Support for Black Lives Matter Plummets From June 2020 High Water Mark; NY Times Tells Us Why

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Unrated Studio from Pixabay

National polling outlet Civiqs has been tracking the level of support from registered voters for Black Lives Matter since April 2017.

Two academics looked at the results from Civiqs most recent survey (May 21) and presented their analysis in The New York Times.

I feel compelled to share their bios, particularly Ms. Chudy’s. [Emphasis mine]: “Jennifer Chudy is an assistant professor of social sciences and political science at Wellesley College. She studies white racial guilt, sympathy and prejudice. Hakeem Jefferson is an assistant professor of political science at Stanford University, where he studies race and identity.

They note that support for BLM overall has seen a net increase since 2018.

On Jan. 1, 2018, 38 percent of registered voters supported the group, 41 percent were opposed, 18 percent neither supported or opposed and 3 percent were not sure. On May 21, 47 percent support BLM, 40 percent oppose, 12 percent neither support nor oppose and 1 percent are unsure.

Support for the group increased over the past three and a half years from 38 to 47 percent while those opposed decreased by one percent. What stands out is that those opposed largely remained opposed and the increase in support came from those who were previously neutral or unsure.

The Times presents Civiqs’ data on a graph which resembles a typical bell curve. It shows a breakout in support starting on March 13, 2020, the date that Breonna Taylor was killed. On May 25, the date of George Floyd’s death, support spikes and the line showing new support is nearly vertical. It continues to rise until June 3. Support reaches 53 percent, just 29 percent of respondents are opposed, 17 percent are neutral and two percent are unsure.

This is the high water mark for BLM. From that point on, support for the movement plummeted.

The authors point out that, by this time, “protests have spread to more than 140 cities nationwide.”

Americans had been shocked after seeing former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin press his knee into George Floyd’s neck for nine minutes, but that wasn’t an excuse for burning down cities, toppling monuments and looting stores.

Chuddy and Jefferson see other reasons for the drop. They lament that they “the more general picture contradicts the idea that the country underwent a racial reckoning. Last summer, as Black Americans turned their sorrow into action, attitudes — especially white attitudes — shifted from tacit support to outright opposition, a pattern familiar in American history. Whereas support for Black Lives Matter remains relatively high among racial and ethnic minorities, support among white Americans has proved both fickle and volatile.”

“Support among white Americans has proved both fickle and volatile?” Is it unreasonable to oppose an organization that burns down buildings and businesses, smashes store windows so they can be looted, wounds our police officers and disregards the law? I don’t see anything fickle or volatile about that.

Then, the two take aim at Republicans specifically. “After Mr. Floyd’s death, Republicans reported much stronger support for Black Lives Matter than they had earlier in 2020. For a party often characterized by its racial insensitivity and antagonism toward racial minorities, this increase in support was striking. But perhaps even more striking is its rapid decline.”

Finally, they write this: “Some have wondered whether support for B.L.M., especially among white people, is genuine or merely virtue-signaling. As the volatility of the polling suggests, there is reason to be skeptical. This conversation, however, misrepresents racism as a social problem rooted in individual values rather than as a system forcefully sustained by our institutions.”

I suppose this kind of stupidity is to be expected from a white guilt and sympathy major.

Not only do I not support Black Lives Matter, I consider them to be a terrorist group.

By constantly telling blacks that they’re oppressed, people like Chuddy and Jefferson are making blacks believe they’re oppressed.

Shortly after the protests began last summer, conservative writer and Senior Fellow at The Hoover Institution, Shelby Steele, joined Fox News’ Mark Levin on his Sunday night show. Steele, who is black, shared some much needed insight into the racial riots that were rocking the country at the time.

Steele recalled growing up in the 1950s in Chicago when segregation was “fierce.” No one was taking money from the government. His father, with a third grade education, bought three ramshackle houses, rebuilt them and then rented them out. He “kept clawing his way up.” And he wasn’t unique. They were all working hard.

Steele came of age during the civil rights era in the 1960s and said the biggest difference between then and now is that, back then, everybody knew exactly what they wanted. “Often [it was] a piece of legislation, a civil rights bill or something else that was specific or concrete.”

He speaks of the vagueness of the current protests. “So, what is this really all about?” Steele thinks it’s about power and, “in order to pursue power, as they do, you have to have victims.”

The death of George Floyd, he told Levin, “generates such excitement among this crowd and validates their argument that America is a wretched country. It feeds this old model of operation that we’ve developed, that America is guilty of racism – and has been for four centuries and minorities are victims who are entitled.”

