Oliver Willis Cries Wolf

I haven't discussed Ollie Willis in a while. Probably because he has nothing of consequence to add to the debate.

Anyway, this post is ridiculous--even by Willis' terms:

Conservatives cannot help themselves. They try, time and time again, to excuse themselves from their movement's racist past. They try to deny that the foundation of the current Republican party came about as segregationist racists were turned out of the newly progressive Democratic party in the wake of the Kennedy and Johnson presidencies.

Notice he doesn't add that southern Democrats such as Al Gore Sr. were venomously opposed to any civil rights legislation:

* R.D. Davis, a member of Project 21 (a black conservative organization), researched the voting records from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and found:

- Al Gore Sr. voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
- Al Gore Sr. participated in a 74 day filibuster to delay and weaken the legislation.
- Al Gore Sr. proposed an amendment to the Civil Rights Act that would have kept federal funds flowing to schools that defied court desegregation orders. It was defeated by a vote of 74-25. 23 Democrats and 1 Republican voted for it. (62)(63)

He also forgets to note that a sitting senator--Robert Byrd--was a high-ranking member of the KKK. I guess it slipped his mind.

Conservatives wonder why Americans of all stripes idealogically (sic) and racially don't buy their protestations that they aren't racist. But it is because of the behavior - in this instance exhbited by The Weekly Standard - that constantly denigrates anyone who isn't a rich white Christian male. The right looks down their nose at anyone who they consider "different" and wonders why the perception of them is so at odds with the world they've built up in their own minds.

Why did Ollie not link to any Weekly Standard piece (update: he linked the cover but no actual writing that carries his point)? It seems to go against Willis' line of thinking that the two highest ranking African-Americans in the countries history served George W. Bush. Not just as Secretary of Commerce or Transportation but as Secretary of State. But then again, they are not quite black enough in Willis' eyes.

It wasn't enough for the Weekly Standard to speak about their disagreement with Ned Lamont, his supporters or even the controversial politics practiced by Al Sharpton (who I happen to disagree with). No, the Weekly Standard, said by some to be the favored political journal of the White House and a major player in conservative politics via editor-in-chief William Kristol (former Dan Quayle chief of staff) - chose to depict the African-American Sharpton as just another white gloved chaueffeur, subserviently ferrying around his white "massa" Ned Lamont.

Tell us how they did that Ollie. What words did they use to depict Sharpton as you've described? This is Willis' M.O, insinuate without facts. It seems to be an epidemic on the left.

What the hell is wrong with these people? It shows the lack of moral compass they've exhibited for years now, and displays that it is so ingrained in their system and the world they live in that there's nothing apparently negative about depicting a black person - even one like Sharpton - as just a modern day Step N Fetchit.

But it's okay to depict Joe Lieberman in blackface? Or what of the words of Harry Belafonte?

This is classic Willis--crying wolf to the point that when real racism is practiced, it is no longer shocking.

Well Ollie, I saw the sign that called Jews "kikes" displayed by your ideological brethren. When will you speak up about that? When will you address the real issues that are dooming a whole generation of young black men. Black on black violence is killing hundreds every week. I guess by pointing that out, I'm now a racist.