Juan Williams Gets One Right Today

Black Conservatives Not Welcome at Rutgers

Jeff - icon sizeIntro by Jeff Rutherford

Today’s opinion article by Juan Williams asks a great question:  “Why do liberals have so much hate for black conservatives?”  This question is significant coming from Williams because he is black himself.

I disagree with Williams’ liberal views on many topics.  But fairly regularly he at least reaffirms that he’s an honest commentator with some guts to utter the truth about freedom of speech and diversity of opinion.  Here is the piece he posted today:


Rutgers rage against Rice — Why do liberals have so much hate for black conservatives?

by Juan Williams

Have you heard the news?Juan Williams

Condoleezza Rice lacks “moral authority.” She fails to meet the standards of “exemplary citizenship” and she does not have what it takes to “inspire” graduating college seniors.

That crazy thinking comes from the New Brunswick Faculty Council of Rutgers University. They voted last week to ask university leadership to cancel Rice’s invitation to be this year’s Commencement Speaker and receive an honorary degree.

Yes, apparently the first African-American woman to serve as National Security Adviser and the nation’s Secretary of State doesn’t have what it takes to be honored by Rutgers.

Rice holds a Ph.D. in political science. She has taught college for decades. She was Provost of Stanford University. She worked her way up from a working-class family in the segregated South to the highest echelon of world power and politics.

But according to the Rutgers faculty council, all of that is negated by her service in President George W. Bush’s administration.

They cited her roles in pushing the false claim of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They also point to her support for using enhanced interrogation techniques to get information from terror suspects.

The facts are right. The conclusion is wrong.

I, too, disagreed with many of the policies Rice faithfully supported as a member of the Bush administration. But only partisan hatred can blind the faculty to her extraordinary level of accomplishment for herself and her country.

Rice is smart, disciplined, hard-working and the model of an inspiring modern American. She personifies the American Dream. She is living inspiration for a young person trying to accomplish great work no matter what the barriers. And in Rice’s generation there were some serious barriers starting with her race and gender.

That is why New Jersey Republican State Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini called the Rutgers faculty’s wrongheaded decision “appalling and an embarrassment to our state.”

“This is nothing more than a political firestorm fueled by their hatred of an opposing ideology, and President George W. Bush in particular. Dr. Rice and the people of New Jersey deserve better,” Angelini said.

There is an added element at play here. There is a disgraceful double standard amongst liberals, particularly those in academia, in the hatred they direct at black conservatives.

We saw this last April when the conservative neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson was forced to step down as a Commencement Speaker for Johns Hopkins University (where he ably served as the head of pediatric neurosurgery).

Liberals on the Hopkins campus mobilized against Carson because he criticized President Obama’s health care reform law and said that he opposed gay marriage.

I am not a conservative but I have spoken out for years against the staggering amount of blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals.

Liberals are shockingly quick to demean and dismiss brilliant black people like Rice, Carson, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Professor Walter E. Williams and economist Thomas Sowell because they don’t fit into the role they have carved out for a black person in America.

Black Americans must be obedient liberals on all things or risk being called a race traitor or an Uncle Tom.

I’ve experienced some of this vitriol firsthand when I have veered by liberal orthodoxy. I wrote about it in my book “Muzzled – the Assault on Honest Debate.”

This shunning of Rice is especially troubling coming from a great American university. This is the place where debate and dissenting views are to be valued as sacred.

Rutgers’s own university mission statement says that one of its goals is to produce students who perform “public service in support of the needs of the citizens of the state and its local, county, and state governments.”

How is the public served by muzzling one of the most thoughtful, accomplished and respected political voices of her time just because she happens to be a Republican?

Do the Rutgers University faculty really have so little faith in the students they are about to graduate that they think are incapable of hearing opposing views and making up their own minds?

Before her commencement speech, I would like to see any of one of the members of faculty council debate Secretary Rice on foreign policy and then let their students see how well their professors’ critique holds up.

Hell, how about we invite the entire faculty council to take their best shot at Secretary Rice in a debate.

Rice is the most famous Republican woman politician in the country. She gave the best speech of the 2012 Republican National Convention and, despite her lack of interest in political office, still gets mentioned as a potential Republican presidential candidate for 2016.

If she is truly on the fence about a White House run, I would suggest she go for it if for no other reason than to rub it in the faces of these pompous jackass professors.

Of course that is not the only reason she should run, but it sure would be a delightful bonus.


