The Justice Department's Race Hustling Division.

From Jason Riley at the WSJ, discussing the nexus between the Justice Dept., race hustlers and suits brought against police departments for "patterns and practices" of discrimination:

Attorney General Holder accuses Americans of being afraid to talk honestly about race relations, then uses his office to scapegoat police departments for black pathology. The conversation that Mr. Holder wants to have about race assumes facts not in evidence. It is also the wrong message to send to the young black men responsible for so much violent crime. These lawsuits make excuses for behavior that ought to be condemned and distract from a much more consequential debate about black cultural attitudes toward work, marriage, parenting and the rule of law. What ails these black communities are the Michael Browns, not the Darren Wilsons. And Mr. Holder’s war on cops won’t change that.

Amen. The Justice Dept. under Obama has become a political arm of the left. When I think back on all the flack Alberto Gonzalez took for hiring a few conservatives, and then look at the uber-radicals that Holder has packed the Justice Department with -- and in particular the Office of Civil Rights (a misnomer) -- it boggles the mind.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

A Note To Ann Althouse - To Fix Black Society, Follow The Example Of Martin Luther King Jr.

What is it with those on the right, that either they argue with no passion or they simply cede ground to the left, as if engaging in the arguments is distasteful? Case in point - James Taranto's article in WSJ stating lukewarm disagreement with Ann Althouse that the right should not be pointing out white on black violence in the wake of the Trayvon Martin shooting.

In the Trayvon Martin shooting, the race hustlers of the left saw an opportunity to argue to the black community that white racism was still alive and their greatest enemy. To say that they grossly overreached is an understatement.

There is a backlash now to that from many on the right who see the canard - and indeed, are its targets. And the most obvious response is to point to outrageous acts of black criminality against whites, asking the civil rights community to address it. It is a trap of course, as to address this violence, they would open up the entire can of worms on the ills of black society. Thus it is something both the left and Ms. Althouse would studiously ignore. She labels such acts as "counter Trayvoning." According to her, as quoted in the WSJ:

Conservatives have rested on the principle of colorblindness for a long time, and they've taken abuse for it. Look at how left liberals abuse Chief Justice Roberts for writing, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." They consider that kind of talk naive (at best). They push the perceived sophistication of what Justice Blackmun said back in the first affirmative action case: "In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race. There is no other way."

Those are the 2 well-defined and socially presentable opinions in this country, and decent, sincere Americans have argued from these positions for decades. Now, we're seeing some conservatives who seem frustrated by this taking account of race that's been done on the left. They seem to think it's a good time to spotlight violence committed by black people. This is not a good idea! It's fine to mourn Shorty, but these candlelight vigils are intended to stir hearts the way hearts were stirred at the Trayvon Martin demonstrations.

. . . To stir hearts counter-Trayvonistically is to nurture feelings that white people are oppressed by black people. This alternative to colorblindness is profoundly stupid. 1. It abandons the easy to express, principled position that many people perceive as the high ground. 2. It steps into the arena of taking account of race, where the left liberals would love to take you on. And 3. It gives air to the white supremacists among us. These people have been outcasts for a long time, but they exist, perhaps not quite yet recognizing what they are.

One, while a color blind society is absolutely what we should all strive for, that will not happen by conservatives ignoring race out of distaste for the argument. Ms. Althouse fully misperceives what is moral in this case. In all cases, facing problems and facing them with honesty defines the moral highground. When the left interprets everything through a racial lens and regularly makes outrageous charges of racism, then following Ms. Althouse's prescription would mean we cede the argument to the left. It is being in a war where only one side is allowed to fight.

Two, her claim that it steps "into the arena of taking account of race, where the left liberals would love to take you," is simply ridiculous. The left wholly ignores problems in the black community because they do not want to have to address them. Indeed, the left attacks any attempt by the right to raise address these problems by anyone on the right as ipso facto racism. The absolute last thing the left wants is an honest conversation "into the arena taking account of race." Indeed, as James Taranto points out in his WSJ article, "counter Trayvoning" has provoked liberals into dismissive responses, and thus might not be such a bad thing.

