From the "You Can't Handle the Truth" Files - Mark Cuban Edition

"In this day and age, this country has really come a long way putting any type of bigotry behind us, regardless of who it's toward. We've come a long way, and with that progress comes a price. We're a lot more vigilant and we're a lot less tolerant of different views, and it's not necessarily easy for everybody to adapt or evolve.

I mean, we're all prejudiced in one way or another. If I see a black kid in a hoodie and it's late at night, I'm walking to the other side of the street. And if on that side of the street, there's a guy that has tattoos all over his face -- white guy, bald head, tattoos everywhere -- I'm walking back to the other side of the street. And the list goes on of stereotypes that we all live up to and are fearful of. So in my businesses, I try not to be hypocritical. I know that I'm not perfect. I know that I live in a glass house, and it's not appropriate for me to throw stones."

So says Mark Cuban to Inc. Magazine in an answer to question about his upcoming vote in the NBA and the Sterling saga.  

Of course yet another firestorm has emerged from these statements.  Somehow this is becoming about Trayvon Martin. I suppose the Martin family have some sort trademark on the word Hoodie now.   To the point that Cuban has issued an apology to the Martin Family:

“In hindsight, I should have used different examples.  I didn’t consider the Trayvon Martin family and I apologize to them for that. Beyond apologizing to the Martin family, I stand by the words and the substance of the interview.”

There is nothing that Cuban said that is untrue.  The problem is that in today's society the truth is no longer valued.  What a sad state of affairs that is.  

We are human beings.  As such we all have frailties.  We all make judgements every single day about people we see out in public.  We do that for safety purposes.  If you are on a first date and that person rubs you the wrong way due to any number of reasons, you are making a judgement not to have a second date.  How you dress for a job interview can, and likely will, make a difference in if you are going to get a job offer or not.  Do you honestly believe that a law firm is going to hire someone who shows up in flip-flops and cut off jeans shorts?  Not likely.  Fair or not fair, it is the way it is.  

I will be the first to admit that if I was walking down the street in the dark and I saw someone with a hoodie on, I would think twice.  It has nothing to do with the color of their skin, but the fact that they are trying to hide their face from view.  I would wonder why.  If I saw some big burly man that had wild tattoos all over I would also feel a little fearful.  The same way a black person would feel fearful if they saw a person walking down the road in a KKK hood.  Heck, in fact I would be fearful if I saw someone in a KKK garb and I am not black.  In my mind someone wearing that is someone worth being fearful of.  It is going to set off red flags in my mind.  A swastika is another fearful sign to me.  Does that make me a racist?  

Another thing that I am fearful of is neighborhoods with high crime rates.  I lived just outside of DC for almost two decades.  I didn't go to certain neighborhoods unless it was absolutely necessary.  To me that is common sense and has nothing to do with skin color.   I would feel the same way regardless of skin color of the majority of people living in that neighborhood.  

We must talk about these issues instead of labeling someone a racist.  Which of course is exactly what happened to Mark Cuban once this interview went viral:

From twitter:

“Mark Cuban is racist. If I see him walking down the street I’m walking on the other side [because] I’m scared of him.”

This from Michelle Obama:

No matter what you do, the point is to never be afraid to talk about these issues, particularly the issue of race, because even today, we still struggle to do that. This issue is so sensitive, so complicated, so bound up with a painful history.

 And we need your generation to help us break through – we need all of you to ask the hard questions and have the honest conversations because that is the only way we will heal the wounds of the past and move forward to a better future.

She may have said it a little differently, but ultimately the context is the same.  We must talk about these issues.  We must face our own biases and prejudices in order to deal with them and overcome them.  We all have them.  Even if it is as simple as our political views.  Many in this country put the democrat in a certain box, put the republican in certain box.  Very few people fit neatly in the boxes that they get stuffed in.  

Telling the truth shouldn't be as controversial as it has become these days.  At this point in history we should be able to handle the truth that people carry stereotypes with them in life.  That virtually all people see certain things in their life and respond in ways that can be conceived as negative.  We make judgements based on how one is dressed.  We make judgements based on the neighborhoods that one lives in.  We make judgements on what type of work someone does.  It is only when we acknowledge these judgements and yes talk about them openly that we can finally break through the barriers of our preconceived notions that we all carry.   

In 2014 we should be able to handle the truth.  

Inter-racial Dating in Harlem - Video

I thought this was great.  With all the hullaboo about Mandela being the most recent thing showing our core differences in this country, this made me smile.  

H/T - Joseph 

Race Baiters and the Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court released its decision on Shelby County V. Holder.  This case dealt with only one section of the Voting Rights Act; section 4.  This section used data from the 1960's in order to decide which states/counties/districts have shown acts of discrimination in allowing minorities to vote, ever.  

There is no denying that in sections in the country the ability for minorities to vote was made almost impossible.  In many cases, those areas are in the south.  But the question in front of the court was does the federal government still have the right to micro manage every aspect of how voting procedures are done in all these areas of the country close to 50 years later.  They answered no.  Chief Justice Roberts said that times have changed and the law must change with those times.  

I am not going to sit here and deny that racism exists, it most certainly does.  We have heard recent stories about churches in the deep south refusing to marry inter-racial couples.  But the other side to that coin is that in many of the areas that this section covered have minority voters registered at equitable numbers of their populations.  

Now we have all the racebaiters out in force today saying that minorities will be again denied the right to register and vote.  Where is the proof of that?  Many areas of the south have black representatives at all levels of government.  Is that automatically going to stop simply because one small provision of the act needs to be adjusted?  It is simply ridiculous.  But Jesse Jackson usually is.  