Steele continued: “And so, when people start to talk about systemic racism built into the system, what they’re really doing is expanding their territory of entitlement. We want more. We want more. … Society is responsible for us because racism is so systemic.”

“Well, that’s a corruption. And I know it’s a corruption. Because the truth of the matter is that blacks have never been less oppressed than they are today. Opportunity is around every corner.”

He also believes there’s always going to be some racism in every society. He noted, “My own sense is that it’s endemic to the human condition. We will always have to watch out for it.”

“Blacks, he says, are unhappy that they’re at the bottom of most socioeconomic ladders, but instead of blaming it on the police or anyone else, they need to take a look at themselves.”

“Why don’t you take some responsibility for it? … I would be happy to look at all the usual bad guys, the police and so forth, if they have the nerve, the courage, to look at black people and say, you’re not carrying your own weight, you’re going to go have a fit and a tantrum and demonstrations…

“Are you teaching your child to read? Are you making sure that the school down the street actually educates your child? Are you becoming educated and following a dream in your life and making things happen for yourself? Or are you saying ‘I’m a victim and I’m owed? And the entitlement is inadequate and I need to be given more and after all, you know racism has been here for 400 years…and so, it’s time for you to give to me.

“That’s an exhausted, fruitless, empty strategy to take and we’ve been on that path since the 60s and we are farther behind than we’ve ever been and we keep blaming it on racism and blaming it on the police. I’m exhausted with that.

“They took a lot of responsibility for their lives because the government didn’t [during segregation]. What civil rights bill is going to replace that? What value system?

“And that is the problem. That we have allowed ourselves to be enabled in avoiding our real problems by a guilty white society. That keeps using us and exploiting us as victims. … If you really care about how minorities do, why don’t you ask them to do it? Why don’t you ask them to drop the pretense?

“We have let this sort of guilty society and our grievance industry put us in this impossible position where we are a permanent underclass.

“White guilt: Buying back legitimacy by exploiting minorities all over again.

“‘Look, we beat you up pretty badly. You can’t make it without us – unless WE are the agent of that change. Not you, us. So they take over the agency, over black development and say, if you don’t get more government money, more government programs, you will never make it. You are dependent on us and what happens? A grievance industry springs up in black America to receive all that white beneficence.

Chuddy and Jefferson would do well to listen to Steele.

The video of this segment can be viewed here.

Pay Attention Biden: France Shows the World How to Crack Down on Woke Culture in Schools

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Phil Riley from Pixabay

The “Academie Francaise,” France’s education ministry, scored a win against left-wing equality advocates seeking to normalize “gender neutral” spellings of words in schools. The Biden Administration would be wise to take a lesson from the French government.

The education ministry issued a ruling last week banning schools from “using gender neutral spellings,” which they claim are “a threat to the French language,” according to a report in The Daily Mail.

The education ministry is “responsible for guarding the French language” and considers the activists’ efforts to normalize gender neutral spellings to be “harmful to the practice and understanding of French.”

Gender equality advocates argue that “full stops in the middle of written words – dubbed ‘midpoints’ – which allow both male and female forms to be represented simultaneously” should be required.

Because English is a non-gendered language, the article explains, the word “friends” refers to individuals of either gender. “In French grammar, nouns take on the gender of the subject to which they refer, with male preferred over female in mixed settings. Therefore, a group of friends with four women and one man is referred to using the masculine ‘amis’.

Advocates of gender equality propose the addition of “midpoints” to neutralize a word. For example, “the written word becomes ‘ami.e.s’, including the feminine ‘e’ ending – though it would still be pronounced the same when spoken.” Thus, they claim the language would be “more inclusive.”

Those opposed to making this change believe the “differences between written and spoken French would make the language harder to learn and threaten its entire existence.”

Nathalie Elimas, the State Secretary for Priority Education, said the use of midpoints would do nothing to increase the use of the French language, “but will instead drive more people to learn English which does not gender its nouns.”

“With the spread of inclusive writing, the English language – already quasi-hegemonic across the world – would certainly and perhaps forever defeat the French language,” she added.

In an interview with Sunday newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche, Jean-Michel Blanquer, France’s education minister, said “the use of dots in the middle of words” would make it more difficult for individuals “with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia.”

The Mail reports that one of France’s largest teachers unions, SUD, called “on teachers to ignore the ruling.” The union issued a statement saying that Blanquer must “stop trying to impose his backwardness on the education community.”

In America, the teachers union would have had the last word.

According to the article, the ruling provided some concessions. “Certain job titles should change forms when the person holding the role is female. For example, a female president would be referred to as ‘présidente’. Job application forms should also include both male and female titles to encourage more women to apply, the decree added.”

