Subscribe via RSS Feed

The Racists & The Shoe-Shine Boy

[ 223 ] March 16, 2013 |

I’m still waiting for reputable conservatives to repudiate Scott Terry’s statements, but I understand if they’re reluctant because I couldn’t prove that the Scott Terry whose reading list I linked to is the same Scott Terry from CPAC. Now I can:

Many of you are visiting this blog due to the recent CPAC controversy, where my friend Matt Heimbach and I, made national news by showing up and asking (in civil, articulate tones, mind you) a few simple questions.

What was our main concern?

There is a lot of rhetoric in the conservative movement about reaching out the mestizo demographic, or reaching out to the homosexuals and blacks.

Our question: why not reach out to whites?

In case you had any doubt about whether his concerns were racialist or racist in origin, here’s how he answers that question:

This is exactly what the GOP needs to do, as a matter of fact.  Steve Sailer and the guys at VDARE have done an excellent job in pointing this out.  Please educate yourself about the Sailer Strategy.

It’s not that he hates black people, he’s merely upset that

The GOP wants us all to blend together into a mocha-colored, capitalist utopia!

And he’s working on more reading lists! Here he is trying to define the “Kinist” canon. What’s so bad about that? So long as you also believe that God ordained the social order and advocate that man’s first duty is to “love one’s own kind,” absolutely nothing! And Terry takes “lov[ing] one’s own kind” very seriously. Just look at his alarm clock:

A beautiful white girl was slaughtered while taking a ride in the top of a double-decker school bus; the cry was heard:  “Wake up!”

Another beautiful white girl, the more beautiful because she was in the late stages of a pregnancy, was attacked by a gang of twelve savage animals.  A white lawyer stands in passionate defense of one of the animals.  The sane yell “Wake up!”

If I were a professor of rhetoric, I might have something to say about Terry’s choice of unnecessary adjectives here, if only because he seems as obsessed with the deaths of “beautiful white girl[s]” as a latter-day Nancy Grace. But that’s not to say Terry doesn’t have culture. He goes to the theater to see

a half-descent [sic?] portrayal of a group of Godless pagans, prancing around in their celebration of the downfall of Western Civilization.

Is that a pun or one of those Aryan-equivalent-of-Freud’s slips? Doesn’t matter. This man, with his belief in the separation of races and the divinely ordained social order (which he just so happens to sit atop), is clearly an outlier in the modern conservative movement. No real or respectable conservative holds these beliefs, or at the very least, no real or respectable conservative would air them this unabashedly.

A real or respectable conservative like National Review‘s Jillian Kay Melchior would write a paean to “[t]he simple shoe shine” in which, through great effort, she managed to avoid using the word “boy.” She would write nothing of the divinely inspired social order, but instead  let the accompanying photograph say a little something about it:

And unbeknownst to Mechior, this shoe-shine man, Dino Wright, knows exactly which game he’s playing when he “creat[ed] this entrepreneurial activity”:

CPAC and events like it boost business for Wright. He says he thinks it’s because he “provides a very important service to this very image-conscious group.”

You’d have to be as dense as Melchior to believe the “service” he’s paying to “this very image-conscious group” has anything to do with shining shoes.

Comments (223)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Billmon says:

    A little surprised they haven’t taken that down yet.

  2. Larry from Tacoma says:

    You missed the lede. The pagan celebration of the downfall of Western Civ is Fiddler on the Roof!

  3. herr doktor bimler says:

    in civil, articulate tones, mind you
    Are we supposed to admire the apartheid revivalist because he could have expressed his white supremacism in an incivil, inarticulate way Give the man a cookie.

    National Review’s Jillian Kay Melchior would write a paean to “[t]he simple shoe shine” in which, through great effort, she managed to avoid using the word “boy.”

    Mr Wright and people like him lost their retirement funds because the Bush-Cheney government placed those funds (and the economy as a whole) in the hands of pirates. It seems tone-deaf to remind the readership about this, in the context of a conference devoted to praising those pirates and demanding more pirate-friendly policies. Is Jillian Kay Melchior a legacy hire?

    • DrDick says:

      I am only surprised that Manju is not here yet to tell us that liberals are the real racists because Robert Byrd!

      • Malaclypse says:

        My money is on Data showing up to discuss how the fine people at CPAC are just making correlations, which proves that Bijan is the Real Racist.

