July 17, 2009

"Red meat by the slab, folks! Barbara Boxer wound up getting reamed by Harry Alford, the chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce..."

"... , after attempting to challenge his testimony on energy policy. When Boxer started waving position papers from the NAACP and the 100 Black Men of Atlanta, Alford called it a 'condescending' attack and complained about Boxer’s focus on black people rather than science..."

Could you stop chomping on that red meat for a second and explain to me how the chair National Black Chamber of Commerce can get all outraged about being addressed as a representing the opinion of black people? It's the Black Chamber of Commerce! Why does he think he's been invited to speak to Boxer's committee? Don't play innocent. If he'd come there from some race-neutral organization and Boxer had brought up the NAACP and the 100 Black Men of Atlanta, he'd have had standing to complain, but he's from the National Black Chamber of Commerce. Give me a break. Plus, he was rude to Boxer from the start, interrupting her and acting combative. He seems to have been waiting for this moment to generate a hot YouTube clip. Color me unimpressed.

127 comments:

rhhardin said...

I imagine he wanted his time to say something and Boxer boxed him in.

Going the offended black route isn't a great choice; I'd call her a stupid bitch and let her take the offended role.

LarsPorsena said...

He should have addressed her as "Senator" instead of "Ma'am".

We all know how she treasures the title.

Lem said...

Not wise to get in the ring with Boxer.

TRO said...

I watched this three times it was so fun, but it's not surprising. Liberals ooze racism all the time, but it really gushes to the surface when they are attacking a minority that dares to disagree with them.

chuckR said...

He is a black man who recognizes that there is no black science. Just science. Babs continues to earn the sobriquet Brain Dead Boxer.

And count me as one who believes our senators and congresscritters deserve to be smacked around. They aren't doing their job, unless that job description includes pandering to special interests and passing legislation without reading it.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Because he is a black BUSINESSMAN who probably represents a more conservative viewpoint. Notice I stressed the BUSINESSMAN aspect.

To then be compared to a bunch of liberal BLACK people and have that stupid bitch assume that because THEY are black, therefore their opinions must be the same as his or should carry some better weight than his own opinion.

He was offended that instead of dealing with the contents of his mind and the contents of his political arguments, she could not see past his BLACK exterior. She was condescending and racist.

It would be the same thing as if you, a law professor, were arguing a point of law and the frame of reference you were being held to and compared to, were Anna Nicolle Smith and other air head bimbos

Or if a WHITE guy from the Chamber of Commerce were quoted the opinions of other WHITE guys, with whom he vehemently disagrees, merely because they are WHITE GUYS, as if that proves some point.

If you don't get this man's outrage, I really despair of your reasoning abilities. Thank GOD you aren't up for the Supreme Court.

Joaquin said...

He had every right to be pi$$ed when she 'countered' by producing documents from the NAACP when the issue wasn't about race.
She's basically telling him 'Hey, other Blacks don't agree with you, so there'

class-factotum said...

How about because he was representing businesses, so thought he had a reason to oppose the policy as it has a direct impact on his business members.

He does not seem to think there should be a "black" view on energy policy. She was being condescending. Who cares what the NAACP thinks about it? Why is that relevant? He was speaking as a businessman, not a black man.

bearbee said...

And count me as one who believes our senators and congresscritters deserve to be smacked around.

Give me a 'T'
Give me 'n 'E'
Give me 'n 'R'
Give me 'n 'M'

LIMITS!

TERM LIMITS!
TERM LIMITS!

YAH!!!

class-factotum said...

Oh. Dust Bunny Queen. I didn't see that you had already said what I said and said it far better!

The Crack Emcee said...

Science is science and Boxer was playing the race card, period. And i notice, Ann, when you were interrupted, constantly, in that last video clip you were in, by that woman with the shrill whiny voice (sorry, I forget her name) you didn't say shit about rudeness then. I sat there watching it, going, "Jesus, Ann, why would you even talk to her? You had to practically yell to get a word in edge-wise.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - and I hope you're taking it as it's intended - as what friends do for friends:

Why are you so often on the side of an obvious wrong?

MadisonMan said...

I thought Barbara Boxer had dark hair.

Scott M said...

Boxer lost me the very first time I heard her interviewed on the Dianne Reims show back when Alito was being confirmed.

She made comments about how dangerously conservative his viewpoints were. A caller got on (no idea how he actually got past the screener) and asked her if Alito was a conservative, did she describe herself as liberal? Her answer was something very close to "I consider myself to be Barbara Boxer" and then they cut the guy off.

So...she establishes that there is a playing field by calling Alito a conservative, but then elevates herself above that playing field. I rarely see such egregious displays of outright elitism.

The dressing down of that general over her title was disgusting and just goes to show how little she understands the military.

This incident doesn't do anything for my opinion of Boxer as it's already as low as it could be. What it does, wonderfully, is illustrate how fixated the left truly is on identity politics.

The chairman's point was absolutely correct. Why bring up the opinion of a civil rights organization when you're discussing scientific findings? And why trot out a black group at that?

It was hammered into my skull by public school in the 70's and 80's that I'm supposed to be colorblind by the very side of the spectrum that pay the most attention to it.

NKVD said...

Live by the race card, die by the race card.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I think Alford was insulting because he kept calling her ma'am instead of Senator. You know she worked so very hard for that title.

Salamandyr said...

I'm not sure how being part of the National Black Chamber of Commerce should be some impediment to him saying this.

In fact, the only way he could get away with saying this was being part of that racial power structure. If he had been there representing a neutral organization, he would have been accused of racism (yes, even though he is black).

AJ Lynch said...

Bearbee:

Just think - term limits would mean these folks would be long gone:

Biden, Kerry, McCain, Byrd, Specter, Frank, Feinstein.

It would be utopia.

Chase said...

Ann Althouse - you CANNOT be this dense.

You don't get why Barbara Boxer was wrong?

Color you another midwestern racist. You and Boxer would make a great pair.

El Presidente said...

