|
From today's print version of USA Today:
Hmmmm... why oh why has Bush declined such invitations? The reader is left wondering. Nodoby knows, really. Perhaps it's that Bush simply won't speak to anyone who has disagrees with administration policies, as the first paragraph implies. Or perhaps it's just that Bush is one of those horrible racists, as the last paragraph implies. Of course, we wouldn't expect a newspaper to fill in the missing details, like these, so that it's readers could draw an informed conclusion:
Bush didn't merely cite a "scheduling conflict." He also said this:
Once the NAACP represented a wide spectrum of black views, now it is simply another mouthpiece for the left. Wise or unwise, there is nothing inherantly anti-black about the war in Iraq, yet Bond feels free to continually focus on that issue. Bush has appointed more blacks to cabinet-level posts than any President in history (and his appointees were certainly not tokens), yet, because they were not Democrats, Bond feels free to call them the "Taliban" and imply that anyone who opposes the Democratic party, must be a "Nazi". Meaning, of course, that the Democratic party is the only solution for blacks. Leftists like Julian Bond throw bricks, stones, and Molitov cocktails and their opponents, and then accuse their opponents of incivility for failing to drop by. Regarding the Taliban comment, he said "Republicans draw their most rabid supporters from the Taliban wing of American politics." This would seem to not refer to Bush's cabinet picks. Rather, he's targeting a swath of the American public (religious fundamentalist nationalists?) Your call on whether insulting a broad portion of the American public is better or worse than what was previously assumed. Posted by: Ryan on July 18, 2006 01:50 AM My bad, he said that Ms. Rice and Powell were "kinds of human sheilds" so some implications of tokenism... Posted by: ryan on July 18, 2006 01:59 AM Add your two cents...
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once. |
This summary gives a little better detail of what Bond said.
Bond didn't specifically say "Bush is a Nazi." He has an odd habit (apparently) of referring to the confederate flag as "the confederate swastika" meaning, I assume, that the confederate flag has the same meaning for African Americans as the swastika does for Jews.
Bond said;
“Their (Republicans) idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side-by-side,”
in reference to conservative defense of flying the confederate flag.
He also didn't say that Bush's appointees were token figures. He said their appointment shouldn't serve to shield the Bush administration from what Bond sees as a horrible civil rights record.
Of course, none of this was helped by Fayetteville State University stalling on releasing details of Bond's speech.
Posted by: Ryan on July 17, 2006 11:04 PM