Lastly, her claim that to raise issues of color would give succor to white supremacists is a non-sequitur. White supremacists are and should always be outcasts. But demanding changes in and for the benefit of the black community in order to finally realize equality is an entirely different animal. At some level, doing so might provide temporary succor to supremacists, but the moral imperative to help black society is far and away more important, and in the end, wholly contradicts the goals of white supremacists. Ms. Althouse's argument seems to be analogous to the argument that children should not be inoculated against disease because some small portion of them will become very sick from the inoculation, irrespective of the fact that many more will be helped.

Indeed, Ms. Althouse's argument is taking a tack precisely opposite that followed by Martin Luther King Jr. His most powerful speech, given those fifty years ago, honestly addressed the problems of race, stated the moral imperative, and shamed white America into agreement that equality should be an overriding goal in America. As he said, blacks had come to Washington to cash the check that said "that all men are created equal." I concur, but we won't get there by following the advice of Ms. Althouse and ignoring race.

America should indeed be a land of colorblind equality where racism should not be tolerated. Fixing the plight of blacks in America today is every bit the moral imperative it was in 1963. There should not be massive, cyclical poverty for over 25% of blacks. Blacks should not have the worst jobless rate in America. Black children should have the same educational opportunities as whites. Black families should not be dysfunctional, with almost 3 out of every 4 children born to single mothers. And crime should not be disproportionately a problem of the black community, with blacks far more likely to commit violent crime, including murder and robbery. This state of black America is obscene in the 21st century. But, but, but . . . those problems are not the work of conservative white racism.

The idealists of the 60′s, JFK, Patrick Moynihan and their ilk, were deeply concerned and doing what they thought best to truly help the black community. Well, they shot their bullets and, while some of what they did helped spectacularly – the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act – other things that they did failed equally spectacularly – welfare and public education.

If the left could find a way out of this that would not result in their own weakening – or even perhaps demise – they would, I am sure, jump on it. Their catch-22 is that such a solution does not exist.

For the far left to truly address the problems plaguing the black community today would mean addressing failures of left wing programs. It would mean taking on the teachers unions (the group that underwrote the MLK 50th anniversary race hustler palooza a few days ago). It would mean taking a stand on traditional morality. The mortal danger to the left in doing so is that it would fracture the blacks as a monolithic voting block. And in an age where only a few percentage points of votes are what separate Republicans from Democrats, that could well be catastrophic for the left. They are quite happy to leave the black community to wallow in horrendous dysfunction so long as they can make money and gain power off their backs.

So the left continues to beat the drum of imaginary racism as the only true ill of black society. At the same time, they studiously ignore all the problems of the black community. The only way to address this issue is to do what Martin Luther King Jr. did. To raise the problems continuously, to do so with utter honesty, and to refuse to be cowed into silence, whether by the left or Ms. Althouse.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Black Civil Rights Leaders No Longer "Have A Dream"

On Aug. 23, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr stood on the steps of the Washington Monument and delivered one of the two most notable orations in our nation's history, (the other being The Gettysburg Address). MLK spoke of having "a dream" that one day, all Americans would be judged by "the content of their character, not the color of their skin." It was the perfect speech given at just the right time. It had moral clarity. It was a demand for nothing more or less than that America finally live up to its founding claim, that "all men are created equal."

Now, fifty years later, Democrat Representative John Lewis, a man who was there with MLK on that day, shows what has become of the civil rights movement. He is not a black civil rights leader, fighting to correct the ills of black America. He has become a full member of the far left, a movement that cynically uses blacks, feeding them the purest of canards so that they will remain a solid far left voting block.

The civil rights movement was once a moral imperative - one that has all but completely succeeded in this country. Today, anti-black racism doesn't even register on the scale of what now plagues black America - education, poverty, criminality, family. But the civil rights movement is now reduced to a cesspool in which only race hustlers dwell. And the poster child for that morphing of the movement is John Lewis.

In addressing the crowds at the fifty year celebration of MLK's speech, Lewis did not say word one about the problems facing black America. Instead, he chose to play the race card, claiming that the right of blacks to vote was under attack. What utter hore manure. And what an utter slime ball. If you are black, you ought to be far more outraged than I am.

If Lewis cared about the plight of black America, he would have been beating his chest over something like the recent decision of Obama's Justice Dept. to sue Louisiana in order to stop their school voucher program. That is a voucher program that primarily helps poor black children escape failing public schools. Education really is the "civil rights" issue of our time. But have no doubt, when it comes to a decision of whether to support poor black children or the Teachers Unions, blacks lose every time. It is an obscenity. As is, for that matter, John Lewis fifty years on.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Chris Lane: A Real "Trayvon" Case - But Where Are The Race Hustlers?