Barbra Boxer would only let herself be "reamed" by a black person. The General has much smaller constituencies so she was happy to stand up to him.

Barbra falls into the common trap of treating all black folks as a common interest group. Prof. Althouse would ream someone if they used the phrase "all law professors." It is condescending sure, worse it is fatuous.

Henry Buck said...

I view it as a teaching moment to show both: (1) that the idea of a black chamber of commerce is wrong; and (2) that Boxer can't see anything beyond color.

However, ethnic or race-based subgroups or alternative organizations are very common groups in professional occupations is very common. The law facilitates and encourages this with policies such as racial set asides, and required minority participation in contracts.

If Boxer had countered with contrary statistics from another well-established business organization, or even a non-business organization (SEIU)it wouldn't have mattered. By deliberately picking a black group unrelated to business, she invited Alford's attack.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Could you stop chomping on that red meat for a second and explain to me how the chair National Black Chamber of Commerce can get all outraged about being addressed as a representing the opinion of black people? It's the Black Chamber of Commerce!

Maybe because one is representing black business folks and the other is a civil rights organization? I'll leave it to you to figure out who probably has a more relevant position on the impact of energy policy on business.

Big Mike said...

I was going to say pretty much what Dust Bunny Queen said, but she said it first, and better. Well done, DBQ.

As for you, Professor, you can color me disappointed. Even given that you live and teach in a liberal bubble on one of the most liberal campuses in the Midwest -- arguably the most liberal campus in the Big Ten, you should be able to look past the man's skin color and listen to what he has to say.

The Drill SGT said...

The real interesting twist is the Ma'am part.

She wants to dress down a General when he uses the traditional and specified form of address for a female senior (I refuse to use the word superior, in the context of Babs)

However, with a black man, you can't be as snide as you can with a white male, so she ignores the Ma'am slur this time.


as to the substance of the issue, what DBQ said

Randy said...

After reading this post, it seems to me that you don't know much about Barbara Boxer. Despite what you think, Alford appears to understand her. Be that as it may, Lem is right: Not wise to get in the ring with Boxer, particularly when cameras are in the vicinity.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

The Representative from the Chamber of Commerce was trying to get a word in edgewise. These idiotic shows in Congress are merely yet another venue for the brain dead jackasses that we have in power to blather on and on about their own agenda and then.....oooops....out of time...sorry you don't get to respond to the speech that the Senator/Representative just gave in lieu of an actual question.

The opinions of groups like the NAACP or other political orginazations had were not relevant to the topic at hand. The ONLY ONLY ONLY reason that she trotted those out was based on her idea that ...hey...you're black....these guys are black.....and therefore.....what? \

I swear, the Underpants Gnomes have better reasoning abilities than Barbara Boxer and the entire rest of Congress and especially Barak Obama.

Their business plan is as follows:
Phase 1: Collect Underpants
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Profit!

EDH said...

explain to me how the chair National Black Chamber of Commerce can get all outraged about being addressed as a representing the opinion of black people?

His explanation is that he was discussing an objective economic study by Charles River Associates, when Boxer injected position papers intended to isolate and put him outside the mainstream of "black" opinion. The slight being the notion blacks should not have differing opinions on the issue of economics, or that he isn't as black if he reaches a different conclusion.

The analogy would be if Althouse's scholarly interpretation of the constitution was attacked based on the position taken by liberal women's groups, the insinuation being that she can't really be a woman if she takes a contrary opinion.

That said, even if he anticipated, rightly, that Boxer was trying to portray him as some kind of race traitor, argumentatively he got way too out in front of demonstrating that to come across well.

DADvocate said...

OK. Alford was invited because he's black. Racist to begin with. Then he's expected to toe the line of black thought. More of the long time liberal meme that all blacks must think alike. Idiocy from start to finish.

garage mahal said...

Only black BUSINESS people are to be taken seriously. Not a group of stupid civil rights activists! Sure, Alford represents the BLACK Chamber of Commerce, and in his testimony he said “Let me speak for the African-American community, because I am African American”, there is a huge difference here because he is a serious BUSINESS person.

Lem said...

I think that man was being a little disingenuous.
Boxer was playing the game the way the game has been played for a long time now.
Common.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Only black BUSINESS people are to be taken seriously. Not a group of stupid civil rights activists!

I do believe you have the concept surrounded garage!

Dust Bunny Queen said...

That said, even if he anticipated, rightly, that Boxer was trying to portray him as some kind of race traitor, argumentatively he got way too out in front of demonstrating that to come across well.

This I agree with. However, we don't know how long before that clip he had to sit and endure this idiocy. Probably the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak when Barbara trotts out the NAACP etc. ------SNAP-----------!!!

Chase said...

"Seems to me, Mr Black Man Who Represents Some Black People Cause You Are Black After All, that we have a problem here."

"What is that, M'amm"

"Seems you don't agree with what I want you to say. But I want you and everyone else to know that I have the testimony of Mr Black Man Who Represents A Lot Of Liberal Black People and several other Mr Black Mans that agree with me, so neener, neener - you are not really Black"

"Excuse me, M'aam?"

"You don't count, Negro. I can't believe that you are still talking to me after I learned your ignant ass that you are not really 'black'".

"Um, excuse me . . ."

"In fact, you have a problem with Black people, don't you, General? Black People mean what I say they mean, not what some American patriotic dark-skinned honkey wants it to mean. You are a racist!"

"M'aam, I am Black"

"Mot unless I say you are, Willis! Now we have to move on. Somebody, where's that paper on 'Who can really be counted as Black' by Ann Althouse?"

NKVD said...

Nice, Chase, now try again in English.

Skyler said...

I wish more people would tell uppity senators that they aren't royalty, they work for us.

It doesn't matter if the man's retorts were logically inconsistent with his purpose for being there. Since when has sense or logic had anything to do with political grandstanding?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. In this case, it's about time the gander got a taste of how the goose has been treated for a long time.

Jason (the commenter) said...

