Terrorism?

As an addendum to my comments of yesterday as regards to John Derbyshire and the reaction of National Review and a few other angry voices….

Let me describe the problem this way; Derbyshire’s column is the logical reaction similar to that tinge of apprehension you get in the base of your spine when you notice a group of young middle eastern males grouped together on the plane that you’re just getting into. Such is a natural fear- flight reaction, and quite logical under the circumstances we face vis a’vie muslim terrorism.

NRO’s quite politically correct response…. along with the rather hackneyed outcry from the usual suspects…. is in the same vein as the illogic which has governmental officials strip searching  white Irish grandmothers in reaction to that muslim terrorism threat.

The reaction in my view is a pathetic one, born of an illogical racial hypersensitivity taken to the utmost level.

So worried have we become about being seen as reinforcing racial stereo types, that Burger King was forced to remove an ad from the air, that had Mary J. Blige singing the praises of their fried chicken. The objections? Apparently we can’t have blacks being seen eating fried chicken in public. Too stereotypical. Forget, of course, that Popeyes Fried Chicken has been doing that for generations. Perhaps they’ll be next on the attack list, I don’t know.

It is a measure, however, of how hyper sensitive we’ve gotten on such matters. What worries me is when we see NR sucumming to this nonsense.  If we cannot address these issues without charges of racism flying around, and even supposedly stauch conservatives cringing in terror over those charges, we’re never going to get past it.

Now, mind,I can see were some would consider not getting past the constant cry of racism, a good thing. I said a long time ago the worst thing you could ever provide a liberal is an actual solution to a problem, because doing that removes the campaign slogan, and limits their power. If the problem continues forever, so too does their ability to complain about it,and to gather votes with it.

Community organizers, for example.

I notice again this morning, as I have previously, the number of times where issues rooted in liberalism versus conservatism in this country somehow get twisted into racial arguments.  An example of this would appear to be the overly loud response to John Derbyshire’s most recent column at NRO:

10) Thus, while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense:

(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.

(10b)Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.

(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).

(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.

(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.

(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.

(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.

(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

…..

(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

(14) Be aware, however, that there is an issue of supply and demand here. Demand comes from organizations and businesses keen to display racial propriety by employing IWSBs, especially in positions at the interface with the general public—corporate sales reps, TV news presenters, press officers for government agencies, etc.—with corresponding depletion in less visible positions. There is also strong private demand from middle- and upper-class whites for personal bonds with IWSBs, for reasons given in the previous paragraph and also (next paragraph) as status markers.

(15) Unfortunately the demand is greater than the supply, so IWSBs are something of a luxury good, like antique furniture or corporate jets: boasted of by upper-class whites and wealthy organizations, coveted by the less prosperous

From a statistical standpoint, Derb has a point.  It’s one that’s been noted by black authors, as well.  Take the quote posted by David, from Shelby Steele, yesterday:

The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this “truth” has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites.

If Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this—a call “to turn the moment into a movement”—it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites.

Or, ponder Bill Cosby, whose book “Come On People” I commend to your reading. (I found it quite good, thereby the recommendation.)

As Cos points out, as does doctor Thomas Sohl, and countless others.  The issues here are not racial, but are cultural in nature.  This is hinted that , in a  quote that I recently posted elsewhere from Shelby Steele:

There is a price to be paid even for fellow-traveling with a racial identity as politicized and demanding as today’s black identity. This identity wants to take over a greater proportion of the self than other racial identities do. It wants to have its collective truth— its defining ideas of grievance and protest—become personal truth. . . . These are the identity pressures that Barack Obama lives within. He is vulnerable to them because he has hungered for a transparent black identity much of his life. He needs to ‘be black.’ And this hunger—no matter how understandable it may be—means that he is not in a position to reject the political liberalism inherent in his racial identity. For Obama liberalism is blackness.

That does seem to be the prevailing philosophy.  And thereby, any objection at all to liberalism as a whole is inherently racist.  How else to explain, for example, to the charge of the Clinton administration that any move to limit the welfare state, was inherently racist?  Of course, such charges fell on deaf ears once it came out that the vast majority of people on public assistance were white.  Such logical discrepancies and Liberal arguments these days are not at all uncommon, however.