      • Manju says:

        Syndicalists are the real racists because Robert Byrd!

        • herr doktor bimler says:

          Anarcho-syndicalists!

          • Manju says:

            What is an Anarcalist? A Syndicalists. An Anarcalist is nothing but a Syndicalist in disguise. The Syndicalists have never kicked the Anarcalist out. The Anarcalists bolted themselves once, but the Syndicalists didn’t put them out. Imagine, these lowdown Anarcho-syndicalists put the Syndicalists down. But the Syndicalists have never put the Anarcalists down. No, look at that thing the way it is. They have got a con game going on, a political con game, and you and I are in the middle. It’s time for you and me to wake up and start looking at it like it is, and trying to understand it like it is; and then we can deal with it like it is.

      • Julia Grey says:

        Wasn’t the black man running that infamous panel making the case that the Democratic Party had founded the KKK and that was why he was never going to join the Democratic Party?

  4. Erik Loomis says:

    Forget Scott Terry being a liberal plant. I think all of CPAC is a SEK plant just so he can write these posts.

  5. Incontinentia Buttocks says:

    I have to admit that I generally get annoyed at SEK’s constantly making me choose between either not really understanding his posts or clicking-through to horrific bits of internet wingnuttery. But Scott Terry’s website really has to be seen to be believed. The highlight for me are his three “Flagship Articles”:

    A BIBLICAL DEFENSE OF ETHNONATIONALISM
    WHO DOES AMERICA BELONG TO?
    THE REALITY OF RACE

    I was (and am) often critical of those who spent the Bush years insisting that W represented a form of American fascism. One of the reasons: there really are bits of the right like Terry’s website that are actual examples of American fascism … and we need to guard that term a little so that it can be applied where it belongs.

    • Dana Houle says:

      I’ve always opposed the “fascism” charge mostly because at its heart, fascism was about the state being the supreme power, whereas Bushism and most other American conservative visions and practices are about looting the resources of the state, undermining its monopoly functions to open up crony capitalistic opportunities for private profit, destroying the state’s ability to somewhat constrain unfettered capitalism, and occasionally indulging the neocons’ grotesquely juvenile compulsion to play army guys with real people and countries. The other thing is that while Bush et al indulged some theocratic tendencies, fascists–Spain and the Nazi puppet states in Slovakia and Croatia exempted–were generally more focused on anti-Marxism and mythic national cultures (and w the Nazis, of course, race) than on religion.

      But yeah, the other reason calling Bush a fascist is stupid is that it sucks any shock from the term, so it’s not as useful when used to label truly odious racial and authoritarian swill like this.

      • Dana Houle says:

        [Left out that Bushism actually isn't particularly racist at its core; if blacks would vote Repub, that would have been fine with him and Rove et al. And they were just as committed to screwing voters in white liberal college towns as black people in Detroit or Philadelphia; it was just about power. Also, if labor is brown, that's fine with them, as long as that labor is cheap.]

        • OK, in addition the cheap blah and brah labor, there’s the whole “entire base of the party is racist and if the politicians aren’t racist enough, they get primaried out” which kind of means that yes, they are racist at the core.

          • Dana Houle says:

            Right, which is why SC just appointed a black Repub senator and the biggest house fundraiser of last cycle was a black Congressman.

            • “appointed” has little to do with “elected”.

              fundraising? If that’s your metric, OK. Although I don’t see any info post-election. Prior to the election, though, the only African American in the top 5 was Allen West, which as an example has it’s own basket of problems. Not the least of which is that he lost.

              Also, let me introduce you to a concept called ‘tokenism’.

              • Dana Houle says:

                If you don’t know that the guy appointed to the Senate had already been elected to the House, you’re not really up to playing this game.

                But more importantly, you obviously don’t know shit about Nazism or the fascist variants that included racism. That’s what was being compared, and if you think the GOP is like that, well, we don’t live in the same reality.

              • Also, let me introduce you to a concept called ‘tokenism’.

                Did fascists engage in tokenism towards minority communities? Tokenism implies an ideal of cross-racial unity, which must be appeased, if only through empty symbolism. That’s quite distinct from the fascist view of race and nationality.

      • Good point about the inflation of the word “fascism.”

        I’ll tell you something else – there’s no way that fascists would have stood for mass unemployment or the off-shoring of their country’s industrial base. Fascists looked at the working class of their country as something that was important, that they had some kind of responsibility for, and that had an important, albeit subordinate, place in society.

