Posted on 08/09/2003 1:44:09 PM PDT by schaketo
DALLAS - Those at the National Association of Black Journalists who stood and gave National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice a standing ovation Thursday were few and far between in the Landmark Ballroom of this city's downtown Hyatt Regency Hotel. Rice strode into the ballroom after Gwen Ifill of PBS introduced her. There were no boos, catcalls or jeers as the audience applauded, but there wasn't the thunderous, almost unanimous standing ovation given another NABJ speaker seven years ago.
It was in 1996 that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan spoke at the NABJ convention in Nashville, Tenn. Farrakhan graciously accepted his welcome - worthy of a conquering hero - and then proceeded to excoriate his worshipers as a bunch of spineless wusses. The cause of his dudgeon was his curious belief that black journalists should stop being journalists and act as his press agents simply because they're black.
But don't think the conventioneers turned ice-cold and gave Farrakhan no applause when he was done. The streak of masochism among some black folks runs much too deep for that. Many in the audience gave the Nation of Islam leader a standing ovation as volcanic as the one he received when he entered the hall.
There are several reasons for the different receptions given the two. Farrakhan is the fiery black nationalist leader constantly challenging racism and white supremacy of both the real and perceived variety. His "blackness" is never challenged within Afro-America.
Rice is the deliberate and erudite black conservative. She works in the administration of a white, conservative Republican president. No black woman before her has attained a position as high as national security adviser. That achievement garners more contempt than respect among some in black America.
For some African-Americans - this didn't seem to apply to many at this convention, thank heavens - Rice is one of those who is painted with the less-than-endearing terms that are reserved for black conservatives - among them, sellout and traitor.
Some have even questioned how "black" Rice is. Heaven knows what folks have to do to qualify as "black." Apparently being born in segregationist Alabama in 1954 and enduring the horrors of racism doesn't get Rice enough points to join the "black" club.
"Like many of you," Rice said late in her address Thursday, "I grew up around the home-grown terrorists of the 1960s. The bombing of the church in Birmingham in 1963 is one that will forever be in my memory, because one of the little girls who died was a friend of mine. Forty years removed from that tragedy, I can honestly say that Denise McNair and the others didn't die in vain."
Ummm. Sounds black enough to me, but the "blackologists" proliferating in Afro-America won't be satisfied. They're probably the same ones who believe former heavyweight boxing champion Joe Frazier, who grew up poor and fighting racism in South Carolina, wasn't black enough, while fervently believing that former champ Muhammad Ali was.
Maybe it's Rice's patriotism and unswerving loyalty to America that has the blackologists scampering around with their noses out of joint. The national security adviser's speech was peppered with references to America as a land where freedom and opportunity reign. Rice said that President Bush was trying to create in the Middle East "a balance of power that favors freedom."
True, Rice on this day sounded as if she were giving a campaign speech for Bush. In addition to extolling America as a free country - and it is - Rice put in plugs for the war on terror and the war in Iraq. Such support is what, in the eyes of the blackologists, makes her a sell-out. If she is, so were the blacks who fought for this country in the Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Civil War, the Spanish-American War, both world wars, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf war and those now fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. You can throw in the Buffalo Soldiers, who fought valiantly in the Indian wars.
But if those soldiers and their exploits were left out of the history books, it would be the blackologists who would scream racism and bloody murder. If Bush had no blacks in his Cabinet - instead of Rice as the first African-American national security adviser and Colin Powell as the first African-American secretary of state - the blackologists would moan that Bush wasn't practicing diversity.
Diversity isn't just for liberal whites who want to promote or hire liberal blacks. Conservatives - they come in all races, since ideas themselves have neither color nor ethnicity - have a right to have a crack at diversity.
It would just be nice if African-Americans in a conservative administration didn't have to pass the black test.
(Excerpt) Read more at sunspot.net ...
Worth repeating....
ping
If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.
Maybe it's Rice's patriotism and unswerving loyalty to America that has the blackologists scampering around with their noses out of joint.It would just be nice if African-Americans in a conservative administration didn't have to pass the black test.
Bump!
Rice proves diversity exists -- even among conservatives
Like conservatives dont know what diversity is we know what it is but when its shoved up our arse and down our throat for reasons unconcerning diversity we get tired of hearing it and the condesending liberal bastages are the ones who use the word most and understand it least
Dont get me wrong i think rice does a good job but she shouldnt be used as a sounding board for diversity as no one should be we know theres diversity just dont use it to screw those who could care less what your agenda is.!
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.