Let’s address this directly; if America was inherently racist as is the common charge these days, how is it that we have a black President? How is it we have a black Attorney General? Yet when these issue policies that are objected to, that objection is noted as racist? There is a logical disconnect there which you could drive my truck through.

Speaking personally, the issue is liberalism. If my objection to Obama is rooted in Race…. objections I had to Jimmy Carter back in the day are suggestive I was misinformed as to Carter’s racial background. It is, I’m afraid, a typical reaction of the left to charge racism when there is no other defense. We also have been charged with racism here at Bitsblog, when we make the rather obvious point that not all cultures are equal. The linchpin, here, is as I say, the belief that one cannot be black unless one is an avowed leftist. Until that bit of racism can be overcome, there will be no equality.

As a parting shot, I wonder a bit at the tone of discussions over race, these last few weeks. They have the undeniable quality of being ginned up. I suggest that this is directly in line with the statement from the Obama White House that they didn’t need to worry about white working class people in the upcoming election. The incessant screaming of the leftist press over race, as well as the other usual suspects, leads me to believe that this is being chained up incidental to the election. After all, who else would benefit but the far left, Obama at its head?

Side note to Rich Lowry I wonder if you haven’t played directly into the White House campaign, with your reaction to Derb? Some actual courage on the subject is in order. I love you guys, but I think you’ve failed rather miserably in this. I’m quite disappointed.

All cultures are not equal.   The fact of a black socioeconomic disparity is obvious.   While I do not deny the continued existence of white anti-black racism, I contend that such racism to no longer a major contributing factor.    However, while I do not deny that Mother Nature may well be a racist, such is life, sue her, the major cause of the black socioeconomic disparity is chronically dysfunctional culture, from rom Shelby Steele, Wall Street Journal:

The civil rights community and the liberal media live by the poetic truth that America is still a reflexively racist society, and that this remains the great barrier to black equality. But this “truth” has a lot of lie in it. America has greatly evolved since the 1960s. There are no longer any respectable advocates of racial segregation. And blacks today are nine times more likely to be killed by other blacks than by whites.

If Trayvon Martin was a victim of white racism (hard to conceive since the shooter is apparently Hispanic), his murder would be an anomaly, not a commonplace. It would be a bizarre exception to the way so many young black males are murdered today. If there must be a generalization in all this—a call “to turn the moment into a movement”—it would have to be a movement against blacks who kill other blacks. The absurdity of Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton is that they want to make a movement out of an anomaly. Black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites

A media inspired judicial lynching of George Zimmerman will do nothing to solve the problems besetting the black population.

Barack Obama is commonly described a former professor of constitutional law.  Call me a skeptic.  Yet over and over, the law professor demonstrates that he does not understand the Constitution.   The President’s characterization of constitutional law has been repudiated by both a former professor and student of his.

First the professor, from Jared A. Favole, Wall Street Journal:

Constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Law School professor and former mentor to President Barack Obama, said the president “obviously misspoke” earlier this week when he made comments about the Supreme Court possibly overturning the health-care law.

Mr. Tribe, who calls the president was one of his best students, said in an interview: “He didn’t say what he meant…and having said that, in order to avoid misleading anyone, he had to clarify it.”

Next the student, Professor. Thom Lambert of the University of Missouri Law School, from Breitbart:

(Oddly enough, Prof. Obama didn’t seem too concerned about “an unelected group of people” overturning a “duly constituted and passed law” when we were discussing all those famous Fourteenth Amendment cases – Roe v. Wade, Griswold v. Connecticut, Romer v. Evans, etc.) Of course, even a Con Law professor focusing on the Bill of Rights should know that the principle of judicial review has been alive and well since 1803, so I still feel like my educational credentials have been tarnished a bit by the President’s “unprecedented, extraordinary” remarks.