This development proves that, in contrast to the current ruling class in America, there are still some sane individuals inside of the French government.

It might surprise members of the Biden Administration to hear that not all foreign governments approve of the Woketopia they’ve tried to create in America.

According to an editorial in the The New York Times, many French “politicians and prominent intellectuals” believe that America’s new woke culture has gone too far and now poses an existential threat to the French republic and identity.

Specifically, they are concerned about the dangerous social theories on “race, gender and post-colonialism,” which they view as forms of separatism.

The article cites an October speech delivered by French President Emmanuel Macron, in which he warned that the threat to French culture lies in “[c]ertain social science theories entirely imported from the United States.”

Macron is absolutely correct.

In recent years, the emboldened left has tried to force Americans into adopting their radical, divisive ideas. They’ve tried to convince every white person that they’re racist and must atone for it.

The French president sees what’s happening in America and knows the uncertainty we face. He wants to make sure that it stays out of France.

And he has to be wondering why U.S. voters elected such a “woke”, power-hungry and anti-American administration.

On some level, he may take pleasure in our current troubles. On the other hand, he knows the world has suddenly become a far more dangerous place.

Less Is Certainly More

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by sergei akulich from Pixabay

I was just reading the news, or at least all of the news I can ingest without experiencing an equal and opposite intestinal reaction, and noticed a highly impactful story from our friends at Fox News about a 47-year-old woman who disappeared last year, only to be “found” by sheriff deputies. She survived a winter in the Utah front range, not exactly the Hilton of outdoor experiences.

How she made it alive through the winter without tons of necessary gear is a mystery (and a great potential embarrassment to any and all professional preppers), but I am guessing that she had some level of physical, mental and emotional preparedness.

The Fox article reports that the woman wasn’t crazy:

Although the woman had struggled to find an adequate food supply over winter, [Sgt. Spencer] Cannon commended her resourcefulness in foraging grass and moss.

Cannon added that the woman’s campsite was well maintained and organized. He also shared that the woman is “very intelligent” and “has held highly respected jobs.”

With apologies to Charlotte (one of my favorite literary characters); my delicate, woven web message would be “some woman”.

Why she attempted it, to me, is the bigger question. The Fox news article explained that “Her motivation was, in part, for solitude and isolation,” Sgt. Spencer Cannon told Fox News in an email.

Wow.  I’ve driven by the Spanish Fork area on several occasions – it’s beautiful and if you would pick a place to starve to death or perish from the elements, you couldn’t find a more perfect landscape.

My lizard cortex jumps to the forefront of my brain and takes control. … Running from? Running to? Running away? Running towards?  Running, running, r.u.n.n.o.f.t. (Oh Brother, extra credit if you remember that line).

Mr. Narrator (interrupts):  “Richard Edward!  Stop! Deep breath! This woman wasn’t running in fear. Read the statement from Sgt. Cannon. She was running towards a better place, a more sane and serene place. She was running towards health and well-being.”

Richard Edward: “Okay, Mr. Narrator. I’ll consider your opinion. … But why risk death and/or being eaten by a bear for a little solitude? C’mon man, there are spas for that kind of thing, aren’t there? Does getting away from it all have to be a death-defying act? What ever happened to quiet and essential oils?”

Mr. Narrator: “Why do you really think she was running, Richard Edward? You think she was looking for just for a little solitude? Look around you and tell me what is happening. I think maybe she was looking for less. Yes, less of the following things.”

“Critical Race Theory is encroaching on every aspect of our lives. If you are white, you are the worst thing since spam was invented. Not guilty about being white? You should be. Just ask any race hustler who is working their corner.”

“Illegal immigrants are now the disadvantaged people of choice – they’re treated better than U.S. citizens. They’re more deserving of government help in difficult times. Just ask the Biden administration. Break the law to get here, no worries, come on down!”

“Mask up, dude! Every local governmental official below the office of county dog catcher governor is exercising their appropriated power to tell you what to do and how to behave in public.”

“Drug addled thugs from Minneapolis are celebrated as heroes. Cops who risk their lives everyday are the new Brownshirts of our society. Is this law and order you can count on to keep you safe?”

“Felons are released back into the community without so much as an overnight stint in the local jail, much less required to post bail. Local DAs are practicing a catch and release program. No chair to sit on when the legal music stops? No problem, just keep playing the game, we’ve got your felonious back.”

