January 03, 2006
“That’s Not Liberal Racism,” Cries Liberal Racist
We, the crack young staff of “The Hatemonger’s Quarterly,” have oft remarked on the moronic letters to the editor that appear in the storied New York Times. In fact, we have discussed this with such regularity that regular readers of this humble “weblog” may have inferred that some nefarious additive in New York water has rendered its inhabitants mentally incapacitated. If there’s a stupid point to be made, you can bet a member of the public will express it in the Gray Lady.
Although we firmly believe this to be true, we would be remiss if we did not also mention that sundry other newspapers print insipid letters to the editor. In fact, rebarbative epistles in sundry papers appear with such frequency that we are beginning to suppose that most Americans are stupid. Naturally, such a sentiment does not live up to the great traditions of populism associated with the crack young staff, but it has the unfortunate benefit of being true.
Take, for example, a recent letter from The Boston Globe, the slightly-more-northern man’s New York Times. Said missive was a response to a column by Jeff Jacoby, which detailed the disgraceful calumnies directed at Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele. Penned by Don Coolidge, who resides in the tony precincts of Palo Alto, California, in part it reads as follows:
The first item—and it’s the main point of Jeff Jacoby’s “Slurs fly from the left” (op ed, Dec. 28) asserts that “liberals” are issuing racial slurs against Michael Steele because he’s black. A simple reading of the facts puts the lie to this assertion: Steele is not being damned because of the color of his skin; he’s being vilified because he routinely supports and advocates policies that attack the African-American community politically, economically, and socially. In short, Steele’s policies reek of hypocrisy as he acts much like an oldtime minstrel, selling out his heritage in order to advance himself in the eyes of people who look down on persons of color. It would be an abdication of moral responsibility for Steele’s opponents to fail to point this out to the electorate. The truth, however unpleasant, is never a slur.
Rather impressive, is it not? Thus does a Palo Alto resident cast malignant taunts of “Uncle Tom” at a black conservative as a demonstration of deep regard for the truth. Sure, Michael Steele deserves to be pilloried with offensive racial epithets because he’s conservative. No liberal racism here. Not to mention Democratic Party operatives illegally obtaining a copy of his credit report. All’s fair for this “Uncle Tom.”
What’s particularly humorous about Mr. Coolidge’s obtuse epistle is the fact that it argues all black conservatives deserve to be called “old-time minstrels” because of their political views. To the dunderheaded Mr. Coolidge, only those who favor preferential treatment for blacks are authentically black. All others are “Uncle Toms.” How charming.
But we particularly savored this bit: “A simple reading of the facts puts the lie to this assertion: Steele is not being damned because of the color of his skin; he’s being vilified because he routinely supports and advocates policies that attack the African-American community politically, economically, and socially.”
Now, let’s see if we can get this straight. It’s merely due to Michael Steele’s views that he is being labeled a modern-day minstrel act? It has nothing to do with his black skin?
Well, then, we suppose that numerous “truth-telling” liberals of Mr. Coolidge’s ilk are busy labeling white conservatives “old-time minstrels.” Where can one find all the charges of “Uncle Tom” hurled at Bill Frist? Does “a simple reading of the facts” put the lie to Mr. Coolidge’s assumptions? We think so.
In short, dear reader, Don Coolidge is a genuine half-wit. His pathetic letter perfectly proves Jeff Jacoby’s original point. And to think: J. S. Mill called the Conservative Party the stupid one.