The lamers (Lame Stream Media) keep trying to purport the fiction that Barack Obama is both a smart and educated man. I find both propositions to be silly. Professors Tribe and Lambert purport to share a common professor, to wit one Barack Hussien Obama. Tribe purports Obama to have been his law student and Lambert professes to studied law under Obama. As for me, I have never studied law, but unlike Obama I am familiar with Marbury v Madison (1803) where the Supreme Court anointed herself with the the power to declare laws unconstitutional. Color me less than impressed.

As to Tribe, I am skeptical that law student ignorant of Marbury v Madison could honestly be described as one Tribe’s best students ever. As Tribe provides no evidence, such transcriptions or papers,  I submit that Tribe’s characterization is just mere liberal hyperbole. no more.  I note that the person described as one Tribe’s best law student ever, has no law license.

If  you can not trust Obama on the Constitution, which he claims to have taught, how can you trust him on subjects like energy, economics, economics or foreign policy, which he never studied.    The presidency is too important to be left to on the job learning, and Obama has no learning curve.  He can not learn.

I believe that Barrack Obama may be the stupidest president ever.    Consider this stunner

“Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said at a Rose Garden news conference.

Hat tip and reax, Clayton Cramer:

Obama is either lying, or he is too ignorant to have graduated from law school, much less taught at one.

Unprecedented?  The Supreme Court has a long history of striking down laws passed by a democratically elected Congress.  He might want to, you know, actually read a book about his idol FDR, and why FDR felt a need for his court packing plan–because the Supreme Court struck down a bunch of New Deal laws passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.

Too much cocaine will do that to a brain.    Dumbo b/k/a Obama may be credentialed but his not educated.   Dumbo may have sheepskin or two, but his brain lacks knowledge.

I’m about to get into bed, to rest up for a trip into New York city in the morning…. about 3 o’clock in the morning.

I’m trying a new method of posting from my phone. I hope it works because it’s often enough but I haven’t been able to connect from my laptop to be an annoyance. My phone is always connected to the internet, but it’s a pain in the back side to type on.

I’m looking forward to this weekend, where I will be doing some recruiting for the company that I work for. Myself and one other driver will have our trucks all spiffed up and ready to go come saturday morning. The idea being to make a good impression on the driving students who are prospective employees.

My truck is really dirty at the moment as you see. But I’m saving the truck wash until the end of the week so that I look good saturday morning.

I’m listening to what election news is coming up on the radio from WBAL, the big talker in Baltimore. And nothing is going on there that I haven’t predicted. Why should anybody be surprised Romney has managed to win the nod from what’s left of the GOP in one of the most liberal states in the nation?

I will have to check this, but I believe that Maryland was a close call even in the landslide election of Ronald Reagan. Given some of the politics coming out of that place lately nothing should surprise anyone. It’s starting to look like California east. Yep time of the voters there seem to feel Romney is their boy. Hey, what a surprise.

As I have told you repeatedly over the last year or so I think Romney a poor choice for the presidency. The question we are left with is the same question we were left with in the case of bothhave Bushes…. Is the democrat candidate… Obama, in this case… bad enough to make the weak kneed centerist the GOP has coughed up look good?

The numbers currently being touted by the leftist press suggest not. Obviously, you would expect them to say that. It will be interesting to see if those numbers can be turned around. But I wonder at the cost at getting them turned around. How much of the conservative agenda will need to be scrapped to make that happen in the GOP establishment’s eyes?

And in the end of what will conservatism, and for that matter the country, have won?

Middlesex,PA–

(Sigh)

What we have here is buyer’s remorse.

Weeks of bizarre talk about contraception and vaginal ultrasounds has surprisingly alienated women from the Republican Party.

USA Today (“Swing States Poll: A shift by women puts Obama in lead“):

President Obama has opened the first significant lead of the 2012 campaign in the nation’s dozen top battleground states, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, boosted by a huge shift of women to his side.

In the fifth Swing States survey taken since last fall, Obama leads Republican front-runner Mitt Romney 51%-42% among registered voters just a month after the president had trailed him by two percentage points.

