« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Al Sharpton (inadvertently) speaks the Truth

By: Warrior (Diary)  |  January 11th, 2010 at 10:58 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

This morning on Fox & Friends, Al “Freddie’s Fashion Mart” Sharpton finally admitted the truth, though I doubt he realizes it.  While defending Harry “No Negro Dialect” Byrd and Bill “Get Me Some Coffee” Clinton and trashing Trent Lott, Sharpton stated, basically, that such remarks were O.K. coming from the former two august personages because they helped get blacks elected.

He went on to explain that Lott’s remark indicated his (Lott’s) desire to return to Jim Crow America.  Of course, Lott was talikng about returning to the non-racial concept of states’ rights, but since such has been deemed a code word for racism, he could not successfully defend himself against the charge.  We should all be hoping for a return of states’ rights because the Federal Leviathan will eventually crush us all, black and white.

But, getting back to Al “Tawana Brawley” Sharpton, he is admitting that racism really isn’t an issue if it interferes with the acquisition of power for his side.  It only becomes an issue when useful in destroying political opponents.  Kind of like the feminists’ selective outrage. 

Sen. Bob Packwood was hounded out of office by a full frontal assault by the NOW crowd.  Said [then president of NOW] Patricia Ireland in media interviews on the resignation: “They understand that their constituents will no longer tolerate the abuse of power or the abuse of women by those in power.”  Yet somehow, when Bill “Touch It Baby” Clinton’s sexual imprecations were exposed, so to speak, as just the kind of power abuser described by Ms. Ireland, not to mention being a serial adulterer, what did we get from the NOW bunch?  Crickets.

And this is precisely why the CBC, Al, Jesse & Co no longer hold the moral high ground on the race issue.  They have ceded any principle or credibility they might have once had by continually bashing conservatives and Republicans about supposed racial missteps while letting libs and Dems off the hook for far grosser violations of “correct” racial posture.  Indeed, Joey “Clean and Articulate” Biden was given the Vice Presidency and his stupid comments ignored after a brief, perfunctory apology.

The American people are not as evil and racist as the current professional civil rights “Leadership” makes them out to be.  Most Americans favored the 60′s era Civil Rights movement and causes, especially many of us who grew up observing the indignities of the Jim Crow South.  Yet, modern-day “civil rights” has become nothing more than a racial spoils system and a form of political control.  Vote for us and we will go to bat for you if your true racism ever becomes public.  However, oppose us and the slightest murmur of non-PC talk or thought will be portrayed as the equivalent of favoring a return racial lynchings.  Sorry, there’s no honor and certainly no morality in a bunch that acts like that.  As my dear old mom used to say, “That’s ugly, stop that.”

So, please, take it from the lead civil rights’ spokeman’s horse’s mouth.  Racism is O.K. as long as you’re on our side.  Otherwise, you better walk the PC line.  BTW, how many apologies has anyone heard or read about made publicly or privately to Reade Seligmann, David Evans and/or Collin Finnerty?  They were fasely accused by their University’s president, most of its’ faculty, almost all of law enforcement, nearly every major news organization in the U.S. and countless others.  Yet, on the very day of their exoneration, when all charges were dropped, suddenly a new story of evil white racism took its’ place — that of Don “Nappy Head” Imus. 

But wait a minute, wasn’t Imus, before his outlandish (but common to him) remarks, considered a staunch liberal?  Yes, I believe that’s right.  Maybe it’s not as safe to be an insensitive racist on the left as previously thought.  Especially on a day when the entire leftist propaganda mill: media, academia, foundations — all of them — stood with egg on their collective faces and looking like nothing so much as the useful idiots and stooges they truly are.  So, look out Harry, Joey and all the rest.  You may be next under the bus…

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • mom2oneson

    but it’s not in the places that the popular modern day leaders call attention too. There is also a lot of viewing people as less then free people and thinking trash is acceptable for them because of external things.

  • ZootSuit

    In fairness to Al Sharpton, he did condemn Bill Clinton’s remarks and refuses (so far, at least) to excuse him. And for the record, I agree with Sharpton as to why Bill Clinton’s remarks are worse than Harry Reid’s although I disagree with Sharpton for excusing Harry Reid’s remarks altogether.

