President Joe Biden traveled to Tulsa Oklahoma on Tuesday to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the 1921 Tulsa Massacre. His comments ranged from the ludicrous to the downright dangerous. We’ll start with the ludicrous.
In the clip below, Biden says: “You turn on the stations… I don’t know many commercials you see … two to three out of five have mixed race couples in them. That’s not by accident. They’re selling soap, man.”
Maybe he meant to say “hope” and mistakenly said “soap.” Perhaps I’m being overly critical and should have compassion for an old man who suffers from dementia. But can America really afford to have a leader with dementia?
This man is going to face Russian President Vladimir Putin in two weeks. And at some point, he’ll meet with the most dangerous, ruthless man on the planet, Xi Jinping.
BIDEN: "You turn on the stations… I don't know many commercials you see… two to three out of five have mixed race couples in them. That's not by accident. They're selling soap, man." pic.twitter.com/91OisGgIX1
Moving on, Biden said, “According to the intelligence community, terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today. Not ISIS, not Al Qaeda, white supremacy. That’s not me. That’s the intelligence community.”
Well, if that’s what the intelligence community really concludes, they should all be fired and replaced.
Our President continues: “Look around at hate crimes against Asian Americans and Jewish Americans. Hate never goes away. Hate only hides. … My administration will soon lay out our broader strategy to counter domestic terrorism and the violence driven by the most heinous hate crimes and other forms of bigotry.”
I’m not denying that white supremacy is an evil ideology, but it is far from the most lethal threat we face. The most deadly threats to the U.S. are currently China, Russia, and the violence caused by gangs and the drug cartels which the Biden Administration’s open border policy has just exacerbated. Any threat assessment that leaves out all of the above is disingenuous.
BIDEN: "According to the intelligence community, terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today." pic.twitter.com/Mm0KISuiyy
The President needs to take a closer look at the statistics which show that black Americans commit, both proportionately and in number, far more hate crimes against Asian Americans than any other race.
And it’s not only white supremacists who are behind the recent spate of anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S. The flag-bearing, pro-Palestinians we’re seeing in the news don’t look all that white to me.
Consider the blatant anti-Semitic statements coming from Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the tolerance of those remarks by a large portion of other party members. And, in case Biden was wondering, the world noticed his own rather tepid support of Israel during the recent hostilities with Hamas.
Anti-Semitic sentiment in the U.S. is NOT coming from the Republican Party that Biden’s comments were targeting.
Biden leaves out the Democrats’ war against whites. I would argue that the party’s embrace of wokeism might be the most serious threat of all. It’s certainly done more to divide Americans than anything else.
Biden then makes a very racist, insulting remark, although he won’t be called out for it. He said, “…young black entrepreneurs are just as capable of succeeding given the chance as white entrepreneurs are, but they don’t have lawyers, they don’t have accountants …” This comment is similar in substance to the Democrats’ argument that requiring voters to present ID suppresses the minority vote. This Democratic narrative is based on the assumption that blacks aren’t as smart or as capable as whites. I’ve never understood why blacks aren’t offended by that.
BIDEN: "…young black entrepreneurs are just as capable of succeeding given the chance as white entrepreneurs are, but they don't have lawyers, they don't have accountants…" pic.twitter.com/uaVQO6vPeN
Biden, whose administration has done more to subvert America in less than five months than white supremacists could ever do, should not be lecturing us on what great nations do.
I’ll tell you what great nations don’t do. They don’t try to punish their citizens for atrocities that happened long before they were born. They don’t try to rewrite history. They don’t try to persecute their political enemies. Nor do they base their policy decisions on what will cement their power for generations to come.
The most dangerous threat we face today is our current government.
Taking the Initiative Party (TTIP) leader Sasha Johnson was shot in the head early Sunday morning outside of a party in Southwark (south London), according to a Met Police report.
Johnson, 27, was taken to an area hospital at approximately 3 a.m. where she underwent surgery and remains in critical condition.
Although Johnson is identified as a member of the British Black Lives Matter chapter in numerous reports about this incident, she was not associated with the organization. Instead, she was on the leadership committee of TTIP, a separate anti-black racism activist group.
The Post Millennial’s Andy Ngo reported that Johnson “rose in prominence last year for her advocacy of the creation of an armed black militia, the abolishment of police & the overthrowing of capitalism.”
Ngo provides a example of Johnson ginning up a crowd on a London street in the video below.
She tells her supporters: “Racism thrives on capitalism. The back of racism is capitalism. … We need a black militia. … The police is no different than the KKK. They stand around and protect statues and buildings instead of people. … All together, put your fist in the air. Black power. Don’t ever be scared to say, it doesn’t mean that you hate another race and anybody that say that you hate them too have hidden racism. They’re scared of your blackness. Black is beautiful. …”
Charming young woman.
#BLM leader Sasha Johnson is in hospital with life-threatening injuries after being shot in London. She rose in prominence last year for her advocacy of the creation of an armed black militia, the abolishment of police & the overthrowing of capitalism. pic.twitter.com/Q9doTLPCvw
In a statement to the BBC, TTIP said Johnson had received “numerous death threats.”
Imarn Ayton, a friend of Ms Johnson’s, spoke to the BBC. She said the surgery had gone well and that Johnson was “now with her parents.”
Ayton told the BBC she did not believe Johnson “was the intended victim. … As far as I am aware, this incident is more related to rival gangs as opposed to her activism.”
BLMUK reacted to this shooting on Twitter: “BLMUK expresses our shock and solidarity over the shooting of Sasha Johnson. A young mother and fearless political campaigner who was at the forefront of many BLM protests last summer. … While Sasha wasn’t part of our organisation, she impressively founded a new Black-led political party and was dedicated to resist anti-Black racism.”
The group announced a vigil had been set for the next day and said, “Any attempt to intimidate or silence her, is an attack on all of us.”
