It’s ok to be a racist in the South – as long as you’re a black Democrat

Posted by: ST on August 25, 2006 at 9:44 pm

Living in the South, white people – in particular white Republicans – are very sensitive about the issue of race relations. We routinely get slammed by white and black Democrats alike routinely on the grounds that they seem to believe there’s some growing underground movement here to bring back slavery, a ‘movement’ they think we’re all secretly a part of. I’ve documented numerous racist remarks made by black Democrats, remarks that the racists who say them are almost never held accountable for – not by their contituencies, nor the ‘unbiased’ MSM. Before I get started on the article that inspired me to write this post, for the record I’d like to document a couple of instances of past racial demagoguery as practiced by white Democrats as well:

Bill Clinton on the Trent Lott/Strom Thurmond remarks ‘controversy’ 12-18-2002:

NEW YORK (CNN) — Former President Clinton said Wednesday it is “pretty hypocritical” of Republicans to criticize incoming Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott for stating publicly what he said the GOP does “on the back roads every day.”

“How do they think they got a majority in the South anyway?” Clinton told CNN outside a business luncheon he was attending. “I think what they are really upset about is that he made public their strategy.”

He added: “They try to suppress black voting, they ran on the Confederate flag in Georgia and South Carolina, and from top to bottom the Republicans supported it.”

Senator Hillary Clinton on the same issue 12-23-02:

If anyone thinks that one person stepping down from a leadership position cleanses the Republican Party of their constant exploitation of race, then I think you’re naive.

There’s plenty more where those came from.

Now, remarks like the above typically only draw fire from Republicans. The media at large generally treat such statements as Unquestionable Truths, ‘truths’ which are supposedly so steeped into the minds of everyday people that the quotes themselves really aren’t regarded as major news because that’s just Life Here In The South. Race demagogues like the Clintons and their ilk, along with their cohorts in the media have you believing that white Republicans still have their boots on the necks of black people here in the South, portraying a vivid image of the ‘poor black Southern man’ as if to suggest that it’s only white people in the South who have racist tendencies.

If you live in the South – especially if you were born and raised here – you know that while there is a percentage (I’d say a small one) of white people in the South who hate black people and always will, you also are aware that there are black racists in the South who detest white people. I don’t think the percentage on that is small, but I have nothing scientific to base it on. Simply going by what I have observed over my lifetime of living in a Southern state and travelling to others. Sometimes this black on white racism rises from a steet level, to a governmental level, and nothing exemplifies that more than the following piece which appeared today in, surprisingly, the New York Times (emphasis added):

MONTGOMERY, Ala., Aug. 24 — When Patricia Todd won the Democratic primary runoff for a seat in the Alabama Legislature last month, the big news might have been her sexual orientation. With no Republican opponent, Ms. Todd seemed poised to become what political observers said would be the first openly gay officeholder in state history.

But instead, it is the fact that she is white, in a majority black district in Birmingham, that has become the burning issue. One of the state’s most powerful Democrats, who had earlier urged voters not to support Ms. Todd because she is white, is backing a challenge to her nomination that could end her candidacy.

Yes, you read that correctly: one of Alabama’s most powerful Democrats has asked voters to not vote for Ms. Todd because she is white. Here’s more:

On Thursday, a Democratic Party subcommittee heard a challenge to Ms. Todd’s candidacy on the ground that she had violated a rule that, by party officials’ own admission, has not been enforced in nearly 20 years. The subcommittee voted to disqualify both Ms. Todd and her runoff opponent, a black businesswoman named Gaynell Hendricks, because neither had complied with the rule.

They disqualified the black candidate, too? Where’s the story then? you may ask. Read on:

The full party committee, which will meet Saturday, can now either overturn the decision or uphold it and appoint a replacement candidate, and Ms. Hendricks would be eligible. But Ms. Todd’s campaign manager, Mark Kelly, said the dispute would almost certainly end up in court.

Ms. Hendricks, the black candidate, would be eligble, if the decision is upheld while a ‘replacement candidate’ (Ms. Hendricks) is ‘found.’