“I could go on Richard Edward, but answer me honestly, do you think this woman was comfortable walking the streets of her neighborhood, living daily life in her home, encountering her woke neighbors, the shopkeepers in her community, the roving activists with megaphones bellowing that Black Lives Matter, interacting with any level of her government representatives for assistance while constantly having to be aware of her skin color and supposed privilege?”

Richard Edward: “You mean she was running toward a life without ‘woke’ standards? A lifestyle that used to value people as people, and not as generalized identities based upon skin color and political views?

Mr. Narrator: “Yes Richard Edward. She was running towards sanity. She was running towards a life of truth. She was running towards a life of value, not virtue signals.”

Richard Edward: “We don’t have that kind of community any more. We can’t escape the all-encompassing theory of Critical Race Theory. The woke brigade now rules the planet and our daily behavior.”

Mr. Narrator:  “Richard Edward, you will someday wake up and realize that less truly is more. Less critical race theory, less government rules and regulations, less illegal immigration, less leniency to convicted felons, less government spending, less taxes, less politics, less of everything that steals your individual American rights. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe was considered to be an architectural genius and his Bahus style of design influenced generations of architects. He is synonymous with ‘less is more’. Minimal intrusion, by architecture, on lifestyle.“

Richard Edward: “I get it now. This woman who ran away to a Utah campsite in Spanish Fork is more than an architectural genius. She didn’t run away to build a minimalist building, she ran toward liberty and self-reliance. She ran away from a life in the popular culture gulag and toward a life of independence. She ran toward freedom.”

If you think that a life in the wilderness could be better than a life in the Democrat-controlled matrix, please leave Richard Edward and Mr. Narrator a comment about why.

— Richard Edward Tracy

Black Iowa Professor Tries to Limit Interactions with ‘Yt People as Much as Possible’

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Irina Kuzmina from Pixabay

The compassionate left insists that anti-white racism is impossible. Iowa State University professor Dr. Rita Mookerjee, who teaches sociology, gives us yet one more reason why that’s not true.

In a February Twitter post, @RitaMookjee, a.k.a. Dr. Rita Repulsa, responds to an invitation to speak on a student government “Diversity and Inclusion panel” the following month. She writes: “Lately, I try to limit my interactions with yt people as much as possible. I can’t with the self-importance and performance esp during Black History month.”

Campus Reform, which reported this story, explains that “the term ‘yt’ is often used online in place of the word “white” in conversations involving race.”

In October, she tweeted: “whyte men with dirty hair and wrinkled clothes will always be liked and higher ranked” and “Someone called me white the other day so #NewProfilePic because I think the f**k not.”

Now, pardon me for saying so, but these tweets tell me that Dr. Rita Repulsa does not like whites. And she’s not alone. Not even a little bit.

In fact, among some extremely liberal groups, we’re even seeing white people turning against white people.

After catching a glimpse of the young man behind the Boulder, Colorado, grocery store shooting in March, liberals took to Twitter to express their rage at the evil white man. Most of these tweets were quickly deleted when the shooter was identified as Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, a Syrian-born Muslim.

Hemal Jhaveri, USA Today’s ironically named “Race and Inclusion” editor, was very upset after seeing that an angry white man had killed 10 innocents. In response to a tweet posted by Deadspin writer Emily Julia DiCaro, which said, “Extremely tired of people’s lives depending on whether a white man with an AR-15 is having a good day or not,” she wrote, “It’s always an angry white man. Always.” Once she realized she’d been mistaken, she promptly deleted it. I posted about this story here.

Recently, even the U.S. government has jumped on the bandwagon. The $1.9 trillion COVID relief package “offers socially disadvantaged farm owners total debt forgiveness of up to hundreds of thousands of no-strings dollars per farmer. But white men needn’t apply. … It limits aid to racial groups who faced historic discrimination.”

The New York Post’s Betsy McCaughey wrote that this measure had been proposed by Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA). He “says it will make up for years of discrimination.”

Last month, I wrote (here) about two Harvard neurologists who practice at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s hospital. They have a plan to prioritize healthcare for POC. They hope to offer “preferential care based on race.” It calls for an “antiracist agenda for medicine” based on critical race theory.

Even Canada is on board. Last month, Hamilton Public Health (Ontario) announced that “COVID-19 vaccine appointments are now available for Black and other racialized populations/people of colour.”

Although people have become more vocal about expressing their anti-white sentiment since the death of George Floyd, anti-white bias is not new.

Two years ago, Professor Philip Carl Salzman wrote an article entitled, “The War Against White People” in Minding the Campus, in which he makes the case that “anti-white hate is now mainstream American culture” and “not just by racial extremists such as Black Lives Matter.”

