The Color of Death

Source FBI (2009)

From Heather McDonald, National Review:

But is the Martin shooting emblematic of a larger problem? Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the mainstream media here and abroad certainly are portraying it as such. That larger problem, of course, is lethal white racism and a criminal-justice system allegedly indifferent to the killing of blacks. At a rally Thursday night in Sanford, Sharpton said that “Trayvon represents a reckless disregard for our lives that we’ve seen for too long,” and warned that “they,” presumably whites, would try to trick black protesters into violence by “send[ing] in provocateurs.” “Blacks are under attack,” said Jesse Jackson on Friday from Chicago. “Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks, and ultimately killing us is big business.” MSNBC analyst Karen Finney claimed that “racist rhetoric” used by Rush Limbaugh and several Republican presidential candidates was responsible for Martin’s death.

In side the gated communities of the elite black opinion leaders,  maybe white anti-black prejudice is their biggest problem.   However in the real world, where real blacks  live, it not white who are killing blacks, but rather other blacks, but who care about blackacide?   Certain not the good reverends.

Hat tip graphic:   William A. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection.

Newt Gingrich is not inarticulate, but Karen Finney is video:

Hat tip: William Jaoobson, Legal Insurrection.

Mute the sound and Finney looks white. Turn the sound bkck on , and she sure sounds black.  George Zimmerman is an Hispanic and registered democrat.  So how much influence, if any, did Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney have on Zimmerman?   About as much influence as Finney’s speech coach.

Chicago has problem and her problem is not an eighty-one year old black man who defended his life and property.   No Chicago’s problem is Rahm Emanuel who apparently will not rest until he sees all of his citizens murdered.   A sane person would consider Homer Wright(81) of the People’s Republic of Chicago a hero. However Emanuel considers Wright to be a felon, from Chicago Sun-Times:

“I think it’s wrong and it’s unjust that I can’t protect me and my whatever, and that’s wrong.”

Anthony Robinson, 19, allegedly was trying to break into Wright’s home in the 6400 block of South Morgan Street to steal liquor about 6:30 a.m. Monday when Wright shot him in the leg, police said.

Wright was charged with unlawful use of a weapon, a felony, police said.

It is time for Chicago to catch up with the civilized world and recognize that free men a have the right to keep, bear and use firearms to protect their property, homes and lives.    Under English Common Law, free men have the right to bear arms since the Magna Carta.

We as a society should banish the use of the term gender with respect to human being.  Whether sorted by brains or beauty, Babette Josephs goes to the back of the line, from Charles Thompson, Patriot News:

Pennsylvania State Rep. Babette Josephs, D-Philadelphia, picked up the political hand grenade that is the state’s ultrasound bill today when she wondered aloud at a Capitol rally if Republican women who had co-sponsored the bill are “men with breasts.”

Josephs’ remarks came at a political rally sponsored by the Lancaster County Democratic Committee, in which she accused Republicans in control of the state Senate and state House of turning Pennsylvania into a “laboratory for the right-wing. They’re trying all these experiments on us.”

Then, she took specific aim at women lawmakers who co-sponsored the ultrasound bill, asking rhetorically, “I do not understand how a woman in this Legislature can say to herself: ‘I’m not capable of making my own health decisions… but I can get elected and make them for somebody else.

Reax, Tina Korbe, Hot Air:

This is truly one of the most bizarre, perplexing bits of news I’ve ever encountered. It’s the sort of tidbit that justifies the resurrection of that cliché: “We’re through the looking glass.” Up is down, down is up, an embrace of fertility is somehow a sign of masculinity

More, Jill, Pundit & Pundette:

It would be unkind to repeat #2 son’s pithy observations on Rep. Josephs. She probably can’t help it.

Jill, Unkind is my middle name. We will make Number Two a co-blogger here, and let him post his remarks.

And more, Sister Toldjoh:

#WarOnWomen: Hello. I’m a man with breasts …or so @BabetteJosephs says
Posted by: ST on March 26, 2012 at 7:33 pm Heh. Who knew?