Continuing:

The challenge was brought by Ms. Hendricks’s mother-in-law. But it was tacitly supported by Joe L. Reed, a longtime Democratic kingmaker and the party’s vice chairman of minority affairs. Mr. Reed had urged voters to support Ms. Hendricks, and at one point the Alabama Democratic Conference, a black political organization that he is chairman of, gave a check to cover the $3,000 fee needed to bring the challenge in case Ms. Hendricks missed the deadline. He also controlled the subcommittee; three of the five members were drawn from a pool of Mr. Reed’s appointees.

Mr. Reed is the racist black Democrat who is the ‘powerful Democrat’ mentioned earlier in the Times piece. Mr. Reed is supporting Ms. Hendricks, the black candidate who he really wants to see in the seat the white Ms. Todd won. Moving right along:

“This is really not about race” Ms. Todd said in a telephone interview as she traveled to Montgomery for the hearing. “This is about Joe Reed controlling the party and trying to get his way, and he’s just a bully.”

She’s right on one point. He is a bully – but not just any bully, but a racial bully who is trying to subvert democracy (are you listening, Jon Chait?). This actually is about race, and Ms. Todd knows it. Her comments above don’t line up with what she said a couple of weeks ago:

“When do we get past this?” said Todd, who would become the first openly gay member of the Alabama Legislature. “I can’t believe that in 2006 we’re still electing people on the basis of race.”

“It really does disturb me, all this talk about race. When I decided to run I never expected it to be a big deal,” she said.

Mr. Reed was quoted in the NYT piece as saying:

Mr. Reed disagreed. “She doesn’t even know me,” he said, “so she wouldn’t be in any position to know. This is not about lifestyles; this is not about race. This is about whether she complied with the party rules.”

Reed is a liar. From the earlier MSNBC/AP article I referenced:

A black Democratic leader urged black voters to support Todd’s black opponent, Gaynell Hendricks, on the basis of race, and Todd fears racial politics may taint proceedings before the subcommittee.

[…]

Before the runoff on July 18, the longtime chairman of the black Democratic caucus, Joe Reed, wrote a letter urging black leaders to support Hendricks because of her race and stressing the need for keeping the seat in black hands.

Electing a white in a mostly black district would increase the chance of lawmakers redrawing the area as a majority white district after the 2010 Census, Reed claimed.

This type of black racial demagoguery is far more prevalent than most people who aren’t from or don’t live in the South realize – it’s just so rare to see an instance of it reported in the MSM. I have to give credit to the NYT, which is one of the last news outlets that I would have guessed would have carried this story. Keep in mind, though, that the story is nearly two weeks old – which is a lifetime in the media -and they’re only just now picking it up. Although it’s a hope of mine that this story would ‘go national’ in a big way beyond the NYT, being played out on the major nets, etc so people could see the ‘other side’ of racism here in the South, I won’t hold my breath. Especially considering that as of this writing, you only see less than 50 articles on the issue, and about half of them are from opinion sites. Contrast that with the coverage Tennessee state representative Stacey Campfield, who is white, got from the MSM after he said the Black Caucus in Tennessee was ‘less accomodating’ than the KKK when it came to membership versus the coverage Charlie Rangel, House Representative from New York, serving his constituency in the US Congress got when – the same week Campfield made his remarks – he called President Bush our modern day “Bull Connor”.

Some may wonder “Why are you so concerned about this, ST? It’s an Alabama issue. Let the people of Alabama deal with it.” While it’s true that this is happening in Alabama, the basis for the issue has been one that has affected the South for decades now, so that makes it an issue for all white Republicans in the South who are fed up with race-baiting black Democrats who rarely get called to account for their racial statements by their vote-starved white Democratic colleagues nor the MSM, and in this case, may get away with stealing (yes stealing) an election away from a legitimate primary runnoff winner – simply because she’s white.