He described Webster University’s new “safe space” that would be offered that fall “for recovering white people to admit that they are, by virtue of being white, anti-black racists. Only whites are welcome in these meetings, where students can confess to their racism and their white privilege. Note that it is presumed that being racist is simply part of Caucasian DNA, and since “students of color” can’t be racist, they have no need to go to such meetings.”

Salzman asks, “How did we get to this place, in which hating white people, the majority of Americans, not to mention wishing them all murdered, is deemed a virtue? The answer is that our liberal democratic culture emphasizing individual freedom and equality has transitioned, particularly among university and media elites in large cities and on the coasts, to a new culture that classifies and treats people by race, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity.”

“This ‘social justice’ culture replaces the individual with census categories and ranks these categories on a hierarchy of power and a converse hierarchy of virtue. Categories are distinguished between those with power, which are oppressor categories, and those without, which are victim categories.”

Anti-white racism is not a myth. It’s real and it’s becoming too big to ignore.

Another MSNBC Lunatic Criticizes Sen. Tim Scott, Yet No One Will Answer the ONLY Question That Matters

Advertisements
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.com

The host of MSNBC’s “Cross Connection,” Tiffany Cross, became the latest liberal lunatic to express her outrage over Republican Sen. Tim Scott’s rebuttal to President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address on Wednesday night. Scott, as the world already knows, had the temerity to say that America is not a racist nation.

(Note: Please scroll down for a video and a transcription of Cross’ remarks.)

On her Saturday morning show, she insinuated that Sen. Scott was so intimidated by white people, he would say whatever they wanted him to say. “When you speak uncomfortable truths, like Nikole Hannah Jones (the creator of the 1619 project), the party that Scott claims is not racist gets big mad and tries to silence you.”

She said that it wasn’t worth arguing with an individual “Harriet Tubman would have left behind.”

“Perhaps this was merely Senator Scott’s audition to be Sam Jackson’s understudy in the film Django,” she told her audience.

Although she had clearly put some time into what she likely hoped sounded like an impromptu monolog, she needn’t have bothered. It was a mere repeat of all of the tired liberal talking points about voter ID.

I have one big burning question to ask every Democrat who disapproves of asking a voter to prove that they are who they say they are.

HOW is it racist?

Affordability is not an option because most, if not all, states provide free photo IDs for any resident who requires one. So, what is the reason?

Do they believe that blacks and other minorities aren’t smart and/or competent enough to figure out how to obtain an ID?

Because by constantly repeating that this requirement will suppress the votes of people of color, that’s essentially what you’re saying.

The position that requiring an ID in order to cast an absentee ballot is too onerous or too complicated for blacks and other minority groups to navigate is itself racist.

Am I wrong? Then please explain why I’m wrong.

The real reason is that an ID requirement makes it more difficult to commit voter fraud. Each eligible voter receives one vote. Ineligible voters receive zero votes.

The provision of a state issued number on a ballot limits that voter to one vote, rather than two or more votes.

So, do us all a favor Tiff and sit down, huh? Because you’re just another lying liberal hack who’s bummed out that Democrats won’t get away with the same chicanery they got away with in 2020.

 

Transcription of Cross’s Remarks

The Root’s Michael Harriot: Can anyone name a political social or economic institution in America where widespread disparities and discrimination does not exist? Don’t worry, I’ll wait.

MSNBC’s Tiffany Cross: Such a great question from my friend, The Root’s Michael Harriot. And I actually have an answer: The hollow institution that resides inside Republican Senator Tim Scott’s head. No racism there. And apparently no sense either.

This week, the sole Black Republican in the Senate sounded a stone fool when he said this: “Hear me clearly, America is not a racist country.”

Okay let’s be clear. Tim Scott does not represent any constituency other than the small number of sleepy slow-witted sufferers of Stockholm Syndrome who get elevated to prominence for repeating a false narrative about this country that makes conservative white people feel comfortable.

Because when you speak uncomfortable truths, like Nikole Hannah Jones, the party that Scott claims is not racist gets big mad and tries to silence you. Just this week, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell asked Education Secretary Miguel Cardona to stop teaching the 1619 Project in schools because it would “reorient the view of American history.”

Lucky for McConnell, he has his own tap dancer to try and reorient the view of America for him.

There were so many contradictions in the senator’s speech that it was clear not even Scott believed the words he was speaking. I could go into great detail refuting each of his asinine points, but he did that for me.

And moreover, a lesson I’ve learned: Don’t argue with people Harriet Tubman would have left behind.

