Al Sharpton: Nappy Headed Race Ho?

As you can see from the title of this column, I’m not too crazy about Al Sharpton. There are a number of reasons for the dislike, which has finally spilled over in light of his recent insistence on the firing of Don Imus – although, for the record, I want it known:

Radio personality Don Imus, left, and Rev. Al Sharpton appear face-to-face on Rev. Sharpton's radio show, in New York Monday April 9, 2007. Imus issued another apology for referring to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos" on his morning show last week. (AP Photo/Richard Drew) When the present controversy broke out, I was initially confused over which part of the phrase “nappy headed ho” had set Sharpton off. After all, two years ago at one of my speeches I was called a “Little Milky” by a Pakistani professor at Monmouth College in Illinois. Rather than calling for her to be fired, I just made fun of her in a very public way.

After finding out that a fan of mine had recorded my speech – including the “Little Milky” remark - with a digital recorder, I transcribed and published the professor’s racist comment in a column. Next, I had a student post my column on her university’s electronic bulletin board so others – including her own students! - could make fun of her, too.

But I never lost my sense of humor by slipping into a state of Sharpton-like faux outrage. In fact, I even adopted “Little Milky” as my new nickname on www.FaceBook.com. I’m not going to let the anti-white racism of this professor (whose name, by the way, is Dr. Farhat Haq, which is pronounced “Far Left Crock”) ruffle my little white tutu.

Oh, and I almost forgot the best part. Al Sharpton, whose job it is to monitor racism, never came to my defense after I was victimized by the racial epithet. In fact, Sharpton doesn’t even know who I am. But we could change that in a second if I were to simply called Dr. Haq a “Little Brownie.”

But because I am white and don’t hurl racial epithets, I’ll never meet Al Sharpton. And that’s enough for me to conclude that Al really isn’t opposed in principle to racism. He just selectively discusses it in order to get free stuff including, but not limited to, free media exposure.

So, perhaps Al Sharpton is angry about the word “ho” instead of the phrase “nappy headed.” But when I think back to the Tawana Brawley episode I quickly realize this couldn’t be so. To be dubbed a “rapist” of even a “rape victim” is far worse than to be dubbed a “ho.”

Think about it. The proper way to analyze the Brawley episode and, in the process, judge the absolute moral bankruptcy of Al Sharpton is to first imagine you have a teenage daughter or sister. Imagine further that someone had concocted a false story that she had been gang raped and sodomized by a group of adult men. Clearly, the charges would be defamatory and would cause inestimable harm to your daughter’s (or sister’s) reputation and emotional well-being.

And that is the under-discussed problem concerning the Brawley episode. We all know Sharpton defamed (and was sued by) people he falsely accused of raping and sodomizing Brawley. But look what he did to Brawley. She was merely a teenager – a child, in fact – who obviously suffered from severe emotional and mental problems. She would not claim to have been raped, sodomized, and covered with fecal matter had she been mentally stable.

So when Sharpton continued to advance the false rape story (long after it was debunked) he was still defaming Brawley. And he still is today. It is senseless to say that Brawley consented to the dissemination of the story. She hadn’t the mental or emotional capacity to do so. She was just a very sick child living in a very sick country that treats anti-Semitic/anti-Caucasian bigots with greater respect than its war heroes.

So, shame on you, racist Reverend. And, shame on you, Don Imus, for consenting to an interrogation at the hands of Al Sharpton. He might not be nappy headed. But he certainly is a whore.

Al Sharpton

"..Crown Heights Riot

The Crown Heights Riot occurred after a car accident involving the motorcade for the Lubavitcher Rebbe killing a young boy Gavin Cato. A riot was sparked after a private Hasidic ambulance came to the scene and, on the orders of a police officer, removed the Hasidic driver from the scene. Gavin Cato and his cousin Angela were picked up soon after by a city ambulance. Caribbean-American and African-American residents of the neighborhood then rioted for four consecutive days fueled by rumors (in part driven by Sharpton), [8], [9], that the private ambulance had refused to treat Cato. [10]

Al Sharpton became the de-facto representative for the Cato family. During the funeral he referred to "diamond merchants" considered a code word for Hasidic Jews [11] [12], for shedding "the blood of innocent babies" leading marchers shouting "No Justice No Peace". Sharpton did not start the riots but his rhetoric was seen as inflammatory and unhelpful in easing the tension between the black and Jewish communities. A visiting rabbinical student from Australia by the name of Yankel Rosenbaum, 29 years old, was killed during the rioting by a mob shouting "Kill the Jew". [13].."

I keep thinking thru all of this meaningless brouhaha that this is a brilliant way for the race pimps and the rest of the left to sanitize Imus. At the same time, it gives him a bump in the ratings. Here's a leftwing moonbat with a program that is virtually moribund. All of a sudden he gets all this publicity from his "friends" on the left. He's all over the MSM and alternative media for days on end. By the way, his paid vacation doesn't start for almost a week as of the beginning of the "fiasco".