Herein lies the problem.  We are not in 1964 anymore.  Times have changed and the congress was warned years ago that this provisions needed to be updated, not just rubber stamped to continue for an additional 25 years.  This section actually forced the areas it covered to get permission from The Department of Justice if they needed to do something as simple as change a voting location 25 feet away.  How exactly is that going to effect minorities from voting?  If a white person can get 25 feet so can anyone else.  

In one recent instance, one small town wanted to take the party affiliation off the ballot on local elections.  The Department of Justice said that was going to disenfranchise black voters.  All it was going to do was make people actually research who was running instead of seeing a letter after their name and voting based on that.  Since it was a very small town, most people most likely knew them anyway.  But it didn't stop the federal government from sticking their nose into business that had nothing to do with them.  

Congress should have acted on this years ago.  Why won't they?  They are afraid of being labeled racist simply because they admit that many areas of the country no longer discriminate when it comes voting.  The democrats don't get to hold onto they are the champions of minorities and the republicans don't want to get called names.  So what do they do?  They simply act like nothing has changed in 5 decades.  We all know that it has.  

Many on the left are talking about the voting rights act has been gutted.  No such thing is true.  What we really have seen here is that voting rights act has been successful and it is a law that has done what it was supposed to do (the law was always supposed to be a temporary one until things leveled out) and we should be celebrating that.  There may very well still be areas of the country where problems exist.  Lets figure out where those areas are and write laws that make sense.  If this is still such a problem, it should be no problem being able to prove it.  

But of course that will make the likes of Jesse Jackson less relevant.  We wouldn't want that would we?  

The Obama Tape

Last night a video of a speech that President Obama gave back in 2007 was released in its entirety.  The tape is divisive, race baiting, and pandering.  One must ask themselves why that fake accent he is putting is not the moral equivalent of black face?  It isn't like the president grew up in a predominately black neighborhood and was speaking "Ebonics" as a child, then as an adult learned better diction but occasionally falls back into old habits when back in the "neighborhood".  Why the black community doesn't see how condescending it is for him to speak that way in front of them is beyond me.  

The speech was also widely inaccurate in terms of Katrina.  Of the course the media's conventional wisdom has been that President Bush put his feet up on his desk and thought to himself, hey I am gonna kill me some black people today.  New Orleans is what was put on television.  It certainly wasn't the whole story. The damage caused by the storm itself was much worse in Mississippi than New Orleans.  New Orleans actually survived the storm quite well until the levees were breached.  But New Orleans is what people saw.  The media didn't totally ignore what was going on in other parishes in Louisiana, but they almost did.  There was another parish that was just as devastated as NOLA was, and that one is predominately white.  The help didn't get to them anymore more quickly.  The government failed.  Which to me isn't a surprise.  I don't think the government is all that quick or efficient.  Matter of fact the government was by design meant to move slowly.  To me the biggest failures of Katrina in New Orleans was Mayor Nagin not doing enough to get those people out of there before the storm hit.  The Governor also was far too lax in her call for federal help.  

To this day many people don't realize that President Bush couldn't do anything for the first few days.  That pesky little thing called the constitution got in his way.  The state had to request federal troops.   The governor didn't do that for days.  We don't want the President of the United States to have the power on his own to put military forces on the ground in this country.  It is an invitation to tyranny.  

I also think it comes as quite a surprise to people like me who gave money to funds to help the victims of Katrina that I didn't care.  After all I am white, they were mostly black, so hey so what.  My church went to NOLA for about two years after the storm hit, cleaning up areas and helping people rebuild their lives.  We raised over $100K in those efforts in just the first month.  I am sure over the two years we raised a considerable greater amount.  But now I am being told that I didn't care.  That is news to me.  Not only did my faith based community give funds, they gave their time and their sweat.  But I guess I am just that average white person he talked about months later.  

I also found out that my roads don't need to be fixed.  Really?  I pay taxes too.   One of the things that I was reminded of while listening to that speech is the controversy here in D.C. surrounding the opening of the Walmart in several depressed neighborhoods.  He specifically mentioned that people have to go too far to do their everyday things.  That is very true in the neighborhoods that these stores are scheduled to open in.  But they have been fought tooth and nail.  It is mostly about Walmart not being unionized, but they won't admit that.  One of the D.C. council members actually said that opening them is a bad idea because people will get arrest records when they can't resist the urge to shoplift.  Yes, they really said that.  That is how little they really think of the poor.  

But the president had that covered too:

“We can’t expect them to have all the skills they need to work. They may need help with basic skills, how to shop, how to show up for work on time, how to wear the right clothes, how to act appropriately in an office. We have to help them get there.”

I must be an idiot.  It never occurred to me that being poor meant you couldn't figure out how to get to work on time or even understand why that would be important.  I didn't realize that they need to be taught how to dress.  Now, I can imagine that a person of limited income may need some help being able to afford nicer business attire, but not that they were unable to comprehend that they needed it.  I didn't know that being poor means that your intellectual capacity is very limited and the government needs to sweep in and teach you everything that may need to know how to behave in an office setting.  

Sadly, many in this country agree with him on this.  This is why I can't be a liberal.  I have more faith in the individual, even the poor ones.  I don't think they are so stupid they don't know these things without a government program to teach them.  Now, I would like someone who agrees with these statements to explain to me what makes you think if they lack the intellectual ability to grasp this without a government program why do you think they will ever get it?  Obviously you think they are so stupid that the concept of being on time to work doesn't occur to them on their own.  

