The modern definition of "racist" is someone who is winning an argument with a Liberal.
-Peter Brimelow
The Op. Ed. is littered with such baseless assumptions, broad generalizations, and maybe a touch of bigotry. Reed states that the reason for South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley's (an Indian-American Republican, herself) appointment of Rep. Tim Scott to replace retiring Senator Jim DeMint is that the whites of the GOP "don’t want to have to think of themselves, or be thought of by others, as racist." This is followed by a rambling history of civil rights going back to before Reconstruction.
Why does the Left immediately swarm on anyone of a different race that is succeeding and happens to be a Republican? It seems that every time a minority candidate from the GOP is advanced for their merits, they are either "blacks to undermine black interests" or "more tokens than signs of progress"?
Strange that only the Democratic side of the media wants to turn this into a racial issue. Left-wingers are afraid to lose the traditionally-blue votes that come from the black community; so they rush to disqualify any minority that is gaining notoriety and happens to be a Republican.
It is a favorite Dem tactic to force black and Republican to be thought of as mutually exclusive. It seems that whenever an accomplished, capable black person, who happens to be a Republican, is given an opportunity in politics, they are labeled as a sort of double agent against their race? Or against the Republican ethos?
Is being conservative a pre-requisite move against the black community? Of course not, and the people that are distributing that drivel are simply trying to force partisanism on the black community. This kind of divisive and, to be frank, petty writing really has no merit. To make base assumptions about people based on the color of their skin? That's racism in and of itself, and it has no place in a conscience driven political system.