He is a black man who recognizes that there is no black science. Just science.

chuckR nails it. What also bothered me (and no one else seems to be talking about this) is the end part of the video. Boxer seems only interested in building a consensus, not coming up with solutions that work.

Which is why every government plan these people come up with be a failure, from healthcare to stimulus to global warming.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"Mot unless I say you are, Willis!

O/T but I have inject a personal anecdote. True story. Back in my yout, one of my buddies was getting married and he rented a bus and all of us menfolk did a major night on the town for his bachelor party. The driver was a black guy...oops..I mean African American and as we went from bar to bar some of the guys would yell "Drive the fuck out of this bus Willis!"

I being the racially sensitive person that I am was appalled and embarrased and I made a point of apologizing to the driver for their behavior. He looked at me funny and asked why I was apologizing and I said, "Well you know, them calling you Willis...the whole 'whatchu talking about Willis thing." He looked at me and said deadpan. "My name is Wills. John Willis."

Right then I knew what it was like to be Joe Biden.

bearbee said...

@ AJ Lynch

& Dodd, Schumker.....

But in my proposed term limits of 10 minutes (ok, I'm open to negoitating that...60 minutes, maaaaaybe 24 hours)they would ALL be gone!!! .... and new members so busy campaigning they would never have time to legislate!!!!

YEEEEEEsssss!!!!!

garage mahal said...

Suddenly, it's great for a minority to STAND UP to their questioner and call them racial. Sometimes identity politics is a good thing!

[when invited by Republicans who is representing a pro-business org funded by Exxon-Mobil testifying against environment legislation]

Dad Bones said...

I wish I could turn on the TV every day and see a business person ream out a member of Congress. With a little practice the business people would get better at it which would give me a reason to watch the news again.

Chase said...

Suddenly, it's great for a minority to STAND UP to their questioner and call them racial. Sometimes identity politics is a good thing!

I know! Boxer starts with the identity politics and the General spanks her.

More like kinky politics!

Hoosier Daddy said...

Suddenly, it's great for a minority to STAND UP to their questioner and call them racial.

Actually garage is great to see a minority let you brain addled liberals know that some of them actually have independent thoughts and beliefs that happen to be outside of the sterotype your side created for them.

It must really sting when one of them doesn't follow the script doesn't it?

traditionalguy said...

The match was between scientific and economic truth represented by a businessman's testimony being countered by government-grant-pigs-at-the-trough organisations, not even there, asserting to be representatives of black interests (which everyone knows should be only in hand outs from their Democrat Masters). He had a very good point that she was blatantly using racial politics against his non-racial positions. Her idea was that a black man can have no thoughts about earning his own money, but that all blacks live off OPM stolen by the Democrats for them. That is offensive to a black man who can earn his own money. She was dissing his race big time.

bagoh20 said...

Ann, you really should not post in the nude. It's distracting. It looks like YOU are todays red meat.

garage mahal said...

It must really sting when one of them doesn't follow the script doesn't it?.

Not at all. Alford was just saying what he was paid to say, which is his right of course. I just love the double standards from you righties though. You love identity politics. It's like the first person in the room to say "who farted" is almost always the person who farted.

David Walser said...

Althouse,

I get where you're coming from, but your reaction is too superficial. Yes, Alford is the chair of a Black organization. However, the National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC) has a far different purpose and role than does the NAACP. The NBCC is more of an affinity group to allow people of similar backgrounds to pursue a common interest -- business. As such, the NBCC is similar to the "management society" that is sponsored by my university's alumni association. We get together once a month for lunch to network, listen to a speaker on some business related topic, and speculate on how the football team will do this year. The focus is NOT on the competition between our membership and the alumni of other business schools. While we might take a position on an issue of importance to our membership, it's very unlikely we'd view that position as uniquely pertaining to alumni from our school -- unless our school had somehow been singled out by government. So, too, I doubt the NBCC views its position on energy policy as uniquely "Black". (They might view their position on affirmative action as uniquely Black because of the way the issue affects its membership differently than the rest of society.)

The NAACP is different in its role and purpose. The NAACP is supposed to speak for Blacks in our society on a wide variety of issues. That's its purpose and role. The organization's job is to promote the interests of Black Americans without too much regard to how that might affect the larger society. Unlike affinity groups, like the NBCC or my school's management society, the NAACP views other racial groups as competitors. (This need not be a bad thing. There is such a thing as friendly competition.)

Given the different role of the NBCC and the NAACP, Alford was right to call Boxer on why the NAACP's views were germane to his testimony. It was as if she had quoted the Catholic church to rebut the position of the National Italian American Petroleum Engineers Associaiton.

chickenlittle said...

Here's hoping Boxer is defeated in 2010. The woman represents nothing I believe in.

ricpic said...

Get back on the plantation, boy.

William said...

Chase to the cut. The sting in Boxer's criticism was not the truth in it, but the fact that a rich, white woman was telling him that his opinions differed from the NAACP and thus he was some type of Uncle Tom stooge.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I just love the double standards from you righties though. You love identity politics.

Nice try garage but you fail. Its your side that plays identity politics. If you could take your partisan blinders off for two seconds you could see that is exactly what Boxer was doing. WTF does the NAACP have to do with energy policy other than to tell Alford that a bunch of colored folks are on her side so how can you be against me?

It isn't identity politics we love but rather the schadenfreude in watching a liberal get smacked down by someone who they think is on their side simply due to the color of their skin.

Its ok to admit it garage. You won't turn to dust like Dracula seeing the sun.

Dudley Do-right said...

Go DBQ, you nailed it! Would that the general had the guts to press the issue like Alford did.

Chase said...

One day, Ann and Barbara went for a walk. Holding hands as they went along, as is the custom for 10 year old girls of their status and upbringing, they came to edge of the wooded glen.

"What a great place for our picnic tea party, Ann! Let's set up here next to these trees!"

The girls unrolled the blanket they always brought along for their many picnics. They were careful to not soil their beautiful Shirley Temple dresses and stockings, and they certainly took measures to never mess up the lovely curls of blond hair that framed their sweet rose-cheeked faces.