What this all gets is that people who never heard of him are searching around and tuning into his program on messnbc and cBS radio and some of them actually stick around after the show. Basically nothing fellow travelers like smarmy Russert and punk Gregory get face time to step up for Anus. Jackson gets to shake down ABC for some walk around money. You people Sharpton gets creds. The MSM gets to talk about something inane for days on end and can further avoid talking about meaningful things like for example, the economy is doing well except in blue Michigan; the Surge appears to be working; the islimic terror threat is real and always imminent.

Don Imus has compounded his original gaucherie with this mawkish groveling at the clay feet of this hypocritical buffoon, the Reverend Al Sharpton. Normally one would pass this off without a second thought as a kind of pathetic justice visited on a man who himself had slandered white people and Christians as a way of making money for so long. But this groveling to Sharpton certainly demands a second thought

Don Imus, intent on preserving his career ( not for the money, God knows he is wealthy enough, but for the status and leverage it gives him,) has elevated this "Reverend" to the status of a Pope who can dispense absolution for the modern mortal sin of racism. In prosaic language: Don Imus has validated Sharpton as a censor. The implications of this is are ominous for me and for you. It means that Sharpton, in effect, can decide what you and I may hear and ultimately what we might say. I never voted for the Reverend Al Sharpton into any office except buffoon of the week or perhaps hypocrite of the year. Anyway, there is no national federal office of censor. What has happened here legitimates race baiting and in my world race baiting is a far more serious threat than mere gaucherie.

You say I exaggerate, you say I overstate the case. Consider these thoughts from one of my recent posts:

Imus is an equal opportunity traducer. He routinely features a character actor/comedian who satirizes Reverend Falwell. As a Protestant Christian I am offended by this. His producer routinely presents a satire making Cardinal Egan look ridiculous. Catholic Christians equally have a right to be offended. But in neither instance is NBC or CBS offended. They husband their indignation only to react to vilification of female African-American basketball players.

Who was the reactor in chief? That charlatan, the Reverend Al Sharpton! I find Reverend Al's very existence offensive and I certainly find his mendacious behavior in the Tawana Brawley caper to be a vilification of white people. The powers that control the airwaves, private profit making companies, have not reacted in indignation against the buffoonery and malicious anti-white vilifications of Reverend Al, rather they have actually given him his own radio program.

Do I care? Personally, no. After all, I hold Reverend Al in such contempt that it is impossible for him to insult me, impossible for him to get under my skin. Likewise, the contrived slanders against Reverend Falwell or other Christians committed routinely on Don Imus' program fail to arouse me, perhaps because I'm of an age and upbringing which considers these sorts of things to be part of the chaff of our modern world. But on a political and policy level, I care very deeply because the Reverend Al Sharpton, and his fellow travelers at CBS and NBC, are setting a standard which ultimately will shift political power away from me and to the likes of the Reverend Al Sharpton. And that is a prospect that arouses me fully.

Political correctness, multiculturalism, laws against hate crimes, and other legal, quasi legal, and extralegal restrictions on freedom of thought and freedom of expression are not the natural and haphazard expressions of a leftist political philosophy, rather they are a calculated attempt to move the fulcrum of political power to the left by changing the rules under which we live. As a white, male, Christian, I don't have the same standing to complain as a black buffoon and notorious liar. As a white, male animal, I have been defined into an animal who has fewer rights than other animals who are "more equal."

A few years ago we had no notion of hate crimes now the selective prosecution of them has become a weapon to be feared by a group currently approaching minority status in America: white males. When not labeled a hate crime, selective prosecution can nevertheless be an outrage, witness the recent outrages against the Duke Lacrosse team. The actions to suspend Don Imus, evidently taken in concert by two competitors, CBS and NBC, were the acts of private, that is nongovernmental, entities but they enjoy a government granted franchise and they operate under a license which renders them in a very real sense quasi governmental or at least quasi public entities. What they do here sets precedent.

I do not want the precedent set that says that Al Sharpton can control what I hear or see or say.

Sharpton just raised hell as he usually does and got the most attention. Jesse Jackson was out in the cold with a picket sign, probably green with envy at Sharpton's publicity coup

First, Sharpton is not just a hell raiser, or someone with a legitimate beef, or someone who has been elected to anything, he is a man who has been anointed by the media, they gave him a radio program!

second, Sharpton is a raging hypocrite. He is unworthy of both his radio program and the attention he gets. Sharpton is more guilty of the same declension than is the man upon whom he presumes to pass judgment

Third, the issue is not whether Don Imus behaved egregiously, every body, Imus not excluded, agrees to that. The issue is whether the selective outrage of a race baiting hypocrite should be ratified by quasi public institutions operating under government license to the detriment of my First Amendment rights.

Fourth, the fact that the networks have failed to discipline Imus in the past for similar conduct, but act now because of the likes of Al Sharpton, is a terrible president because it says that some races are more equal than others; because it says that political correctness is the order of the day.

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.