The biggest change came among women under 50. In mid-February, just under half of those voters supported Obama. Now more than six in 10 do while Romney’s support among them has dropped by 14 points, to 30%. The president leads him 2-1 in this group.

Romney’s main advantage is among men 50 and older, swamping Obama 56%-38%.

Republicans’ traditional strength among men “won’t be good enough if we’re losing women by nine points or 10 points,” says Sara Taylor Fagen, a Republican strategist and former political adviser to President George W. Bush. “The focus on contraception has not been a good one for us … and Republicans have unfairly taken on water on this issue.”

In the poll, Romney leads among all men by a single point, but the president leads among women by 18. That reflects a greater disparity between the views of men and women than the 12-point gender gap in the 2008 election.

[…]

Romney pollster Neil Newhouse predicts the gender gap will narrow as Romney moves from the pitched battle of the GOP primaries — Wisconsin, Maryland and the District of Columbia vote Tuesday — to a fall election focused on economic issues.

“If there’s a gender gap, it goes beyond Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum to a partisan gender gap,” Newhouse said in an interview. “It’s not Romney-specific. I would argue that it’s broader than that.”

Full disclosure: Neil’s a close family friend. And he’s been Romney’s pollster for many years, so he’s obviously biased in his analysis. That said, he’s right here. Indeed, I’d argue that this is both a longstanding Republican problem and a specific outgrowth of the current campaign and has almost nothing to do with Romney per se.

 

(Shaking head)

Here it is, gang….
I’ve said all along Romney wasn’t a strong enough candidate…. the GOP establishment… and people like Doug, frankly, chased away the best of them, and what we have left…. well….

Of course this has been happening ever since Reagan…. where every candidate the GOP has been coming up with has been a weak-kneed centrist, like Romney.  Bob Dole? Both Bushes? McCain? really? These are really the strongest proponents of conservatism the party can find?

Reagan’s winning, because of, not in spite of his very vocal social conservatism, you see, to today’s GOP leadership, is just an aberration. Forget that the same cries from the social liberals of that day were drowned out by the vast majority of voters. And remember, gang, the GOP establishment wasn’t happy, even back in the day, that Reagan won.

The establishment GOP keeps ignoring these facts, and they keep coming up with the same result. And it’s happening again.

The rank and file knows it, and so do the independent voters. YOU don’t. At least, you can’t bring yourself to admit it.

Congrats, centrists. You’ve done it yet again.

Instead of coming out strongly with the social conservative values of mainstream America, your pre-annointed boy backed away trying to save the mythical center, when the liberal media, in the form of Clintonita George Stephanopoulos, started playing the birth control game. To his credit, Romeny’s people identified the attack…. at least by the next debate.

ROMNEY: John, what’s happened — and you recall back in the debate that we had George Stephanopoulos talking out about birth control, we wondered why in the world did contraception — and it’s like, why is he going there? Well, we found out when Barack Obama continued his attack on religious conscience.

I don’t think we’ve seen in the history of this country the kind of attack on religious conscience, religious freedom, religious tolerance that we’ve seen under Barack Obama. Most recently, of course —

(APPLAUSE)

ROMNEY: — most recently requiring the Catholic Church to provide for its employees and its various enterprises health care insurance that would include birth control, sterilization and the morning-after pill. Unbelievable.

And he retried to retreat from that but he retreated in a way that was not appropriate, because these insurance companies now have to provide these same things and obviously the Catholic Church will end up paying for them.

But don’t forget the decision just before this, where he said the government — not a church, but the government should have the right to determine who a church’s ministers are for the purposes of determining whether they’re exempt from EEOC or from workforce laws or labor laws.

He said the government should make that choice. That went all the way to the Supreme Court. There are a few liberals on the Supreme Court. They voted 9-0 against President Obama. His position —

(APPLAUSE)

ROMNEY: — his position — his position on religious tolerance, on religious conscience is clear, and it’s one of the reasons the people in this country are saying we want to have a president who will stand up and fight for the rights under our Constitution, our first right, which is for freedom of religion.

