schools. There are parents who have children to get the welfare money and the kick the kids to the curb once they turn 18. There is an entitlement mentality amongst many of the poor who don’t even consider working once they graduate.

        The problem is acute amongst the black community and I suppose that’s what I mean by “institutional discrimination.” It isn’t what the liberals mean by it. What I’m getting at is generations of families stuck in poverty and welfare because that’s all they know and because there are large procedural barriers to moving out off of welfare. You can make something like $30k per year on welfare, ADC, Section 8, etc. Take a minimum wage job and the welfare benefits drop much more than the job pays. This is not unique to blacks but African Americans make up a large part of that population of that sector. When you grow up in that kind of a situation, participation in schools is merely the symptom of the problem. Parents, especially single parents, can’t or won’t discipline the children, won’t prepare them to succeed at school, can’t equip them to succeed at life in general.

        The reason, as far as I can tell, that blacks make up such a large portion of this sector is because of the institutional discrimination of the past. Skin color may not be a big barrier to success, but the culture of poverty and entitlement and thuggery are. And it is not easy to escape the culture you were reared in. When I was in the military, we saw the cultural stiffness between black and white largely disappear. The cultural distinctions remained but there was more comfortability camaraderie with each other. That kind of “social smoothing” could make it easier to function in a culture you’re not familiar with. I’m not sure that is still happening in the military these days.

        It just all frustrates me so much. I agree with you, I don’t think quotas are the answer but I’m not sure what else to do to help. Thanks for the interaction. Dialog helps I think.

        Like

Comments are closed.