Detective Chief Inspector Jimi Tele said: “We are all hoping that this young woman’s condition improves. Our investigation is in its early stages and urgent enquiries are under way to establish the circumstances.
“I would appeal to the residents of Consort Road and the surrounding area to check any doorbell or dashcam footage for any suspicious activity that may relate to this investigation.”
Considering one of Johnson’s goals is the abolishment of the police, does she even want them to carry out an investigation to find the shooter?
Really? Can anyone even imagine what would happen to this great nation if we were to hand over the keys to Westminster to this woman?
In her wildest dreams, The New York Times Magazine’s Nikole Hannah-Jones couldn’t have imagined the monumental impact her 1619 Project essay, a warped, dishonest revision of American history, would have on race relations in the U.S.
Of course, the fact that it was the opening salvo of The Times’ editor Dean Baquet’s meticulously orchestrated master plan to put a Democrat in the White House the following year, helped.
The idea that most conservatives found so duplicitous and repugnant, that slavery stood at the center of the American story, was carefully and massively promoted by The Times and then immediately embraced by the rest of the liberal media, eventually winning Hannah-Jones a Pulitzer prize.
Following the death of George Floyd in May 2020, Hannah-Jones achieved super-star status.
In the summer of 2020, according to NC Policy Watch, Hannah-Jones was invited by UNC Chapel Hill’s Hussman School of Journalism and Media, her alma mater, “for its Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism, a tenured professorship.”
Policy Watch reported last week that due to “political pressure from conservatives who object to her work on the 1619 Project,” the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees rejected the tenure committee’s recommendation to grant Hannah-Jones tenure. “Instead, she will start July 1 for a fixed five-year term as Professor of the Practice, with the option of being reviewed for tenure at the end of that time period.”
Knight Chairs, the article explains, are sponsored by the Knight Foundation. “They are important and influential journalists who bring their expertise to the classroom at some of the nation’s most respected universities. While continuing their work in journalism, Knight Chairs offer students the perspective they’ve gained through their experience in the industry.”
Susan King, dean of UNC Hussman, spoke to Policy Watch. She said, “It’s disappointing, it’s not what we wanted and I am afraid it will have a chilling effect. … I’m not sure why and I’m not sure if that’s ever happened before. It was a work-around.”
The university has been working with the Knight Foundation since the early 1980’s, and all of their Knight Chairs have been tenured from the start, according to the report.
One of the board members spoke to Policy Watch on the condition of anonymity. This individual said there was one word to describe what happened to Hannah-Jones and that was “politics.”
“This is a very political thing. The university and the board of trustees and the Board of Governors and the legislature have all been getting pressure since this thing was first announced last month. There have been people writing letters and making calls, for and against. But I will leave it to you which is carrying more weight,” the trustee said.
The trustee blames the Republican-dominated UNC Board of Governors and claimed that several conservatives groups exerted pressure on board members. “The groups,” according to this individual, “have been highly critical of Hannah-Jones’s work and the idea of her teaching at UNC-Chapel Hill.”
Policy Watch reported that a second trustee, who also wished to remain anonymous, “confirmed the political environment made granting Hannah-Jones tenure difficult, if not impossible.”
The trustees seem to miss the fact that the conception and promotion of the 1619 Project was itself a political act.
The editor of the most influential newspaper decided he would set a narrative he knew every major media outlet would follow that would inflict so much damage on then-President Donald Trump, he would lose his bid for reelection.
It happened in August 2019. The occasion was a “crisis employee town-hall,” a staff meeting held by The Times’ executive editor Dean Baquet. A recording of his remarks was leaked to and published by Slate. (The full transcript of the meeting can be viewed on Slate.)
At the time, Trump had just delivered a positive and widely praised speech on two mass shootings that had taken place nearly simultaneously in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio. The President had denounced racism in the strongest possible terms.
The original headline in the The Times’ article on this speech read, ““TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM.” Following harsh criticism from the left for their positive take on the speech, the newspaper changed its headline to “ASSAILING HATE BUT NOT GUNS.”
The Times’ title change became a huge story, as it should have.
Baquet opened the meeting with a discussion of the “significant missteps” they had made in handling what he called the crisis. “But there’s something larger at play here,” he told employees, referring to their coverage of Trump.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller had given his disastrous testimony several weeks earlier which pretty much ended their attempt to take Trump down with their bogus Russian collusion story.
“We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well,” Baquet said. “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.”
The story that would dominate the news over the next two years, he said, would be race.
The newspaper would fabricate a new story, the ‘Donald Trump is a racist’ story.
He told his staff: “Race in the next year and I think, to be frank, what I hope you come away from this discussion with – race in the next year is going to be a huge part of the American story. And I mean, race in terms of not only their relationship with Donald Trump, but Latinos and immigration.”
Baquet offered his “vision” of what this meant for them.
“I think that we’ve got to change. I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks? How do we cover the world’s reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that’s become so divided by Donald Trump? How do we grapple with all the stuff you all are talking about? How do we write about race in a thoughtful way, something we haven’t done in a large way in a long time? That, to me, is the vision for coverage. You all are going to have to help us shape that vision. But I think that’s what we’re going to have to do for the rest of the next two years.”
The 1619 Project has plenty of problems by itself, but moving to make Hannah-Jones a tenured professor in a prestigious and respected university was simply a bridge too far for the Board of Governors. This was seemingly done to cash in on her name and the infamy of the woke garbage she peddles.
No doubt she will receive tenure at the end of five years, but at least for now, she’ll have to prove she has something to offer the university as a professor before being handed one of the most coveted positions there.
This article was originally published by The Western Journal.
Apparently, the Walt Disney Corp. either hasn’t heard of or is not concerned about the concept, “Go woke, go broke.”
The company has embarked upon a new “diversity and inclusion” program called “Reimagine Tomorrow” that requires employees to participate in training sessions on subjects that include systemic racism, white privilege, white fragility, white saviors and more.
