Accusing Clinton of "mimicking black dialect," Walter Williams didn't note she was reciting hymn in Selma speech

Walter Williams is nothing but a lackey for white supremacy. When he's finished his daiy chore of writing negroid comments to support anti-Black perspectives and policies, he serves as ventriloquist for David Duke's lawn jockey and blackface guest-host of the Rush Limbo Show.

Can you imagine if she had changed the words to sound more "white"?  Wouldn't this guy have a more understandable complaint then?

What a jackass.

She was just reading a hymn as written, but with a demeaning ebonic accent!  It's the accent, not the words thats the issue.

When quoting Cesar Chavez, would it be appropriate to do so in an accent like an extra in a Speedy Gonzales cartoon?

When quoting Ghandi (who, as the Sen. claimed ran a gas station in St. Louis), is it appropriate to do so in a bad attempt at an Apu/Simpsons accent?

It's the derogatory mimicing of the accent, not the words, that's the issue!

MMFA is intolerant of idiots and liars like Walter Wiliams, regardless of their race.

"Dare I suggest MM is racially intolerant with this post? Is not he as a black man entitled to question a presidential candidates intentions on such matters within his community?"

Let me get this straight.  Hillary was quoting.  She was reading something as written.  Williams failed to mention that highly pertinent fact in his work.  But that's not a problem...because Williams is black?

It's not racial intolerance.  Nobody's saying he doesn't have a right to question intentions, he just has to do it honestly.  Is this really so difficult to understand?

Go ahead and dare. You'll just sound as much like a lazy propogandist as the rest.

(I hit the [POST] bar too soon - here's the entire post I ment to make - Wzwriter) 

Agreed this man is one of a kind. Brilliant, witty and a thorn in liberal elites side.

He's one-of-a-kind, all right.  Stupid beyond compare.

Dare I suggest MM is racially intolerant with this post? Is not he as a black man entitled to question a presidential candidates intentions on such matters within his community?

Actually, he seems to be a black man who's ashamed of being black.  His pal Thomas Sewell seems to act the same way.  And they've both gone so far out of their way to distance themselves from other African-Americans that they are no longer part of the "black community".

Any man who would buy his wife golf shoes so she wont slide around on the ice whilst doing his chores is alright in my book.

Actually, a REAL man would not subject his wife to a dangerous situation.  He would "do his chores" himself.

Bore, anyone parroting a line like 'liberal elites' has pretty much blown any credibility they would ever have talking with intellectually honest people.  No, not just talking to liberals, talking to intellectually honest people.  The attraction to slurs like this is very revealing of the movement you admire and your own character. 

If making his wife do chores when it's icy outside by garbing her in golf shoes, instead of doing them himself, is your definition of "brilliant," then you are a very sad person. 

I guess that's why it is so acceptable to you for George Bush to get nearly 4,000 young Americans killed to prove his manhood.

T Bong

That's like saying that one pile of dog poop smells better than all the other piles of dog poop.  It's still dog poop...

:-)

If he isn't with Faux News now, he will be soon.

Not ignorance... just intellectual laziness.

I include Booker T. Washington because like his spawns Sowell, Williams, Elder, Steele, etc., he downplayed the effects of racism while being cozy with white reactionaries who funded his projects, with Washington his Tuskegee Institute. Washington suggested that blacks weren’t ready for integration, political and/or equal rights until we fix our “lack of morality” and lack of "self-help" skills. He, in effect, gave many institutions the rationalization for enforcing the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson. It was his suggestion that blacks should tolerate Jim Crow without seeking political rights is what sparked the heated exchange between him and his rival and contemporary, W.E.B. Dubois. Here’s a quote from Adolph Reed, Jr.’s book [Class Notes] about Booker T. Washington: “The black public intellectual’s more direct progenitor is Booker T. Washington, who turned the slave narrative into a saga of personal triumph befitting his era. In Up From Slavery (1901) Washington constructed a program and a rhetoric that promised group progress through acquiescence to white supremacy. He crafted it in the idiom of the gospel of personal enrichment then popular in both religious and secular (and often overlapping) forms. In presenting his tale of individual and group success through strength of character and perseverance, he simultaneously presented himself as a Horatio Alger figure and an Andrew Carnegie dipped in chocolate.