Thing is, the response, while correctly programmed, was far too late to do much about it. That’s what happens when you have someone like Romney who speaks conservatism as a second language, and even then not very well. Stephy should have been called down then and there. Romney couldn’t find it in himself to do it.

The stupidity, Doug, is not recognizing that voters know.. and dislike it… when the candidates biggest talents are playing both sides against the middle. And that’s all the GOP’s been able to do since the 80’s. And if they can’t do better than that, they deserve to lose.

The Pig is a Pants Suiit, b/k/a Mrs. B.J. Clinton should know a thing or three about sluts, she is married to male version of one, to wit B.J. Clinton.  Further the bulk of Mrs. Clinton’s executive experience has been ramrodding  Bimbo Eruption Control for B.J., from Politico:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Monday called the controversial comments Rush Limbaugh made about Sandra Fluke in February a “verbal assault.” But she also said she was encouraged by the public rebuke of the radio host.

Saying she was speaking as a woman and mother, Clinton told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell in a pre-taped interview, “I thought the response [to Limbaugh] was very encouraging. The response from the public, the response, in particular, from women cutting across all kinds of categories, the response from advertisers.”

“I think we need to call people out when they go over the line. They’re entitled to their opinion but no one is entitled to engage in that kind of verbal assault. Let’s keep it to the issues,” she said.

Mrs. Clinton is neither a strong nor smart woman.   Her husband is a chronic cad.  Yet Mrs. Clinton continued to profess shuck and amazement over each of every new B.J. revelation.  She all stood mute when the Clintonisata trashed each and everyone of B.J’s bimbos.

I’d call PIAPS trailer park trash but no self-respecting trailer park would have her.

I hereby assert:

• One, the new sexism is to deny sexism.
• Two, Bill Maher is a sexist.

What say you Bill?  Video;

Hat tip:  Donald Douglas, American Power.

If Maher’s logig (sic) is true, well so is mine. Well even if Maher’s argument is still born, my conclusion is still right. Maher is aexist.

Back to Maher’s so-called argument, his premise can not be falsified, which to say his argument is immune to logic, evidence or rebuttal, much like Intelligent Designn

As I define it, racism is making assumptions based on race.    Show me one person who does not.   Our culture is racist, and being color blind is dangerous.

I suspect that according to Maher, racist is defined as white anti-black bias.   Those while rhe Simpson jury may be dumber than a hod of bricks,  they are not racist, because they largely black.   I contend that assuming that blacks can not be racists, is an assumption based on race,  therefore, is itself racist.    So now Maher is likely a racist as well.

The Congressional Black Caucus shows herself to be no more than a silly gaggle of clowns, from Mike Lillis, Hill:

In the wake of the slaying of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, House Democrats are drafting legislation designed to prevent similar tragedies in the future.

The lawmakers want to adopt tougher rules for neighborhood watch programs, eliminate certain state gun laws, rein in racial profiling and require an examination of racial disparities nationwide.

The Democrats behind the legislation – all members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) – say the steps might have prevented last month’s fatal encounter between Martin, 17, an unarmed African-American walking home from a convenience store in Sanford, Fla., and George Zimmerman, 28, a Latino neighborhood watch

Source FBI (2009)

Black youths being killed by Latino neighborhood watchmen is hardly the biggest problem besetting the black population.

Circa thirteen times as many blacks are killed by other blacks, than whites and Hispanics.   Yet the Congressional Black Caucus continues to campaign draconian gun control laws which render black in places like
Washington DC, Detroit and the People’s Republic of Chicago virtually defenseless.

Is the CBC acting in the best interests of her constituents or their liberal masters?   I say the latter.  What say you?

Been having some issues with my laptop this past week, so I have some catching up to do.

One of the issues that I want to cover is of course the Trayvon Martin thing.

I suggested, back when the story first started going viral that it was being twisted and trumped up by the race huxters and anti-gunners… both core constituencies of the Obama regime.   As I expected, I took serious heat for making the suggestion. One such suggestion  was in the Ramble  of the 22nd.