And sure, Tim Scott has spoken out about his encounters with law enforcement and he co-sponsored the anti-lynching bill in the Senate, but there are two sides to every token.

So thirsty for white approval, this dude actually stood on the national stage to defend the voter suppression law in Georgia even though, as of last month, 361 bills were being introduced in 47 states to keep people who look like him out of the ballot box.

The ability to shame the ancestors and appease the oppressors all in one speech, that’s extreme. Though not quite like the domestic violent extremism that the Department of Homeland security is investigating within its own ranks, mind you. But please senator, say more about how unracist the country is while you trot out that tired line about going from cotton to Congress to clown.

Perhaps this was merely Senator Scott’s audition to be Sam Jackson’s understudy in the film Django, because as a descendant of the enslaved, and damn near a daily survivor of institutional racism, I can assure you the question “Is America a racist country?” is one that has been asked and answered many times over.

Yet we still love America, not for what it was, but for what it could be.

On this one, you’re not only in the wrong side of the aisle, Senator Scott, but you’re embarrassingly on the wrong side of history as well.

DemoCats and Other Radical Creatures

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by mjimages from Pixabay

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?

Race is certainly taken front and center stage in what’s left of the mind of the President of the United States, resulting in his comments about equity in the administration of COVID vaccines between white seniors of those seniors of color. Not to be outdone in the vaccine race (pun intended), the President is pushing for grants, through his department of education, that would fund the teaching of CRT in American schools. As reported by Fox news:

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.”

Mr. Narrator: “I am glad you asked Richard Edward. Once again, your editor and colleague Ms. Elizabeth is out in front on this. We are finally seeing a sane politician and geo-political entity pushing back on having this nonsense taught in our communities. You won’t be surprised or disappointed that it’s a red state. Who knows, maybe some other bastions of rational thought won’t be far behind once they see how Idaho fares. (Arizona, Governor Ducey, looking at you).

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.

—  Richard Edward Tracy

No, Actually Ma’Khia Bryant’s Death Is NOT a Reminder the US Has a Long Way to Go

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

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?

Like these people do:

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.

MacDonald appeared on Newsmax’ Rob Schmitt Tonight show on Tuesday.

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.

VA High School Teacher Rebukes Student Who Refused to See Race in a Photo; Doesn’t End Well for the Teacher

Advertisements
Photo Credit: Image by Hatice EROL from Pixabay

A high school teacher held up a photograph of two girls standing back to back, one of whom was white and the other black. The caption on the photo asks, “What is race?”

He asks his students what they see in the picture. The exchange that follows took place in an advanced English classroom in the very affluent town of Ashburn, Virginia.  It was caught on video and published by Fox News.

One boy replies, “Just two people chillin’.”

“Right, just two people,” the teacher says. “Nothing more to that picture?”

“Nah, not really. Just two people chillin’.”

“I don’t believe that you believe that. I don’t believe that you look at this as just two people,” the teacher tells him.

“It truly is just two people though, is it not?”

“I think you’re being intentionally coy about what this is a picture of,” the teacher replies.

This continues and finally the student says, “I’m confused on what you would like me to speak on…”

I don’t think you are, I don’t know why you do this…You act as if there’s noting noticeable about this apart from the fact there are two people.”

“Well, I’m confused. Are you trying to get me to say that there are two different races in this picture?” the student asks.

“Yes, I am asking you to say that,” the teacher says.

“Well, at the end of the day, wouldn’t that just be feeding into the problem of looking at race instead of just acknowledging them as two normal people?”

“No, it’s not because you can’t look at the people and not acknowledge that there are racial differences, right?

“But, if we’re looking for equality within all this, then why would we need to point out things such as that?

“Because those differences are real things.”

 

My parent’s generation was very cognizant of race. But as each new generation followed, race gradually began to recede into the background.

When my own children were going through school in the 2000s and beyond, I can honestly say it wasn’t an issue, at least from our perspective.

America had made great strides toward equality and I can’t think of a country in the world that offered greater opportunities to blacks and other minority groups than the U.S. If I’m wrong, please enlighten me.

It was when Democrats decided to use race as a political weapon against former President Donald Trump, and ultimately against anyone who supported him, that it exploded as an issue.

And now everything is racist – from the books we read to our children to the pancake syrup we use.

The teacher in this video is the problem. ‘How can this boy not see what I see? He must be lying.’

‘One girl is white and one is black, see, see!’

Sorry $#&^$%#, he doesn’t see.

The racial divide in America was closing up until liberals took a chisel and pried it open again.

This is on them.

