LA Times Publishes Racist Column Referring to Larry Elder As 'Black Face of White Supremacy'

  • oeb11
  • 08-22-2021, 08:18 PM
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/rebecc...emacy-n2594544








Source: AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez, File


On Friday, The Los Angeles Times published a racist column by Erika D. Smith about California gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder. The current governor, Gavin Newsom, is facing a recall election which will take place on September 14. "Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy. You’ve been warned," her column's headline screamed.
Smith's column was an over 1,500 word screed about Elder and how his conservative views supposedly are on the level of "white supremacy" when it could to how bad they would be for Black Californians.
The biggest takeaway, other than how racist Smith is towards a fellow Black person, is that Elder is less Black than Smith and her ilk because of his views. Smith even references her own father to signal as much.
"Like a lot of Black people, though, I’ve learned that it’s often best just to ignore people like Elder. People who are — as my dad used to say — “skinfolk” but not necessarily kinfolk," she writes. Yet here she is, writing such a column about him and claiming she sought comment from him several times, though he did not respond.
Smith goes on to write:
That’s certainly how many of L.A.'s Black and politically powerful have tried to deal with him over the years. As The Times once wrote of Rep. Maxine Waters’ refusal to be a guest on Elder’s radio talk show: “Why should she boost the ratings of a man who ridicules her by mixing a recording of a barking dog over her sound bites?”
But with polls showing that nearly half of likely voters support recalling Newsom and that Elder is in the lead to replace him, ignoring the self-proclaimed Sage from South-Central is no longer a viable strategy. Particularly for Black people.
One of those people quoted in Smith's column is Melina Abdullah, the co-founder of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles, who is quoted in the very next paragraph as the one quoted above. "He is a danger, a clear and present danger," Abdullah warned.
She's quoted later in Smith's piece as well, with Smith then adding her own two cents about the supposed danger Elder presents:
Abdullah of Black Lives Matter: “Anytime you put a Black face on white supremacy, which is what Larry Elder is, there are people who will utilize that as an opportunity to deny white supremacy. They say, ‘How could this be white supremacy? This is a Black man.’ But everything that he’s pushing, everything that he stands for, he is advancing white supremacy.”
Black people know better than anyone how dangerous Elder is. He is the O.G. troll that no one was supposed to feed. But here we are.
Another person cited includes state Sen. Sydney, whom Smith references in her closing lines:
But, as Kamlager said, “I’m not interested in going back to Jim Crow because I want to have a Black person as governor.”
Duh.
Blacks who would dare to agree with Elder get a paltry, one sentence mention. "Some Black people do agree with him. We aren’t a monolith, so it’s true, he does have fans who are Black and are likely to vote for him," Smith writes.
In a Google News search, the column's headline appears as "Recall candidate Larry Elder is a threat to Black Californians." This is also the article's URL.
As of Sunday night, though, the headline about "Black face" is still there on the outlet's web page and has been since Friday.
What also appears on the screen is an invitation to sign up to "Get the latest from Erika D. Smith." The invitation has that buzz word, as it says those who sign up will get "Commentary on people, politics, and the quest for a more equitable California."

Recommended
NY, LA and SF Just Committed Suicide; Is Vegas Next? The Suicide of America Wayne Allyn Root



Elder addressed the column during his appearance on "Hannity" that same night, revealing "I anticipated that would happen." He also pointed to how The Los Angeles Times has also called him a Black David Duke.
He suggested that his critics "are scared to death. They know if California can elect a conservative governor like myself, and they can and they will come on September the 14th, that any state can't come and they're deathly afraid of this."
When it comes to who would replace Newsom, should he be recalled, Elder leads the way in polling. As blue a state as California may be, which Smith went through great lengths to remind readers in her column, recent polls may very well have Newsom worried.


newsome is seriously worried - after cuomoo is booted ,
the racist kalifornia media is doing its' bet to "Uncle tom" Larry Elder - and doing its' usual pathetic job of anything but spewing marxist idiotology.

Larry Elder is articulate and clued in to kalifornia issues - He would be a good governor.

much better than the cesspool of a kalifornia special interests legislature deserves - but the Peoples deserve good governance for a major change
I hope Mr. Elder can deal with the kalifornia legialtors.

