The View: Racist, Hateful and Stupid

The bigoted women of The View are at it again. A few days ago we had Whoopie Goldberg promising to play the race card as much as possible and calling Trump a racist because he dared to raise a legitimate question about Obama’s lack of qualifications. Now we have Sherri Shepherd demonstrating her utterly racist views during her criticism of the royal wedding.

Before we start, let me make this clear: I don’t care about the royals. Royalty means nothing to me except (1) inbreeding, (2) unearned celebrity, and (3) the need of many humans to believe that some people are superior by birth. I don't like any of those things, so you won't see me defending the royals. But I am one to point out the ugliness and racism inherent in liberalism, hence this discussion of The View.

The View is no stranger to racist/sexist controversy. Beside her race card comment, Goldberg cause quite a stir when she claimed that dogfighting was not a big deal because it was just “part of [Mike Vick’s] cultural upbringing.” She later insulted the Chinese using racist stereotypes. She declared that Roman Polanski’s raping a thirteen year old girl wasn’t really “rape-rape.” And she and Sherri Shepherd, the show’s alternative black, both attacked token “conservative” Elisabeth Hasselback when she criticized Jesse Jackson for using the word “nigger.”

On Friday, Sherri Shepherd added to this legacy with the following comment about the royal wedding in Britain: “where are the black people?” Shepherd continued:

“Our producer was looking for the black people in the wedding and we found our Rosa Parks moment, because we were like 'where are the black people'? It was like where's Waldo, where are the black people? We found one little black child in the choir but where's the black people at this wedding?”

This should strike most people as strange right out of the gates, unless you want to believe that most people are so obsessed with race that they sift through crowd photos counting the members of each race.

Moreover, Shepherd’s initial outburst was false. There were indeed blacks at the wedding, as Shepherd eventually mentions. Although, she tries to dismiss this disproof of her claim by saying they were just among “the guests.” And I doubt she would even have mentioned these except they were sitting in a group, which she angrily referred to as being “segregated.” She also leaves no doubt she thinks this was both intentional and nefarious: “I don't know why they put all the black people over here.” But then she smugly added “but they are at the front of the wedding so I ain't complaining, they got in the front.”

This is a fascinating display of abject racism. First, notice the obsession with race when it probably wouldn’t have occurred to most people to go counting the crowd. Secondly, note that in Shepherd’s racist worldview, there better be blacks among the major players, not just the crowd, or something is wrong. Of course, let me point out that there aren’t any Asians, Hispanics, Muslims, Buddhists or men on The View, but somehow that doesn’t bother Shepherd. Further, even if we accept her idea that blacks must be present in proportion to the total population of blacks, she clearly has no idea what that should be. She, like many American blacks, wrongly assumes that they are a large group that should be obvious all over the crowd -- a recent poll found that blacks believe they make up 30% of the population, when they really are only 11% and falling. But in Britain, they are only 2% of the population, which means 2 out of every 100, a number that would not stick out in a crowd and which can easily be found in this crowd. Moreover, this was not a general admission event. You had to know someone to get into this event. . . like your uncle the king. Thus, population percentages are irrelevant.

Further, notice that it bothers her that the blacks she found were “segregated” (even though they were actually mixed with whites). It never dawned on her that the reason the group she saw was “segregated” was they were a group of African royalty. Perhaps they should have forcibly spread these families apart to please the racist eyes of a black American television host? Finally, notice that despite her allegations of racism in the seating, she is placated by the blacks getting the better end of the deal. In other words, this isn’t about a principle like equality, this is about spoils and she's happy so long as she thinks blacks are getting a better deal that whites. That’s racism.

This is the problem with the race industry, they actually think like this. They believe in an apartheid system that requires a perfect distribution according to their views of the percentages of minorities within the population. . . without any regard for the accuracy of their views and they see the goal of this integration to be spoils, not equality. And that's how the Civil Rights Movement became the American Apartheid Spoils System.

Finally, having decided that the wedding was somehow racist, they now felt that they could be vile about the event with impunity. Thus, for example, Joy Behar (who has been accused of anti-Semitism by the Anti-Defamation League; Catholic-bashing by the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights; attacked John McCain; walked out on Bill O’Reilly after he claimed that Muslims were behind 9/11; and who said Republican Senate Nominee Sharron Angle’s campaign ad was “a Hitler youth commercial” before calling her a “bitch”), said this of the Queen (right):

“[She looks like] a bumble bee with a drinking problem. I’ve never seen a Queen wearing yellow, she looks like a taxi cab. Keep that meter running Queenie.”

So now it’s ok to disrespect an 85 year old woman because she shakes? Put another nail in the coffin of the lie that liberals care about people.