Minnesota Judge Reinstates Third-Degree Murder Charge Against Derek Chauvin in George Floyd Case

Advertisements

Jury selection began on Tuesday in the murder trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin.

Chauvin had been charged with second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the death of George Floyd.

On Thursday morning, however, a Hennepin County, Minnesota judge reinstated a third-degree murder charge against Chauvin, according to a CNN report.

The report said that “Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter Cahill dismissed the [third-degree murder] count in October, saying it did not apply to this case.” CNN explains how that charge came to be reinstated.

An appeals court ruling in February in the case against former Minneapolis Police officer Mohamed Noor opened the door to reinstating the charge against Chauvin, and the state subsequently filed an appeal of Cahill’s ruling.

In court on Thursday, Chauvin’s defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Noor’s case was factually and procedurally different than Chauvin’s interactions with Floyd, in which he knelt on Floyd’s head and neck area for an extended period. However, prosecutors argued that the judge was bound to follow the appeals court’s precedent in Noor.

Judge Cahill ruled Thursday morning that he accepted the appeals court’s ruling that the opinion in Noor’s case immediately set a precedent, and he ruled to reinstate the charge.

He added that the third-degree murder charge only applied to Chauvin and that the potential to reinstate the charge for the three other officers charged in Floyd’s death will be addressed at a later date.

“This charge has not come out of left field,” Cahill said Thursday. “It was originally charged. I think the defense has been aware that the state will take every opportunity to try and add it back.”

If convicted, Chauvin could face up to 40 years in prison for second-degree murder, up to 25 years for third-degree murder, and up to 10 years for second-degree manslaughter.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals ordered Cahill to reconsider the motion to reinstate the charge last week. On Wednesday, the Minnesota Supreme Court refused a request by Chauvin’s attorney to block the appellate court’s decision, clearing the way for Cahill to reinstate the charge.

Chauvin has pleaded not guilty to all three charges.

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison issued a statement (on Thursday) which read: “The charge of 3rd-degree murder, in addition to manslaughter and felony murder, reflects the gravity of the allegations against Mr. Chauvin. We look forward to presenting all three charges to the jury.”

Hmmm.

In light of the underreported developments that many of us just learned about this week, one has to wonder if the reason the third-degree murder charge has been reinstated is because prosecutors are worried that second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter charges might be too difficult to prove.

It’s clear that Ellison and many others desperately want to convict Chauvin for something in this case.

Days after the video of Chauvin pressing his knee on Floyd’s neck for nine minutes went viral last May, Chauvin was charged with third degree murder and second degree manslaughter. I posted about this here.

On Wednesday, I presented excerpts from an article written by The Spectator’s Roger Kimball. It turned out that at the time of Floyd’s death, he had a lethal dose of fentanyl in his system.

Kimball noted that rather than being St. George, Floyd was a “drug addict, a woman abuser and a career criminal.” He wrote:

First, the video clip that horrified the world was heavily edited. We see Floyd, pinned to the ground by Chauvin, piteously crying ‘I can’t breathe.’ Conclusion? That he can’t breathe because Chauvin is pressing on his windpipe. But a look at the police bodycam footage shows that Floyd was complaining that he couldn’t breathe before he was restrained by the police. Why? Because, as the FBI’s interview with the local medical examiner on July 8, 2020 revealed, Floyd was suffering from pulmonary edema, i.e., his lungs were full of fluid. And why was that? Partly because of an underlying heart condition, partly because Floyd was full to the gills with fentanyl, a drug known to affect respiration and cause pulmonary edema.

By the way, I say that FBI report ‘revealed’ this extenuating evidence, but it was evidence that the prosecution withheld from public scrutiny until the end of October 2020, by which time Minneapolis and many other cities across the country had been torched by Black Lives Matter rioters demanding ‘justice’ for George Floyd.

Here’s something else. Although Chauvin’s restraint looks brutal, it was actually part of the standard Minneapolis police protocol for dealing with persons exhibiting ‘excited delirium,’ a dangerous, often fatal, condition brought about by too much fentanyl with one’s afternoon tea. According to the medical examiner, Chauvin did not appear to have obstructed Floyd’s airway — Floyd would not have been able to speak if he had — and Floyd did not die from strangulation. Bottom line, George Floyd died from the effects of a self-administered drug overdose, effects that might have been exacerbated by his interactions with the police, i.e., his exertions in resisting arrest. For their part, the police were trying to help Floyd. It was they who called the ambulance because they recognized that Floyd was in extremis.

It just may be that Ellison and his colleagues, who are far more familiar with the details of this case than anyone else, are acutely aware of its vulnerabilities.