More than Douglass ever had been, Washington became the singular, trusted informant to communicate to whites what the Negro thought, felt, wanted, needed. Washington’s stature derived from relatively progressive racial politics. He became the first purely freelance race spokesman; his status depended on designation by white elites rather than by any black electorate or social movement. To that extent he originated a new model of the generic Black Leader – the Racial Voice accountable to no clearly identifiable constituency among the spoken for.

What made this possible, and credible, was black Americans’ expulsion from civic life. The role was unthinkable, even for a figure as prominent and respected as Douglas, during the first three decades after the Civil War because a culture of broad, democratic political participation flourished among black citizens. The obvious multiplicity of articulate black voices, from the local Union Leagues and Loyal Leagues to the United States Congress would have immediately exposed as absurd the suggestion that any individual carried – or should carry – a blanket racial proxy. The idea of the free-floating race spokesman was a pathological effect of the disfranchisement specific to the segregation era, the condition to which Washington contributed.

Washington’s paramountcy as bearer of the race’s interests was always contested by other blacks, and no one claimed the mantle after him. In fact the fifty years between his death in 1915 and the final defeat of Jim Crow regime were punctuated by periods of intense, politically engaged debate among black intellectuals.”

No, Williams is offended because a Democrat reaches more people of his race than he does, so he has to lie by omission in this hit job of a column. He equates reciting literature with delivering offensive language to other races, but never mentions the literature. It's a false comparison, and he's smart enough to know better. You should be too.

Just because you weren't insulted, doesn't mean that you should not have been insulted.  She is milking the black community for what they're worth, which to her, means their votes. 

See my response to Pearlene and Preston

Redking isn't troubled by facts where his emotions are concerned.  And he sure hates those Clintons!  King, you missed your calling.  You would have made a great rightwinger. 

I'm not saying that I'm offended or that anyone should be, just that I understand how people could be.  I've witnessed situations in which a person trying to imitate a particular dialect greatly offended people who speak that way naturally, as it was seen as being insensitive, and mocking.

that IS what's potentially offensive about the whole thing - not that black people talk in any one particular way, but in that Hillary has a "black people generic" voice to go into, almost subconsciously, which is a caricatured, fake voice that's not the one she normally uses.  you can all plug your ears and say NA NA I Can't hear you! as much as you want, but I've seen this behavior offend perfectly reasonable people in the past.  Its incredibly silly that the point of whether it was potentially offensive, and whether it was "mimicking" is even up for debate. 

No - people like Walter Williams are called Uncle Toms because of their actions.

From "Wikipedia":

Uncle Tom is a pejorative for an African American who is perceived by others as behaving in a subservient manner to White American authority figures, or as seeking ingratiation with them by way of unnecessary accommodation. The term Uncle Tom comes from the title character of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin, although there is debate over whether the character himself is deserving of the pejorative attributed to him.

It is commonly used to describe black people whose political views or allegiances are considered by their critics as detrimental to blacks as a group.

IO what is most interesting is you claim that I as an African American SHOULD be insulted by Hillary. I am MORE insulted that you would lecture on what is or is not acceptable to ME as an African American. Who are you to tell African Americans what they should think or feel? Who are you to judge what is or is not insulting to African Americans. If you are African American and YOU were insulted, say that you were insulted but speak only for yourself!

I read every single posting on this subject.  I did not see anything which referred to Hillary's "plantation" comment, which is relevant to the subject.  If you listen to her entire speech, you will see that her dialect only changes when she makes the platantation remark.  How is this misinformation?  Still not convinced there is a pattern here?  Well then, lets see what she said at the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network convention.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9TQq0C3Ac