"What a lovely day, Barbie! Will you have some more tea?" Ann asked, pretending to hold the imaginary teapot? "Oh my! What was that?"

Barbara turned her to see what caused Ann's wide-eyed gaze. From behind the trees nearest them out stepped a young boy, about an inch taller than either Ann or Barbara, dressed in farmer overalls, no shoes or hat. He stood looking at the girls, his face expressionless. Ann and Barbara had never seen someone with such dark skin before.

"Who is that?" Ann asked, her words shaking.

"I don't know", Barbara said, her gaze turning to that of a girl desiring to learn something new. Barbara stood up and walked towards the boy. "What's your name?"

The boy remained silent as Barbara walked toward him. When she was just about right in front of him

ricpic said...

Cut to the chase, Chase.

garage mahal said...

It isn't identity politics we love but rather the schadenfreude in watching a liberal get smacked down by someone who they think is on their side simply due to the color of their skin.

Again, Alford said “Let me speak for the African-American community, because I am African American”. Then subsequently has a meltdown when faced with opinions from the black community.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Again, Alford said “Let me speak for the African-American community, because I am African American”. Then subsequently has a meltdown when faced with opinions from the black community.

Don't you think it was a given he was speaking for the business side of said community? The one that would have a more relevant opinion the topics impact on business than the NAACP?

If not than I guess you're right garage, he's just a 'typical uppity black man' givin it to the MAN.

garage mahal said...

Don't you think it was a given he was speaking for the business side of said community?

LOL. Sure okay Hoosier.

Lexington Green said...

Italicize the noun, not the adjective. He was there in his capacity as a businessman, talking about the impact on business. On other days, he may be there to talk about the race element.

Boxer was incredibly condescending.

She is saying, I trump your facts by getting other Black people to say "no, you're wrong".

It is like saying that a Black lawyer representing the NAACP with good arguments loses to a Black lawyer on the other side of the case because the second lawyer is Black, too.

The issue is the merits.

Sometimes there are merits, aside from the race of the advocates, that matter.

This is one of those times.

Hoosier Daddy said...

LOL. Sure okay Hoosier

I'll take that for what its worth since you can't admit the Boxer was doing nothing but playing a race card.

Just goes to show the liberal mind is impervious even to the blatently obvious.

Pogo said...

"Could you stop chomping on that red meat for a second and explain to me how the chair National Black Chamber of Commerce can get all outraged about being addressed as a representing the opinion of black people?"

Alexis de Tocqueville answered that question more than a century ago.

He described the essential role played by "political associations in American life by the aid of which men endeavor to defend themselves against the despotic action of a majority or against the aggressions of regal power."

He goes on to add: "If each citizen did not learn, in proportion as he individually becomes more feeble and consequently more incapable of preserving his freedom single-handed, to combine with his fellow citizens for the purpose of defending it, it is clear that tyranny would unavoidably increase together with equality."

Organizations like the Black Chamber of Commerce are intended for that very purpose.

He contrasts those organizations with civil associations that follow another pattern: "As soon as several of the inhabitants of the United States have taken up an opinion or a feeling which they wish to promote in the world, they look out for mutual assistance; and as soon as they have found one another out, they combine. From that moment they are no longer isolated men, but a power seen from afar, whose actions serve for an example and whose language is listened to".

This no longer describes the NAACP, which was initially about mutual assistance, but has become just another pig at the government trough.

But as the US government reaches more than half of GDP, we are all reduced to begging for scraps, and the distinctions fall away.

But don't blame Alford for that.

Jana said...

Wow, all I have to say is that Hoosier Daddy, David Walser and others have pretty much decimated the reasoning in this post.

I think they've got you there, Althouse!

Maguro said...

Alford should have just noted that the NAACP has no expertise to assess the merits of global warming theory and moved on. Instead, he made the whole thing about him, which was probably his intent in the first place.

I do find it interesting that Boxer seems to believe that lining up an ethnic pressure group in support of global warming theory somehow immunizes it from criticism from members of that ethnic group. Identity politics is all powerful, at least in her eyes.

Alex said...

I don't care if he is opposed to CapNTrade, I don't like racist organizations! America should be beyond race already, but it isn't. How sad. I know Titus would be only thinking of how to fuck him or get reamed.

Alex said...

Can someone tell me where I can collect my piece of the 50% government pie? I don't want to be left with just scraps.

Mortimer Brezny said...

Barbara Boxer is a racist.

chuckR said...

Pogo @ 10:22

Thank you. How is it that you can bash off a short editorial like that and most editorial writers that I (increasingly don't bother to) read can't do as well in a 24 hour cycle?

T J Sawyer said...

Question for professor Althouse:

Are you now or will you ever be a member of the AAUW? (That's the American Association of University WOMEN.)

John said...

Good comments all. I think that Alford pretty well nailed it and most here seem to agree.

I am surprised that nobody else picked up on Mrs Boxer's supreme minute of briliance (ie; laser like stupidity.

She seems to be taking Alford to task for not being a Californian, though I fail to see what that has to do with anything. He mentions that he had lived in CA longer than she. "I was there when you came."

So she starts in getting indignant "You don't know when I came." How stupid can she be? Or does she think that Alford is just another stupid black man to dumb to check her bio before making a statement like that.

He says he came in 62 (63?) and she mumbles that she actually got there in 65.

I look forward to her early retirement.

John

Oligonicella said...

Here's the reasoning level Althouse.

You believe a judge should use empathy. I know a woman who is white that believes that judges shouldn't rely on empathy.

Therefore, you're wrong.

SteveR said...

Boxer's place as a U.S. Senator ultimately leads to an understanding of why California is near financial collapse and why the United States is fast heading in the same direction. How does this box of rocks get elected?

B said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dust Bunny Queen said...

How does this box of rocks get elected?

