Relentful pandering will get you nowhere.
Good point.
Etymology:
From Chaucer’s character Pandare (in Troilus and Criseyde), from Italian Pandaro (found in Boccaccio), from Latin Pandarus, from Ancient Greek Πάνδαρος (Pándaros). (See also Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida).
Political Blackface
Nice phrase. I have an idea how to propagate it.
Someone, please download this Al Jolson data –
– and mash it up with political principles and public figures of your choice.
Satire: all the opportunity of a public service announcement, none of the responsibility.
Well, the problem with that, is that I interact with lots of actual real live Americans of African descent pretty much every day, usually for eight to ten hours a day. And that’s not even counting my actual family. Now, I know Boingers in California don’t actually sit down and work with large numbers of dark-skinned people very much, but I’m over on the other coast, and the extreme right wing pseudo-libertarian anti-tax anti-government viewpoint is well represented among the ethnic minorities of my personal acquaintance. There’s even one black guy who is a fervent Trump supporter, although most of his friends think that’s pretty nutso.
So if it’s astroturfing for a rich old white man to donate to a nasty right-wing organization run by a black man, is a rich white man donating to the NAACP also astroturfing? Cornell Brooks of the NAACP, who lives in Hyattsville near my sister, is a black man, after all.
And what about the SPLC, which is an organization founded by a Jew and run primarily by left-wing white people, that works for the benefit of poor American minorities? Since it seems to be so important what the relative colors of people’s skin are, am I still allowed to donate to SPLC, or is that restricted only to Jews?
Answering that fundamental question seems far more important than race-baiting… maybe the skin tone of donors doesn’t really matter, and we should focus on the activity of the group and whether or not their activities do harm to black Americans?
Like the Arab League peace plans for Israel and Palestine which ignore the demands of both parties.
So if it’s astroturfing for a rich old white man to donate to a nasty right-wing organization run by a black man, is a rich white man donating to the NAACP also astroturfing?
The point of the article is that Black Americans for a Better Future is not run by a black man at all or has any Black Americans nor represents them in any conceivable way. It is simply a way to cultivate the black voters they want, not represent how black voters are. NAACP is acknowledged by black voters as a group representing their interests. Not what some rich white people want them to vote for. BAFOABF represents white rich people but pretends to represent black people.
And what about the SPLC, which is an organization founded by a Jew and run primarily by left-wing white people, that works for the benefit of poor American minorities?
When did Jews stop being a minority in America? Since when has anyone accused SPLC of not representing the group they claim to work for?
Mister44 had the right idea about the organization. It is merely a diverse sounding name for a shell organization for ultra conservative rich white people.
I know you like to argue for colorblindness, which is a nice sunshiney goal and all, but you really are willfully blinding yourself to the realities in this case. An org called Black Americans for a Better Future, which is funded by wealthy white men who clearly lack any genuine interest in improving the actual circumstances of most black Americans, has an appointed black face at its helm, who’s clearly their for the purpose of hiding who the real moneyed backers are and what their actual interests are.
The “skin tone,” that is, race, of everyone involved in this con game really does matter – it’s central to it.
If you look at where Obama got the vast majority of his votes in 2012, it was in the major cities, and represented virtually all African-American voters.
Turns out it’s both. I didn’t realize that deductions withheld from an employee’s wages were also called payroll tax, by the employer. Hence my confusion. 
Guess again. This is the organization where I spent the better part of the last decade working and teaching. But do share what else you “know” about us Californians.
How well does a gig like that pay? Bennies? Working at the bombfactory is getting old.
The good and bad news is that it’s one of those places you work for because you get to feel good about what you do for a living. As far as the monetary compensation… I’m actually making more now that I’m teaching at the local community college.
Heck community college would be nice too but sadly I would have to upgrade that university of dropped out degree… 
No. BAFABF is a political action committee, i.e. they buy ads and donate to political campaigns, but mostly hide who the actual donors are. They can not and do not spend money on other activities, so nothing they do directly impacts black people. Also, their name implies that BAFABF is made up of black donors when (gasp) there are none.