The Sister likes to be known for more than her girl pats The Sister non-girl parts work just fine.  Sadly for Josephs, none her parts appear to have ever used.

It would behoove us to remember that our sex essentially determined by God, or fate, and is immutable.  That is, sex an unalterable traits, as race is.  Your sex is a given.  It is inane to to think of sex, as Josephs does, as some kind of mailable social convention.  The term gender can never be properly used to describe any person.  Gender is only a property of nouns, not people.

In contrast, the term lady describes a female with a certain style of behavior.  Which why, I would the congressional term of gentlelady to redundant and absurd.

From Fox News:

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. – A psychologist who looked into a 1998 allegation against former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky told police at the time that his behavior fit the profile of a likely pedophile, NBC News reported Saturday.

Yet Sandusky was not criminally charged nor placed on a state registry of suspected child abusers, and prosecutors say he continued assaulting boys for more than a decade until his arrest in November.

Funny, I had been under the apparently mistake impression that the police motto was:  To serve and protect.   Now, I grant that what the police suspect can not necessarily be translated into what a prosecutor can legally establish in open court.   So I will give the State College police on not arresting Sandusky.

However didn’t at least one police officer in State College actually have any children?   Apparently not.   For the motto of  “To Serve,  and To Protect” obviously wasn’t not seen as extending to children.

Sandusky was employed by the state.  Yet was allowed to continue to have apparently allowed to continue to have access to children and to continue to prey on them.   Note to our liberal readers:  Preying is not protected under the First Amendment.

I like to think that some resourceful police officer could have found a way to curtail Sandusky’s access to children    I mean, Sandusky was not in position where he wanted to State College police suspicions to become public knowledge.

Again, would the State College police have shown the same indifference,  or even acceptance of Sandusky’s predatory behavior had he liked little girls rather then boys?

Two conchics but one message.

First from the leggy Tina Korbe: Hot Air:

This really isn’t a hard or complicated issue to understand. A wide variety of factors contribute to the price of gas. The president doesn’t have control over all of them — but he does have significant control over energy policy in the United States and energy policy is one of the factors that contributes to the price of gas. It makes sense, for example, that if oil and natural gas companies have to pay more in regulatory compliance costs, they will price their products to compensate for the increase in regulatory compliance costs.

Second, from the darling of the conservative blogosphere, the incomparable Clarice Feldman, American Thinker:

Do you believe that Presidents can affect the price of gasoline?

Well, sometimes the media thinks that he can and sometimes they think that, even though he can keep the waters from rising and the climate from changing, he can’t. I’m talking, of course, about the disparate treatment the media gave George Bush when gasoline prices spiked to $3.51 per gallon — even though he and Vice President Cheney tried desperately to override Democrat obstruction and increase production by opening ANWR, permitting drilling on the continental shelf, allowing the extraction of oil from tar sands on federal land and slashing red tape on new refinery and pipeline construction. Back then they blamed Bush.

No president, not even an oil man in the White House, can set the price  of oil.   However  the current president hate fossil fuels and lets hs blind hatred over power what little common sense he has.

If  the linked video is factual, a person purported to be one Mikhail Muhammad is an open conspiracy to either, kidnap, cause the murder of or both on George Zimmerman.     I would think Mr. Muhammad has committed multiple civil torts as well as state and federal felonies, from John Hayward, Human Events:

The Black Panthers have now placed a cash bounty on Zimmerman’s head.  Originally it was $10,000, but later Mikhail Muhammad, speaking in Sanford, Florida, announced that he was receiving additional funds from “the black community, athletes, and entertainers as we speak,” and anticipated kicking the bounty up to one million dollars by next week.

This is ugly.   Mr. President you have a problem.