Thing is….. wellll….. Hour by hour, it’s looking more and more like I was spot on.  David’s been doing a superlative job of documenting a large number of bits of information that those clinging to the leftist narrative would rather not have you see.

The only surprise, in fact is how bald faced an attempt to get a scapegoat going this has been, and where it has apparently come from. The degree of cynicism, coming from the left on  this,The level of obvious manipulation,  has been nothing short of breathtaking….

Of course now comes the refusal of the “Me too!” liberals to admit they started making pronouncements about all of this before the evidence was in. we saw one tweet from Will Smith, that cmae up right in line with the left… only to see Smith claim it was fake when the facts started leaking out in direct disagreement with the leftists narrative.

That refusal of the “me, too!” left to admit they were played like chumps by their supposed leaders, is a telling story…  and it has started putting question marks in a lot of people’s heads…. Has this kind of  group-non-think been going on all along?  The obvious answer is “Yes” and it’s embarrassed a number of folks.  It’s shown the degree to which the “black community” can and is manipulated on a daily basis, in ways that have not been done since, well, Duke University Lacrosse players were accused, and before that when the name Tawana Brawley was all over the papers.

In each one of those cases, the left… in which the race and poverty pimp industry is of course rooted… spent a great deal of effort, pushing the mantra that America is racist, and pointing angrily to these cases as a prime example of that racism. All the usual suspects came out to play, then as now.

Now, when the facts came out other than the mantra, they tried to deny the facts presented. When those facts became undeniable, even for them, they simply clammed up for a while. .. only to try the same play again,in the more recent cases.

That the examples used to push the mantra of American racism have repeatedly been exposed as flat out lies,  and those pushing it as bald-faced liars… matters not at all to those who want to believe that mantra… that often have their entire being wrapped tightly around that mantra.  That’s why this ploy is so repeatedly successful. So successful is it, , that people are willing to commit violent acts to ensure the continuance of the lie.

These would have you ignore the fact that Zimmerman, the alleged shooter, is a registered Democrat. That he is not as the leftist press has been saying white, but rather Hispanic.  That the gated community involved ere is about 49% ethnic… hardly a bastion of rich white folk. That eyewitnesses had reported Martin on top of Zimmerman, beating the snot out of him.  That the largest percentage of murders in this country are black and black crime…. Which given the smaller percentage there are of blacks vs the general population,  makes the per-capita rates rather startling. As Juan Williams says the other day, nothing is being said about this…. The reason why of course is these facts don’t fit the narrative that the anti-gunners, poverty pimps and leftists in general will have you believe.

Do not doubt for a moment, dear readers, that it’s these people on which the left is resting it’s re-election chances on. Remember  the story a while of a while ago, containing the comment from Obama’s re-election staffers that they’d pretty much written off white working class people for the upcoming election? Given that, they need to really get the leftie base riled up, particularly the black vote. Obviously, they’ve decided to use the social media, such as Twitter and Facebook, to further that lockstep.  This is uniting the country, Obama style. Welcome to hope and change.

The question becomes however, how many of the people who initially signed on to this nonsense are going to wake up.  Oh, I’m quite sure there will always be true believers attached.  Without these, the likes of Al Sharpton would have ended up in political oblivion some years ago.

I commend to your reading a column by Juan Williams.  A taste:

Juan Williams

Nationally, nearly half of all murder victims are black. And the overwhelming majority of those black people are killed by other black people. Where is the march for them?

Where is the march against the drug dealers who prey on young black people? Where is the march against bad schools, with their 50% dropout rate for black teenaged boys? Those failed schools are certainly guilty of creating the shameful 40% unemployment rate for black teens.

How about marching against the cable television shows constantly offering minstrel-show images of black youth as rappers and comedians who don’t value education, dismiss the importance of marriage, and celebrate killing people, drug money and jailhouse fashion—the pants falling down because the jail guard has taken away the belt, the shoes untied because the warden removed the shoe laces, and accessories such as the drug dealer’s pit bull.

Supposedly all of this is just entertainment and intended to co-opt the stereotypes. But it only ends up perpetuating stereotypes in white minds and, worse, having young black people internalize it as an authentic image of a proud black person.