Even this won't wake up the inner city/poor black community.  Here he is, telling you that you don't have the capacity to complete simple and basic thought processes on your own.  You are totally dependent on government to do that for you.  Yes, he has your best interests at heart.  

But, even more sadly is that, as president, he has done none of those things to help you.  The unemployment rate is almost doubled that of the general population.  But, hey details.  What do I know? After all, I am the racist for thinking this tape says something important about the liberal mindset of minorities and the poor.  Even though I have said repeatedly that being poor is more of a barrier in this country than color is.  Being born white and poor is no easier than being born black/hispanic/asian/ and poor.  I am still the racist.  

Jay-Z Admits Voting Based On Skin Color, Yet I am the Racist

We have all heard the stories of President Obama and the $40,000 per person fundraiser held by Jay-Z and his wife Beyonce.  A fundraiser, I might add, that was held immediately following a terrorist attack on our country and the deaths of four people in that attack.  

I have said The President is in a tough spot in some respects, it is election season, money has to be raised and the base has to be rallied.  I get it.  But it doesn't change the optics of the whole thing.  They aren't good.  President Obama has this knack of not understanding that.  

Jay-Z, not only a supporter of Obama, he is a supporter of The Occupy Movement as well.  That makes these statements to MTV all the more interesting:

"I don't even like the word politics. It implies something underhanded and I think we need less government,"
 "I support Barack because I gotta respect that sort of vision. I gotta respect a man who is the first black President ever," he said. "To have that sort of vision and dream, I have to support that."

It sounds like Jay-Z is really a libertarian.  His views on social issues seem to be more to the left of mine, but he seems to understand the need for limited government and fiscal responsibility of that government.  So why would he support Obama?  He admits it himself, it is skin color.  

He understands the need for economic freedom and the entrepreneurial spirit, that is exactly how he lifted himself out poverty.  He fully understands that the government did not do that for him.  He worked for it.  While I have little use of his music.  I think it glorifies a culture that is unhealthy, but I do respect what he has accomplished in his life.  I also admire that he and his wife do give back to the community.  I may not agree with all the different charities that he supports, but I respect that he understands that individuals have a role to play to help the less fortunate in the world.  

What I don't respect is that not only does he not vote his own values, he does so based on skin color.  I am not oblivious to the fact that the first black president is a big deal.  I get that.  But it needs to be based on character, accomplishment, and ability or doesn't really mean anything.  

People in this country need to open their eyes and accept the fact that many people voted for President Obama solely based on the color of his skin, and have closed their eyes to the fact that he isn't qualified for the job.  Voting on skin color is just plain wrong.  I say that about the people who voted against him as well as the people who voted for him.  We are not electing Prom King, we are electing the leader of the free world.  The office has been diminished by people like Jay-Z.  It is a shame he doesn't see that.  

Of Dog Whistles and Other Such Things

I have enjoyed the spin on the left about the convention this week.  The outright falsehoods that are going on about the auto plant in Wisconsin has been quite amusing.  The video and newspaper reports that prove that the plant was indeed still making cars when President Obama took the oath of office doesn't seem to deter them.  I guess Romney's underwear is truly magic since the videos dated long before he choose Paul Ryan as his running mate.  

The outright disgusting behavior that was shown towards Mia Love and Condi Rice was very sad,  but even worse, it was expected.  The cries of the female version of Uncle Tom was heard loud and clear.  We get it, you don't like any person of color being conservative.  They are not allowed to think for themselves.  They must follow your vision, because after all, you are the party of tolerance.  

The left got their pants all twisted by Ann Romney's line of 'I have a real marriage'.  She wasn't talking about gay marriage.  She was talking about the same thing that every other married couple knows to be true, marriage is work.  The movies and the fairy tales don't tell you that when you are growing up.  She had five children to raise with a husband who travels.  She has dealt with real tragedy in her life.  The loss of a child, numerous health problems in breast cancer and the knowledge that she will be dealing with MS for the rest of her life.  She has come out the other side of those things with her marriage in tact.  That is not an easy thing to do.  The rates of divorce in our country prove that.  

Chris Matthews schooled me this week on the words that I am not allowed to use.  Chicago means racist.  Golf means racist.  All that secret code, oh my.  Al Sharpton has decided that the fact that Romney has a proven and clear record of putting minorities and women in positions of power and authority is a negative.  I am not even going to try and figure that out.  In his world up is down and black is white.  The only people who can legitimately put minorities is someone who shares his world view.  If not, I guess they are just pandering.  Some have gone as far to say that proves that they are racists.  Paul Ryan's college girlfriend who happens to be black is also somehow proof that he really doesn't like black people.  You figure it out, it just makes my head hurt.  

But this has to be one of my favorites of the week.  

 But that line about how when America needs to accomplish something great, "you need an American"? Dog whistle to the birthers?

Now, take a look at what he actually said:

Tonight that American flag is still there on the moon. And I don't doubt for a second that Neil Armstrong's spirit is still with us: that unique blend of optimism, humility and the utter confidence that when the world needs someone to do the really big stuff, you need an American.

She is just pulling this crap out of thin air.  He didn't say when America needs to accomplish something, he said when the world does.  He was talking about American Exceptionalism.  Something that Maria Cordona obviously cannot even begin to understand.  The left doesn't see America in the same vision that I and others on the right do.  They just don't.  They don't view our place in the world as something special.  We are just one of many to them.  We should be more like Europe to them.  Why they don't just pick up and move to Europe is something that I don't understand.  You like it there so much, pack your bags.  No one is stopping you.  I will help you pack.  