Hat tip:  Donald Douglas, American Power

Addendum: video added:

If the linked video is factual, a person purported to be one Mikhail Muhammad is an open conspiracy to either, kidnap, cause the murder of or both on George Zimmerman.  I would think Mr. Muhammad has committed multiple civil torts as well as state and federal felonies, from John Hayward, Human Events:

The Black Panthers have now placed a cash bounty on Zimmerman’s head.  Originally it was $10,000, but later Mikhail Muhammad, speaking in Sanford, Florida, announced that he was receiving additional funds from “the black community, athletes, and entertainers as we speak,” and anticipated kicking the bounty up to one million dollars by next week.

This is ugly.  Mr. President you have a problem.

Hat tip: Donald Douglas, American Power

Addendum: Added video:

Yeah, it is ugly.

In a 2009 case in Greece, New York, he was, from American Thinker:

We know this because in fact, such an event occurred in 2009 in Greece, N.Y., a suburb of Rochester. Roderick Scott, a black man, shot and killed an unarmed white teen, Christopher Cervini, whom he believed was burglarizing a neighbor’s car, with a licensed .40 cal. handgun.

There are many similarities between the Scott-Cervini case and the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case in Florida. In both cases, there had been a spate of criminal activity in the neighborhood. In both cases, the shooters called 911 to report suspicious activity, yet chose to confront the unarmed suspects outside their residence and off their own property prior to the arrival of the police. In both cases, the shooters claimed that they felt threatened, and fired in self-defense. In both cases, local law enforcement applied relevant state law

It was local to me, confusing and much discussed.   From the news accounts,  it was  hard to get a read of the case.  and I never did.   In the end, I did what the community did, trust the jury to figure it out.   They did, and acquitted the shooter, with no Reverend Al, national media attention local riots are thinly veiled threats of violence.

And from the Chicago Sun-Times:

Perils on an unarmed society and the benefits of an armed one, from  Bob Owen, Confederate Yankee

Who poses a greater threat to life and liberty, armed citizens like George Zimmerman or fanatics like Rahm Emanuel?

Carlisle, PA— Actually, I’m a little closer to Harrisburg… but whatever.

GREAT TO BE BACK– Yes, it took a while, but we’re back. I simply got fed up with the antics at the webhost I was using.  Far too much downtime, usually caused by them.  And always without notice. For a while there, I didn’t say very much because I was almost to the timing could deal with these problems in a reasonable amount of time.  But with me taking on my new job as a driver, that’s a little harder to do.  I finally hit the international “enough” line. In the process of backing up my site, I got to talking with my old friend, Art Smith, who runs The Conservative Reader, and he offered me a berth over here.  I’d not have done it,  except that Art had a great point when he suggested this will be great for both of our sites.  He has both the talent and the time to watch over things technical, and he seems to like BitsBlog, and thinks it’ll add to his site.  I hope so.  Meanwhile; there is so much to catch up with I can hardly begin. Here’s a few:

• GAS PRICES, OBAMA STYLE: Yes, Doug, contrary to your ongoing mantra, the President CAN raise gas prices. In fact, he has done so by several means… including spiking the speculators by spiking the Keystone Pipeline. I see now he’s starting to walk that one back, so he too apparently recognises he brought us higher priced fuel. We’re sitting on more oil than the whole of the middle east. Most of which is made inaccessable by the siera club leftists dictating our “energy” policy. (Hint… Once their boy got in the WH, gas prices went from under two bucks a gallon to around $4/gal.)Put that oil in the sights of the people who drill for it, and the prices go down almost at once. True, the oil won’t be at the gas pump for a few years, but that’s the nature of the Futures markets…. When they see the extra oil coming on the market, the prices come down.About half of the nonsense being generated up on this issue is clearly coming from people who have no idea how the free market really works. Or, that demagogues the issue because they don’t want the free market in place.And gee… that would seem to include our president and his energy secretary. And let’s consider this for a moment; I’m currently paying around $4.40 for a gallon of Diesel. At 300 gallons per tankfull, that’s $1320.00 a tank. And that’s for fuel alone. Now… does anyone think that these prices are not being reflected in the things they buy every day? Welcome, dear friends, to hope and change.
• Trayvon Marin:  A lot more heat, than light, surrounding thhe shooting the left is screaming about down in Florida…    Look, Gang…  That Zimmerman, the shooter, may be as McPhillips says, Barney Fife on ibogaine, strikes me as a reasonable conclusion to draw, though as yet unproven.  ]That said I can’t help but wonder if there would be so much screaming about this case if the kid were white.The scenario being offered up by the leftist media  just now is right online with the left wing mantra that anyone who believes in law and order is inherently racist. Given that history, it seems reasonable to ask if we’re getting the whole story here. I suspect we are not. Nor, I suppose, will we.What we have here is a minefield. On the one hand we have the race huxters and on the other hand we have the anti second amendment people. Historically neither one of these is been attached to the truth in any great amounts. .  As McPhillips says…
  