There is no fashion, no thug attitude that should be an invitation to murder. But these are the real murderous forces surrounding the Martin death—and yet they never stir protests.

Of course that’s true.  The reason is simple; there is nothing to gain in terms of the race hucksters mantra if you point this out.  It runs afoul of the image of a racist America. That information runs afoul of the left’s efforts to rouse the rabble. There are a large number of people who will benefit politically from the death of trade on Martin, provided that the mantra of “this death is the result of racism” is continued. it’s not unlike what leftists have done in the past when someone has died. If you need reminders, I give you the Paul Wellstone funeral and pep rally.

(note the use of the phrase “social and economic justice” in that video. Pretty much as it is now, no? A clue as to the political forces that have attached themselves to this in hopes of political gain.)

Finally, I observe the possibility of race riots occurring, if Obama does not gain reelection.  I wonder how long it will be before that threat becomes headline material.  It has after all worked so well in the past.  Being, of course, just another tool of the leftist race huckster. But before we pick up stones to start another riot over the issue of race and the supposed predominant American racism, perhaps the question should be asked if America is so very racist, how was it that we have a black president? A black attorney general? And so on.

A question I doubt they’ll ever answer.

The Reverend Al Sharpton is NBC’s designated house nigger and anointed expert on all matters racial.   Who, if anybody outside the media, accepts the Reverend as legitimate spokesman for anybody, much less all blacks?  A person of pallor can recite a litany the Reverends miss deeds.   Tawanna Brawley or Crown Heights anybody?

So what if the Reverend attempted to start a race war, and nobody outside the lame stream media showed up?  From Click Orlando

SANFORD, Fla. – The Rev. Al Sharpton said his National Action Network will “move to the next level” if George Zimmerman is not arrested in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

Sharpton called for an escalation in peaceful civil disobedience and economic sanctions, although he did not say what those sanctions might be.

Turner Clayton, the Seminole County chapter president of the NAACP, reacted immediately to Sharpton’s warning, saying, “We hope that the citizens of Sanford will govern themselves accordingly. We are not calling for any sanctions, against any business or anyone else. And, of course, what Rev. Sharpton does, that’s strictly the [National] Action Network. We can’t condone that part of the conversation, if that’s what he said.”

The Reverend certainly has no claim to represent all blacks.   Does the Reverend present anybody’s interests, aside from his own?    Is Sharpton attempting to start a race war to pay down his debts?    From Richard Fernandez, PJ Media:

After Trayvon Martin was killed, the Chicago Tribune found the Reverend raising money for Trayvon’s cause.  At a rally he shouted:

“I’m going to start off with $2,500,” Sharpton said, holding up a check. “Who’s next?”

Then Sharpton announced that television personality Judge Greg Mathis donated $10,000.

Several elected Florida officials were present, and each took a turn addressing the crowd before Sharpton was scheduled to speak. U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown was one of the first to address the crowd Thursday night. She rallied the crowd by yelling, “I want an arrest, I want a trial.”

The she asked the crowd: “What do you want?”

And the crowd responded, “We want an arrest!”

Doubtless Sharpton really wants an arrest. But given the parlous state of his finances, it would be understandable if he didn’t mind making a few bucks on the side as well. All across the board the Blue Model is experiencing what parliamentary systems call the loss of “supply.” Supply is a term used to describe money bills, either taxation and government spending, which is the lifeblood of politics.

Reax,from Darleen Click, Protein Wisdom:

NBC’s libel just throws fuel on a fire: Al Sharpton is calling for riots, though he euphemistically says “escalation”. A Georgia High school erupts in ugly violence in the name of Trayvon. Twitter refuses to delete the Kill Zimmerman account.

Not like NBC is alone in its making the news rather than reporting it. ABC ran grainy video of Zimmerman at the police station and declared “We don’t see blood or bruises!” Ooooo… smoking gun!