Have you ever been to San Francsico? Land of the knee jerk liberal.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Or does she think that Alford is just another stupid black man

Considering Boxer and her Party think that African-Americans can't do anything without government assistance and intervention I think pretty much speaks for itself.

SteveR said...

DBQ: yeah I know the answer. Too bad I live in a state they want to come to and "improve".

Hoosier Daddy said...

How does this box of rocks get elected?

I think that can be asked about at least 50% of our elected cockroaches. Hell, the Vice President of the US just said the government needs to spend more money or we'll go bankrupt.

Ralph L said...

This week, it was front page news here when the local white Masons and black Masons held their first ever joint meeting. It never occurred to me they were still segregated, but I suppose neither lodge wants to disappear or dilute.

tim maguire said...

garage, why are you having such a hard time with the concept that he was angry because he was speaking within his area of expertise and he was being countered by people speaking outside their area of expertise for no other reason than skin color? Boxer was countering his economic argument with a racial purity argument.

As for your snide remarks about Republicans standing up for minority rights, I would hope that you are smart enough to realize that you are changing the subject. A tactic very similar to what Boxer was doing in that video.

Prof. Althouse, I suspect, wrote this post with the same part of her brain that pulled the lever for Obama on election day.

Brent said...

The Spring Cotillion brought out all the eligible young ladies to be seen and properly matched with a handsome beau. This was the first year that Ann and Barbara would attend as guests rather than novices watching from the punch service table.

"Where is Barbie" Ann thought. But she already knew the answer. Barbie was with Jefferson. How could she keep stealing away with that black boy? Of course Ann nursed her own secret dreams of being in the sweaty, well-muscled arms of the beautiful farm hand Jefferson. Why not her? She knew why not. Barbie was a risk taker, attracted to danger; she often came to the old mansion bedroom the girls shared smelling of sweat and sex, often just before dawn and the wake-up call.

But this was Spring Cotillion, they were there "to be seen". Beauregard had no sooner introduced himself to Ann when a scream was heard out on the veranda

garage mahal said...

garage, why are you having such a hard time with the concept that he was angry because he was speaking within his area of expertise.

His expertise is environmental legislation? And I wasn't angry. I just found the angry black man speaking up to a white congressperson being embraced by conservatives pretty funny. That's not something you see every day.

Roger J. said...

Nahhh--Boxer isn't stupid--She's a J.A.P. The title for stupid goes to patti (osama day cares) Murray who the twinks in Seattle keep sending to the Senate. Now THERE is stupid.

Synova said...

"It must really sting when one of them doesn't follow the script doesn't it?."

"Not at all. Alford was just saying what he was paid to say, which is his right of course."

Garage, I'm ashamed of you. You *know* better than this. You do!

I can not believe you just expressed, outright, the idea that no, indeed, a black man can NOT have a legitimate opinion other than what is defined by his race.

Paid? That's as outright slanderous and insulting as the b*tch feminazi that once explained to me that I was told what to think by men. It completely removes any respect due a person to say that they do not EVEN own their own thoughts and ideas if those thoughts and ideas are not the proper ones. They don't even have the basic human dignity of being allowed to be genuinely in error, of having a different opinion and being *wrong*.

I don't think that you are a person like that, so I'm disappointed that you've done the same thing.

Alex said...

Garage - you find it funny that conservative embrace black men when they are "Uncle Toms" right? Is that how it is?

Synova said...

"Alford should have just noted that the NAACP has no expertise to assess the merits of global warming theory and moved on. Instead, he made the whole thing about him, which was probably his intent in the first place."

She really wasn't giving him a chance to "note" anything like that. She had a stack of papers and was going through them one by one without a pause before the next even when he said something like "What does that mean?"

So she ignores him and keeps on with the next one and he says something like, "You're being racial."

It was obvious that the people she was quoting had no bearing on the question beyond issuing an opinion while black.

Laura(southernxyl) said...

"I just found the angry black man speaking up to a white congressperson being embraced by conservatives pretty funny. That's not something you see every day."

You actually could say this:

"I just found the angry black man speaking up to a Democrat congressperson ... pretty funny. That's not something you see every day."

I have to say that I get Ann's point. If you come to me with the qualification of being the chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, I'm going to be stunned if you get irritated by me talking about black folks. Because you had your identity politics badge on already when you stuck your hand out to shake and said "hello". Now maybe he didn't realize that that's how all that comes across, but if not, then perhaps he will now.

Alex said...

So is Alford an Uncle Tom or what? Me gots to know!

Maguro said...

His expertise is environmental legislation?

His expertise is business and he certainly understands the burdens that Waxman-Markley would impose on business better than Barb Boxer or the NAACP.

Again, his anger kind of detracted from his testimony, I thought. He should have focused on the facts instead of getting pissed off at an idiot congressperson.

I guess if he'd just talked sensibly about the effects of enviro legislation on business, no one would have noticed his testimony.

Alex said...

Fact is with Obama/Pelosi trying to shove their Communist dystopia down our collective gullets, I'm shocked we're not seeing more anger directed at them. Some of you think it was a distraction, but I say HIGH TIME! We need more anger!

garage mahal said...

Garage, I'm ashamed of you. You *know* better than this. You do!

I can not believe you just expressed, outright, the idea that no, indeed, a black man can NOT have a legitimate opinion other than what is defined by his race.
.

It's not race, it's about what organization he is representing. I'm not even saying who is right or wrong on the legislation. Exxon gave them over 300k, (again, not saying it's wrong), but you know exactly what their position is going to be.

garage mahal said...

His expertise is business and he certainly understands the burdens that Waxman-Markley would impose on business better than Barb Boxer or the NAACP..

There's no businesspeople in the NAACP?

Veeshir said...

explain to me how the chair National Black Chamber of Commerce can get all outraged about being addressed as a representing the opinion of black people

I'm mostly with you on that and that it seemed he was waiting for the moment except.....
I love seeing fools hoist on their own retard.

Alex said...

Can I just come out and say it? White liberals like garage who play identity politics all day long are EVIL!!!!

section9 said...