  The way this is going, there will be five hundred lies around the world before the truth can get its pants on. Next up we’ll see Occupy Wall Street signs reading “Justice for Trayvon Martin,” and we’ll hear about it all summer, and then the fall, right into November.

  Think that’s an exaggeration? I don’t. Repeatedly, Zimmerman has been reported to be white. He is not. He is Hispanic, in fact. That point alone suggest that there is at least a certain level of manipulation going on. Which begs the question, manipulation to favor what and whom, precisely? I note with some degree of interest that both the anti-gunners and the race huxters are within the core constituency of the current occupant of the White House.

  Here it is gang, and this is something that we sat in this site many times previously; when the likes of Al Sharpton get involved, that ought to be a red flag that something of the truth is being withheld. Tawana Brawley… Name ring a bell?  What we need here, is less heat and a lot more light.  Given the usual suspects hanging off this thing, we are not likely to get either.

• The EPA:  Glenn mentions:
  

  E. DONALD ELLIOTT: The Case For Trimming the EPA. “The EPA, just as large as it ever was, is now on autopilot, churning out rules and regulations without heed to cost or competing values. It spends huge sums chasing the tiniest of risks.”

  Well, that goes directly to what I said about Romney. All while ago Romney made the comment that he wanted to run government as a business. It sounds to to say it that way, but consider that the EPA is emblematic of what happens when government is run as a business.

  Think about it this way; the business of oil companies is to sell oil and to increase their influence in the marketplace, and grow their business. The purpose of computer companies is to sell computers and hopefully increase their influence on the market, and grow their business. And, so on. If we are running government as a business does that mean that our primary task is to grow government? Certainly, the EPA seems to be taking a businesslike approach to the deal. The problem is that after a while you get to the point where you’re reaching diminishing returns . You have so much control that your effectiveness starts to wane. Not only can you not be all places at once, the resentment factor starts taking over. And once the PA laws are in place real businesses tend to falter under the regulatory load. The economy begins to fail . And we have what we have been treated to the last several years… businesses are running away from doing business here in united states, our economy faltering, joblessness skyrocketing, and so on. Certainly, Elliott mixes points well, and they should be heeded. But I suggest that what goes on at the EPA is emblematic for what happens in government, in general. Consider; what can be said about the EPA can also be said about the transportation department. The admirably surnamed Ray LaHood is certainly running the place like a business. growing it like a business. And we’re all paying the cost.

Dear reader, if you are incapable of understanding the difference between justification and provocation, stop reading this post now.

Now if you still with he,  I do not claim to understand what SSgt Robert Bales, USA did, or did not, do in Afghanistan.    However I do have some awareness of what was happening in theater.   Like Susan Estrich, neither is pretty.

from Susan Estrich, via NewsMax:

Don’t get me wrong. The killing of 16 Afghan men, women, and children by an American soldier without provocation and without threat to his own life (or so it appears) was wrong. Completely wrong. It is an unspeakable tragedy for all those involved. It places the lives of other Americans in danger.

I’m no fan of the myriad “abuse excuses” that once held sway in the American legal system. Those who know the difference between right and wrong and have the capacity to choose are responsible for choosing wrongly. End of story.