The racial tensions in the South today still exist, not nearly to the extent that they did back in the 60s and earlier, but they are there and whether you’re black or white in the South you do take notice of it. While, as I noted earlier, there are white people in the South who will always hate black people, the elephant in the room that is black racism keeps the racial division alive and well more than anything else. It’s one thing to experience it between your everyday average white person and black person. It’s another to see it played out in government, whether it be a local, state, or national office.

There is a reason that black racists in government continue to fan the flames of racial disharmony in the South: they know it’s an issue they can ride that will garner them votes. Don’t elect whitey because it’ll only be a matter of time before he puts you in chains again. We see the same mentality behind affirmative action advocates as well. Don’t take away affirmative action because if you do, black people will eventually be pushed to the back of the workplace and college education opportunity bus. You’re better off if you remain a ‘victim’ of society. Not entirely surprising, considering that the promotion of victimhood status is a key strategy Democrats use to win votes.

Complicit in this, of course, are white Democrats and the media, who perpetuate the stereotypes of Southern Republicans over and over again to the point where it’s not supposed to even be questioned. The white and black Democrats who are either directly complicit or stand by and say nothing while this perpetuation of white Southern Republican stereotypes go on are repugnant hypocrites of the highest order, because these people are the ones who parade in front of the cameras and push legislation day after day to supposedly promote ‘diversity’ and ‘support minorities.’ These type of people really don’t give a damn about ‘diversity’ and minorities. They just know how much they have to pander to them to get their votes, and if those votes come at the cost of strengthening racial divisions while at the same time perpetuating victimhood, they don’t care. Race relations and widespread real empowerment in the black community in the South are a casualty of their quest for power and glory.

I should note that this does happen on a national level as well, but when it happens in the South – where racial tensions are most prominent – it’s even more frustrating, because even those who want to take several steps forward and move beyond what has divided black and white people in the South for so many years can’t do it because race pimps like Rev. Jackson and Sharpton, Rep. Rangel, Rep. Mel Watt (my “representative” in Congress – sigh) and racist election stealers like Joe Reed in Alabama keep stirring the racial pot, deepening the divisions.

Racial tensions in the South will never completely go away, but imagine if it got to the point here sometime in the future where the issue was almost nothing but a distant memory. Race hustlers like Jackson, Sharpton, and Reed wouldn’t be in power. That is what they fear the most. The people who claim to want to “solve” the problem actually are the problem, and that problem is not going to get better until three things happen: 1) More prominent black people like Bill Cosby speak out against negative black cultural influences, 2) respected black Republicans like Md. Lt. Gov. and Senate candidate Michael Steele get more attention in the media, and 3) white Republicans like Ken Mehlman and the President himself stop pandering to the black community by taking the bulk of the blame for the racial tensions we see in the South today. Until racist black Democrats are held personally respsonsible – by respected, well-written leaders both Republican and Democrat in the black community – for their statements, actions, and policies they have purposely said, done, or advocated in a shamelessly deliberate attempt to widen the racial divide, continuing the cycle of victimology within their constituencies in an effort to stay in power, the racial divide in the South will only grow.

And that’s exactly the way they want it.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

8 Responses to “It’s ok to be a racist in the South – as long as you’re a black Democrat”

Comments

  1. camojack says:

    “And that’s exactly the way they want it.”

    Unfortunately, that bottom line is the “bottom line. :-w

  2. stackja says:

    Race double standard, Dems can say, GOP cannot say.

  3. Drewsmom says:

    We can thank the rev al and fake preacher jacksoon for this and the fools who support them …. what a double standard.:-?

  4. Marshall Art says:

    True racism requires that those of us who don’t suffer such crap easily, stand up and confront those who perpetuate it, both by votes and direct confrontation. By that I mean, calling the perps on it when they engage in it and not allow them to color it (no pun intended) as something other than what it is. I think it was Spike Lee who said that it’s not possible for blacks to be racist. This is obvious crap and I fear a more commonly held notion by blacks than one might think. Though this black to white racism may be more prevalent in the South as ST indicates (and thanks for doing so–I think it’s important), it is pervasive throughout the nation, particularly in major cities where liberalism and victimhood and white self-loathing fester.