NAACP is not a Super PAC. Its work continues outside of elections (not even sure they can donate to campaigns), and they take concrete actions toward the advancing the status of blacks and minorities. BAFABF is just trying to get Ted Cruz elected.
You could give these white guys the benefit of the doubt, but why wouldn’t they just donate to another PAC supporting Ted Cruz then? Or donate to an organization such as NAACP that has a long and robust history of supporting minority interests? The only plausible explanation is that having the appearance of black support would somehow make Cruz appear as an every man.
Hey, that’s really cool! I will take some time and look at it closer, but I like what I see at that link at first glance. Thanks for helping make a difference! #notallcalifornians I guess.
But to answer your request for sharing, Wikipedia says that California had a 7.6ish percent Black population in 2000. I haven’t spent much time in Cali since 1976, but it seems to me that 7.6% represents a considerable increase since then. I think I saw maybe three non-hispanic dark-skinned people in the whole state, honestly. It was like Potter County PA, only with Mexicans.
Where I work, it runs between 60 and 80% African-American. At the state level, in 2000 we were 20% Black, but since I live in the northernmost county it’s a little higher, and in the city less than five miles from where I sit typing it’s 58%. My nuclear family is 25%. Everything’s relative, obviously, but from my point of view most white Californians don’t have a lot of black people to interact with, and honestly it shows.
There are many places in California with very few African Americans but there are also places that are predominantly African American. Go to the Watts neighborhood in L.A. or the Bayview district in San Francisco or pretty much anywhere in Oakland and you won’t have any problem finding dark-skinned people.
I think you’re overdosing on your Zionism.
No, I just have a keen eye for bullshit. But nice to see ad hominem has not gone out of style.
The “Arab Peace Initiative” usually has terms which are unacceptable to both Israel and Palestinians but give the impression of wanting to be involved. Any peace plan which involves the term “1967 borders” or “complete withdrawal from the occupied territories” is a deliberate dealbreaker which signifies the people proposing it are not to be taken seriously.
These plans are never run by either party before being proposed. Neither Palestinians nor Israelis want that. Both groups have demographically spilled past those borders so much that they are untenable. Real negotiations involve using current geographical borders. (like what was attempted with Oslo in 1997)
I think we’re getting way off topic here.
Nevertheless, The Arab Peace Initiative is basically the Two State Solution (TSS). The PA accepts the TSS, until they tumbled to the fact that Israel is fillibustering the peace talks to death. Netanyahu has recently said her will always support more settlements, so the party who doesn’t want the Arab Peace intiative is Israel.
Both parties aren’t blocking the TSS. Just Israel.
That’s where we disagree. For me it’s more important whether or not it’s a con game, because I don’t believe that the race or ethnicity of donors matters unless it’s a con game. In other words, race of donors is at best peripheral, not central, to the issue, and if the donors were self-hating anti-black Black men it would be just as big a story if, in fact, it’s a con game.
If the people running the show are black people, and they believe their actions will result in a better future, then they are indeed Black Americans for a Better Future. Israel happily takes money from Armageddonist Christians who are openly anti-Semitic and want all Jews to die horribly in the End Times, but that does not mean Israel is secretly plotting to kill all Jews, right?
Remember that voters who vote against their own interests are a commonplace in America - look at voting results from North and South Carolina for example, or look at all the Jerseyites voting for Christie. Being an idiot is not the same as being a traitor or quisling, and I think what’s most important about this organization is whether or not it’s honest. I haven’t seen anything anywhere yet that tells me the answer and I won’t base judgement on a race-baiting headline. I won’t fault a black man for taking money from rich old white dudes and frankly I don’t think anyone else should either.
Its a two state solution with no regard to the needs of both states and 2 deliberate dealbreakers woven into it. These proposals predate Netanyahu. It was telling that its terms had nothing to do with what was actually being negotiated the last time both sides actually did so in good faith. When the Israeli left can finally get a decent coalition going we will see real negotiations here. There is no impetus for Netanyahu to do so, and yes he is the main obstacle to peace in the West Bank.
But this is a digression and I will post no more on the subject.