Unless Ms Estrick of understands the oldest convention in warfare, the rule of Tit for Tat she does not understand armed conflict and is incapable of expressing an informed opinion     The rule of Tit for Tat holds that I will refrain from taking certain action if, but only if, you exercise like restraint.

Under the Obama/Panetta de facto rules of  engagement, our servicemen are serving in free fire zone.   Afghans are free to fire of American servicemen, but we not expected to fight back, from the Detroit Free Press:

WASHINGTON — The shooting deaths of two U.S. military advisers in the Afghan capital and the quick decision to pull coalition personnel from all government ministries injected a sobering measure of doubt about the reliability of the most important U.S. ally in the war.

The Pentagon condemned Saturday what it called the murder of the two American officers, but said it was committed to working closely with the Afghans to counter violent extremism and to stabilize the country.

In a written statement, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s press secretary said Afghan Defense Minister Gen. Abdul Rahim Wardak called Panetta on Saturday to offer his condolences and to apologize.

In other words, kill an American Fighting Man and our Secretary of Defense will grovel for an apology.   Kill and Afghan, and we are expected to shoot our soldiers, without the needless hassle of a trial.

It is not realistic for expect this imbalance of restraint to stand.

Actually, I unduly disparage village idiots.   The village idiot, better known as Joe Biden who by our misfortune is Vice President of the United States uttered:

“You can go back 500 years. You cannot find a more audacious plan. Never knowing for certain. We never had more than a 48 percent probability that he was there.”

Off the top my head, I can think of Pearl Harbor, Dolittle’s Raid, Entebe,  and Serman’s March to the Sea.    However the most audacious of the all, and one with whom the former senator from Delaware ought to be familar, is George Washington crossing the Delaware in blizzard to attack a superior British force.  A raid led by the commander-in-chief, himself.    That is audacious.

Hat tip and more, Ed Morrissey, Hot Air.

Er … what?  I won’t take anything away from the call to hit the Abbottabad compound; there were genuine political risks in play for President Obama, and no guarantee of success.  However, only someone with complete ignorance of military history could call a green light on a mission with a 48% chance of success the most audacious plan in the last 500 years.  Here are a few from just off the top of my head:

• Guadalcanal
• Raid on Tokyo
• Battle of Cowpens
• Dunkirk
• Bunker Hill
• Agincourt, if one is willing to go back 600 years or so

The White House should take pause before they use the phrase “deliberate ignorance.”

With this post, BitsBlog is back online.

We hope you’ll like the new digs.  Which, in reality look pretty much like the old ones, with the only real change being that we are now part of The Conservative Reader.

I want to take a moment to thank Art Smith, TCR’s creator, for his boundless help  and tech support.  It was his idea to move BtsBlog over to TCR…. an idea I found attractive…. this will be a great thing for both of our efforts.

Onward!

OK, John King got his butt handed to him in a basket by Newt Gingrich. David’s got the video up already, so I won’t bother with it. We all know of the exchange. Frankly, it’s no great feat of foresight that Gingrich saw the question coming.  The supposed mainstream media is nothing if not predictably leftist.  Which is not to say Gingrich doesn’t deserve accolades for knocking it out of the park.  Indeed, I would think an ill prepared for the Presidency indeed had he not seen it coming.

But, please, let’s not fall into the trap of thinking that the liberal media has learned its lesson by this.  I will guarantee you that John King is being inundated by leftist admirers in his emails and phone calls.  He is being greeted and hailed as a liberal hero.  And of course, his objectivity is never in question in these comments. The same goes for Brian Ross.

Essentially what happend there with John King happens all the time.

Brian Ross, the guy who went after the interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich, that King played off of, tried to pull a Dan Rather.  I will remind you that Dan Rather lost his job over that.  Frankly, the same should happen to both Brian Ross, and John King…. They both should lose their jobs.   That is, if ‘objective’  is at all prized in the supposed minatrseam media…but I tend to doubt that’s going to occur.