As you might imagine, that has more than a few employees concerned.
The employees agree that the “Reimagine Tomorrow’ program has become deeply politicized and engulfed parts of the company in racial conflict,” Rufo wrote.
It is built around a phrase that’s filled the airwaves over the last few months, “critical race theory,” which unfortunately won’t be going away anytime soon.
The “antiracism” program consists of a series of modules, according to Rufo. The first is called “Allyship for Race Consciousness,” which “tells employees that they must ‘take ownership of educating [themselves] about structural anti-Black racism’ and that they should ‘not rely on [their] Black colleagues to educate [them],’ because it is ’emotionally taxing.'”
It teaches employees that the U.S. has a “long history of systemic racism and transphobia” and white employees need to “work through feelings of guilt, shame, and defensiveness to understand what is beneath them and what needs to be healed.” The company suggests employees can remedy the situation by “challeng[ing] colorblind ideologies and rhetoric” such as “All Lives Matter” and “I don’t see color”; they should “listen with empathy [to] Black colleagues” and “not question or debate Black colleagues’ lived experience.”
Another module, according to Rufo, is called “What Can I Do About Racism?” Employee are told to reject “equality” which merely means “equal treatment and access to opportunities.” Rather, they should aim for “equity,” which means “the equality of outcome.”
The company asks employees to “reflect” on our “racist infrastructure” and “think carefully about whether or not your wealth, income, treatment by the criminal justice system, employment, access to housing, health care, political power, and education might be different if you were of a different race.”
Disney has collaborated on a separate program with the YWCA called the “21-Day Racial Equity and Social Justice Challenge.” This starts with the assumption that employees have “all been raised in a society that elevates white culture over others.”
Rufo write: “Participants then learn about their ‘white privilege’ and are asked to fill out a white privilege ‘checklist,’ with options including: ‘I am white,’ ‘I am heterosexual,’ ‘;I am a man,'[ ‘I still identity as the gender I was born in,’ ‘I have never been raped,’ ‘I don’t rely on public transportation,’ and ‘I have never been called a terrorist.'”
Rufo explains an exercise that employees must complete to find out if they suffer from “white fragility.” I have a feeling most will be told that they do. Statements such as “I am a good person, I can’t be racist … I was taught to treat everyone the same” are viewed “as evidence of the participant’s internalized racism and white fragility.”
Lately, it’s been getting crowded in my house or at least it seems like it. At first, it was just me and the fourth First Lady. Then, and almost without fanfare, I noticed that an alter-ego had arrived. Not too inconvenient, but he (for those of you who care, Mr. Narrator’s pronouns remain officially undeclared) did impinge upon my time and was seen to be taking up space in the landscape of my thoughts. Okay, still a livable arrangement and the fourth first doesn’t seem to mind. But ‘it’ eventually happened. After a year of two of skirting the issue, the fourth first popped the question: “Since your allergies are under control, can we get a cat? All Russian households, at least ‘real’ Russian households, have a cat.”
Panic. Last time I checked the atlas (for you younger readers, it’s a book of maps – not a god or a bodybuilder), Arizona isn’t anywhere close to Russia. Okay, we’re not a Russian household but the fourth first lady is Russian and that trumps all other geographical arguments. (Did I mention that Russians tend to be somewhat intransigent personalities?)
Renewed panic. If forced to declare a preference, I am a dog person. Conservatives are dog people. How do I know? Dogs are loyal, affectionate, smart (sometimes) and (mostly) reliable. Some of them are even classified as ‘working’ dogs, dogs that can even carry alcohol in kegs under their chins. How much more ‘conservative’ can you get?
Cats, ugh. Cats are the animals of the 1%. The ones with which I am familiar have been distant, dispassionate, aloof, elite, distrusting, self-interested, the kind of animal that never gives back, a creature that only takes …
Mr. Narrator (interrupts): “Richard Edward, stop. You are denigrating an entire species of animal. It’s unfair and unsubstantiated, too. Additionally, you are anthropomorphizing, painting an entire species of animal with the broad brush of ‘identify’ classification. Don’t you realize how racist, how divisive and polarizing that kind of process appears?”
Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, wait, wait. Zoologists always use the classification system when talking about animals. That’s what I learned in school. It is how we can discuss wonderful animals in general and then those other animals, like cats, in particular.”
Mr. Narrator: (sighs) “Richard Edward, you are so ‘not woke’. Critical Race Theory teaches us that everything you learned in school, every value you were taught to respect, everything in your everyday life is simply based in white privilege and formulated to support white supremacy. You think dogs are okay and cats are so-so? Racist! Why is the love of dogs racist? Dogs were used to hunt down escaped slaves. See, I am sure that’s why you like dogs. On the other hand, cats have independent attitudes, are owned by no one. Cats exhibit the ultimate anti-slavery, anti-racist animal attitude. Your white supremist attitude is really why you don’t like cats.”
“Your assignment of negative, humanlike traits to cats is nothing more than your effort to marginalize a noble species. You are so mired in white privilege that you cannot see beyond your white schooling and the old, white-designed scientific methods, promulgated by dead, white-guys with science degrees.”
Mr. Narrator is considerably younger than I and his school experience more recent. I’ll have to take his word that what is being taught in schools is quite different than my old curriculum. How in the blazes did this newfangled thinking get introduced into our culture and quite honestly, who is crazy enough to believe it?
Then it dawns on me. This is simply an extension of what I’ve been reading about in the news. White privilege is everywhere and it’s responsible for everything that is wrong.
Of course, with power like that, why wouldn’t CRT be used for framing our daily experience? Got to go to the doctor? Don’t worry about making an appointment. You will be seen, not in the order of your arrival at the office but based upon your race. My colleague Elizabeth Vaughn has written about the proposed new medical triage process.
Think its only happening here? If you are white, just try to get a vaccine appointment in the city of Hamilton, Ontario in Canada. Maybe that trip across the border needs to be delayed.
