This article would be merely a footnote if any Caucasians were also under investigation. Yet the journalist discerned a “social justice” angle from their absence and wished to alert his countrymen of a truth that exists only in his own mind (and in those of other leftists).
We are encouraged to believe that — despite everything we may personally experience or observe — racism is still a force that rages in the United States. In keeping with the dictates of leftist ideology, any disparity between the races is cause enough to impugn the entire nation.
However, should these discrepancies run in the other direction, such as with the dearth of Caucasians in the NBA, they are totally overlooked. Racism is a charge that need only be asserted. Proof is optional.
Should we be optimistic about the present day, the narrative seeks to dispel our contentment. Of course, there is no validity to this reporter’s “eternal Klansman” assumption regarding the citizenry, as practically every injustice cited by America’s detractors is extinct in this new millennium.
Apart from the reporter’s penumbras of institutional racism, the article proffers nothing in the way of evidence that any discrimination occurred.
Why doesn’t the journalist consider alternative hypotheses? One that is glaringly obvious is that these members of Congress may actually be more corrupt than their peers.
Isn’t it at least possible that the aforementioned lawmakers are guilty as charged? Any writer who even paid lip service to objectivity would at least consider this eventuality.
While the Politico failed to do so, one paragraph cited was quite revealing. A quote from an anonymous black congressman tells us much about the jaded mentality that pervades among these “public servants”:
Is there concern whether someone is trying to set up [Congressional Black Caucus] members? Yeah, there is. It looks as if there is somebody out there who understands what the rules [are] and sends names to the ethics committee with the goal of going after the [CBC].
Understands what “the rules” are? What an (accidental) admission of guilt. Scrutiny in response to violating the law is the complete opposite of getting “set up.” A more appropriate response by CBC members would be to accept the injunction to operate within legal parameters.
Let us now explore some provocative (i.e., honest) lines of inquiry. What if the political correctness endemic among whites — making them perpetually fear appearing “racist” — cajoled the congressional hierarchy into maintaining looser ethical standards for CBC members than for the rest of its body?
What if their “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t accuse, don’t report” ethos enabled those flawed individuals to take more risks and delve into less kosher transactions with lobbyists? Perhaps it was white guilt which fertilized the ground from which their corruption grew.
Support for my counter-thesis is evident in a response one of them had in relation to open-and-shut proceedings against a brazen thief from Louisiana. Striking is the tenuous logic that follows:
African-American politicians have long complained that they’re treated unfairly when ethical issues arise. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are still fuming over Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s decision to oust then-Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) from the House Ways and Means Committee in 2006.
They still fume? For what reason? If that’s the case then they bristle alone. The rest of us know a crook when we see one … or when we come across $90,000 in cash hidden in his freezer.
There was nothing uncertain about the former congressman’s conviction. This summer he was found guilty by a federal court of 11 counts of corruption. He’s now been handed a 13-year sentence behind bars.
If the Congressional Black Caucus wants to defend snakes like William Jefferson, then all of its members should be regarded as suspect; however, this truth, and countless others, is something advocacy enterprises like the Politico wish to hide behind spurious suggestions of racism.