Okay, would everyone have been happier if George Lincoln Rockwell had come in and testified leading in a procession of the Illinois Nazi Party?

Synova said...

"I have to say that I get Ann's point. If you come to me with the qualification of being the chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, I'm going to be stunned if you get irritated by me talking about black folks."

There is no indication at all that Mr. Alford doesn't find value in black organizations or in an organization promoting black businesses. There is little doubt that he was invited to testify at least partly because he *is* black, if only as a bonus to illustrate with his person that whatever the heck it was affects everyone and certainly all businesses and the economy.

Boxer obviously prepared ahead of time to discredit his opinions on the facts by showing he was out of step with other large black organizations.

Yes, I'd be irritated. And besides, isn't that pretty classically an ad hominum attack or whatever? She was attempting to discredit his opinion by addressing his person through race. Period.

I'm not at all surprised she tried it, but if it were me I'd be furious.

It's a bit hard to present an analogy that would work... how about if I were an engineer or even a manager for a company that built nuclear power plants and the administration was set on some policy that would ruin my industry and the opposition invited me to speak to the Senate because, frankly, I'm a woman with children and all nurturing and crap and would present, along with the facts and research and opinion, a "message."

And I sat down to testify, all my little ducks in a row, and a Senator who doesn't like the fact that I might put a softer, more nurturing "face" on nuclear power, did research and preparation ahead of time and instead of citing facts starts off with a long list of opinions and resolutions by women and women's organizations, to oppose nuclear power.

And I say... But, I'm an engineer, and these are the facts! Or, we've done studies and found these things to be true, the studies and methods are here and here.

And the answer is... well, you showed up here with a vagina, so forget your studies or your facts, let's talk about all the vaginas that think that nuclear power is icky... because if you don't agree, then you're obviously in the employ of the patriarchy and your opinion isn't even your own.

Laura(southernxyl) said...

Synova, but if you came in as chair of some group of "Women Engineers" and that's what got you in the door?

I'm not saying that what Boxer did was all right. I'm just saying that if you identify as an identity politics person from the get-go, you should expect crap like this.

Synova said...

"Exxon gave them over 300k, (again, not saying it's wrong), but you know exactly what their position is going to be."

So examine the study!

Exxon would probably not give them lots of money if they were not confident of the conclusions but *knowing* and *proving* are different things. They can *know* this is going to have a highly negative impact, but they have to *show* it. So they need a study with controls and everything, to cross their t's and dot their i's, so it's not just he said, she said.

Now... please... if this was NOT going to negatively impact industry and business, why would Exxon even care?

In fact... NO scientist undertakes an experiment where he or she doesn't have a starting hypothesis to check. Any research that reaches experimentation stage has reached a stage where they think they have the answers and now they've got to prove it.

If the study and the conclusions are bad, show that the study and the conclusions are bad.

Dismissing them on account of the fact that those paying for it all wanted to prove that what they knew in their gut was true, is lazy and stupid because it enters the realm of DUH!

Original Mike said...

Yeah, she (Boxer) stepped in it.

Synova said...

"Synova, but if you came in as chair of some group of "Women Engineers" and that's what got you in the door?"

Absolutely. If someone like Boxer thought that she could discredit my opinion by citing a resolution or two passed by NOW and MADD, yes.

(And that NOW and MADD might also have members who are engineers or MIT grads is utterly irrelevant.)

"I'm not saying that what Boxer did was all right. I'm just saying that if you identify as an identity politics person from the get-go, you should expect crap like this."

Yes, and be prepared to say, "Senator, I worked hard for this degree and am proud of my accomplishments in this industry, and I refuse to be reduced to a vagina."

And if the Senator in question walked into that, then... score.

rhhardin said...

Organized women engineers are trouble.

Lay low, is my advice to the men.

Synova said...

Do I need to be clear that I was describing a hypothetical world where I didn't get mono half way through my first semester as an EEE student and switched to Art and Poly-sci?

bearbee said...

Per his bio he is a regular before the creatures of Congress, so he knows his way around, and has in the past testified that he believes Kyoto is bad for black businesses:

Mr. Alford is regularly called upon by Congress to testify on various legislative initiatives related to small business development, e-commerce, health care, social security reform, tax reform and global trade issues. He has delivered key testimony, for example, on the ongoing debate over the Kyoto Protocol. During his presentation, Mr. Alford argued that Black businesses in America and those in developing nations would suffer disproportionately if the United States agreed to adopt many provisions of the Kyoto Protocol.

Apparently prior to the blow-up, WJS writes he had commented on the regressiveness of cap and trade tax on black households and was skeptical about green job creation benefiting the black community.

As someone earlier mentioned she accepted his address of her as 'ma'am' but sharply reprimanded a white military officer for the same 'offense.'

He can't have it both ways and, yes, she is a clown.

bagoh20 said...

"I just found the angry black man speaking up to a white congressperson being embraced by conservatives pretty funny. That's not something you see every day."

That statement all by itself demonstrates your blindness and it's source. Bigotry toward both blacks and conservatives. If only you could make the points you want so elegantly.

Pogo said...

The black man, once freed from the iron fetters forged by the white man, now finds he is once again enslaved, this time by a white woman, and this time by an idea, identity politics.

His kind are owned by the progressives, she tells him. She points out that he has to get his mind right, and act like the rest of the good blacks who espouse the righteous faith. She carries the list of right-thinking blacks as proof that he has strayed; a runaway, a fugitive, who needs to be returned to his master.

What strange fruit the Progressive tree bears.

AllenS said...

What's up with that uppity coon-ass? Doesn't he know better than to disrespect that white woman? He even got this Althouse woman all upset.

NKVD said...

Allen S - as was pointed out to me by someone calling him self Galbraithe, "coon-ass" does not mean what you think it means.

But that's some fine racial hatred you have goin' on there. Obama thanks you for your vote.

Matt said...