The new-think of CRT demands that white, privileged people remember their place at all times and in all circumstances. Don’t believe me?
Take sports (yes, please take them, especially football). The NFL, where the top four highest paid players (quarterbacks) are black, is now racist, according to some sport analyst. Why? Maybe white quarterback prospects are being scouted and drafted ahead of players of color because of the racist owners and team management. Really?
The rule would funnel federal grant money to help schools teach the New York Times’ controversial 1619 Project by controversial essayist Nikole Hannah-Jones and Boston University Director of the Center for Anti-Racist Research Director Ibram Kendi’s book, How to Be an Anti-Racist into K-12 school curriculums.
Wow, identify politics and race has seeped into the very fabric of our lives.
Mr. Narrator: “Be careful Richard Edward, you just made another racist reference; ‘cotton’, the material that commercially used to be known as the ‘fabric’ of our lives. Remember who used to pick that cotton, Richard Edward. Now do you see how complete CRT can be? All you have to do is submit to seeing everything through the lens of race and assume that anything you know or understand is evil, and you really don’t have to go to school to learn this, all you need is attitude.”
Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, how do we unwind this? I know in my knower that the values I was taught are not bad, that my commitment to view people’s character instead of the skin color is the proper way to treat my fellow human beings. We’ve got to stop this crazy indoctrination.”
Richard Edward: “I hope the law passes Mr. Narrator. I want to see equality of opportunity in my beautiful America. I don’t like the radical actors in the U.S. pushing these irrational theories on everyone, trying to negate traditional conservative values, values of faith.”
So, as I sit back and ponder the sad state of race theory that’s undermining my beautiful America, the attack on my neighbors and fellow citizens by those who would divide and destroy based upon the insane radical theory of white supremacy and white privilege, I see from the corner of my eye my new cat walk by on her way to her food bowl, glancing disdainfully back at me from over her shoulder, slowly sauntering by my office, taking in the entirety of her new kingdom. Well, at least one of us in the house understands the concept of privilege.
If you think that the ideas of white supremacy, white privilege, CRT and other race-based politics are causing an American Crisis, please leave me a comment.
If you have a degree in sociology, psychology or gender studies, it’s not my fault. This isn’t a knock on your choice. I know how it feels to waste my own money, personally carrying around a degree in philosophy. I told myself I would continue on to law school, but the new ‘lottery’ (apologies to Shirley Jackson) draft system and my amazingly low draft number altered my plans.
Imagine my surprise when reading the news today and stumbling across an article that details just exactly how I, specifically as a white person, am supposed to behave in public when visiting the newly erected shrine dedicated to George Floyd; a drug addict and thug who had a violent criminal history. I am so glad that some woke social studies major got that figured out. I just hate not knowing how to act.
What would I do if I found myself in George Floyd Square, previously known as the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago, and didn’t conform to dictatedexpected behaviors?
Now I can go and visit that hallowed ground and do exactly what the rioters, BLM racists and socially woke, useful idiots want me to do.
Mr. Narrator (interrupts): “Richard Edward, stop! You are being disrespectful to the memory of George Floyd. People are trying to build a shrine to the memory of a hero, a man who sacrificed his life on the altar of justice. Crazy Nancy said so just a couple of days ago and you know you can’t tell her she is wrong.”
Richard Edward: “What? (don’t you just hate being surprised all of the time?) Shrine to? Social justice warrior? I read in an article by my colleague Elizabeth Vaughn that he was high on fentanyl at the time of his arrest. He told the officers “I can’t breathe” and repeated “put me on the ground” several times before he was placed on the ground during his apprehension. You sure we’re talking about the same dude?”
Mr. Narrator: “Yes, Richard Edward. That was George Floyd in life. In death, he has been given an entirely different biography. In life, he was just another drug-addled thug in Minneapolis who resisted arrest for his latest suspected crime; but in death, he has become a civil rights icon, more than worthy of your obsequious genuflecting. The woke graduate sociology majors have declared it so.”
Wow, is there anything a liberal arts degree can’t do? Rewrite history? Dictate your behavior in public places, especially according to your race? Tell millions of your neighbors how to think and feel about current events? I never understood that the possession of a degree in social studies, sociology or any other of the ‘Liberal Artx’ would hold the answer to all of the world’s conundrums.
Mr. Narrator: “Don’t be snarky, Richard Edward. These folks are serious. White people need to be told how to act in a place of worship. Here, let me show you what is required of you if you visit. Newsmax captured the woke folk’s instructions in a nifty little list:
White guests need to “decenter” and “come to listen, learn, mourn, and witness.”
“Remember you are here to support, not to be supported,” the sign instructs.
White people are then asked to “contribute to the energy of the space, rather than drain it.”
Any “processing” must be brought to “other white folks” so that “BIPOC” (an acronym for “Black and Indigenous people of color”) are not harmed….
Richard Edward: “Well, that does it. I am going to plan my trip to George Floyd Square right away. But before I go, I’ll first need to decipher the social justice warriors’ instructions to ensure my behavior will be acceptable to their hall-monitors, whom I am sure will be on duty, cell phone cameras at the ready. These instructions are so wonderfully today’s pop psychology, I am positive they were written by recent graduates from any woke, ivy league school.”
“Mr. Narrator, do you know where I can go to find out how to ‘decenter’? This is important to me. My balance isn’t as good as it used to be, so any ‘decentering’ might have significantly adverse effects on my health and ability to stand upright. If I can’t stand up right, how can I follow the rest of their instructions?”
“Support? I love being a support. That’s something I can get right without any homework. I’ve raised and supported a family, been married four times and thus clearly understand the true meaning of support. Heck, I once single-handedly held up a section of fence until the last post was installed. I can easily go to the location of the Great Fentanyl Incident and hand-out money, along with my deepest personally sympathy, to the race grifters who will inevitably inhabit the sidewalks of said intersection.”
