Washington Times steps over the line and shows its racist colors.

"Romney and the Democratic plantation: Who's the racist?" read the headline.  Go ahead and read what James Picht, the senior editor of the Washington Times' Community Politics section, wrote, and judge for yourself if he's guilty of his own rhetoric:

"A Democrat might even find it useful to have a “Sister Souljah moment” to not seem too close to more assertive black interests and be more palatable to conservative whites.

[Liberal Democrats] consider black conservatives who vote Republican to be traitors, “Oreo cookies,” ingrates to the benevolent masters of the great Democratic plantation. A Republican who addresses a black audience is supposed to know that, so must have an ulterior motive for going there."

That's at least an insensitive attack, but are you kidding me, in 2012, some chump is slinging around derogatory language to denigrate both Democrats and African-Americans on the Washington Times?

Hey, nevermind, that Southern Democrats left the party for the GOP half a century ago, following the civil rights laws passed by Northern Democrats, right?  An economics instructor from this Louisiana university may have failed American History, or perhaps selectively chosen to ignore the ugly parts of American history, eh?

I understand that this is a community-based section of the Washington Times, so it's not necessarily something that has been reviewed and condoned by WT, but no quality control?  And what does this say about Louisiana Scholar's College, for employing an instructor who may be spreading his bigoted message to his students?