Oct 26, 2014
We had this video set to go before the Walpole / Academic Magnet School story came to our attention, but this video now takes on a more timely viewpoint.
To call someone a racist is a serious charge. A racist is someone who believes that one person is superior (or inferior) to another person simply based on their skin color. It’s a belief that is both foolish and stupid. But conservatives are accused by progressives of being racist on an almost daily basis. Is it a fair accusation? Or, is it just political posturing? And, if it is political posturing, what does it say about the people making the charge? Derryck Green of Project 21 has some provocative answers.
Courtesy the Prager University.
May 4, 2014
This past Wednesday night, the Montreal Canadians beat the Boston Bruins in double overtime 4 – 3. With 4:19 left in the second overtime, Montreal defenseman P.K. Subban fired a slapshot past Boston goalie Tukka Rask for the game winner.
Canadian fans were ecstatic. Bruin fans, not so happy and took to Twitter to voice their displeasure.
The target of the fans anger was the aforementioned Subban, who is black.
Tweets from fans rained down against Subban using racial terms and epitaphs that would make a sailor blush.
It was vile, stupid, wrong, and every other adjective we can think of that would decry this type of bigotry. You would think that after a week of the mess with Donald Sterling, people would know better.
It is okay to dislike a guy because of the uniform he wears, but don’t hate a man because of the color of his skin.
The Bruins organization, for their part, released a statement condemning the racism:
“The racist, classless views expressed by an ignorant group of individuals following Thursday’s game via digital media are in no way a reflection of anyone associated with the Bruins organization.” – President of Boston Bruins Operations Cam Neely
What is missing from the condemnation of Sterling and the Bruins fans is the overall condemnation of whites, of males, of conservatives and of Republicans if the incidents had taken place south of the Mason-Dixon line.
You would have heard that Sterling was typical of the people in the south – racist, white and conservative. Yet Sterling is from Los Angeles, a town that leans to the left politically. Sterling himself is a supporter of liberal and Democratic causes.
Boston is a city than decidedly leans to the left yet no mention of the political leanings of city or the state is made.
If the same tweets had occurred while the Canadians were playing the Nashville Predators, the Carolina Hurricanes, or the Atlanta Thrashers, would the city, the state, and the fans have gotten a pass as Boston and Sterling did? Would the press had dug deep into other racial incidents with owners, teams and fans if these incidents had happened in the south?
You bet they would have.
And that’s the problem.
Feb 20, 2012
“Well, in all my years I ain’t never heard, seen nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it couldn’t be talked about. Hell yeah! I’m for debating anything.” – Stephen Hopkins, Rhode Island Delegate, from the movie 1776.
Or, if you’d prefer, “nigga.”
There. We said it. It is forever locked into the annals of the internet and this blog for all time – never to be erased or lost. Somewhere, someone will have a record of the day the word appeared on this blog.
That being said, we find the word offensive. In today’s world and modern landscape, there is no need or purpose behind anyone using the “n-word” in public or polite conversation when directed at or describing another person. While we have been a consistent supporter of the First Amendment, the purpose of the First Amendment is to encourage debate and discussion. When used as an invective, the “n-word” has the effect of shutting down conversations. Points of view are no longer exchanged. While a person has a right to use the word, in most cases we believe they should not.
One of those cases when the use of the word is acceptable is when it is used in a discussion of the offense it causes, the perception it has, or the stifling of debate. The only way to discuss how the word does these things is to use the actual word, as we are doing here. We used the word here because we are talking about the word itself and not directing it at anyone.
Which brings us to teacher Lincoln Brown of Chicago. Brown teaches at the Murray Language Academy located on the south side of Chicago. His 5th and 6th grade writing and social studies students are mostly black children.
We would bet that Brown had no idea when he went to work one fateful day in October there would be an incident in his class ending up being his being suspended and his reputation impugned, resulting in him filing a lawsuit against the City of Chicago.
Feb 3, 2012
Damn those Southerners. From the time the United States of America was formed, the South has been hostile to minorities. It is always the states in the North that are models of tolerance and equality. After all, look at Jesse Jackson who rails against racism in the Southern city of Chicago. Uh… sorry. That can’t be right. Well, then we have Al Sharpton who constantly points to racism in one of the South’s biggest metropolises, New York. No wait. That can’t be right either. Chicago and New York aren’t southern states.
