@jimgeraghty The fact the NYT is coming out so aggresively with the 'Tim Scott=token' slander seems defensive. What are they afraid of?—
Scott Goldstein (@BBBE555) December 19, 2012
Mostly the New York Times is afraid of missing a juicy opportunity to diminish an accomplished black politician by reducing him to the color of his skin. Can’t have that now!
Here’s what University of Pennsylvania political science professor Adolph Reed had to say about South Carolina Rep. Tim Scott in his NYT op-ed on “The Puzzle of Black Republicans”:
The trope of the black conservative has retained a man-bites-dog newsworthiness that is long past its shelf life. Clichés about fallen barriers are increasingly meaningless; symbols don’t make for coherent policies. Republicans will not gain significant black support unless they take policy positions that advance black interests. No number of Tim Scotts — or other cynical tokens — will change that.
Are you wearing your shocked face?
Really, how better to demonstrate enlightened tolerance than to insult soon-to-be Sen. Tim Scott as a “cynical token”?
That’s a-OK with the Left’s self-declared arbiters of racial authenticity. He’s a black conservative whose politics “are utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans,” writes Reed. So, you know feel free to belittle his successes. He’s fair game.
Whoopsie! Looks like Professor Reed isn’t on the linguistic cutting edge:
And if Gov. Nikki Haley had selected another qualified candidate to replace departing Sen. Jim DeMint?
He might not have used those words, but he said it loud and clear.