“Be a contributor? You bet. Didn’t I already say I’ve been married four times?”
“Keep my processing to myself or folks of my own race? (So much for reaching out to others.) I guess I can support and contribute to those in the George Floyd matrix without letting it upset me to the point where I become triggered and need to run off, screaming for my safe space. Processing? Well, I used to work in the tech industry and can understand a little about processing, so I guess I’ll be alright with that one, too.”
“I can do this trip, Mr. Narrator. I can make the hajj to George Floyd Square and prostrate myself before the alter of wokeness, asking for forgiveness for being a white, law-abiding citizen; one whose expectations used to be only to ‘treat others as I would like to be treated.’ That life approach is so passé.”
Mr. Narrator: “Richard Edward, I knew you would get it. There is hope for you to fit somewhere towards the bottom of the new woke, world order. We are so lucky that the sociology majors of the world have shown you your path to redemption.”
If you think that having a Liberal Artx degree and a holier than thou attitude does/doesn’t give one the right to dictate other’s behavior, please make a comment and let Richard Edward and Mr. Narrator know your thoughts.
A widely read CNN op-ed claims that “Ma’Khia Bryant’s death on the day Chauvin was found guilty is a reminder that we have a long way to go.”
As he awaited the Chauvin verdict on Tuesday, University of Texas history professor Peniel Joseph worried that the “U.S. justice system was going to prove, once again, unable to recognize and protect the sanctity of Black life.”
Joseph had been pleasantly surprised by the jury’s decision. But when he later heard that a 16-year-old black girl had been shot by an Ohio police officer shortly before the verdict was announced, the temporary relief he’d felt quickly passed.
The teenager, Ma’Khia Bryant, had tried to stab a girl, and was lunging toward a second girl with a knife in her hand when the officer pulled the trigger.
Joseph writes that “many are openly questioning why this young teenager could not have been subdued with nonlethal force.”
Because given the facts as they have been reported so far, had the officer not acted, Bryant would have plunged a quite large kitchen knife into another girl. So, let’s see, should he have tried to subdue her first? He did offer two verbal warnings. The group of individuals involved in this episode had been unable to deescalate the situation. A member of the group had called the police 12 or more minutes earlier because none of them had been able to subdue her either.
This case has nothing whatsoever to do with race. It has to do with a police officer responding to a call for help because that’s his job. Does Joseph really believe the officer thought, “I’m going to shoot this girl because she’s black?’
Equating Chauvin’s actions to the Ohio police officer’s actions is a reminder that the far left has really gone off the deep end. Mr. Joseph and his ilk are trying to attach Chauvin’s crime to every conservative.
By seeing “systemic racism” everywhere and in everything, and labeling everyone who doesn’t see it as they do as racists, they’ve lost credibility.
It seems that local and state governments care more about property, building and money than people of color. … We need only to point to the outpouring of state and local resources to prevent violence in the event that Chauvin was acquitted. Imagine if the same level of care that Minneapolis officials and law enforcement agencies took in turning the Twin Cities into a military encampment had been directed toward investing in Black communities?
Considering Black Lives Matter members generally react to every perceived slight by burning a building or looting a department store, law enforcement had to be proactive.
While we’re on the subject, doesn’t the professor think that behavior is rather infantile? Does he feel that BLM members are entitled to destroy property because 160 years ago, people none of us knew, thought slavery was a good idea?
I agree it was a horrendous institution, but sorry, I’m not going to feel any guilt over it.
Next, he addresses the new Georgia voting law. House Judiciary Committee member Burgess Owens, a black Republican from Utah, absolutely destroyed this talking point on Tuesday. Owens spoke at the “Senate Judiciary Hearing – Jim Crow 2021: The Latest Assault on the Right to Vote.”
Owens grew up in the Deep South and said he has “actually experienced Jim Crow laws” and would “like to set the record straight.” He told colleagues that “any comparison between this law and Jim Crow is absolutely outrageous.”
He said he’d once protested with his friends outside of a movie theater where blacks were not allowed. He spoke about gas stations that had restrooms for white men and white women and then one filthy bathroom in the back for “coloreds.”
“In addition, Jim Crow laws like the poll tax, property tests, literacy tests and violence and intimidation at the polls made it nearly impossible for black Americans to vote.”
He cannot fathom how it’s considered racist to ask for an ID.
“By the way,” he notes, “97% of voters already have a government-issued ID.”
“What I find extremely offensive is the narrative from the left that black people are not smart enough, not educated enough, not desirous enough of education to do what every other culture and race does in this country: Get an ID.”
“True racism is this: this projection of the Democratic Party on my proud race. … It’s called the soft bigotry of low expectations.”
“To call this Jim Crow 2021 is an insult, my friends. … For those who never lived Jim Crow, we are not in Jim Crow.”
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa told colleagues, “These claims about Georgia aren’t about truth, they’re about politics.”
On the other side of the aisle, Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont said Georgia’s law was “the greatest crisis facing our democracy today.”
Actually Senator, the greatest crisis facing our democracy today is the Democratic Party’s insatiable hunger for power.
Back to Joseph. He spends a lot of time elevating Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of California and activist Stacey Abrams to rock star status. I’ve addressed Waters’ actions twice in the last week, here and here, and I have nothing more to say on the subject.
Then, mercifully, Joseph concludes, telling readers: “In the meantime, Black people continue to be shot, to be brutalized and to die at the hands of the police.”
He is gaslighting. He knows that blacks kill other blacks multiple times more often than white officers kill blacks. According to Manhattan Institute Fellow Heather MacDonald, one of the smartest conservatives I know, 0.2 percent of black homicides are the result of unarmed black men being shot by police officers.
After the Chauvin verdict had been announced, President Biden said, we have to get “systemic racism out of policing.” Schmitt asked MacDonald, “What exactly do the numbers say about ‘systemic racism’?