        The Bushies were not fascists.

    • SEK says:

      I have to admit that I generally get annoyed at SEK’s constantly making me choose between either not really understanding his posts or clicking-through to horrific bits of internet wingnuttery.

      It’s a decision I have to make with each post. On the one hand, when I first started here, people complained that I included too much of the nasty material I linked to and ruined their days, so could I please just link to it. Then people complained that by just linking to it, I was “framing” the site, which couldn’t be as bad as I said, because I knew most people wouldn’t click through. Now I’m trying to find a happy medium, by only quoting a taste of the offensiveness. If you’d like more, you can click through; if not, you can remain sane.

      • elm says:

        It’s not the amount of the offensiveness, it’s the lack of your descriptions without click through. This one was fine, because I had read the original piece you wrote plus went to the relevant sites. The first piece, I had to click through to understand what was going on. Something along the lines of “At the CPAC conference, on a panel on ‘the race card’ a racist interrupted the black speaker to praise slavery,” but, you know, with SEK flair. because, without clicking on links, I had no idea who Scott Terry was and why we should care about him at all.

      • cpinva says:

        myself, i just assume that any links you put in a post are going to require, should i click on them, a complete brain bleaching afterwards, in a probably failed effort to remove the stain. it’s a risk i accept going in.

      • Don’t worry about it. There will always be people to tell you that you’re blogging incorrectly.

      • I quite enjoy wingnuttery. It’s fascinating and amusing to me to see how these people work.

    • Bitter Scribe says:

      Oh, you’ve just scratched the surface. That guy’s website is just dripping with racial and sexual resentments.

      To name just two: He laments about how the “stunning young blonde” daughter of someone who wrote a book he liked about UFOs has probably “been pushed into a relationship with a negro by now. What a shame.”

      And he just luuuuurves him some anti-gay bullying: “I think its heroic when a few brave, high-school jocks take it upon themselves to enforce (and impose) traditional hierarchies onto their peers.”

  6. Nice photo.

    Perhaps next time, they can hold the workshop on “Avoiding the Race Card” before the convention, and invite the organizers and any interested members of the conservative press who might be covering the convention.

    Take, for instance, Ms. Mechior, who didn’t so much “avoid” the race card, as walk up to it, hold it in her arms, kiss it deeply, buy it a nice dinner, bring it home, and introduce it to her mom.

  7. Hogan says:

    If he really wants to promote white pride, he could start by not making me ashamed of being white.

    • Erik Loomis says:

      Someone is definitely not a credit to his race.

    • Dana Houle says:

      Big difference between white liberals and a too-big-portion-of white conservatives:
      White liberals (when not distracted by shiny third party objects) band together in the Democratic party with minorities to assemble a coalition that can win elections and gain power.

      White conservatives delude themselves in to thinking that they can both win presidential and a majority of Senate elections and they can continue to not share anything, politically or even spatially, with significant numbers of non-white, non-straight, and/or non-religious men and non-uppity women. They’d rather have a party that’s almost entirely people just like them, even if that doesn’t add up to 50%+1 in any national elections.

      Now, if we could only get the liberals to be more focused and even a bit ruthless in how they exercise power after they win the elections, we’d be all set.

    • herr doktor bimler says:

      Is there any way to formally divorce the human race?

    • cpinva says:

      “If he really wants to promote white pride, he could start by not making me ashamed of being white.”

      if you (without reflexively gagging) read his posts, you very quickly realize his “white pride” is of a very narrowly drawn variety (which they all are), excluding at least 50% of the european continent. any eastern/slavic isn’t part of his “white” population base. in fact, i feel certain his “white” includes only those from the anglo-saxon and nordic countries. so we’re talking about a pretty thin slice of humanity here.

    • heck, on most days, the Republicans make me ashamed to be HUMAN.

  8. Not enough shoeshine in all the world to scrub away what I saw after clicking on those links.

  9. Anonymous says:

    But how does he feel about ugly white girls, is what I want to know.

  10. LosGatosCA says:

    Great picture. The old white guy shows that getting your shoes shined is, in some ways, better than a National Review cruise. It’s a better value (same satisfaction, lower cost). It can be affirmation, as in this case, of the natural order of the races. And, best of all, the help smiles and is grateful for your largesse as you dispense it.