More of the Tolerant Non Racist Left - Condi Rice Edition Language Warning

Tweets following Condi Rice's amazing (no telepromter needed) speech at the Republican National Convention:

Fuck Condoleezza Rice fucking uncle tom    

Fuck Condoleezza Rice!!!!!!!! Uncle Tom ass Biotch!!!

Condaleeza Rice has to be the biggest Uncle Tom in history.... Right after Uncle Ruckus from Boondocks.

Condoleezza Rice..smh.. I guess I have to respect the fact that she's been an uncle Tom for quite sometime now.. that can't be easy

See, Condoleezza Rice, is what we call, an Uncle Tom.

Watching Condalezza Rice at the Republican Convention makes me sick she a Uncle Tom like hell

I hope that fuckin' Uncle Tom @AllenWest was paying attention Condoleeza Rice disagreed with the first black president w/o disrespecting him

Somebody need to tell Condoleeza "Red Beans and" Rice ol uncle Tom ass she got lipstick on her teeth.

Condeleeeza Rice is such a dick rider.... that;s why I don't like her uncle tom ass....!!!
sadly, this one is from a black woman.  

CONDELEEZZA RICE IS A UNCLE TOM ASS BROAD... SHE'S BEING PLAYED BY THE REPUBLICANS AS A PAWN AND SHE'S OK WITH IT... SMDH

CONDOLEEZZA RICE......YOU OLE UNCLE TOM AS BITCH!!!!!!!!

Condoleeza Rice is the definition of a Uncle Tom

Why is it so hard for people to call Condi Rice an Uncle Tom?

Condoleeza rice is the definition of an uncle Tom and a coon all at the sane time!

I wonder how Condoleeza Rice and @gopblackchick feel when them white folks make em sleep in the slave quarters after the election.

Yep, racism only exists on the right.  Got it.  

Chains, Politics, Racism, & VP Biden

All the political chatter today is about Vice President Biden's remark

"put y'all back in chains"

But let's looks the entire quote in context

“Romney wants to, he said in the first 100 days, he's going to let the big banks once again write their own rules. Unchain Wall Street. They're going to put y’all back in chains,”

To me these look very different when taken in full context.  He was using a metaphor.  A poor one may be, but a metaphor just the same.

Much has been made of the fact that this took place in Danville, Va which is a city that has a population of almost 49% black.  This is what I find offensive.  If he had said this in a city that had a population that is say only 8% black it would have been different?  You can see from the pictures of the event that the crowd was diverse.

What I find so offensive is that what I am hearing in this uproar is that apparently we are supposed to change our language depending on who were are talking to.  Does that mean that I am supposed to create a blog for hispanic readers, another for whites, and yet another for blacks?  That I am supposed to change the language I use for the point I am trying to make depending on the skin color of the reader?  That is really offensive to me.

Is what he said stupid?  Of course it is.  But in full context it wasn't racist.

I do believe that Biden has some preconceived notions of things.  I think many will remember that he once made a comment about Indians and 7-11's.  The fact of the matter is that in the area that I live in you would be hard pressed to find a 7-11 that didn't have employees that are not of Indian descent.  What he said is true, at least in this area of the country.  That may not be true everywhere, but here it is.  So is that racism/bigotry?  No, it isn't.  Maybe it isn't polite to point it out, but that is about political correctness, not racism.

See I am no fan of how everything we say and do in this country has to fit into some preconceived notion of being politically correct.  Who is it that makes these rules?  Because we all know that they are different for different people.  Had Paul Ryan used the same words the likes of Roland Martin would be the first one to screaming and yelling it was indeed racist.  Whereas today he is saying that it isn't.  For once I actually agree with him that it was not a racist statement.

We need to get past all this PC nonsense and realize that using the metaphor of chains has nothing to do with slavery.  It is a commonly used metaphor that covers all kinds of things.  I am sick to death of everything being labeled "offensive" or "racist".  It is no more attractive when it comes from the right then when it comes from the left.

I dare anyone who disagrees with me on this to look me in the eye and tell me honestly that you wouldn't feel that had the exact same scenario happened to a politician you agree with, you wouldn't be defending it and saying it wasn't racist and people were over-reacting.  If you can't do that, then stop playing the same "racist" card that has been played on us for the past four years.

Is VP Biden a gaffe machine?  Oh, yes.  He is not the smartest tool in the shed, that is for sure.  He also has a habit of changing his dialect up a little bit depending on the crowd he is front of.  Which is offensive.  But there is no proof that VP Biden is a racist and that this comment was nothing more than metaphor of a theme that the right has been using for the past two years, of unshackling the private sector.  Could he have used a different word than chain?  Yea maybe.  But why should he have?  At some point we have to get beyond this nonsense and stop equating everything to race and slavery.

Take it away Joe:

Open Letter to VA State Senator Louise Lucas

Dear Ms. Lucas:

I heard your comments about the upcoming presidential election and how Mitt Romney is appealing to the racist segment in society that is against President Obama due to his skin color.  Your exact statement was:

“All of the folks who are saying ‘we don’t like Barack Obama,’ they can’t tell you any reason they don’t, because — let me say this first of all, President Barack Obama did not create the situation that has us in this economic mess that we’re in. Everybody knows that this stuff happened under President George Bush, and they’re trying to dump on the president. But those people — intelligent people understand that President Barack Obama did not create this mess, and the mess that was created could not be solved in two or three or four years. Intelligent people understand that.
“But Mitt Romney will go out and try to play to the fringe by saying it’s all Barack Obama’s fault. But intelligent people know better. I listen to MSNBC. I listen to all the media outlets. And you know exactly where the slants and biases are coming from. But right thinking people know that this mess was not created by Barack Obama, and he’s done the very best job that anybody sitting in the White House could’ve done to try to pull us up out of the muck and mire that George W. Bush got us into.”