More reax, from Sister Toldjah:

Hat tip: Sister Toldhah

#Trayvon: Video/screencap shows laceration to George Zimmerman’s head
Posted by: ST on March 31, 2012 at 12:32 am I’m absolutely shocked that this was found and discussed on Chris Matthews’ MSNBC show Hardball (via @nickarama1);

Link to the Sister for the video of utterly stunned Chrissy Matthews.

As to the Reverend Jesse Jackson, from Rich Lowry, National Review:

Jesse Jackson is right that “blacks are under attack.” According to a 2005 FBI report, blacks accounted for 13 percent of the population and 49 percent of all homicide victims. In 93 percent of the cases, the killer was black. Half of the victims were ages 17 to 29. That works out to 4,000 murders of young blacks in one year, overwhelmingly at the hands of other blacks. In the communities where these killings occur there is, to put it in Jackson’s inimitable terms, no justice and no peace.

[…]

An injustice may well have been done in the handling of the Martin shooting, but let’s not fool ourselves. Zimmerman could be arrested, convicted, and hanged tomorrow, and it will have no effect on the lives of young black people in communities beset by social disorder. Whatever happens to Zimmerman, the drip-drip of spilled blood will continue, all but ignored except in the police blotter. In America, the lives of young black people are cheap, unless they happen to fit the right agenda

There are a multitude of problems facing the black community.   George Zimmerman is not one of them.  Race pimps like the Reverends Al Shartpton and Jesse Jackson are.

How stupid do you have to be to write for the Washington Post?  Brain dead stupid, from, WaPo:

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Beach shots depict her as every inch a curvaceous beauty queen.

But 23-year-old Jenna Talackova was born male, and that led the Miss Universe Canada organizers to disqualify her last week as a finalist in the 61st Miss Universe Canada pageant in May.

The rules of the contest run by the Donald Trump organization say entrants must be “naturally born” females.

The Vancouver woman underwent a sex change four years ago.

Just the facts:

• If Talackova was born a male, then he still is a male, and will die a male.
• Sex change is impossible. Has never happened.
• It is not proper to use the pronoun she to refer to male, such as Talackova.

Mother Nature can not be altered by political correctness.

Hat tip and more:  John Hawking, Hot Air:

Who has the right to decide “who is female?” That would be God and, yes, your genitalia have EVERYTHING to do with how you “perform femininity,” even if you make the terrible mistake of having them cut off.
If Jenna Talackova wants to pretend to be a woman, that’s his right. He can “feel” like a woman, have female hormones pumped into him, and have extensive surgery that makes him look like a woman. However, all of that doesn’t change the fact that he’s still a man and men don’t want to see a man competing in a beauty pageant.

If you are familiar with John’s blogging, you know that Hawkins has always been able to spot a girl.

While our nation black leaders talk race ear and celebutards  hello Spike Lee and Rosie O’Donnell,  practice vigilant justice,  Mayor Rahm Emanuel denizens continue to kill each other, from New York Daily News::

Funny,  if you want to know what is happening here in the west side of the pond, you have to read the east pond papers.  Strange.

Now, I really don’t believe that is the job of the president to comment on state criminal cases.  So in this particular case, I may actually agree with President Obama.  Stranger things have happened, but keeping his mouth and respecting judicial process is not exactly Dumbo’s b/k/a Obama, strong suit.  Case in point, Skip Gates.

When we had a dead black youth and an Hispanic shooter, Dumbo proclaimed that if  he had a son, he would look like the late Tayvon Martin.   Well now we have two dead whites, and a convicted killer, who just happened to look a lot like what Obama said his son would look like, that is black,  from Paul Thompson, Telegraph(UK):

The parents of two British students murdered in Florida have criticised President Barack Obama for his lack of compassion over their son’s deaths.

His failure to respond to three letters sent to the White House was because there was no “political value” and not worthy of a few minutes of his time.

They spoke out as teenager Shawn Tyson began a life sentence after being found guilty of the murder of James Cooper and James Kouzaris last April.

The 17 year old, who shot the men as they begged for their lives, will die in prison.

Did the white version of the Reverend Al Sharpton, the Reverend Fred Phelps promise no justice no peace? Not that recall.