Wednesday, February 09, 2011
The NAACP - Condemn or condone?
The NAACP appears to have a double standard.
This article points that out and I'm not surprised.
Racism is a two-way street. It should be condemned in either direction.
I might add that (in some cases) failure to condemn could be considered as condoning...
This article points that out and I'm not surprised.
Racism is a two-way street. It should be condemned in either direction.
I might add that (in some cases) failure to condemn could be considered as condoning...
Matthew Boyle has the story at DailyCaller.com:
"In response to The Daily Caller’s request for comment on a video showing progressive protesters calling for somebody to “string up” African American Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, or 'send him back into the fields' or 'cut off all his toes and feed them to him one-by-one,' NAACP spokesman Hilary Shelton pointed to the organization’s recent resolution calling for a 'civil political discourse.'
'Last summer, the NAACP passed a resolution calling for a civil political discourse,' Shelton said in an e-mail to TheDC. 'We continue to call on all Americans to abandon vitriolic language. It serves as a distraction from the real issues our society need to address and distorts the challenges we as Americans have to confront to make our nation greater still.'
Shelton would not, however, address the content of the video directly."