But let’s look at the nature of the “Gotcha”

First off, there are divorced people all over this country.  Finding an ex- husband or ex-wife who is actually LIKED by their ex, is in fact the rarity, not the norm. So on that point alone, this story is not news. But further, the story was already out there…. years ago. And found no traction, then and if the numbers in the South Carolina race are of any indication, it’s not found any traction in the more current iteration, either.

But let’s remember, also, back in 1994 when Gingrich hadn’t even taken the speaker’s gavel yet, that the supposed mainstream press was trying to attack him then, as well.  It didn’t stick then of course, but neither did Gingrich’s innocence in the matter change the leftist mantra.

And let’s look at the response from Gingrich, who says:

Newt Gingrich

I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office. And I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that.

Obviously, Gingrich makes a great response.  But he doesn’t go far enough here.  The question should have been raised why the press never directs that kind of questioning and that kind of ardor against leftists.  Even there, however, they wouldn’t be ashamed for their double standard having been revealed.You see, the fact of the matter is, you cannot shame a Liberal.  They are totally without shame.  Anything…. any lie, any mistruth, any stretched truth, any fact ignored, is worth the price to them of furthering the agenda.  That is the ultimate goal.  This situation was nothing if not a clear demonstration of how the supposedly mainstream media can and does control the agenda… tilting the national argument to the left.

And left we forget which way the press leans, let’s remember that the supposedly unbiased “mainstream” press that takes such pride in attacking Gingrich is the same one that carried the water of Bill Clinton for the best part of a decade. So, their bias was already revealed in any case.

There are those around the sphere who will point out that Gingrich got press out of this thing that Romney,Satorum, and Paul cannot touch.  I’ve even seen accusations that John King tossed Newt a softball. I doubt that in the extreme. I suspect, rather, the he hoped Gingrich would flub the response, thus killing his electoral chances. Clearly, that backfired, but don’t anticipate that that’s going to change any minds in the supposedly mainstream media.

Addendum, 5 minutes after posting:

There’s something else that needs to be said here as an extension of these thoughts.  For decades we honor I have been told that we should not directly confront leftist bias.  We should not call the socialist left what it is.  That we must, in fact, avoid all confrontational with such.  The reason given is that the press will never like this.  Without the presses support we can’t get anywhere.   The fact of the matter is, we will never as conservatives get the support of the press.  That is simply put because they are died in the wall leftists.  They are not unbiased.  They are fighting for the leftist cause.

Those cheers that you’re hearing both on the video in question and from around the country right now are not because confrontation was avoided, but because Gingrich had the actual stones to go after bias when he found it.  Not timidly, not in a tone of false friendship, but with both barrels.

I was sitting in a rest area outside Ulter, New York during that debate, putting together some rough notes for the Ramble that night.  I can tell you there was a lot of cheering going on… with many happily saying “It’s about time”.

The path to victory is not being timid.  The path to victory does not involve the canine courtesies as prescribed by the supposedly mainstream media, and the establishment GOP’s consultants.  The path to victory is going after lies where they are found, with both barrels.

Will Newt Gingrich ride into the White House on crest of belittled and mocked Lame Stream Media reporters.   Saturday night, Juan Williams tried carrying water for the Obama campaign,  and go humiliated for his efforts.   Last night, ignoring Williams’ carcass, and got more of the Newt Treatment, from Don Surber, Daily Mail (WV)video:

Reax:

“The audience gave Newt Gingrich a standing ovation for his response at to a question about whether he asked his second wife for an open marriage, which was the opening question at Thursday night’s CNN Republican presidential debate.

Gingrich turned John King’s question around, saying, “I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office. And I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that.”

The former House speaker categorically denied the allegation that his second wife, Marianne, apparently made in an interview that ABC News has yet to broadcast.

Every adult of voting age knows several divorced people.   It is fair to say, that the nastiest phrase in the language is ‘the ex.”    The phrase is wielded like a tomahawk and for the same purpose.    There is no purpose in interviewing an divorced person, on the subjecvt of their former, other than to dig for dirty.  John King, how does it feel to be covered in your own dirt?