How Many ‘People of Color’ Does it take not to be Racist?

The appointment of Tim Scott in South Carolina to fill the seat left vacant by Jim DeMint is proving to be vexing for liberals. They can’t praise the appointment of a black man to fill a Republican seat. That would be an admission that Republicans aren’t the racialists that liberals say they are.

And while Gov. Nikki Haley is not black, she is a “person of color.” That is, her skin is darker than that of most people. She’s of Indian — as in the nation of India — descent. She doesn’t count as a “person of color” or a “minority” either since she, like Scott, is a token. She’s only there for racial window dressing. The same has to be true for Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.

So will the characterization of the GOP as “the-white-only-party” finally be removed from the GOP? If not, how many “people of color” does it take to get the stigma removed?

For liberals, it wouldn’t matter if the entire GOP was made up of “people of color” because color is not the issue. It’s liberal ideology.

Am I exaggerating? Not one bit. Consider these comments in The New York Times by Professor Adolph L. Reed, Jr., professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in race and American politics (naturally). Here’s Reed’s necessary operating assumption: The appointment of Congressman Scott by a Republican governor “obscures the fact that modern black Republicans have been more tokens than signs of progress.” He went on to write:

“Mr. Scott’s background is also striking: raised by a poor single mother, he defeated, with Tea Party backing, two white men in a 2010 Republican primary: a son of Thurmond and a son of former Gov. Carroll A. Campbell Jr. But his politics, like those of the archconservative Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, are utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans. Mr. Scott has been staunchly anti-tax, anti-union and anti-abortion.”

It’s really the Democrats who use blacks as political props to keep millions of blacks to vote for the person with a “D” after his or her name even though the economic policies of the Democrat Party have done untold damage to black families.

And what about black liberals like Professor Reed? How does a guy like him fit into the program to keep blacks on the liberal plantation? He’s the very thing that he accuses Congressman Scott of being:

“Obviously, this is all about keeping blacks ‘in line,’ condemning blacks for straying from how they’re expected to think, and ensuring they keep voting for the right people (Democrats).”

The good professor is rewarded by the party to keep his fellow-blacks on the plantation. Reed is the modern equivalent of the houseslave, “the kind of slave that is the closest to the master. The most flexible type of slave.” He uses his professional academic status to give legitimacy to his claim that blacks are better off being under the care of the Democrat party, that is, to remain as slaves under their white masters.

Previous post

Did Adam Lanza’s Genes Make Him a Mass Murderer?

Next post

Anti-Gun Advocates are Out for Blood