  5. Aghast says:

    There’s a couple of straw men in this post.

    1. I’ve never heard anyone express the idea that republicans want to bring back slavery. No one. By assuming that liberals are motivated by something so stupid, you expose your own ignorance about why liberals actually hold certain positions. You have shown that you don’t even attempt to understand why the other side has come to certain conclusions. One can only assume that you haven’t really considered the argument from both sides.

    2. When people talk about how the right has used racism, they aren’t saying that republicans are literaly out there with their boots to people’s necks… they simply send coded (and not-so-coded) messages that appeal to the racists they want to court. It’s true that republicans have run campaigns on the issue of the confederate flag (See georgia, where a republican governor won on a platform of putting the confederate flag back into the state flag (it had been removed years ago)…did he actually bring it back? no. because he was running his campaign on it… a cynical political move designed to get support from racists.)

    As an aside, I understand that (for some people) the confederate flag is viewed as a source of pride that doesn’t have anything directly to do with racism. That argument could apply to the Nazi flag too; it doesn’t make it an appropriate symbol on a state flag! Also, the confederate flag is a symbol of a rebelious, traitorous movement that defended slavery as an institution and would have destroyed this country if it wasn’t stopped. A little introspection might reveal that the movement is not one to be remembered fondly.

    Furthermore, Pat Buchanan’s statements that only the european races could have created the obviously superior western civilization have been parroted around cable news shows with little disgust expressed. So for some reason or other (and it’s not just a left-right, black-white thing) some racist comments are accepted by the mainstream and others decried.

    On the other hand, you’re absolutely correct that southern blacks can be extremely racist towards whites, and that that racism is used for political advantage by some democrats…

  6. Baklava says:

    Aghast,

    2. Liberals in general are for OVERT racism. And to justify it they make claims like you just did about US (strawmen arguments from you) speaking in code. I can honestly tell you that we believe in Ward Connerly’s idea of ending race preferences. That is the end of racism. If there are programs to give people a hand up it should be given to all who need it and not only to those based on a certain race. Read Ward Connerly’s book creating equal and you’ll see clearly who are the racists. He dismantles the left’s arguments and chronicles them so you can’t call them strawmen. Denial aint pretty.

    So… Instead of throwing accusations which your post seems to do. …

    … Please tell us your position… Are you for institutionalized racism (preferences based on race) or against it and discrimination based on race?

    Let us know. Because accusations get you nowhere. It doesn’t convince anybody of anything.

  7. Aghast, the only one showing their ignorance here is you, by taking what I said literally rather than figuratively, which is the way I intended it to be taken. Dunno if your ignorance was intentional or not, but in case it was, I recommend that you go back and re-read what I wrote with that in mind.

  8. Leslie says:

    A couple of things-I live in a predominately poor, rural, black county in south GA. My dh teaches at the local public middle school that is 98% black. During the last local elections the county seat had 2 candidates for mayor:one black man who has been mayor for a while and who was also under indictment for double digit counts of fraud and one white man who was a county deputy sheriff. My dh asked his students who they would vote for and every single class told him that they would rather vote for a crooked black man who had been convicted than a white man anyday. When asked why nearly every single student told him that a white politician would put them back into chains and that all white people, esp. republicans want to bring back slavery. When he asked where that idea came from he was told that it came from the black churches and that the black campaigns came to speak in the churches and that is what they said.(Sorry Aghast. Just because you haven’t heard it expressed doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been.)

    And the “confederate” flag issue in GA. Perdue was NOT elected b/c he was going to bring back the “confederate” flag. He was elected b/c he was going to let us have a SAY, i.e. vote, on the flag that we want. Unlike Roy Barnes (D) who changed the flag overnight to a mighty ugly one.So when Perdue was elected, he got the flag on the ballot and we “racist” Georgians voted to change the flag to one that did not contain the “racist” confederate battle emblem.