Alford, whose organization has received at least $275,000 from ExxonMobil, spoke on behalf of the "black community" in his opening statement. As Boxer noted, it seems "relevant" that other organizations with "a deep understanding" of the "black community," such as NAACP and 100 Black Men of Atlanta see the threat of global warming and the opportunity in a clean energy future.
Boxer was right. This guy was trotted out just like Linda Chavez was trotted out by the GOP yesterday. They don't represent anyone but corporate GOP interests.

Howard said...

I agree 100% with Althouse and Matt. What sane person could argue with these considered arguments:

1)Harry was way (way) too Uppity (well above his station) by being rude to the honorable Jr. Senator from Cawlifornia (by way of Brooklyn). I get very upset when a black man stands up to a white woman. Those were lynching words in a better era.

2)Mr. Alford clearly did not Know His Place by arrogantly deviating from the script by not playing the ever grateful Stepin Fetchit shuck and jive routine expected from all of the Brothers called to entertain the hoi polloi. Obviously he needs to be sent back to the woodshed for "re-education".

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Because you had your identity politics badge on already when you stuck your hand out to shake and said "hello". Now maybe he didn't realize that that's how all that comes across, but if not, then perhaps he will now.


So if you are a member of the National Organization for WOMEN and you are invited to speak on the topic of women's rights and job pay disparity, it would be ok with you when the questioner begins citing recipes from Betty Crocker and that most stay at home housewives who home school their children disagree with you about the need for equal pay for equal work?

To quote those off topic and irrelevant sources during your serious discussion merely because you have the temerity to have the "identity" of WOMAN and they are WOMEN also. After all WOMEN have a group identity and therefore we all think alike or if you don't then you must not be a real woman. Probably some sort of dyke I guess?

Forget your expertise in your field or your credentials. If we wear panty hose we all are the same.

Correct?

tim maguire said...

garage mahal said...
And I wasn't angry. I just found the angry black man speaking up to a white congressperson being embraced by conservatives pretty funny. That's not something you see every day.


True. I can't argue with that.

Matt said...

Howard
I was actually unaware of this gentlemen's tone because I had actually only read the more salient parts of the transcipt when I wrote my comment. So stop pretending to play your game.

Personally, I don't care if he yelled at Boxer or whispered to her. The gentleman's attitude is completely irrelevant to the arguement being made. What is relevent is a general misuderstanding on his part of what Boxer was doing.

The bottom line is in his opening statement her said:
On behalf of the National Black
Chamber of Commerce (NBCC), thank you for the opportunity to address you today.


Get it? He was not there on behalf of just a regular Chamber of Commerce. He was there [in part] representing the Black Chamber and the black community. So, therefore, it completely makes sense for Boxer to point to other Black organizations [who represent blacks] who disagree with his position - which, by the way, is a position that has been well oiled [pun intended] by ExxonMobil.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

So, therefore, it completely makes sense for Boxer to point to other Black organizations [who represent blacks] who disagree with his position

The issue isn't that there aren't other organizations that represent BLACKS. The issue is that it is completely irrelevant to the subject of business people and the affect of a cap and trade bill upon their businesses what the NAACP thinks. NAACP is an organization with a very different focus than the Chamber of Commerce.

The ONLY reason that it was brought up was because he is black, they are black. Think of it as a logic problem or a math subset. There may be some overlap in the sets black businessman, black political activists....but just because there is some overlap, it doesn't make the sets identical or equal.

However, in the racist logic of Babs, black is black is black. It is demeaning, insulting and RACIST to assume any such thing.

Cedarford said...

Roger J. said...
Nahhh--Boxer isn't stupid--She's a J.A.P. The title for stupid goes to patti (osama day cares) Murray who the twinks in Seattle keep sending to the Senate. Now THERE is stupid..
.

Boxer has inherited the mantle. She took over when Sen William Smith of NH, believed one of the stupidest ever to serve. She has had to defend that "stupidest Senator" against formidable competition. Dick Durbin, Strom Thurmond in his final vegetative state, Patty Murray, Mel Martinez, and some say Jim Bunning.

She is also probably Good-for-Jews. In the sense that anytime someone talks about "clever and cunning Jews" manipulating the media, Wall Street, the prime movers of Bolshevikism....people can say "all Jews are not like that stereotype. Look at Barbara Boxer. Dumber than a sack of hammers!"
Sort of like stereotype debunkers like Catholic Priests discovered with 3 hot female mistresses. Or the hopelessly disorganized German who does not get a covert woody seeing Leopard II tanks heading Eastward.

For true JAPs who married into great wealth, you have Jane Harman, Diane Feinstein...and Pelosi - though Catholic - is in essence a JAP wannabe.

====================
An equivalent would be the Council of Cuban business leaders of Southern Florida testifying that cap&trade is a horrifically bad idea for the S Florida economy. Having numbers showing what taxes and premiums and higher electricity costs would do to businesses and jobs. Pointing out only a few companies close to Algore and Wall street tycoons will benefit. Not businesses or jobs outside the Beltway, NYC, or Algore's circle.
Then being informed by Boxer that "Your co-Hispanics in the Mexican La Raza movement love Cap&Trade and whatever else Obama wants to do."
That would be similarly - highly ignorant, lumping all "you people" together, and condescending.

Alford was pissed off at that oft-used pet Sen. Boxer tactic? Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

Titus,hellohowareyouIamsuperasusual said...

I absolutely love her.

She is fabulous.

Been on Curb Your Enthusiasm.

Jewish-fab.

Rich-fab.

San Francisco-fab.

Thin-fab.

Not bad looking for an older broad.

I have said this before but Pelosi, Harman, Feinstein, Boxer all fab. It is so nice there are some fabulous women in government.

There is only one jewish republican in the house and no jewish republicans in the senate. That is just sad.

Jews are fab.

Synova said...

"spoke on behalf of the "black community" in his opening statement."

Did he actually say that or are you making it up? Because that's not what you quoted.

