Why Shouldn't Blacks Be Conservatives?

From a story (surprisingly) coming from the AP (via Breitbart), black conservatives are taking heat...for being black conservatives.

The story actually focuses on blacks who support the Tea Party movement, but this kind of thing has been going on for some time.  Colin Powell was routinely criticized for being a black man working for the Bush administration.  Condoleezza Rice came under similar criticism.  Michael Steele was also criticized (and reportedly attacked with Oreo cookies during his run for Lieutenant Governor of Maryland).  It didn't matter that their positions within the government were "historic" (a word that the Left just loves to throw around).  They're black, and don't conform to what the Left sees as the norm for black people, and that in itself is enough to earn them the Left's vitriol.

From the article, quoting Timothy F. Johnson of the Frederick Douglass Foundation:

"Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks,"

This is what continually astounds me on the issue of African-American conservatives.  Liberals are the ones who say we should move beyond race.  Liberals are the ones who urge us to avoid labels.  But when the rubber meets the road, the Left is all talk and no action.  They are the first ones to look at race.  They are the first ones to apply labels.  They are the ones who blindly enforce their stereotype that all minorities should, by default, be Democrats.

Conservatives, on the other hand, are the ones who are more willing to look beyond race.  One of my favorite political conversations of all time was when I watched a conservative African-American woman take on a white liberal man who said he planned to vote for Barack Obama because he would be the first black president.  For conservatives, it's not about race, it's about ideals and ideas.  It's not about race, it's about policy.

The defining line from Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous "I Have A Dream" speech states:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. 

The Left has made it abundantly clear that they have no intention of living up to this, the defining ideal of the Civil Rights Movement that they purport to treasure so dearly.  Whenever the Left says they want racial equality, the first thing they do is focus on skin color, judging and stereotyping people arbitrarily based solely on the color of their skin.  

Those on the Left love to engage in race-baiting, but in the final analysis, it's very clear who the real racists are. 

Who's The Bigger Racist? Who Cares!

It was revealed this week that Harry Reid made a choice comment about Barack Obama back in 2008 during the Democrat primary.

Reid described Obama as a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

Republicans immediately went on the attack, dredging up the Trent Lott fiasco of 2002.  Reid immediately apologized.  The Democrats immediately absolved Reid of his sins.  The Republicans kept on whining.

This whole "scandal" is a sham.  The Democrats didn't attack Trent Lott in 2002 because they thought he was a racist.  They attacked him because he made a comment they could exploit for their own political purposes - and it was no surprise, really.  Democrats just love to throw around the race card, and inevitably, the Republicans then wait for their opportunity to throw it back.  The problem for the Republicans is that the Democrats' PR machine has been much more effective at branding Republicans as racists, which means that Republicans' attempts to play the race card typically end up coming off as clumsy and stupid.

The big issue is consistency.  When Trent Lott made his comments, the Democrats and the media went into an uproar, demanding that Lott apologize.  After he apologized, the Democrats and the media demanded that he resign from his leadership position.  Lott apologized again...and again...and again...and even went on the cable network BET to apologize yet again...but it was to no avail.  He finally bowed to the media pressure and resigned his leadership position.

When Reid's comments came to light, he immediately apologized, and that apology was immediately accepted by Obama, the Democrats, and the media at large (with the exception of conservative talk radio and possibly FOX News).

Personally, I care as much about what Reid said as I did about what Lott said, which is to say that I don't give a damn!!!  The Democrats will always play the race card first, because it is one of the few strategies they have that actually works (some of the time) when they can't argue logically about the issues (which is most of the time).  When Republicans start going on about the Democrats' double-standard, they just end up making themselves look stupid.  They look stupid to Democrats because the Dems don't care about their opinions anyway, and they look stupid to conservatives because we're smart enough to know that the Dems don't care and aren't going to change...and there's no chance in hell that Harry Reid is giving up his power until either he dies, or the Democrat political machine decides he's no longer useful and offers him some sweetheart retirement deal.  Should the Democrats be consistent?  Yes, they should.  If Lott's comments were bad enough that he disqualified himself from leadership, then Reid should step down, as well.  But instead of bloviating about it until the public is sick of hearing about it, Republicans should voice their opinions for one day, and then start working on ads for the election...because honestly, no matter how offended the Republicans act, the vast majority of voters won't remember this incident come election day.

Racist "Diversity" Program Defeated in Delaware

Last week, stories began emerging about a program on the campus of the University of Delaware. The program required that all students living on-campus be subjected to indoctrination.

Under the program, students are required to acknowledge that:

1. All white people are racist.
2. It is impossible for any minority to be racist, because they don't have a racially biased system to back up their beliefs.
3. Reverse racism is a term used by racists who are in denial.
4. Non-racist: a non-term.
5. Racism and white supremacy are synonymous.

The actual text of the "Diversity Facilitation Training" goes on and on for 14 pages, and reads like something written by The Black Panthers. This is racism: anti-white racism, and it's been thrust upon students at the University of Delaware. It is an attempt at ideological indoctrination, suppressing freedom of thought.

Thanks to the vigilance of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), the program has been suspended. The fact that the program has been widely reported on in conservative talk radio probably helped as well, but the publicity originated with FIRE, and FIRE is to be thanked for keeping the University of Delaware accountable for this blatant attempt at racist indoctrination.

This program goes to show just how empty the left's cries of tolerance truly are: tolerance only extends to those radical views held by the left. If it's good news for whitey, the left doesn't like it. If it engenders hatred for the United States or Christianity or the white race in general, then the left is okay with it (until they get called on it).

All of this begs the question: why was a program like this started in the first place?

For some reason, liberals cannot get past the 1950s. They seem to be stuck with the idea that the entire nation is divided by race and that, given the chance, white people will rise up and re-institute segregation (or maybe even slavery) because we all hate minorities so much.

The truth is that the US has taken great strides forward when it comes to racism. No, America's not perfect, but race relations in the US are much better off than liberals let on. When it comes down to it, America's main problem with race relations comes from the Left: any time the smallest action may potentially be perceived as racist, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton jump all over it, screaming "RACISM!!!" False allegations of racism are so abundant on the left that
in the end, all they do is cheapen the cries of true racism. People of all races have been trying to fight racism for decades, but throwing 50-year-old sins back in the faces of today's white people will not help anyone.

Unfortunately, this is where leftist politically-correct "tolerance" is taking us: we will be so tolerant a society that there will be no freedom of speech, no freedom of action, and no freedom of thought that does not conform to the left's template.

Thank goodness the Left lost this battle...and may they lose many more in the future.

Why are we still talking about Duke?

The "Duke rape case" is in the news again, this time with the lead prosecuter recusing himself, and the new news is that the Attorney General's office is taking over the case.

My question is this:

Why is this case still in the news? Any reasonable prosecutor would have put forward a motion to drop the charges long ago...after all, the DNA evidence didn't pan out, the accuser has changed her story more than once, and some of the accused even have solid alabis!

But the sad truth of this case is that it's a racial issue, and for that reason, they just can't let it go. Stories are coming out about how several of the Duke faculty pre-judged the case, one female professor even going so far as to fail a male student simply because he was on the lacrosse team!

When will this insanity finally end? When will common sense finally prevail? At this point, it's impossible to tell.