(Photo via Crusader Rabbit)

The canard pushed by the left in the Trayvon Martin case is that Zimmerman stalked Trayvon and then, without justification of any kind (they gloss over Trayvon's attack of Zimmerman and the fact that Zimmerman had already called the police), shot Trayvon in cold blood. Some of the most avid race hustling pimps are comparing that shooting to the 1955 murder of Emmett Till, a black teen who was killed after flirting with a white woman in Mississippi.

Well, we have a real life example of the Trayvon story today - and a murder even more senseless than Till's. Three feral black teens in Oklahoma saw a white jogger run by, then for no apparent reason - one claims they were "bored" - got in their car, stalked him and shot him to death.

The white jogger was a 22 year old Aussie in the U.S. on a baseball scholarship. The feral black teens were Chancey Allen Luna, 16, James Francis Edwards Jr., 15, and Michael Dewayne Jones, 17. All are shown on this video (that happens to be an Aussie news site - strangely, I do not know that any MSM site in the US has identified the three feral teens by their race)



So which of those three feral black teens will we hear Obama claim to look just like his would-be son?

Or when will we hear from the race hustling community on this one. Rev. Al? Jesse Jackson? Henry Louis Gates, Jr? Attorney General Eric Holder? Oprah? Hillary Clinton? Anyone? Come on, isn't it long past time to hold a real the conversation on race?

While they are silent, we do have sheer idiocy coming from some on the left. Here is Piers Morgan's tweet on the issue: "When an innocent Australian student is shot dead in Oklahoma for 'fun' - America's gun crisis becomes the world's problem." It just makes my blood boil.

No, Piers, guns are inanimate objects. The only way you get to argue about a "gun crisis" is by skipping over the real issue - a black subculture that is completely dysfunctional. And that is perhaps our most serious national issue.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

The Institution Of Arab Islamic Slavers

From Black Educator:

Here's a brief summation of the history of Arab enslavement of African Peoples. It is important to know this history in order to understand both the evolution of Western capitalism's slave trade and the current atrocities against Africans (by Africans) unfolding in the name of Islam and/or "Arab Civilization.

Islam & slavery by BLACKMUSICS

I touched upon a lot of this in my post, The Origins Of The Slave Trade & The Race Hustler's Holy Grail. The combination of ignorance and falsehoods that surrounds the historical - and modern - institution of black slavery is appalling. That combination is useful only in as much as so many have a stake in promoting slavery as an "original" sin of whites.

And slavery of blacks by Islamists is ongoing. The Washington Post ran a story less than a month ago, Timbuktu's Slaves Liberated As Islamists Flee, documenting the practice by Muslims of enslaving blacks in Mali. As disheartening as the story itself was, equally disheartening was some of the supremely historically ignorant comments. One in particular sticks in my craw - "Religious fundamentalists (conservatives) of all stripes have no problems with slavery." That statement is so hateful, so stupid, and so historically wrong that it leaves me in amazement. White Christian fundamentalists are the people that drove slavery not merely from our nation, but from acceptability on the world stage. The whites who in fact supported slavery, the KKK and other such institutions were Democrats. White Republicans started the NAACP. And the Republican Party was quite literally born out of opposition to slavery. Want more, go here and here.

Update: Almost as if on-cue, just as I am complaining about the complete and total rewrite of history by the left, MSNBC runs a retrospective on segregationist Alabama Governor George Wallace, the man who, in 1959, tried to stop blacks from integrating into then all-white Alabama schools. MSNBC identified George Wallace, who was a life long Democrat until registering as an Independent late in life, as a Republican. Scurrilous idiots.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Blacks In Chicago Having A Reality Check

Visit Bookworm Rooms, site for the video. She writes "I suspect this is a bump, not a groundswell, but it’s amazing nevertheless: inner blacks say that overwhelming government interference in the economy stifles the kind of economic growth their communities need."

