Posted on 03/08/2014 8:13:07 AM PST by Bratch
The rejection of Condoleezza Rice as a commencement speaker at Rutgers by its faculty council won’t surprise many Hot Air readers. It doesn’t surprise Fox News commentator and generally liberal Juan Williams, but he’s not shrugging it off, either. Williams, who has written about the shocking treatment of black conservatives by his supposedly enlightened liberal brethren, makes sure to note this episode as yet another marker in a long arc of hatred and bigotry against African-Americans who dare to challenge liberal orthodoxy — even Juan Williams himself:
There is a disgraceful double standard amongst liberals, particularly those in academia, in the hatred they direct at black conservatives.
We saw this last April when the conservative neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson was forced to step down as a Commencement Speaker for Johns Hopkins University (where he ably served as the head of pediatric neurosurgery).
Liberals on the Hopkins campus mobilized against Carson because he criticized President Obama’s health care reform law and said that he opposed gay marriage.
I am not a conservative but I have spoken out for years against the staggering amount blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals.
Liberals are shockingly quick to demean and dismiss brilliant black people like Rice, Carson, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Professor Walter E. Williams and economist Thomas Sowell because they don’t fit into the role they have carved out for a black person in America.
Black Americans must be obedient liberals on all things or risk being called a race traitor or an Uncle Tom.
In part, this is a power play more than anything else. The faculty at Rutgers don’t want to deal with people who oppose their preferred policies, or more importantly, cause others in their little bubbles to think critically about the only sanctioned ideology in those bubbles, either. In that sense, there is no double standard at work here — Jim DeMint and John Bolton would be just as unwelcome at Rutgers as Condoleezza Rice is and Clarence Thomas would be.
That is in itself a double standard. The same faculty who would protest if pushed out the door of their sinecures over political disagreements as a violation of academic freedom suddenly refuse to offer that same courtesy to the administration in its choice of commencement speakers, or to invited guests of the university. Rather than simply declien to attend or encourage others to do the same, they want heterodoxy silenced. ‘Freedom for me but not for thee’ is hardly a consistent approach to liberty, but it’s at least consistent with the sanctioned ideology they’re protecting.
Still, the vitriol of the reactions to Rice, Thomas, Scott, and the rest goes beyond even that double standard. The attacks on them as Uncle Toms and house slaves (and worse) show the place that politics and identity hold in the progressive mindset. It’s inexplicable to progressives that a black man growing up in the South might value individual liberty over group identity and be suspicious of government power, and so the only explanation for Clarence Thomas is that he’s insufficiently black. It’s not just on ethnicity, either, but also on gender. Take a look at the unhinged and ignorant rant by Jamie Stiehm attacking Sonia Sotomayor for her insufficient woman-ness by issuing a temporary stay in the Little Sisters of the Poor case against the HHS mandate. Steihm couldn’t be bothered to do even minimal research before branding Sotomayor a gender traitor over a meaningless pause in enforcement.
What is it called when someone assumes that people have to act and believe in a certain way based on the color of their skin or the composition of their genitals? The word is on the tip of my tongue …
Yep—it’s also part of why Sarah Palin had to be trashed far more than if she were merely a male VP candidate. (E.g., Paul Ryan)
The Left (and that includes the GOPe however much they deny it) don’t want minorities or women to begin to imagine that it is acceptable to think conservatively.
Liberals hate all conservatives. If you understand that, you won’t have to waste your time by throwing out the race card. Race doesn’t trump politics or give you special compensation by liberals.
I’m surprised that he’s surprised...
Talk is cheap.
Juan is still a dedicated far left liberal stooge so this "shocking treatment" hasn't shocked him enough to abandon the racist democrat party.
Juan is still a dedicated far left liberal stooge so this "shocking treatment" hasn't shocked him enough to abandon the racist democrat party.
Whatever happened to "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"?
How can you be repelled by liberals' mindless hatred directed at those with whom they disagree but not see that their ideology cannot brook dissent because it is so flawed so as to be indefensible?
Democrat’s war on women.
The treatment Condi received is NOT a double standard.
It is the standard.
I’m sure when Juan is challenged on this he will standby what he said, then follow up with, however bad this may be, the Republicans are still the very worst racists.
Because being a liberal pays his bills. This is the once-a-month or so time that Williams takes a position that might elevate him above the majority of liberal talking-heads. He’s just a liberal arts major (BA in Philosophy from Haverford College), who has spent his whole career as a writer and journalist. No advanced degrees, no research, nothing but a pundit. In a different time, he would have become a blogger.
Why FReepers get so wrapped up in what paid columnists and commentators say is a mystery to me.
All of this black feel sorry for me crap has reach the tipping point. Time to tell them to stick it where the sun don’t shine.
She didn’t get invited because she was conservative. She was invited because she was black. Rutgers in defense of their decision always mentions that she is black.
It’s recently occurred to me that there’s more behind this sort of liberal hate treatment than just philosophy. As the old saying goes, follow the money.
It would be interesting to see a tabulation of the following:
1. Number of speeches given by leading liberals over a 5 year period.
2. Awards given to those leading liberals over 5 year period
3. Speaking fees and other monetary considerations along with awards given those same liberals over the time frame
4. Source of the fees and monetary considerations, i.e., private money or money from taxpayer-funded institutions.
5. The same four metrics for GOP and/or Conservatives.
What I strongly suspect you’d find is that liberals have established a significant gravy train funded primarily by tax dollars, or by awards/speaking fees from businesses that benefit greatly from tax dollars, through which they pad their incomes when they are out of office, while waiting for future employment opportunities in the public sector.
Thus, any threat to that gravy train such as, for example, Ms. Rice becoming a popular college commencement speaker, must be shouted down to prevent all that taxpayer “gravy” from being siphoned off by non-liberals.
Liberals are very good at rewarding each other with taxpayer-sourced funds when they are temporarily out of power, and they’re also quite effective at protecting those funds from poaching by conservatives.
Note that I’m not including other obvious taxpayer-funded plums such as ambassadorships and university presidencies, but just speaking fees and monetary awards, and the source of funding.
I realize conservatives get money for their speeches as well, but I suspect the source of funding for said speeches tends to be private rather than taxpayer sourced.
She is also not a Yankee
If the Wookie was white, she would want to be Condi Rice
YET, I respect his intelligence and ability--clearly displayed in the article cited in this thread-- to call out the BIGOTRY of those who cannot stand to listen to those who have ideas and opinions that are not in lock-step with their own!
As citizens of a democratic (NOT DEMOCRAT) republic, we need to remain CIVILians, and keep ad hominem attacks out of our discourse.
That way, we do not sink to the level of those whose only idea of criticism is derisive--and devisive--name-calling.
I’m not surprised at all. Juan is as sharp as a bowling ball. Takes a beating from his own team, but still won’t leave them.
Liberals are not liberal. They are closed minded fanatics who cannot tolerate any opposition to their benighted opinions.
“Wrapped up” might be overstating it. What Juan Williams believes is of little interest to me and most here, I suspect. We’re here to collect info and occasionally comment.
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.