I can give many reasons that I don't like President Obama and not one of them has to do with his skin color.  I have three years worth of blogging about issues that I care deeply about that again have nothing to do with skin color.

You make these statements without any regard to the people in this country that have real differences of opinion about how policy should be dealt with.  It makes no difference to you the people who I have in my life.  The people who I consider my loved ones, my close friends, the people who I genuinely care about.  You can't be bothered to find those things out before you spew your racial comments.  Comments that are not meant to be the least bit helpful, but to further divide our country.

You see Ms. Lucas, I am willing to concede that there are people who don't like President Obama simply based on skin color.  Why is that you are so unwilling to concede that the vast majority of people who are not happy with the job performance of President Obama have differences in opinion regarding policy?  Could it be that you have nothing left to say and you can't defend the policies?  Because it seems to me that is the most logical explanation.

In your diatribe you even admitted that you couldn't get your own children to see the racism that you seem to think permeates everything and everyone in this country.

Frankly Ms. Lucas I am sick to death of people like you playing the race card.  It has long since reached its limit.  What you have done is make it next to impossible for the people who are truly victims of racism to get a fair hearing.  Your calling everything under the sun racism has done nothing but diminish the word to the point that it has virtually no meaning any longer.

You would like to know what it is that I don't like about President Obama?  Ok, here you go:

1. Obamacare will not reduce healthcare costs in this country.  I will be paying more for insurance than in the past.  I was told I wouldn't lose my health insurance if I was happy with it.  That was a lie, I did lose my insurance.  I am now paying close to 80% more than I was the day Obamacare was signed into law.
2. The Stimulus package did little to actually stimulate the economy.  It was a payoff to democratic constituencies.  The next generation shouldn't be saddled with that debt to make your union buddies happy.
3. Yeah, I have a problem with guns being brought across the border and having two border agents lose their lives.  Why don't you?
4. Eric Holder is a disgrace.  He used his position to further political causes without regard to the law or our constitution.  His refusal to help Arizona with a law that the Supreme Court says is perfectly consitutional is proof of that.
5. President Obama using executive privilege to save Eric Holder's ass is disgraceful and illegal.
6. President Obama has skirted around the legislature in order to pass his so-called Dream Act.  It matters none to him that is an issue that has to be passed into law through congress.

Those are things that simply jumped to the front of my mind.  I could come up with hundreds of others.  My opposition to President Obama has nothing to do with his skin.  It has to do with his policies.  My objection to you is that you are a small-minded idiot that thinks that dividing people will score you cheap political points.

The economy is awful.  The spending is out of control.  We have more people on disability then those living in the City of New York, and record numbers on food stamps.  Unemployment has not been below 8% since the President took office.  We were told if that we spent almost a billion of mostly borrowed dollars we would never reach that point.

We continue to rise the debt limit so that President Obama and his buddies like you continue to spend money we don't have.

You want to come at people who oppose the President with facts, than have at it.  I am willing to debate you on that.  But until that time, please go crawl under a rock.  We don't need to hear from the likes of you of how racist this country is.

What you are saying is that President Obama is perfect and deserves no criticism.  That is simply ridiculous. Had President Obama been a white man you would be the first in line to bring torches and pitchforks to The White House demanding an answer of what is going to be done for the 14% unemployment rate for blacks.  But you are the one who is showing your racist stripes by refusing to address this issue.  You are the one that can't criticize a black man.  That is what is racist.  You give him a pass and treat him differently because he is black.  I simply treat him as bad president whose policies are failing.  You should try it sometime.  It is quite liberating.

Are we so worried about right vs. left that we have forgotten right and wrong?

I am beginning to think so.  Much has been made about National Review's Rich Lowry firing John Derbyshire.  I would think it was a pretty simple clear-cut case.  Derbyshire wrote an article about his version of "The Talk" you have with your children.  His version was for people of white and Asian backgrounds.  It was in a word, disgusting.  He flat-out says that black should be judged by a different standard as whites, especially in terms of politicians.  I don't know about you, but I will take Tim Scott over Nancy Pelosi any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

He also went to try to demonstrate that blacks are stupid and violent.  He used some "evidence" to back up his claims, but what he didn't do was talk about how socio-economics factor into those numbers.  Take a good hard look at any poor performing school district anywhere in the country and the standardized test results are lower.  Not all poor performing schools are in predominately black areas.

He also said to tell your white children to stay out of mostly black neighborhoods.  Does he include the neighborhoods of Prince George's County Maryland as well?  That is the most affluent black community in the country, or did he just mean instruct your children to stay out of neighborhoods that have high crime rates?  Of course, any parent that isn't living in one of those areas will tell their children that.  But again, not all high crime areas across the country are black communities.

This man is free to think and feel what ever he so chooses to.  That isn't the issue.  The issue becomes does National Review have to employ someone who so blatantly demonstrates those views?  I don't think they do.

