Showing posts with label Juan Williams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Juan Williams. Show all posts

15 January 2008

John McWhorter on Race & Al Sharpton

This afternoon Juan Williams and John McWhorter were on From Fox News with Laura Ingraham discussing the ongoing racial-tinged spat between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (we first blogged about it here), what we called yesterday, the Democrat Dust-up. McWhorter had some particularly interesting things to say about the 'old racial guard black leaders' (read: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson):
I love this interesting idea people seem to have that Al Sharpton will somehow help determine the black vote as if he were a boss, a white boss in some old city. I mean the fact of the matter is there are no new Al Sharptons, if you think about it. And certainly an Obama presidency would presumably be one where we got beyond that sort of thing. It'd be interesting to see if nobody actually kowtowed to him, they'd notice that everything went exactly the same. The man is an entertainer, not an actual thinking person.
It's nice to see that not all African-Americans look to Sharpton and Jackson as the arbiters of black America. If only patronizing white liberals were so open minded.

If you have tips, questions, comments, suggestions, or requests for subscription only articles, email us at lybberty@gmail.com.

13 January 2008

Hillary Clinton is a racist

Or at least, she'll use race or anything else to her political advantage. This much we know.

This morning, while getting ready to leave, we watched Fox News Sunday with Brit Hume, Juan Williams, Mara Liasson and hosted by Chris Wallace. We were particularly interested when they turned their attention to the latest spat between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Quick review: Hillary said Obama was no Martin Luther King Jr., and that anyway, it was Lyndon Johnson who passed important Civil Rights legislation.

Drudge is carrying the most recent headlines:
Chris Wallace and Brit Hume got Juan Williams to admit that Hillary and her surrogates were trying to "remind" people of Obama's race. But to what end? They tried to push him to follow his thinking to its logical conclusion, but he would not. Bill Kristol stepped in and filled in the blanks: it was, simply, because Hillary thought she could gain from this bigoted "reminder." The same way Mike Huckabee gained from mentioning that, 'well, don't Mormons think that Jesus and the Devil are brothers?'

Was it because she thinks Democratic voters are racist? Maybe.

Did she do it because she is racist? Probably not overtly so. She does seem to believe that they need "taking care of." That, like her MLK allusion, she thinks blacks are capable only of making nice speeches but that it's left to the whites--like her and Lyndon Johnson--to do what's best for the African-American community.

This last point seems most likely to us. It fits the overall narrative of the nanny state Hillary would try to create were she (oh, the horror) elected President.

And if this is the case, where is the outrage from the unelected "leaders" of the black community? Where's Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson with sanctimonious calls for Clinton's withdrawal from the race?

We have no time nor patience for this type of racism (or any type of racism for that matter)--that Lyndon Johnson did what MLK Jr. could not or even that the same is true today--that blacks somehow need Hillary Clinton. That they need her to tell them what to think and how to vote.

What must independent minded African-Americans like Clarence Thomas be thinking? If only more people would take their cues from he and Thomas Sowell rather than following the liberal Clinton/Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson stereotype.



If you have tips, questions, comments, suggestions, or requests for subscription only articles, email us at lybberty@gmail.com.

StatCounter