About Necessary and Proper

Jeff believes in the Individual's ability to excel when liberty and freedom of choice are protected. Also believes in the Community's ability to take care of the vast majority of its own issues and needs when the federal government leaves the Community's resources and sphere of control alone. State and local choice produce better results than centralized federal control. https://necessaryandpropergovt.wordpress.com/
This entry was posted in Politics in Practice, Progressive Paradoxes and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Juan Williams Gets One Right Today

  1. bullright says:

    Good post, credit where due.


  2. Jane says:

    Jeff, I loved this! Don’t they know that her family became republican because that was the only party that would allow African Americans to become members and vote? Another hypocrisy of liberals. They were the ones(not the conservatives) that were keeping racism alive. Mmm, sounds familiar with what is still going on. I would encourage everyone to read Condoleezza Rice’s book, “Extraordinary, Ordinary People.” It’s incredible. I have so much respect for her and it just goes to show what jokes our universities have become.


  3. Pingback: 3/8/2014: Juan Williams: ‘staggering amount blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals’ | pundit from another planet

  4. tannngl says:

    I like Juan. He’s pure prog but he can be fair.
    And Rutgers and Harvard? RACIST


  5. bullright says:

    Maybe it’s underhanded but there is a way we could probably get Condi to run. Tell her she is actually running to be NFL commissioner. Then we would see fireworks. 🙂 (I think its her biggest dream)


  6. Excellent thoughts, Jeff. Thanks for posting this. Personally, I think the reason Rice isn’t interested in running is because she knows the news media would rip into her in a way that would make their treatment of Sarah Palin seem like kindergarten. They know she would be a formidable opponent for the Democratic nominee – particularly in the debates, and I think they would do everything in their power to destroy her in whatever way possible. Maybe more so because she IS black, and a woman.


  7. hiimback1 says:

    so true, i have noticed this, and I have heard the phrase “Wait, you’re a Republican? But you’re black!” I’m white though, so obviously its never been directed at me.


    • Hi there, hiimback1.

      Please send me an email at jeffrutherford6@gmail.com. I’d love to find out a little more about your group of bloggers.

      Even though he’s a liberal, I give major credit to Juan Williams as a political commentator because he despises the connection of political ideology to race. He consistently believes and says that a person’s political viewpoint and a person’s ethnicity have no relationship to each other…and anybody that discriminates on the basis of political ideology and then calls their political opponents “racists” is full of crap.

      Your comment gives me quite a few additional ideas. Please let me share them with you….

      Just like retail products are marketed towards specific demographics that are likely to buy them, certain political philosophies are marketed towards specific groups in the population. I’ve actually heard this called “retail politics.” The whole notion that conservative individualism is anti-black, and liberal collectivism is pro-black, is total bull. But there is a whole Progressive political industry dedicated to concocting story after story that sells that phony narrative to the black community, in order to group them all into one big reliable voting block for the Democrats. Unfortunately, it works REALLY well, especially with today’s journalists being so one-sided (towards Progressivism), and no longer really dedicated to reporting the facts and letting the readers / viewers make their own conclusions. (I’d be honored if you would check out this article I wrote awhile back about media bias.)

      So here’s the key question: If 100+ years of increasingly Progressive urban government policies are so wonderful for the black communities, then why are the huge urban centers like Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., and Philadelphia (which are almost always represented by Democrat mayors, Democrat city councils, Democrat state legislators, and Democrat federal legislators) crumbling into disrepair and saddled with high unemployment, high crime rates, high drop-out rates and poor scores in their school systems, high rates of unwed mothers, etc.?

      I have two answers to that question: 1) The economic principles behind collectivism do not work. That system of government and community organization does not promote true productivity — it subsidizes a lifestyle of government dependence that must be funded by the redistribution of wealth away from the productive capitalistic segment of the country; and 2) The Democrat Party, whether they’ll even admit it to themselves or not, is not wholeheartedly committed to finding actual solutions for the black community because then Democrats wouldn’t be able to get their votes by promising to solve their problems. They’d rather have the black community WISHING its problems could be solved by voting for Democrats. In other words, the votes of the black community are more important to Democrat politicians than the plight of the black community. The Democrats don’t care that Progressivism isn’t the solution…they don’t seek a solution, they just seek perpetual power.

      Here’s one last way of looking at it: Conservatives consider a government program to be successful if it helps LOTS of people to GET OFF of being dependent on the government. Progressives consider a government program to be successful if it helps LOTS of people to GET ON being dependent on the government.

      I hope to hear from you again.
      – Jeff


  8. Pingback: 5/3/2014: Condoleezza Rice Takes the High Road | Necessary and Proper Gov't

Chime in! Leave Jeff a comment...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s