  11. DrDick says:

    What does he have against mocha? So much more attractive than the pasty mayo on tapioca white of the average CPAC attendee.

  12. Ya know, it’s very important to me that someone have a camera rolling whenever conservatives gather…because I know things like this are inevitable. INEVITABLE.

    I normally feel pretty giddy when things like this are captured…but this just leaves me feeling weary and depressed.

  13. The Pale Scot says:

    He keeps making references as belonging to the Anglo-Saxon race. I guess nobody has the heart to tell him that his name and facial structure make it more likely that his origin is south Scotland than the plains of Salisbury.

    He’s an ardent Calvinist too. Perhaps he’s Ian Paisley’s lovechild.

    I can’t remember who said this “If the border Scots were shipped to China, in a couple of generations they’d be insisting that they were the real Chinese” but it seems apropos.

  14. Joel Patterson says:

    Guys, read the shoe shine article carefully:

    Wright began shining shoes after the airline he once worked for defaulted on its pension obligations, driving him to find a source of income in retirement.
    “I was able to create a pension for myself by creating an entrepreneurial activity,” Wright says. He noticed that fewer people were entering the shoe-shining profession, and “I saw that as an entrepreneurial opportunity” – an ethic that sits well with the CPAC crowd.

    After a lifetime of hard work, airline executives figured out how to weasel out of the deal they made with him to give him a pension he earned. I bet those executives got big bonuses for that.

  15. commie atheist says:

    Sometimes the NR comments are worth reading, par examplo:

    What an inspiring, not-at-all-condescending portrait of a humble and hardworking African-American gentleman! If only more of his community would decide to be dignified Shoe-Shine Entrepreneurs, instead of lounging around listening to “the hip hop” all the time and being president! Our streets would be safer, our shoes would be shinier, and we’d have taken a giant step back towards being the Traditional America we’re supposed to be!

    • Worth reading because they’re good sarcasm, presumably.

      • commie atheist says:

        The attempts made by loyal NRO readers to call liberals the real racists for denigrating this fine, upstanding black entrepreneur are pretty amusing, too.

        • commie atheist says:

          he_who_scoffs_at_danger Angus Johnston • 5 hours ago
          How dishonest. This would have been written about regardless. If a prominent conservative outlet was not the first out with an affirmative narrative which personalized Mr. White and addressed the presence of his business as both welcome and incidental to the conference, we’d be having this conversation over at some lefty blog under a story about CPAC providing black menservants for the pleasure of the attendees. And, in the course of massaging that narrative, no one would have thought to catch the guy’s name or consider his view of it, because progressives see black americans as objects and instruments and never as people.

          Redmond Jennings he_who_scoffs_at_danger • 4 hours ago −
          ” If a prominent conservative outlet was not the first out with an affirmative narrative which personalized Mr. White [...], because progressives see black americans as objects and instruments and never as people.”

          It’s “Mr. Wright.”

        • herr doktor bimler says:

          the presence of his business as both welcome and incidental to the conference

          “Incidental”? I’d say that Mr Wright’s business is quite central, in that he’s shining shoes to replace the pension funds stolen by Makers and Creators.
          Fortunately he has the sense to tell the CPAC crowd that he bears no bitterness against business malfeasance and is in fact grateful for the opportunity to practice entrepreneurial self-support (rather than fall back in parasitical ease upon the money he had saved during his earlier career).

          • commie atheist says:

            Yes, hard to believe that someone who probably depends on tips as a major part of his income would show no outward signs of bitterness or resentment at having to shine shoes for a living after his retirement – and, in fact, considered it “an entrepreneurial opportunity.”

          • herr doktor bimler says:

            I can see how the NRO readers see Mr Wright’s current occupation as a success story: by ridding him of his retirement savings our Feudal Overlords freed him from a demeaning culture of deficiency! Also he can shine our shoes now, so Win-Win! Vote Republican to bring the same liberation to the rest of us!

            Not good optics from an outside perspective, however.

            • herr doktor bimler says:

              s/deficiency/dependency

              • LosGatosCA says:

                reads the same either way.

                Or perhaps improved with ‘deficient dependency’ or ‘dependence from deficiency’ almost all permutations fit the conservative mindset.