I have read different things across the conservative blogosphere in regards to his firing.  Many are upset about the fact that he was let go and say that Lowry has no right to fire him.  Why exactly is that?  Stacy McCain has explained it that since Derbyshire has been expressing these types of views for quite sometime the only difference is that the left complained about it.  While there is truth to that in part, it isn't the whole truth.  Derbyshire has always been  provocative in his writings, but he has never gone this far before.  This was an outing of his racist views.

— n
1.	the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by hereditary factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others

There can be no doubt that his little rant is racist by the true definition of the word.

Now, the right spends a great deal of time pointing out the racist views of those on the left.  Pointing out that the likes of Al Sharpton is considered a hero by many on the left and is allowed to spew his views on television.  There is currently an online petition going around asking MSNBC to fire him.  There are all sorts of things being said about how Eric Holder is doing nothing about the threats made against George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed a black teenager in what he claims to be self-defense.  The truth is that the Eric Holder has no power over what the black panthers are currently doing.  That is a state issue.  The person that should be answering the question of why nothing is being done is AG Pam Bondi or the local police departments.  Not Eric Holder.  It is easy to make him a target, but in this case he shouldn't be one.  But AG Bondi is a conservative republican so the questions are not forthcoming.

If you think that it the right thing to do to take Al Sharpton off the air for his views, then how can it be wrong that Lowry fired Derbyshire?  What Derbyshire said was equally offensive.

I have heard others say that Lowry should have used this as way to disprove him.  Others have said the answer to bad speech is more speech.  I don't disagree with either of those statements.  But neither justifies keeping him employed.  You can actually do both things; fire him and prove him wrong.

There is right and wrong in the world.  Derbyshire can be as racist as he wants to be.  That is his business.  But Rick Lowry has a responsibility to National Review and to its readers to give fair and accurate accounts of the happenings in the world.  Giving a platform to a man who holds the views that blacks are stupid and violent by nature is neither of those things.  Good riddens, Mr. Derbyshire.

It is time that we admit that racism is neither right nor left.  It is a human condition.  Racism knows no boundaries when it comes to politics or to social strata.  It will rear its ugly head in just about any place and by people of any color or background.

The Politics of the Death of Trayvon Martin

The death of Trayvon Martin is still in the headlines and getting a great deal of coverage on the cable news shows.  I personally watch very little television, but when I do turn on CNN or MSNBC this is a major topic.  New polling is out that shows a racial divide on how you look at the case.  Many whites, myself among them, feel that this has been politicized by the likes of Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton.  Now, I will admit anytime that Rev. Al gets involved in something I am more than just a tad suspicious.   See, I grew up outside of New York City and I remember the Tawana Brawley Case.  A very sad story of young teenaged girl who made accusations of rape at the hands of white attackers.  The longer it when on the more of the circus it became.  Brawley came from an abused background and had a step-father who was literally a killer and a mother who had abused her in the past for running away.  The racial strife that besieged the city during this incident is well-remembered by the people who had to live with it once this story left the news.  While Sharpton was successfully sued, he didn't pay the monetary damages, people paid it for him.  We then can move onto the Duke LaCrosse players.  Rev. Al tried to destroy these young men's lives based on a lie.  When there is a big spotlight that he can climb into, he never misses the opportunity.  He is nothing more than a race hustler and a con man.  How this man continues to have any creditability is beyond my comprehension.  Al Sharpton has blood on his hands.

I have been on record as being disgusted about how some one the right have decided to put Trayvon on trial.  This doesn't belong in the court of public opinion.  This case is moving along in the justice system.  More slowly than many people would like, but nonetheless it is moving along.

There are many things that we don't know about this case.  What does the coroner's report say about where the bullet entered Trayvon's body.  They can tell what angle the gun was held at and how close the gun was to his body when it went off.  Did Trayvon have any defensive wounds, did he have Zimmerman's DNA under his fingernails, and did he have any other injuries beside the gunshot?   Where was Trayvon's body in relation to Zimmerman's car?  Where was Trayvon spotted in comparison to the store and his dad's home?  All of these things will help bolster or help destroy Zimmerman's statement of events that led to the shooting.  None of these things have been made public, so we have no way of knowing what evidence the state has and what they don't.  Zimmerman has said that Trayvon went for his gun.  Is his fingerprints on the gun or the holster?  If so, game over; Zimmerman will be a free man.  Rightfully so, in my opinion.  That will be a clear-cut case of self-defense.

I have nothing but sympathy for the parents of Trayvon.  They buried their child.  Let me say that again, they buried their child.  That is a pain that no person should have to go through.  No matter the circumstances, it is one of the most painful things that anyone will endure.  They want justice done in the name of their son.  A perfectly understandable thing.  Any parent would want a full accounting of what happened to their child and how they died.  I am even willing to cut the woman some slack about getting the trademarks.  She has a very good attorney who I am sure told her to do this.  Lets be honest here, people would have tried to make money off her son's death and this prevents people from profiting off her pain and loss.

What I find so troubling is how this boy's death is being used and politicized.  The family made an appearance on Capitol Hill in regards to Stand Your Ground laws.  That is a state issue and has nothing to do with the federal government.  But people have decided to use this death to further their anti-gun agenda.  Stand Your Ground Laws isn't really a gun law.  It says that you can use up to deadly force to protect yourself  even off your own property.  You can do that in any number of ways that don't include a gun.  Some people are well-trained in martial arts and could end another's life with their bare hands.  You could use a knife if you happen to have one, a tire iron if you are on the side of the road changing a tire and some one tries to attack you.  The law isn't designed to be about guns, it is designed to allow people who are being threatened with imminent danger to protect themselves.  But of course the anti-gun lobby will use anything that they can to limit the constitutional rights of gun owners.

