Home Editor's Essays Libs Refuse to Invite Black Justice to Their Victim Party

Libs Refuse to Invite Black Justice to Their Victim Party

293
0
SHARE

[img]9|left||remove link|no_popup[/img] Justice Clarence Thomas rates an A-plus for prescience. As he suspected, the first four days of this week, surrounding the publication of his new book, have been violently illuminated by shooting flames spat out from the crude torches wielded once more by a familiar-faced lynch mob.

Liberals are crawling along the ceilings, down the walls and from out of their rabbit-holes to punish a black man for what these creative thinkers call his anti-black convictions. Blacks are supposed to be victims. Doesn’t the hoary heretic know that?

Justice Thomas of the U.S. Supreme Court predicted in his book, and in successive interviews this week, that lockstep liberals would hunt him down, to his grave, for deviating from the script that white liberals dictated to black liberals for all time. But the harried judge’s liberal opponents just can’t help themselves.

The Whole Debate

Staying a step in front of the mob, Justice Thomas crystallized the lockstep liberal smears against him in three cogent sentences last Sunday night on “60 Minutes”:

“I’m black. So I’m supposed to think a certain way. I’m supposed to have certain opinions.”

This has been an exhausting, but not necessarily a bad, week for liberals of both colors. White libs welcome a chance to quench a deep-seated cultural thirst by sandblasting the handiest black man without getting tarred with a racism brush. Black libs, who gaspingly cling to the collars of white men for their legitimacy, just as in slave times, scorch Justice Thomas for threatening to delegtimize their cherished permanent victim status.

Crutches Are for Cripples, Aren’t They?

Liberals of both colors are howling mad at the Supreme Court Justice. They say he violated political law — the First Commandment states that only liberals, not conservatives, may charge racism — and for daring to oppose the line of the Black Party on affirmative action. Justice Thomas long has maintained that quotas —“affirmative action” is quotas with a party dress on — are insulting to black people. In sensible times, black people fought against quotas. The judge holds that affirmative action is a crutch. Only cripples use crutches. Right?

Let’s Have a Victim Party

With the publication this week of Justice Thomas’s life story, “My Grandfather’s Son,” venom is boiling in the soiled, sold-out souls of black liberals. They are a large, reliable section of the crowd that the astute KABC radio commentator Larry Elder derisively refers to as “Victo-crats,” that is Democrats who have willfully surrendered their thinking mechanisms.

Every black and white liberal who could race to a pencil or a computer has been indicting Justice Thomas for racial heresy. Just as in the religious realm, racial heresy gets you drummed out of the club.

Justice Thomas, dear readers, hereafter will be recognized officially as a white man. I wonder if that will gain him entry into the Los Angeles Country Club.

For Sale: My Soul and a Little Hatred

Black spewers of racial hate with direct access to media form a small but influential group in America. Among the nastiest mongers are Bob Herbert of The New York Times and Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post.

The two dandies have fashioned handsome careers out of nonsense philosophies. Hewing to the racial script that their white supervisors chiseled in stone for them, Mr. Robinson and Mr. Herbert regularly characterize fellow blacks as woebegotten victims of that mean old white man who always seems to wear a doggoned “conservative” label on the lapel of his suit coat. Goll-leeee, Mr. Autry.

Don’t Think. It Could Hurt

Not likely to be confused with thinkers, unless the order is inserted by their white supervisors into their script, the gentlemen ride frustrated into the night. Writhing in pools of perspiring emotion, neither of them is able to distinguish between Justice Thomas’s status as a victim who overcame and their own status as permanent, submissive victims. The distinction is the difference between being right and being wrong.