            • cpinva says:

              “Not good optics from an outside perspective, however.”

              that’s actually at the heart of CPAC: to them, there are no “outside optics”, it’s completely inward looking. extreme, rightwingnut conservatism survives as a wholly incestuous activity, mating with itself (sorry for that visual). unfortunately, in-breeding has been scientifically proven to cause all kinds of physical-mental deficiencies. CPAC is a gathering of them, put on public display.

              • Lancelot Link says:

                unfortunately, in-breeding has been scientifically proven to cause all kinds of physical-mental deficiencies.
                So that‘s why they call it “kinism”!

      • Jo says:

        If this comment were sarcastic it would violate Poe’s law. Therefore it’s serious. Pay attention.

    • Malaclypse says:

      Poe’s Law is harsh, but fair.

    • I want to marry the person who wrote that comment.

  16. LOOMIS BOT says:

    *BEEP BOOP*

    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’
    I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’ I GOT NOTHIN’

    *BEEP BOOP*

  17. Chesternuts says:

    !!

    The Republican Party has left Conservatism in order to become “conservative” – in the sense of being risk averse. The bold party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan has become the party of Romney and Bushes — defending lamely an eroding conformity whilst the left’s revolutionary culture has shifted the battle lines by playing cultural offense; with shy conservatives playing cultural defense. This phenomenon left Republicans without an actual agenda.

    In the aftermath of the 2008 and 2012 elections, the Republican party is confused and lost… because its leadership does not have a clue on how to turn weakness into strength.

    And whilst the left was able to define conservative Republicans as nefarious bankers or neo-klansmen, the Republican party began to fear being associated with those stereotype and has repeatedly compromised away its principles and alienated its base.

    By running away from its base, the Republican party has empowered actual neo-racists and nefarious bankers by ceding issues such as immigration, states’ rights and fiscal-and-monetary conservatism to them extremists — whilst the party itself became more bland by the day, and has bred a culture of lameness in which the leadership is afraid of anything that might being associated with sign wavers and angry people. Yet the party needs those sign wavers and angry people to give it meaning and energy.

    • Malaclypse says:

      I blame Satan.

    • MAJeff says:

      This IS the party of Reagan, cracker. Bring it on down to Neshoba County to talk about States’ Rights!

    • SEK says:

      Chesternuts, you’re this close to being banned from commenting on my posts on account of how boringly irrelevant your comments are. If you were amusingly irrelevant, I wouldn’t mind, but your tedious drivel just isn’t cutting it.

      • Chesternuts says:

        Ok. I hope I redeemed myself with my comment on Daguerre !! If not, ban me, I won’t hold it against you!

      • efgoldman says:

        SEK, he’ll only come back with a different iteration of his nym. And the same iteration of sharia catholicism. And gold buggery, also too.

        • MAJeff says:

          That’s the interesting thing. For someone so obsessed with “private property,” the internet property of other people is simply not to be recognized. The changing of nyms, and the use of IP masks, in order to troll is the online equivalent of a home invasion.

          • efgoldman says:

            Well, no it isn’t. You can turn off the toobz whenever you want to.
            I’d liken it more to people who gab through a movie, in a place with teenage ushers who won’t shut them up.

          • sparks says:

            I wonder how many of the trolls here morph, either when banned or even when not.

      • cpinva says:

        “If you were amusingly irrelevant, I wouldn’t mind, but your tedious drivel just isn’t cutting it.”

        only high class drivel is acceptable on this site, none of that cheap, Brand X drivel!

    • Major Kong says:

      And whilst the left was able to define conservative Republicans as nefarious bankers or neo-klansmen

      Just because the left calls them neo-klansmen doesn’t mean they’re not neo-klansmen.

    • Joshua says:

      And whilst the left was able to define conservative Republicans as nefarious bankers or neo-klansmen

      They’re not?

      the Republican party began to fear being associated with those stereotype

      They have? Last election they gave exactly zero fucks about being portrayed as the rich person “maker” party.

      Romney and especially Ryan were crystal clear on their stance, on their ideology, and Americans wanted no part of it. Maybe y’all just need to realize your shit ain’t that popular anymore.

  18. Surreal American says:

    But Republicans don’t, since the party has no leader willing to fight for what they believe in; it is ruled by moderate, inoffensive mediocrities.

    I guess getting 1 out of 3 correct aint bad.

  19. Mike Schilling says:

    Is it just me, or does the shoeshine guy look exactly like Gus Fring? (I so want NRO to be celebrating a front for a major drug ring.)

