Skip to comments.1994 Derrick Bell ‘Jewish Neoconservative Racists’
Posted on 03/10/2012 7:56:19 AM PST by Kaslin
The leftist media are saying about Bell and Obama, “So what? We were are a little ‘radical’ in college”. However the truth of the video and of Bell’s relationship with Obama is important as it’s merely one of the parts of a mosaic that makes who Barack Obama is.
We’re all like that. I’ve been influenced in many ways from everyone from Frank Zappa to Ronald Reagan, and that exposure IS part of who I am today. It’s unavoidable to not have those who influenced you through not be a part of who you are today.
When you connect the dots, Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Derrick Bell, you don’t get disjointed occurrences, you get a pattern. A Pattern of radicalness which we’ve seen in Barack Obama from his days in college until now. You also get antisemitism in all it’s ugly forms.
John Podhoretz writes:
“The controversy over the videotape of Harvard Law School student Barack Obama speaking in support of his professor Derrick Bell during Bells one-man 1990 uprising against the law schools failure or refusal to hire a black woman as a professor has caused a predictable back-and-forth about what it might mean for Obama to have a favorable view of Bell. Michael Powell of the New York Times reflected conventional opinion in liberal media circles when he tweeted: Derrick Bell, Radical? Were to pretend our history cleansed? He fought 4 Civil Rights in Mississippi.
It is incumbent on Powell and others, if they want to get in on the conversation about Bell, to explain what on earth is mainstream about comments he made in an eye-opening New York Observer interview published on October 10, 1994, that is not available online. Among other remarks, Bell denounced Henry Louis (Skip) Gates for writing a New York Times op-ed condemning black anti-Semitism:
I was furious. Even if everything he said was true, it was inexcusable not to mention what might have motivated blacks to feel this way, and to fail to talk about all the Jewish neoconservative racists who are undermining blacks in every way they can.
Bell went on to say, Now, that wouldnt excuse anti-Semitism, which is awful, but it would at least provide a context for this anger
It might seem nice of Bell to acknowledge the awfulness of anti-Semitism, but he didnt mean it. The very same interview began as follows: We should really appreciate the Louis Farrakhans and the Khalid Muhammads while weve got them. Khalid Muhammad was Farrakhans right hand, who made a name for himself referring to Jews as, among many other things, bloodsuckers whose father was the devil. As for Farrakhan, if you need a refresher course in his vileness, look here.
Why exactly were we supposed to appreciate them? Quoth Bell: While these guys talk a lot, they dont do anything. The new crop of leaders are going to be a lot more dangerous and radical, and the next phase will probably be led by charismatic individuals, maybe teenagers, who urge that instead of killing each other, they should go out in gangs and kill a whole lot of white people.
One could hear Obama now, “just words”, but following up with “words matter”. Stacy McCain writes:
” It is important also to note just how much toxic unfairness is embedded in Bells phrase Jewish racist neoconservatives. The attempt to make neoconservative a sort of synonym for Jewish Republican if not indeed Zionist warmonger was one of the dirtiest smears of the post-9/11 Left, and you see in Bells 1994 comments the bitter root of this kind of smear.”
Let’s revisit my take from 2008 on Obama’s “closet” antisemitism.
Sounds like he was a Paultard.
I have found that the person that screams “racist” the loudest is usually the biggest “racist” in the room.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.