We also see cries of racism.  There is zero proof that Zimmerman is a racist.  Zero.  The people who are perpetuating this should be hanging their heads in shame (Rev. Al).  Racism is a very serious charge and it should not be made lightly.  There is word on the 911 call that you can't make out.  Somehow this has turned into the word "coon".  When is the last time you heard a person use that word to describe a black person?  That is not something that is part of the everyday conversation about race in this country.  When you make claims of racism that have little to no basis in fact, you are taking away from the true claims of racism.  I have heard one person go as far as to say that Zimmerman's tutoring of underprivileged people was actually proof that he is a racist.  He did it to prove his superiority or something like that.

The Congressional Black Congress is not going to be outdone by Rev. Al, so they have decided to enter a resolution to honor the life of the young slain teen and it also calls for a repeal of the stand your ground laws.  Oddly, one of the people who signed onto the resolution is Congresswoman Frederica Wilson who helped pass the law in the Florida legislator.  Oh, the irony and how it is not being reported that this law passed unopposed.

The media bias in this case is well documented.  NBC has admitted to "editing" the 911 call.  Apparently that happened in the control room.  Uh, huh.  They purposely reported this case as a white on black hate crime.  They have done everything in their power to convict Zimmerman, to heck with the facts; or more precisely the lack thereof.  They have led to some of this uneven polling that we are seeing.  They have taken an unfortunate set of circumstances that we don't have all the facts about and turned it into political theater.  A very sad commentary on how the view their jobs as unbiased reporters of facts.   They are losing even the bare threads of journalistic integrity that they had left.  Especially when you consider Al Sharpton is allowed to lead rallies then report on them during his show.  While he is opinion and should be given a little more leeway, he has been allowed to use that platform to push a point a view about a criminal matter.

Rev. Al says it is people  on the right who have decided that Zimmerman is not guilty.  I don't believe that to be true.  I think most on the right feel that they don't have enough facts to say what did or did not happen and we would like to see what the special prosecutor has to say about the available evidence.

I have heard on interview with Trayvon's mother.  She won't accept anything but a conviction.  Of course she is still in mourning and dealing with her grief.  I can't imagine that Al Sharpton will accept it if the prosecutors come back and say that the evidence shows that Zimmerman acted within the law and no charges will be brought.  I know some who will not accept it either.  At least at this point.  They have made up their minds.  They ignore the fact that there is a witness that backs up Zimmerman's claims.  Trayvon was on top of him punching him.  There are wounds seen on him in the video that released.  There was tape on his nose showing that their was some sort of injury.  To me the only way that Zimmerman should have felt reasonably in danger was if Trayvon did go for his gun.  If not, he was not justified in shooting him.

I have come to the conclusion that at the end of the day we will find that both Zimmerman and Trayvon both made some bad choices.  Zimmerman should have stayed in his car and locked the door once he knew the police were coming.  Trayvon should have either ran to his dad's or called 911 when he was made uncomfortable once he realized that some strange man was following him.  If either of them had done these things, Trayvon would still be alive today.

Marion Barry - The Gift that Just Keeps on Giving - Dirty Asians Start Up Dirty Businesses

The scariest part of this is that he said that after winning his primary race Tuesday night.  What in heavens name is wrong with the people in Ward 8?  See the demographic data of the people who keep voting this man into office.  You need to understand that when a democrat wins the primary, he will be elected.  Most times there are no republican challengers.  

The Tragedy of Trayvon Martin

I was just about to do a post on that poor young man that was shot murdered in Florida.  I happened to read SilverFiddle's take on the incident and there is no way that I could say it any better:


A Stupid Gun Owner is a Dangerous Gun Owner

Responsible gun owners and defenders of the right to self-defense must demand the prosecution of George Zimmerman

Police in the central Florida town of Sanford have said that 28-year-old George Zimmerman says he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in self-defense during a confrontation in a gated community. Police have described Zimmerman as white; his family says he is Hispanic and not racist. (US News)

Neighborhood vigilante George Zimmerman murdered young Trayvon Martin.  I don't see how a reasonable person could reach any other conclusion. News outlets are blaming Florida's Stand Your Ground Law, but that's just agenda reporting. 

Nothing in that law green-lights what Zimmerman did. He was flat-out wrong. Criminally wrong. You can’t just go chasing law-abiding citizens down the street at the point of a gun.

Zimmerman told a police dispatcher that the teen was "up to no good" because he was walking through his neighborhood "just walking around, looking about" with his "hands on his waistband."  Does the idiot have kids? That's what teens do!

Zimmerman chased after Martin, complaining to the dispatcher, "These a******s always get away."

Hell yeah!  When a gun-toting man is chasing you, you're going to try to get away. Of course Martin’s going to run. He probably thought Zimmerman was a pedophile or some kind of crazy person. He had every right to run. He also had a right to turn around and “jump” Zimmerman “from behind” (how do you get jumped from behind by someone you’re chasing? Zimmerman is lying.)

When someone chases you down and assaults you, you have a right to fight back. Too bad the kid didn’t end up kicking the dumb bastard’s head in.

Critics are calling for a repeal of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law in the wake of the killing, but that is like calling for the repeal of driving automobiles every time a pedestrian gets run down.

The perpetrator was not “standing his ground,” he was chasing down an innocent young man who was just trying to get back to his house before the second half started. If anything, had the kid killed Zimmerman, that same law would have protected him.