La crimes is doing its' best to throw him under their Racist CRT bus!!!
HedonistForever's Avatar
As to the question "have you no shame Democrats"? The answer is an unqualified NO, they do not. Sorry, not all Democrats, just the ones who participated in this shameful episode of racism.
Wile E Coyote's Avatar
If you do not read/watch the news, you are uninformed, if you do read/watch the news, you are misinformed.
Ob I posted this yesterday, but facts still stand...


https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2798763
adav8s28's Avatar
The republican party did filibuster the LBJ cival rights act bill in 1964.
WTF does that have to do with the LA untimeless calling Larry Elder what they did...the fucking racist leftwing rag ought to be ashamed...but the left is incapable of that
You just pull off topic shit out of thin air...that is some desperate shit!!
rexdutchman's Avatar
they getting desperate now ,,
  • oeb11
  • 08-23-2021, 10:05 AM
The republican party did filibuster the LBJ cival rights act bill in 1964. Originally Posted by adav8s28

When all else fails - :Little 'a and the marxist DPST Deny, Deflect, Obstruct - and engage in "Well, whatabout....."


A hopeless case of Tds and Trump hatred.

sad - what teachers union educations do to what could have been -otherwise - an independent, thoughtful mind.



Two FACTS - KKK was founded, and promoted and embraced - by the Democrat party
The Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 were passed - MLK Jr forced a very reluctant LBJ (Democrat from Texas ) to use his political capital to get the Acts passed.

Irrelevant - a specious argument from Little 'a'!




Who voted for the civil rights Act of 1960?
After several amendments, the House of Representatives approved the bill on March 24, 1960 by a vote of 311–109. 179 Democrats and 132 Republicans voted Aye. 93 Democrats, 15 Republicans, and 1 Independent Democrat voted Nay. 2 Democrats and 1 Republican voted present.
Again -




179 Democrats and 132 Republicans voted Aye. 93 Democrats, 15 Republicans, and 1 Independent Democrat voted Nay. 2 Democrats and 1 Republican voted present.


Voting rights Act of 1964:What were teh party votes for teh voting rights ACT of 1964
The original House version: Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%) Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)





Does little 'a' see a pattern her - doubtful - math and history are racist and forbidden to DPST minions by their nomenklatura.

The DPST party - which vilifies Larry elder as a racist Uncle Tom - Is still teh party of Racism in America- both anti White and Anti Black. Their Racism is known as CRT , and Plantation in the halls of teh nomenklatura
Those who post teh nonsense and outright Lies of the marxist DPST idiotology - I do consider as Racists!
texassapper's Avatar
The republican party did filibuster the LBJ cival rights act bill in 1964. Originally Posted by adav8s28
Don't know much about history do you? Actually you probably don't you're just spouting off your public mis-education.

Committed to the filibuster effort were the powerful Senators Richard Russell, Thurmond, Robert Byrd, William Fulbright and Sam Ervin. Russell started the filibuster in late March 1964, and it would last for 60 working days in the Senate.



Senator Richard Russell: Democrat
Senator Strom Thurmond: Democrat at the time of the filibuster
Senator Robert Byrd: Democrat
Senator William Fulbright: Democrat
Senator Sam Ervin: Democrat

Without the Republicans there would have been no civil rights act of 1964.
rexdutchman's Avatar
Denial ,,,,,,,,,,of history its a cult fanatic
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
Don't know much about history do you? Actually you probably don't you're just spouting off your public mis-education.

Committed to the filibuster effort were the powerful Senators Richard Russell, Thurmond, Robert Byrd, William Fulbright and Sam Ervin. Russell started the filibuster in late March 1964, and it would last for 60 working days in the Senate.



Senator Richard Russell: Democrat
Senator Strom Thurmond: Democrat at the time of the filibuster
Senator Robert Byrd: Democrat
Senator William Fulbright: Democrat
Senator Sam Ervin: Democrat

Without the Republicans there would have been no civil rights act of 1964. Originally Posted by texassapper
so as you know, 6 republicans voted nay.
  • oeb11
  • 08-25-2021, 10:16 AM
'a' never permits Facts, Truth, and accurate History - to get in the way of his marxist propaganda narrative
must be tough to have One's posts soundly shown to be false
Time, after time after time, after time.

Repeat for each 'a' post.
rexdutchman's Avatar
Same old same old ,, if its against anybody that's not in the cult is fake, T fault denial of facts the conditioning is complete in some peeps