Okay, it is those Southern redneck guys that are racists. You know, the ones that live in small to mid sized communities. They must be the ones that are keeping minorities down. Right?
Many people that travel across the country and have lived in multiple places will tell you that racism is much worse in the northern areas of the country than in the south. That is not to say that race relations are perfect south of the Mason Dixon line. What is being said is the idea of northern states being less racist than their southern brothers is am outright lie. It is the elitism of intellectuals from the North who like to look down their noses at those in the South and proclaim superiority in racial matters without a basis in fact.
Their continued sense of superiority is proof of that adage “if you tell a lie enough, people will believe it as truth.”
The Florida Today newspaper summarizes a report commissioned by the Urban Institute:
Sep 28, 2011
Another day – another quick hit.
Via our friends over at Cold Fury and the Doug Ross comes a comment by Mary Frances Berry who previously served as the head of the US Civil Rights Commission. We remember Berry as the head of the commission that looked into the 2000 presidential election and whose staff leaked reports and documents that were later removed from the final report for lack of support.
As part of a blog on Politico.com, participants were asked to comment on the “racist” allegations made against the Tea Party and its members.
Berry’s response is telling:
Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.
Berry’s position is clear. It is acceptable to brand a label opponents as “racists” when there is none. It is acceptable to play the “race card” when there is no bigotry.
That alone should speak volumes about the Berry herself and the party of which she is a member.
CNN is reporting on a press credential badge issued by the White House for reporters who are traveling with the president as he makes stops in Washington state, California, and Colorado.
The three states the president will visit are highlighted in white on the badge.
Only one problem: Wyoming, not Colorado, is highlighted.
To be fair, both states are rectangular, nearly identical in size, and stacked next to each other. But we doubt our third grade teachers would buy that!
If this were the Bush White House, the press and left would be all over this as an example of how “stupid Bush is.” As it is the Obama White House, there isn’t much commentary other than to laugh it off.
Wonder how the people of Colorado think knowing the White House can’t identify their state?
Or maybe it is one of those 57 states candidate Obama visited?
Jun 21, 2011
We would hope that every conservative reading this blog would agree that “Jim Crow laws” were an affront to what this country was founded upon, the result of the Civil War, and the 14th Amendment. Republicans, starting before the Civil War have long fought against racial inequities.
(For a deeper look into this rich history of Republicans fighting for equal rights, we suggest that you read our friend Steve Bussey’s article “A Conversation About Race,” as well as visit one of our favorite websites, “Grand Old Partisan,” where you can read daily a different fact about Republicans and race.)
In a practical sense, Federal law has made the Jim Crow laws moot. We no longer allow “white only” water fountains, or “blacks on” bathrooms. State sponsored and state mandated segregation needed to be ended and wiped from the law books of the land.
That sentiment was what drove Republicans in the Alabama Senate to propose legislation stripping Jim Crow laws from the Alabama Constitution. Even though the laws were no longer enforceable, they were still on the books.
May 10, 2011
We here at Raised on Hoecakes wish to acknowledge the men of Bethune-Cookman University and the women of the University of Texas-Pan American for winning this years PGA Minority Collegiate Golf Championship held this past weekend at the PGA Golf Club in Port St. Lucie, Florida.
The NCAA and the PGA have combined to promote, recognize and help sponsor this event since 1986. This was the 25th year of the event.
The NCAA stands strong on the position of diversity in college and collegiate athletics. Their official position is stated as:
The NCAA believes in the values of diversity and inclusion. Although it has made progress in increasing the diversity of the membership and generating opportunities within intercollegiate athletics for individuals of all backgrounds, the Association’s leadership recognizes there is more work to be done. The diversity and inclusion staff at the national office aims to centralize efforts concerning diversity and inclusion, serve as a point of contact for related concerns and assist the membership in developing initiatives that will lead to increased diversity and inclusion throughout intercollegiate athletics.
The PGA has a similar positon:
The PGA exercises sound practices to ensure that all individuals receive fair treatment in their desire to become affiliated with the Association and the business of golf. We encourage diversity as it leads to new opportunities to help fulfill the mission of The PGA of America.
So if both the PGA and the NCAA are committed to “diversity and inclusion,” why are they sponsoring a golf tournament that is not all-inclusive? Why are they sponsoring a tournament that only allows minorities to enter?