This is a tragedy. It is assault with a deadly weapon and murder. And Florida's Stand Your Ground law needs to stand.  It will protect potential victims from assaults by people like George Zimmerman. 



The Martin family deserves justice for their son.  Mr. Zimmerman needs to be charged and tried.  Let a jury of his peers decide what his punishment will be.  The city/town of Sanford also deserve a new police chief, one that will follow the letter of the law.  This case is screaming for an arrest and he should be doing just that.


Although, I do want make another point that Silverfiddle didn't cover in this, the fact that media is purposely fanning the flames of racism by reporting incorrectly that Mr. Zimmerman is white.  That is not a small point when charges of racism are flying around so freely.    Mr. Zimmerman is Hispanic.  


You should also go and read DaTech Guy's take on this as well.  He makes some very good points too.  The numbers of black on black crime that dont' seem to generate all the outrage that this case is generating.  It is very possible that Mr. Zimmerman had some issues with race.  It is also very possible that he has some issues with aggression and anger management that had nothing at all to do with race.  I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on that until more evidence is presented.  But he needs to be arrested and charged.  Let a jury decide his fate.  


Rest in Peace Trayvon.  

Hey Jay Thomas, Meet Mrs. Joel Pollak

The liberal drive by media is all in a tizzy about vetting Obama and the Breitbart video of our dear president embracing the views of a man, who at the very least, has outside of the mainstream views on race relations and what the white community feels towards minorities.  Jay Thomas, for reasons that I can't explain, was asked to join in on the conversation on CNN between Joel Pollak and Soledad O'Brien on Critical Race Theory and the video of President Obama asking people to embrace the views of Derrick Bell, the late professor behind this theory.  


Maybe, just maybe, before you call someone a racist and ask them if they are afraid of black people you should  find out a little about their personal lives.  Since his wife is black, I have this feeling he isn't afraid of them.  But, what do I know, I am just some raaaaacist tea bagger.  

Let Breitbart's Vetting Begin - President Obama Harvard Protest Speech

Is there anything in this that would make a true blue democrat not vote for this man?  No, they like all this nonsense.  Victimhood is part and parcel of the left.  


Would this have given pause to people in the middle who feel no real allegiance with any party?  I think it would have, especially if they did the research on who this professor really is.  But thanks to the media not doing their jobs four years ago we will never know.

Runaway Slave with CL Bryant

Just returned home a short while ago from the DC Premiere of the new documentary Runaway Slave.  An honest look at the plight of conservatives who happen to be of color.  


Pastor Bryant lost his church for preaching about conservative values.  He was dismissed from the NAACP after voicing his opinion about the horrors of what abortion is doing to the black community, so he knows of what he speaks.  He has lived it.  


It is a powerful and thought provoking look at the community, the values they hold, and how they are taken for granted by the Democratic party.  


Hollywood has not embraced this movie (shocker, I know) and they need help getting it more widely distributed.  It doesn't necessarily answer the questions of why the black community votes the way it does, but it does generate some questions.  


If you get a chance to see it, please take advantage of it.  


Oh, I got the chance to meet Zo.  He is just as charming and funny as he appears in his videos.  

A Little Black History Lesson From Congressman Allen West

In case you have not seen this, it is well worth the listen.  Tell it to your liberals friends.  They have completely rewritten history on this topic, heaven forbid they admit to the racism that was part and parcel with the democratic party for more than a century. 

The next time a liberal tries to tell you that dems (if they are willing to even admit this one) who were the racists became republicans, just remind them there is only one documented case of a racist democrat becoming republican.  That man was Strom Thurmond, who by the end of his life had turned his back on his racist past.  Also remind them when the south became mostly republican was also the time that the culture wars in this country started.  The era of free love, sex without consquences, women's lib, and all the other assualts on conservative values became the norm.  The conservative dems finally woke and realized that the democratic party had left them behind. 

Supporting Newt is Racism?

So says Glenn Beck.  It is no secret that Beck doesn't like Newt; no, it is more like he can't stand him.  That is fine, he has the right to his opinion.  Beck doesn't think that there is a big difference between Newt and President Obama.  He feels that they are so much alike that if a tea party member supports Newt it must mean that they don't like Obama due to racism.  

“If you have a big government progressive, or a big government progressive in Obama… ask yourself this, Tea Party: is it about Obama’s race? Because that’s what it appears to be to me. If you’re against him but you’re for this guy, it must be about race. I mean, what else is it? It’s the policies that matter.”

The stretch in logic that one must make to come to this conclusion must mean that Beck is a contortionist.  Look Newt has issues.  He has done many things that upset social conservatives, he has upset the republican establishment (not to say to that is bad thing), he has upset moderates, and he certainly has upset the left (again, not a bad thing).  

But, to think that Newt would have done the things that Obama has done over the past three years is simply ludicrous.  Would we have Obamacare?  Would we have had almost a trillion dollar in stimulus that really only stimulated friends of the far left?  Would he have signed Dodd/Frank?  I don't think any of these things would have happened.  

Does he really want me to believe that Newt's supporters are racist?  Newt also has done some very good things in his career.  He led the first republican comeback of the House of Representatives in four decades.  When others said it couldn't be done, he did it anyway.  Many of the things that are traditionally credited to President Clinton; such as welfare reform and a balanced federal budget, were done under his watch. 

So let me ask you a question Mr. Beck, why should I believe that you are a conservative when you pulling the race card from the bottom of the deck?  How is what you just said any different than what the left does anytime you criticize President Obama?  

This is not the first time that Beck has played the race card.  Let's hope it is his last.