    Here is the link from FoxNews:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/11/sharpton-clinton-coffee-remark-obama-disturbing/

    and yes, Harry Reid should be forced to resign his leadership post.

  • Warrior

    But I’ve heard entirely too much equivocation from this guy to care what kind of excuses or explanations he makes or how exactly he parses Cinton’s evil vs Reid’s evil. It is all simply too politically opportune to believe anything he says, especially after the Tawana Brawley mess. He might call Bill Clinto for an apology? Big deal. He’s never apologized to the men whom he falsely accused in NY and whose careers and lives were ruined thanks to his big mouth. And don’t even get me started on his involvement in the Freddie’s Fashion Mart fire in which eight people were burned to death. He is beneath contempt and don’t really care about being “fair” to him until and unless he starts being “fair” to everyone else. (Thanks for the reco BTW!)

  • Warrior

    important things as you point out. I truly long for the day when the content of one’s character is indeed considered by most folks as more important than the color of one’s skin.

  • ZootSuit

    Al Sharpton has done so many despicable things that we don’t have to intimate him doing others.

  • voteindy

    I don’t believe that Imus ever considered himself a liberal….nor was ever considered a friend to the liberals.

    He detested the Clintons and made that clear many times. Remember the big flop and twitch over some his comments at the WH Correspondent’s Dinner??

    Nice diary….just don’t agree with characterizing Imus as a liberal. I don’t think that is accurate.

  • Warrior

    do you want to bet Sharpton WILL eventually forgive Clinton?

    (The lone exception might be that if Obama finds himself in a close primary with Hillary in the ’12 primaries and the Coffee remark can be used to bash her, then Sharpton et al might not forgive, or might retract a previous, albeit ill-timed absolution. Sound far-fetched? Like I said, nothing is beyond or beneath this guy…)

    Yet, I don’t agree that Clinton’s remark was necessarily more racist than Harry’s. Bill might have just meant that ANY freshman Senator with no experience would have been used as a figurative step’n'fetchit back in the day, black or white…

    Of course, if he meant the way it sounded, i.e. racial, then it definitely was far more racist. But, again, all of this simply makes my point that much more trenchant. Here we are dissecting the subtlties and minute degrees of racism while Trent Lott wasn’t even given a chance. It was automatically assumed that he was talking about a return to the days of Moonlight and Magnolia’s.

    I guess I just don’t like double standars, regardless of who they harm or favor.

  • Warrior
  • Warrior
  • Warrior

    which might enlighten you as to the liberals’ love for Imus, at least before he was sacrificed to draw attention away from the media’s HUGE embarrassment over falsely accussing members of the Duke LaCrosse team of gross felonies:

    “Curiously, those abused women on his show, strident feminists all, usually giggle appreciatively. I refer to columnist Maureen Dowd, reporters Andrea Mitchell, Claire Shipman, and Cokie Roberts, and plagiary-challenged historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, to name a few. But then again, they are usually on his show to promote their books.

    Liberal male authors and reporters fawn all over Imus, too: Tom Friedman and Frank Rich of the Times; network broadcast faces Bob Schieffer, Tim Russert, Chris Matthews, Jim Miklaszewski, George Stephanopoulos, James Carville, Mike Wallace, and Brian Williams; print reporters like Jeff Greenfield, Mike Lupica, Howard Fineman, Jonathan Alter, Evan Thomas, and Pete Hamill.

    Is it possible that these same liberal solons-who solemnly pondered the possible racial implications of a Republican Senator from Virginia who referred to an opposition gate-crasher at one of his events as “Mr. Macaca”-never listened to the general content of Imus’s show? Not even while they were on hold, waiting to go on the air? With few exceptions, the liberal reportariat is silent, because Imus is suddenly not okay. They’ve shown that they don’t disapprove for moral reasons; it’s simply because Everybody’s Talking About It.

    “Now, if you take away the trash talk, what you’re left with is a series of suck-up interviews with lefties selling books. In other words, Air America. Not a very promising business model, is it?”

    The only thing Duncan Anderson got wrong was that Imus was through in broadcasting. How quickly the left forgives one of its’ own.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/the_imus_formula.