  20. jim, some guy in iowa says:

    you’re gonna burn through a *lot* of lantern batteries before you’ll find a ‘reputable conservative’ to repudiate that guy

    • Timb says:

      Rick Moran did and then, hilariously, his only comments were from racists asking why black people can’t dress right

  21. Chesternuts says:

    Shoeshiners always me think of this famous photograph of Daguerre, Boulevard du Temple, considered the first photo in which appears a human figure: that of a man having his shoe shined !!

    Daguerre photographed the Bouleverd from the window of his studio; the Boulevard was crowded with people and carriages. Yet because the cameras of the time required very long exposure, nothing of those moving elements is visible in the photo — nothing, except a small black figure on the sidewalk: a man having his shoes shined. The man must have stood there a long time, with his legs on the shoeshiner’s stool !!

  22. Jeffrey Beaumont says:

    This shit is great. I love it when they accidentally tip their real hand. We need to encourage this guy to become a louder voice in the GOP, and the whole party needs to follow this Sailer plan or whatever. Right into racist irrelevance.

    • Timb says:

      They don’t need our encouragement. The grifted are a necessary part of the grift. Thus, the racists will always be at home in their Southern Reional party

  23. Joshua says:

    It’s so sad to see someone put so much work attempting to be an “intellectual” all to advance some low down shit like slavery, miscengation, and segregation. In the name of Christianity too!

    Imagine if this guy actually tried to use his brain waves to advance the causes of peace, love, and justice. You know, the stuff Jesus talked about and did. Maybe the world would be a smidgen better than it is now.

  24. c u n d gulag says:

    Modern Conservatism’s “Big Tent:”

    A place for everyone – and everyone in their place.

  25. brad says:

    Anyone have any idea why Terry and his supporters consider it clever to talk about how they consider slavery to have been unfairly maligned, then act offended when their support for it as “an institution” is mentioned? Happens repeatedly in the comments just in the linked post.
    Obviously at heart it’s little more than an attempt at bullying, but I’m curious as to the rhetorical strategy they think is involved.

    • DrDick says:

      they think

      Assumes facts decidedly not in evidence (quite the contrary).

    • ACS says:

      Like most things conservative, it’s pure id masquerading as considered belief. They desperately want to be daring provocateurs taking on the entire world while also having everyone agree with them and admit how right/smart/cool they are. Consistency or strategy ain’t got nothin’ to do with that.

    • brad says:

      Just to be extra clear, I’m not trying to credit Terry in any way, just wondering what the inside joke they’re pretending means something is, I guess.

    • STH says:

      Maybe it’s because calling it an “institution” makes it part of the evil Gubmint that is evil. They aren’t supposed to like a government program, even if it’s racist and oppressive.

  26. Kyle Huckins says:

    Well in Terry’s defense there are large swaths of white voters who are terribly offended by the GOP who they need to win back. You know, the sane ones.

  27. Chesternut says:

    @David
    look more carefully at Daguerre’s photography : there’s only only human silhouette. Yet there are a multitude of humans and carriages that passed on the Boulevard — except none of them were captured, since they were moving; only one figure remained fixed in position long enough to be “judged” by the angel of photography!

  28. Chesternut says:

    @Julia
    Children, not children’s. My bad. I blame the sunlight reflecting on my iPhone’s screen!

  29. Jon Hendry says:

    The shoeshine guy would do even better if he put up a sign saying “RELIVE THE JIM CROW EXPERIENCE”.

    Then when some fat Republican is getting his shoes shined, he could talk politics with the customer, and say things like “I sure wish I could vote, but that poll tax… Well, it’s the will of the people, so I guess I have to respect it, huh, sir? I’m sure it’s for the best. I’m still not sure about women voting, neither.”

    Or maybe talk sports, and say things like “You know, I’m not sure I agree with Jackie Robinson, I think maybe he should have waited until society was ready.”

    Just confirm their beliefs.

    Dude would be rolling in money.

  30. [...] 3/17, seems I was wrong about Scott Terry… oh, wait not so much. So I’m not sorry I characterized him as a “racist piece of shit”. I’m just [...]

  31. [...] movement about reaching out the mestizo demographic, or reaching out to the homosexuals and blacks. Our question: why not reach out to whites?”“There’s just too much denial, bad faith and comedy there under high pressure for the [...]

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

  • Switch to our mobile site