It doesn’t surprise me at all – rather I am surprised that this is the first real example of working class blacks daring to speak out openly. I served in the infantry with 20 to 25% blacks. They were my soldiers, my NCO’s, my fellow officers and my superiors. I served with men very much in the mold of LTC, now Rep., Allen West. The single difference between the black soldiers and the rest was that the blacks had a bit better natural camouflage at night.

What surprised the hell out of me was when I left the army and was introduced, for the first time, to the race hustler industry. What has surprised me since is how many blacks have accepted the bile that industry sells them, seemingly uncritically. There simply cannot be that great a divide between blacks in and out of service.

So what I see above is what should be the norm. Obama and the left are destroying America, but they are utterly devastating blacks. The question is, how many blacks will it take waking up to reality before what we see in the video above becomes the norm, not the rare anomaly. I really think, as Thomas Sowell suggested, that the time is past ripe for the right to make a play for black support.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

The Last Refuge Of The Race Hustlers - "Color Blind Racism"

"Color Blind Racism" was the title of a recent article in the Henry Louis Gates, Jr. on-line publication, The Root.  Henry Louis Gates, Jr. last appeared on this blog for his outrageous charge of racism against a policeman for following protocol, and The Root was last mentioned on this blog for its list of blacks whom they would like to see erased from history.  The list was a who's who of murders, cannibals and despicable people, and included both Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and right wing black politician Alan Keyes.

So what is "color blind racism?"  According to The Root, it is "a racial ideology that expresses itself in seemingly nonracial terms. As such, it is most practiced by people who never see themselves outside their own myopic worldview. "  What that means in practice is a redefinition of racism from its actual meaning, a belief that a particular race is inherently inferior, into a wholly new arena, where, mirabile dictu, criticism directed towards blacks, and indeed, the mere mention of any inconvenient fact, is inherently racist.  The "Orwellian term, 'color blind racism.'" is, as James Taranto at the WSJ describes it, "the pithiest summation we've ever encountered of the absurdity of contemporary left-liberal racial dogma."

According to The Root, "Colorblind racism is the new normal in American conservative political thought."  Their exhibit number one, Newt Gingrich calling Obama the "Food stamp President," stating that the black community should be demanding paychecks, not food stamps.  The author does gild the lily a bit.  He goes on to tell us that the "bloodthirsty" audience actually applauded these remarks, and that Gingrich than followed up with a plan to "force" inner-city youth to work as janitors.  The author ultimately concludes that Gingrich is railing against, not the Washington elites, but the "black 'elite'" in the White House.  He finishes with the plea that "[v]oters . . . across the nation must demand that Republicans take responsibility for wallowing in a cesspool of race-baiting for political advantage, ever hiding behind a veil of colorblind ignorance and innuendo."

What I did not find in The Root was any article discussing the fact that Obama had, in fact, put more people on food stamps than any other President.  Nor did I find any discussion of the fact that Obama's policies, as bad as they are for the economy at large, are having their most destructive impact on blacks - from a rise in black unemployment to over 16%, to the destruction of the black middle class, to a rise in black poverty to over 25%, and to a rise in black youth unemployment to over 50%.  So in other words, any attempt by conservatives to actually address the problems of the black community is, ipso facto, racist.

When you see this wholesale redefinition of racism, what you are really seeing are the race hustlers of the left manning the ramparts in a last, desperate defense.  I am sure that a portion of the left is so conditioned at this point to view the world through a racial lens that the die hards will buy it.  But for everyone else, the race card is becoming ever less effective.  The device is obvious, as is the motivation.  The only thing the people at the Root care about is protecting their own political power and race based goodies, irrespective of how dire the impact on the black community as a whole.

As an aside, also from the Root, comes this great ad from Mark Oxner, a white Republican Congressional candidate in Florida:



The race hustlers at the Root claim that this ad, portraying Obama as Captain of our ship of state being rowed by children in chains is a "transparent effort to harness racial anxiety." They act as if they own the trademark on the word "slavery" and that any reference to slavery in any context other than referring to enslavement of blacks by whites (and blacks) in pre-Civil War America is inherent racism. The actual history of slavery in the world, including the fact that twice as many white Europeans and white Americans were enslaved by North Africans during the 1600's and 1700's as were blacks brought to America as slaves during that same time period is apparently of no consequence. It helps to be deliberately ignorant of history - a fact I have pointed out about Henry Louis Gates, Jr. before.

Read More...

Summary only...