“The numbers say that it does not exist,” she replied. “The police go where the crime is. We have a crime problem in this country. We do not have a police problem. We have been talking about phantom police racism for the last three decades obsessively so as to continue turning our eyes away from the cultural breakdown that you so rightly spoke about Rob.”
“America does not want to confront the disfunction in the inner city black community.” She said that ten percent of white and Hispanic homicide victims are killed by police officers while only three percent of black homicide victims are. “Why,” MacDonald asks. “Because the number of black homicide victims is so huge that it dwarfs anything else. Blacks die of homicide at a rate 13 times that of whites.”
In 2020, MacDonald said there were 18 unarmed blacks killed by police. “Unarmed is defined very liberally, to mean going after an officer’s gun or fleeing in a stolen car with a loaded handgun on the seat next to you. Those 18 unarmed blacks represent 0.2 percent of all blacks who died of homicide last year.”
“The police could end all police shootings and it would have no effect on the black homicide rate. This idea that blacks are being gunned down on a daily basis is an optical illusion,” She explains that this is created by the media which should surprise no one. Watch the whole segment here (starts at 13:30 in the video).
The message from the left is anti-American. It’s disgusting that our president is in on this farce. The left has gone down the rabbit hole.
Call me crazy, but I think it would be difficult to find a country where there are greater opportunities for blacks than in America. I wholeheartedly encourage those who feel life is so unbearable to move. Quite frankly, I’m tired of hearing about their perpetual victimhood.
So professor, I’m going to call BS on your attempt to use Ma’Khia’s death to advance your narrative. America does not have a long way to go.
If you’re truly concerned about the sky high homicide rate among blacks, please start with the inner city black communities.
Brearley is a prestigious all-girls private K-12 school, located on the Upper East Side of Manhattan that is deeply committed to indoctrinating the next generation of social justice warriors. On its admissions page, prospective parents and students are informed that “The Brearley School condemns racism in the strongest possible terms and is committed to building an anti-racist community.” In addition to the privilege of paying $54,000 per year for your daughter to attend, at least one parent or guardian is required to participate in anti-racist training and active introspection and must sign an anti-racism pledge.
At Brearley, they take diversity seriously. An entire department is dedicated to promote a “welcoming, inclusive and affirming community.”
Independent journalist Bari Weiss came across what she calls “a barn burner of a letter” written by Andrew Gutmann, a father whose daughter attended Brearley for seven years. After becoming fed up with the school’s increasingly radical policies, he decided she will not return to the school this fall. Gutmann then wrote a blistering goodbye letter in which he excoriates the school for what it has become and sent a copy to each Brearley family.
The result is a withering indictment of Woketopia.
He encourages other families to “act before the damage … to your own child’s education is irreparable.”
“It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. … If the administration was genuinely serious about diversity,” he wrote, “it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.”
I applaud Mr. Gutmann for his courage to speak out against the radicalism that has now infected the entire U.S. educational system.
His letter is a call to action. He states the problem. And a potential solution. Hopefully, some parents will be inspired by his message and take action.
Our family recently made the decision not to reenroll our daughter at Brearley for the 2021-22 school year. She has been at Brearley for seven years, beginning in kindergarten. In short, we no longer believe that Brearley’s administration and Board of Trustees have any of our children’s best interests at heart. Moreover, we no longer have confidence that our daughter will receive the quality of education necessary to further her development into a critically thinking, responsible, enlightened, and civic minded adult. I write to you, as a fellow parent, to share our reasons for leaving the Brearley community but also to urge you to act before the damage to the school, to its community, and to your own child’s education is irreparable.
It cannot be stated strongly enough that Brearley’s obsession with race must stop. It should be abundantly clear to any thinking parent that Brearley has completely lost its way. The administration and the Board of Trustees have displayed a cowardly and appalling lack of leadership by appeasing an anti-intellectual, illiberal mob, and then allowing the school to be captured by that same mob. What follows are my own personal views on Brearley’s antiracism initiatives, but these are just a handful of the criticisms that I know other parents have expressed.
I object to the view that I should be judged by the color of my skin. I cannot tolerate a school that not only judges my daughter by the color of her skin, but encourages and instructs her to prejudge others by theirs. By viewing every element of education, every aspect of history, and every facet of society through the lens of skin color and race, we are desecrating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and utterly violating the movement for which such civil rights leaders believed, fought, and died.
I object to the charge of systemic racism in this country, and at our school. Systemic racism, properly understood, is segregated schools and separate lunch counters. It is the interning of Japanese and the exterminating of Jews. Systemic racism is unequivocally not a small number of isolated incidences over a period of decades. Ask any girl, of any race, if they have ever experienced insults from friends, have ever felt slighted by teachers or have ever suffered the occasional injustice from a school at which they have spent up to 13 years of their life, and you are bound to hear grievances, some petty, some not. We have not had systemic racism against Blacks in this country since the civil rights reforms of the 1960s, a period of more than 50 years. To state otherwise is a flat-out misrepresentation of our country’s history and adds no understanding to any of today’s societal issues. If anything, longstanding and widespread policies such as affirmative action, point in precisely the opposite direction.
I object to a definition of systemic racism, apparently supported by Brearley, that any educational, professional, or societal outcome where Blacks are underrepresented is prima facie evidence of the aforementioned systemic racism, or of white supremacy and oppression. Facile and unsupported beliefs such as these are the polar opposite to the intellectual and scientific truth for which Brearley claims to stand. Furthermore, I call bullshit on Brearley’s oft-stated assertion that the school welcomes and encourages the truly difficult and uncomfortable conversations regarding race and the roots of racial discrepancies.
I object to the idea that Blacks are unable to succeed in this country without aid from government or from whites. Brearley, by adopting critical race theory, is advocating the abhorrent viewpoint that Blacks should forever be regarded as helpless victims, and are incapable of success regardless of their skills, talents, or hard work. What Brearley is teaching our children is precisely the true and correct definition of racism.
