On Confusing Prejudice with Journalism

I wondered which pejorative term Wendi C. Thomas, of the Commercial Appeal, was referring to in her article “Bergmann More of a Blip than a Threat.” The article is a pure diatribe against the Charlotte Bergmann campaign. Wendi Thomas is known for her racist leanings, however, in this article, she has shown the light of her views upon liberal racism like few before her. In liberal circles, if you’re not the right kind of black, you need to “get back on the porch” as she concludes in her article.

So in reading the phrase, I searched out the etymology of her inference. The phrase, in its contextual history, was a pejorative way to describe African-Americans. In fact, the context was “porch monkey” or “porch Negro (sic)”. The Urban dictionary defines porch monkey as “a derogatory term for a person of African or African-American decent. But it could also mean a generally lazy person.” It further defines porch negro (sic) as “an African-American that is fond of sitting on the front porch for extended periods of time.”

So I wondered if the pejoratives that were strewn throughout the article would be sufficient for NPR executives to call for the dismissal of Wendi Thomas. But alas, she doesn’t appear on Fox News.

I questioned whether the liberals who are so fond of Steve Cohen proudly cheer her column on and not to my surprise, many of those liberals did with comments on the newspaper’s website.

But alas, I move too quickly. We need to go back to explore her article in context of the “wrong kind of black” and recognize that liberals will excoriate minorities who don’t fit their profile of the Democrat victimology. So they call the FBI when an apology is requested by Ginny Thomas, they fire Juan Williams when he expresses his emotions, and they tell an up and coming black candidate to get back on the porch when she has the temerity to stand for office as a conservative.

Thomas’ article criticizes everything about the Bergmann campaign, from the picture on her signs:

“The words on the white signs, with Bergmann’s oval picture, were so tiny they could barely be read from a passing car. (Just FYI: Oval pictures are appropriate only when the photo is of the dearly departed on the front of a funeral program. As you were.)”

To her ability to win her audacious campaign;

“One version of the red-and-white new signs, declares boldly: Charlotte Bergmann Can Win. This could be true. Bergmann could win the lottery. Or prom queen. Or a trip to the moon. But winning enough votes to beat the incumbent? Not in a million years. The 9th Congressional District is as blue as the sky.”

To her views of expanded government:

“Instead, she recites worn Tea Party rhetoric, including the one about fighting off Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi who, contrary to what Republican TV ads might have you believe is not on the November ballot.

Earlier this month, Bergmann, described as another Mama Grizzly, went on the Web-only “Sarah Palin Radio” show.

When asked what’s the biggest difference between her and the incumbent, Bergmann replied that Cohen “believes that the people in the community should live off food stamps and unemployment,” while she believes in free enterprise.

To her opinions in reversing the policies of Obama, Reid and Pelosi (and Cohen too!):

“Her legislative priorities include a desire to “turn back the hands of time” but that could be problematic. Some of Bergmann’s Tea Party brothers and sisters would turn it back so far, they’d repeal the constitutional amendments that allow Bergmann to vote, both as a black person and as a woman.

So, thank you, Bergmann, for the entertainment. You may now join Tinker on the porch.”

You see, the Thomas hypothesis is that all blacks are blue, that all blacks cannot think for themselves and all blacks are beholding to the Democrats. Maybe the folks in the 9th District will consider whether they like the “Willie Herenton School System,” the “John & Ophelia Ford Ethics in Government” or the “Cohen Economy” as they vote on the 2nd of November.

The NAACP recently published its report on the racist and radical elements of the Tea Party. Using a left wing enterprise to “discover” the covert relationships to white supremacists and militia groups, the NAACP was quick to condemn those sinister elements of the Tea Party. I wonder if Ben Jealous would simply like to read a Scripps Howard newspaper to find those racists in his own liberal back yard or should I say porch, to turn a phrase? It’s doubtful.

Memphis politics has always been racially charged. But with the ascendency of conservatives and the Tea Party movement, and the likely tsunami that is overtaking Democrats everywhere, it appears that “Bush Derangement Syndrome” is once again setting in on the intelligencia of the liberal press. So as I ponder the vitriol so apparent in this piece of journalism, I am struck by how the Commercial Appeal and the Scripps Howard News Corporation could allow this article. And to that extent, I am calling for the termination of Wendi C. Thomas and her editor, Otis L. Sanford, for allowing this racist drivel to be printed.

Unlike the Tea Party, which has firmly rejected racism and removed any leadership who would write or represent these disgusting and small minded attitudes, it is unlikely that the Commercial Appeal, Scripps Howard News or the NAACP will weigh in on this matter. Apparently, you’re only a “good” black if you’re not running as a conservative and any conservative blacks need to be “back on the porch.” Now which porch would that be? Perhaps Wendi can provide her insights to such a rhetorical question.

Note to readers: Wendi C. Thomas is a staff writer at the Commercial Appeal. You can contact her at 901-529-5896 or Send Wendi C. Thomas an email.