Was the "Asterisk Editorial" Racist? Well, it Certainly Wasn't Constructive Criticism!
This story is several weeks old, so I certainly hope you've heard it by now. It's being discussed all over the blogosphere (Links: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ), and getting national attention. I've been searching for the right words to express myself over this, and I think I've finally managed to stop hissing and spitting enough to be intelligible.
I have no idea how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel can say that Clarence Thomas deserves an asterisk because he does not represent mainstream Black America, and expect that there will be no outcry.
Turn to the liberal play book, page 42: "That which does not promote racial harmony destroys it."
This was not a unifying, hand-holding statement that graced the pages of the MJS. It was an attack, intended to exclude an individual from a group. By stating that Thomas deserves an asterisk because his views do not agree with the majority of his race, the paper painted the rest of Thomas' race with a rather broad brush. That was a major faux pas up until a few weeks ago, wasn't it?
Thanks to the mandatory cultural diversity credits required by the UW system, I too am trained to spot racism in all its forms. As your expert witness, I say this was a culturally insensitive remark. As hate speech breeds often more hate speech, it has no place in our popular culture. (Would someone please inform Chris Rock?) Leave it to the "alternative media" to behave this way, or the Ivory Tower will crumble. Handing Thomas the asterisk is akin to sending him a box of Oreo cookies, with the message "way to go, Whitey."
What ever happened to role models? Isn't success something to respect? Where is the inspiration coming from now? Not to put too fine a point on it: but it seems like once the civil rights movement put African Americans on the bus, many of them jumped right back off it. And, the American Left is right there with them, "inspiring" them to demand cheaper bus fare.
"I got my start by giving myself a start." - Madame CJ Walker
I have no idea how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel can say that Clarence Thomas deserves an asterisk because he does not represent mainstream Black America, and expect that there will be no outcry.
Turn to the liberal play book, page 42: "That which does not promote racial harmony destroys it."
This was not a unifying, hand-holding statement that graced the pages of the MJS. It was an attack, intended to exclude an individual from a group. By stating that Thomas deserves an asterisk because his views do not agree with the majority of his race, the paper painted the rest of Thomas' race with a rather broad brush. That was a major faux pas up until a few weeks ago, wasn't it?
Thanks to the mandatory cultural diversity credits required by the UW system, I too am trained to spot racism in all its forms. As your expert witness, I say this was a culturally insensitive remark. As hate speech breeds often more hate speech, it has no place in our popular culture. (Would someone please inform Chris Rock?) Leave it to the "alternative media" to behave this way, or the Ivory Tower will crumble. Handing Thomas the asterisk is akin to sending him a box of Oreo cookies, with the message "way to go, Whitey."
What ever happened to role models? Isn't success something to respect? Where is the inspiration coming from now? Not to put too fine a point on it: but it seems like once the civil rights movement put African Americans on the bus, many of them jumped right back off it. And, the American Left is right there with them, "inspiring" them to demand cheaper bus fare.
"I got my start by giving myself a start." - Madame CJ Walker
0 Amendments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home