I object to mandatory anti-racism training for parents, especially when presented by the rent-seeking charlatans of Pollyanna. These sessions, in both their content and delivery, are so sophomoric and simplistic, so unsophisticated and inane, that I would be embarrassed if they were taught to Brearley kindergarteners. They are an insult to parents and unbecoming of any educational institution, let alone one of Brearley’s caliber.
I object to Brearley’s vacuous, inappropriate, and fanatical use of words such as “equity,” “diversity” and “inclusiveness.” If Brearley’s administration was truly concerned about so-called “equity,” it would be discussing the cessation of admissions preferences for legacies, siblings, and those families with especially deep pockets. If the administration was genuinely serious about “diversity,” it would not insist on the indoctrination of its students, and their families, to a single mindset, most reminiscent of the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Instead, the school would foster an environment of intellectual openness and freedom of thought. And if Brearley really cared about “inclusiveness,” the school would return to the concepts encapsulated in the motto “One Brearley,” instead of teaching the extraordinarily divisive idea that there are only, and always, two groups in this country: victims and oppressors.
l object to Brearley’s advocacy for groups and movements such as Black Lives Matter, a Marxist, anti family, heterophobic, anti-Asian and anti-Semitic organization that neither speaks for the majority of the Black community in this country, nor in any way, shape or form, represents their best interests.
I object to, as we have been told time and time again over the past year, that the school’s first priority is the safety of our children. For goodness sake, Brearley is a school, not a hospital! The number one priority of a school has always been, and always will be, education. Brearley’s misguided priorities exemplify both the safety culture and “cover-your-ass” culture that together have proved so toxic to our society and have so damaged the mental health and resiliency of two generations of children, and counting.
I object to the gutting of the history, civics, and classical literature curriculums. I object to the censorship of books that have been taught for generations because they contain dated language potentially offensive to the thin-skinned and hypersensitive (something that has already happened in my daughter’s 4th grade class). I object to the lowering of standards for the admission of students and for the hiring of teachers. I object to the erosion of rigor in classwork and the escalation of grade inflation. Any parent with eyes open can foresee these inevitabilities should antiracism initiatives be allowed to persist.
We have today in our country, from both political parties, and at all levels of government, the most unwise and unvirtuous leaders in our nation’s history. Schools like Brearley are supposed to be the training grounds for those leaders. Our nation will not survive a generation of leadership even more poorly educated than we have now, nor will we survive a generation of students taught to hate its own country and despise its history.
Lastly, I object, with as strong a sentiment as possible, that Brearley has begun to teach what to think, instead of how to think. I object that the school is now fostering an environment where our daughters, and our daughters’ teachers, are afraid to speak their minds in class for fear of “consequences.” I object that Brearley is trying to usurp the role of parents in teaching morality, and bullying parents to adopt that false morality at home. I object that Brearley is fostering a divisive community where families of different races, which until recently were part of the same community, are now segregated into two. These are the reasons why we can no longer send our daughter to Brearley.
Over the past several months, I have personally spoken to many Brearley parents as well as parents of children at peer institutions. It is abundantly clear that the majority of parents believe that Brearley’s antiracism policies are misguided, divisive, counterproductive and cancerous. Many believe, as I do, that these policies will ultimately destroy what was until recently, a wonderful educational institution. But as I am sure will come as no surprise to you, given the insidious cancel culture that has of late permeated our society, most parents are too fearful to speak up.
But speak up you must. There is strength in numbers and I assure you, the numbers are there. Contact the administration and the Board of Trustees and demand an end to the destructive and anti-intellectual claptrap known as antiracism. And if changes are not forthcoming then demand new leadership. For the sake of our community, our city, our country and most of all, our children, silence is no longer an option.
I am sitting at my work station, contemplating the state of my State and more largely, my beautiful America. Did we have a real State of the Union address this year? Does it matter, either way? Where are we when we contemplate the matter of the health of the American culture? So many aspects of my life seem so different than they did a mere 18 months ago. But not just slightly different, they feel irreparably changed. Will I ever be able to go outside without a mask? Will I ever be able to walk the streets of my hometown without being an assumed racist, simply because of my gender, ethnicity and skin color? Will I have to continue to live with the new, woke concepts of intersectionality and diversity, along with the word salad that is used to define them? Will it ever again be morning in America?
I am on a quest to find hard news, not just some radical left-wing interpretation of events accompanied by a screed telling me how I should feel about said interpretation. In that process, I’m continually confronted by ledes, headlines and proclamations from the elected (and non-elected) elite that remind me just how precarious my life situation really is.
The ongoing immigration crisis is caused by Mexican cartels and the federal government is turning a blind eye, Texas Congressman Chip Roy argues. “The most important thing for the American people to understand is that cartels control the border,” Congressman Roy said.
Lawless gangs/cartel thugs in charge of the US southern border? What in blazes? Now what?
Wait, is that a song I hear, low down in the place where my memories are supposed to reside?
Mr. Narrator (interrupts): “Richard Edward, you’re just hearing things again. There is no one here but me.”
Richard Edward: “No, no Mr. Narrator, I hear something. It sounds like country music. Listen, you’ll recognize it sooner or later, just like I will. Reach way, way back in your memory to the days when television was still popular.”
There it is again, but this time it’s louder, a catchy little tune:
Ah ha, I remember it now. This was a skit, a funny poke at all the ‘sad sacks’ of the day, moaning about their fate in life when as things weren’t going their way.
Then I think about this memory a little more. Why does this not feel very funny? Funny? This little ditty is now a downer. Why do I feel like this is the prevailing mood over much of the country? Are things really this bad, or am I just being told that my world is garbage by a media that competes for eyeballs with ledes that bleed?
Mr. Narrator: “Richard Edward, you’ve been reading too much news. Just because President Biden signed some meaningless EO’s about firearms and some CEO of a large successful American corporation said that gun violence is ripping the country apart doesn’t mean it is. Look at the actual FBI stats. … Not true.”