"On behalf of the National Black
Chamber of Commerce (NBCC), thank you for the opportunity to address you today.
"

Saying you represent the Black Chamber of Commerce is not the same as announcing that you are speaking for the black community as a whole.

onparkstreet said...

I had the same thoughts as Pogo (not as eloquent, of course), but that we have a long and proud history of civic organizations in this country. My desi peoples, who only started immigrating in significant numbers in the late 60s have all sorts of different private civic organizations. Indian American Motel owners or physicians groups. Lots of groups have done that. I don't see the big deal.

Anyway, even if he was obnoxious, I wish more people would be. Senators need a dose of reality now and then - the political class is really so full of it.

Laura(southernxyl) said...

"So if you are a member of the National Organization for WOMEN and you are invited to speak on the topic of women's rights and job pay disparity, it would be ok with you when the questioner begins citing recipes from Betty Crocker and that most stay at home housewives who home school their children disagree with you about the need for equal pay for equal work?"

But DBQ, Boxer wasn't quoting Betty Crocker or Aunt Jemima, she was quoting these organizations on clean energy's effect on jobs, which was the subject at hand.

I just really dislike the "I can say X but you can't" stuff. If you don't want people making a big deal about your race, or your sex, you have to start by not making a big deal of it, yourself. IMO.

Matt said...

synova
In his testimony he said:
I come to you, not as an economist, but with a deep understanding of small and minority owned businesses. Later in his testimony he says the 'black community' suffers when the economy 'goes south'.
So he is representing a group [or groups] rather than just the Black Chamber and, in turn, his interest is to represent small business minority communities [notably black ones]. Therefore, Boxer mentioning the viewpoints on energy policy by other black groups [such as the NAACP] is completely within reason.
The guy has legit points from a business stand point - so that is not the issue. The issue is that it is odd in this context that he thinks Boxer is being racist for pointing to other groups that ALSO represent black communities.
Does he expect her to mention the views of the French or Hungarian small businesses?
If he were a black man who was CEO of a company that did not represent minority groups and Boxer asked the question then THAT would be offensive. As it is I am not sure why the guy got angry.

Chase said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chase said...

Matt-

If you "are not sure why this guy got angry", you might just be a redneck.

BJM said...

Bearbee, unfortunately some of the most egregious examples of government incompetence are appointees, czars or advisors.

I really can't believe Summers said this out loud. As foolish an example as it is on its face, does he not know that Google laid off 6000 workers?

Summer's 15 minutes expired three years ago.

Matt said...

Chase
I'm guessing you read only the last sentence I wrote?

Clearly, if Boxer was saying to the guy, 'Hey, all black people think alike and you're black so why are you not thinking like they do?" Then, yes, that would be offensive. But she is not saying anything of the sort.

This man represents black communities and he comes to the Senate to speak on their behalf - and in this case show how Energy policy will affect black communities. Note he is not speaking on behalf of White, Hispanic or Asian communities. Therefore, it is completely within the realm of reason to mention the opinion of other black community representatives who come to a different conclusion about Energy policy.
This, perhaps, begs the question: Just who represents the black community? I would say both this gentleman and the NAACP along with many other groups do. But he is not more representative than the NAACP is - and so Boxer points that out for the record.
Now I will agree Boxer is Liberal. But his pocket has been lined by ExxonMobil so he is not above board himself.

juniorfruit said...

Lars-lol

I like what Beck had to say. He said he loves watching the libs eat their own.Not Glenn, Jeff...

Both were out of line. Boxer w/ the games. And the black guy for being too sensitive.

Don't you think theGeneral could have chewed out Boxer if he would of wanted to?

Will Cate said...

Ann, I politely disagree. Her not-so-subtle subtext was clear: "But you're a neeegro, Mr. Alford! Why don't you think like all these other neeegros?"

Synova said...

"Does he expect her to mention the views of the French or Hungarian small businesses?"

Why not? At least that would be relevant.

Compare apples to apples... minority owned small business to minority owned small business.

Granted... she wouldn't do that because the French or Hungarian small business organizations would have agreed with *him* and not with *her*.

Hoosier Daddy said...

There's no businesspeople in the NAACP?

LOL ok sure garage!

JAL said...

He mentioned he was a veteran a couple times.

Think it was part payback for the treatment she gave the general?

LoafingOaf said...

JAL, apparently the general emailed him and said "Go get 'em!"

I do think Boxer exposed herself as a racist and deserved what she got. Alford was invited to testify because his group had a study done on the impact the bill would have. Boxer pulls this racial stuff on lots of black people, going back to the high tech lynching of Clarence Thomas.

BTW, the other senator in the clip seems to be saying Boxer wasn't even telling the truth about the NAACP resolution. Anyone know if she was lying on top of being a filthy racist?

Deb said...

If anybody thinks that most of these clowns in Washington are looking out for anyone but themselves, they are wrong. I include all branches of government.

These creatures in Congress must go. The longer they stay in office, the less they care about us and the more arrogant and disdainful of ordinary people they become.


IMO, Boxer's treatment of the general and Alford just underscore that arrogance of the life time civil servant.

LoafingOaf said...

Plus, he was rude to Boxer from the start

You realize that this exchange happened 99 minutes into the hearing, right? And, although I haven't watched the whole hearing, I have seen more than the YouTube clip. I see that Alford was told by Inhofe that Boxer was about to start bringing up the NAACP resolution to him, and this occurred immediately before the YouTube clip.

Furthmore, in Alford's first interactions with Boxer (around the 78 minute mark), he is not rude to her. At the 85 minute mark, Boxer and Alford have their first exchange about whether Alford is from CA or not. She starts saying to him that she wants to invite him to her home state. He smiles and points out he's a native Californian and in in CA often. But it must've bugged him that she didn't seem to have any research on who she was talking to.

Anyway, he wasn't rude to her from the start.

The full hearing is availble at this link

Aaron said...

to me, i will be honest. after she was so rude to that military man, i loved watching her get her comeuppance.

but yeah, its a little tough to wrap my head around a man in a race based business associaion getting all huffy about her treating him as a black man.