From the diaries by Neil
Over the last few weeks the left has made a concerted effort to target black conservatives, challenge the legitimacy of their organizations, demand the names of their funding sources, all in an effort to control those who've rejected their inherit need for supremacy.
The left has a few black organizations they control, or at least they think they do....
For those of you familiar with my site, Black & Right, ColorofChange.org may sound familiar. ColorofChange.org collected money for the Jena 6. A New York rapper joined up with ColorofChange.org and MoveOn.org to protest the racist scrutiny Fox News dared inflict on then-Senator Barack Obama during the presidential campaign. This is also the same ColorofChange.org that led the advertiser boycott of Glenn Beck's program
Let's take a quick look at ColorofChange.org, who like Al Sharpton, is still on Fox' case.
The founder is this guy named James Rucker.
Before ColorofChange.org, Rucker just happened to work with Moveon.org. Both organizations have been closely involved in the push for net neutrality regulations. In fact, Rucker recently led the Professional Left's protest against Google after Google announced a compromise position on net neutrality, though Rucker seemed to be better at organizing buses and reporters than actual protesters.
On Monday, James Rucker issued a broadside against somebody named David Honig, “the face and voice for Black America in Washington, D.C. on Internet issues, and perhaps the most influential person from the civil rights community representing our interests on media and telecom policy.” Apparently, Honig has not lined up with Free Press, Moveon.org and ColorofChange.org on Internet regulation. This puts him in the company of just about every other Democrat politician and group who uses these groups during elections and keep them at arms' length during the off years.
Don't get me wrong; I sit back with popcorn when liberals eat themselves alive but James Rucker may have pulled a Plaxico and shot hisself. Again with the attack-the-source-of-funding tactic, Rucker is essentially accusing David Honig and his organization of selling out. Via HuffPo, Rucker wrote,
While one can argue that these dollars don't have influence, the disclosure is important when making such statements, as is providing a characterization of an organization's funding picture and any other evidence to show how these dollars don't introduce influence.
However, when you're trying to get into people's business, people start asking questions about yours.
Where does ColorofChange.org gets its funding? They don't seem to be big on full disclosure.
Color of Change claims they “take no money from lobbyists or large corporations that don't share our values”. I'm a simple man, but it sounds to me like they do take money from lobbyists and large corporations that do share their values, but I can't confirm this because the info just isn't publicly available.
Is Rucker getting paid by someone outside of Color of Change that might be pulling his strings? That's only something we can speculate because we just don't know, but a brother with family's gotta eat so he's getting paid by someone.
Bottom line: ColorofChange.org isn’t being very transparent, but a ColorofChange.org donor let it slip.
Michael Kieschnick is the president of CREDO Mobile. He has known Van Jones for a decade and has served together on the advisory board of The Beatitudes Society. CREDO Mobile has supported the Ella Baker Center, Color of Change, and Green for All, each founded or co-founded by Van Jones.
CREDO Mobile is a wireless company. A very, very far left wing wireless company. So that means ColorofChange.org and James Rucker get telecommunications industry funding, but they probably forgot to mention that before launching an attack on David Honig and demanding transparency from Honig and MMTC.
As vicious as the left can be when wanting to know who feeds their opponents (and we are dealing with the hypocritical left), don't hold your breath waiting for him to tell us all who helps pay his bills, especially someone who may be influencing his high-profile actions.