“Just because a high-ranking CDC official is purporting that racism is a serious public health threat doesn’t mean you will catch it and die a horrible death, attached to a anti-racist ventilator and diversity IV drip….”
“Just because a US Congressman is telling us that the illegal immigrant surge at the southern U.S. border is being controlled and leveraged by Mexican gangs…well, okay, maybe they have one side of the border under control. It’s just too bad that we can’t seem to do the same for our side, but it’s not a permanent condition. Remember how it was under President Trump?”
Richard Edward: “Mr. Narrator, still, isn’t this all horrible? I feel like America is reeling like a prize fighter in the 10th round, one who has been pummeled unmercifully during the previous nine. How can we continue on when we can’t even enjoy life without the fear of guns appearing out of nowhere, the racism health risk hovering about, just waiting to pounce on us when we demask and — ”
Mr. Narrator (interrupts, again): “Richard Edward, full stop. If anything is infecting you, it’s the woke radical left’s virus of doom. This virus is spread by media’s inaccurate reporting, by radical left’s woke talking points that haven’t been scrubbed by the light of truth and by the ignorance of those who believe that they will find comfort in the arms of socialists and their authoritarian governments.”
“Richard Edward, think! Who controls your ultimate destiny? Who created the heavens above and the earth on which you stand? Who knows the count of the hairs on your head even as in your case, Richard Edward, His job being a little more difficult as you lose more and more of them every day? Who has the power to deliver you from the lion’s den, from the Pharaohs in DC and from this proposed hell-on-earth, a socialist democrat work-in-process?”
Richard Edward: “You are so right. Why do I despair? I know my eternal future and I know that He can deliver me from circumstances that seem overwhelming. I need to quit being afraid. I need to stop focusing on the negative and I need to start being positive, spreading truth. Encouraging lawful and civil behavior. I need to stop believing that everything I read in the media is fact-based. To paraphrase one of my favorite presidents, Don’t Trust, Always Verify.”
Our world hasn’t been perfect since we left the Garden. I sometimes (too often) forget that a fallen state is our normal state. In my desire to have and see things better than they are, I forget that we are supposed to be salt, here to preserve the good as we find it. If we are here to be salt, goodness must need preserving. If you agree that our beautiful America is worth preserving, please leave us a comment.
I was surprised that a U.S. president would even suggest that MLB commissioner Rob Manfred pull the All-Star Game out of Atlanta. But I was gobsmacked when he opened the door to moving the Masters out of Georgia and then went on to cite the state’s new Jim Crow laws in his response. What do we make of a president who singles out an entire state?
Even before dementia began taking its toll on Joe Biden, he was never what one might consider a smart man. Nor was he ever a particularly honest man. But the ease with which he has embraced the radical left’s agenda is stunning.
On Tuesday, a reporter asked, “Mr. President, do you think the Masters golf tournament should be moved out of Georgia?”
“I think that’s up to the Masters. … It is reassuring to see for profit operations and businesses are speaking up about how these new Jim Crow laws are just antithetical to who we are. … The best way to deal with this is for Georgia and other states to smarten up. Stop it. Stop it.”
President Biden is asked if he supports moving the Masters out of Georgia:
"That's up to the Masters… It is reassuring to see for profit operations and businesses are speaking up about how these new Jim Crow laws are just antithetical to who we are." pic.twitter.com/mB8tDRnwFe
Um. Didn’t The Washington Post just give him Four Pinocchios for these precise comments last week?
Biden is well aware that he owes his victory to the explosion in mail-in voting and the lax oversight of absentee ballots in November. We get that he’s trying to discourage other states from strengthening their voter ID requirements, but he’s the President of the United States. And he’s lying through his teeth.
He has singled out the state of Georgia. A state in which top Republican officials, including anti-Trumpers Gov. Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, were key to his victory.
Biden’s remarks influenced the decision of the MLB commissioner to pull the All-Star Game out of Atlanta, a city which has a black population of over 50 percent. As a result, the city will lose approximately $100 million in expected revenue.
The game will now be played in Denver, Colorado, which has a black population of 9 percent. The state also requires voter ID.
The candidate who campaigned on uniting the country after “the divisiveness” of the Trump Administration, has become the most divisive president we’ve ever had.
But, from the President to the MLB commissioner, they all keep spouting the lies.
What is new (sort of) is that we’re seeing corporations joining the fray. Last week, Delta, American and United Airlines all condemned Georgia for passing election reform legislation.
University of Tennessee professor Glenn Reynolds, better known to conservatives as “Instapundit,” appeared on Fox News’ “Primetime” on Tuesday to make some sense of this.
Host Mark Steyn asked Reynolds, “Why has the business world suddenly turned super Bernie Sanders, AOC left?”
Reynolds explains: “The thing you have to understand first is none of this has anything to do with justice or fairness or concern for the well-being of black people or anyone else. It’s all about power. Woke politics is the state religion of the corporate oligarchs now and they use it to enhance their own power and to suppress their opponents. That’s all it’s about. Everything else is noise. And that’s why it doesn’t make sense, because it’s not meant to make sense. It’s just meant to procure compliance. They hope you’ll just be afraid.”
“How do you push back against it? If you’ve got American, United and Delta all going woke, what do you do? Boycott them and take the Greyhound?” asked Steyn.
“Honestly, you should do what the left does which is you make life unpleasant for their CEOs and other corporate officers. Don’t waste your time with economic boycotts. Send buses full of protestors to the CEO’s house and go to their shareholder meetings and make a big stink and you generally do stuff that reduces their quality of life. The left has done this and it’s worked for them. I think the right is starting to do that and Republican governors are starting to really push back on this in a formidable way for the first time really,” Reynolds said.
In short, we need to start using their tactics against them. We can make a difference. We already have.