Although I am not a lawyer, CNN’s explanation for the reinstatement of the third-degree murder charge doesn’t make sense to me.

I recall vividly that many people were deeply disappointed by the third-degree charge and exerted tremendous pressure upon the powers that be to upgrade the charge to second-degree murder. And on June 3, prosecutors announced the elevated charge.

With the highly partisan Ellison in charge of the case, it remains to be seen if Chauvin will get a fair trial.

New Poll Shows Major Shift in Number of U.S. Adults Who Believe George Floyd was Murdered

Advertisements

Jury selection has begun in the (second degree) murder trial of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin for the May 25 death of George Floyd which sparked riots throughout the nation and around the world last summer.

Chauvin, as you may recall, is on video pressing his knee into Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes, as Floyd repeats “I can’t breathe.” Americans of all races had been horrified after seeing that recording.

A new USA Today/Ipsos poll has been released which shows only 36 percent of U.S. adults currently believe that Floyd was murdered, down from 60 percent in June 2020. That’s a significant shift in opinion.

It may be that people have since learned of the mitigating circumstances surrounding Floyd’s death which I will address.

Another notable difference was in the number of people who don’t know the reason for his death. Last summer, only 4 percent were unsure. That figure has quadrupled over the last nine months to 17 percent.

In June 2020, 28 percent presumed Floyd’s death was caused by negligence on the part of the police officer. That figure has increased only slightly to 30 percent.

Three percent assumed it had been an accident compared to eight percent today.

Two percent believed the police officer did nothing wrong last June while six percent think so today.

The poll also found a major difference between the number of blacks (64 percent) and the number of whites (28 percent) who view Floyd’s death as murder.

Similarly, 33 percent of whites believe it was Chauvin’s negligence that killed Floyd compared to only 16 percent of blacks.

“Americans who have heard at least something about Chauvin’s trial, say 4 to 1, or 60 percent – 15 percent, that they hope Chauvin is convicted. That included 54% of white Americans and 76% of Black Americans.”

In the hours and days following Floyd’s death, it’s not an exaggeration to say he achieved martyrdom status. In the photo of the mural of Floyd above, he is given wings and a halo.

The Spectator’s Roger Kimball asks, “How would you like to be a juror at that trial? How easy will it be to find impartial jurors in Minneapolis, where the city council, in the wake of Floyd’s death, actually voted to abolish its police department? If you were a juror, would you dare to return a ‘not guilty’ verdict?”

He cites former federal and state prosecutor George Parry who wrote, ‘there is no conceivable possibility that Derek Chauvin can receive a fair trial in Hennepin County, simply because it will be impossible to seat an unintimidated jury free from the threat of mob violence. Conducting a trial under these circumstances will serve only to put a thin veneer of pretend due process on what in reality will be a legalized lynching based on a verdict rendered by a properly and quite understandably terrorized jury.’

“In other words,” Kimball explains, “the trial of Derek Chauvin, which would be difficult to conduct fairly any place in the country, will be little more than left-wing theater in Minneapolis. It ought to be moved far away. Even then, should he be acquitted, look for an explosion of violence in Minneapolis and possibly around the country. What the mob wants is not justice but ‘social justice,’ which in this case means racial redress. Derek Chauvin, alas, is likely to be the scapegoat in this despicable farce.”

 

Kimball looks at the reality of the man v. the myth as jury selection begins. Rather than being St. George, Floyd was a “drug addict, a woman abuser and a career criminal.” He tells the real story of what happened to Floyd on that fateful day.

First, the video clip that horrified the world was heavily edited. We see Floyd, pinned to the ground by Chauvin, piteously crying ‘I can’t breathe.’ Conclusion? That he can’t breathe because Chauvin is pressing on his windpipe. But a look at the police bodycam footage shows that Floyd was complaining that he couldn’t breathe before he was restrained by the police. Why? Because, as the FBI’s interview with the local medical examiner on July 8, 2020 revealed, Floyd was suffering from pulmonary edema, i.e., his lungs were full of fluid. And why was that? Partly because of an underlying heart condition, partly because Floyd was full to the gills with fentanyl, a drug known to affect respiration and cause pulmonary edema.

By the way, I say that FBI report ‘revealed’ this extenuating evidence, but it was evidence that the prosecution withheld from public scrutiny until the end of October 2020, by which time Minneapolis and many other cities across the country had been torched by Black Lives Matter rioters demanding ‘justice’ for George Floyd.

Here’s something else. Although Chauvin’s restraint looks brutal, it was actually part of the standard Minneapolis police protocol for dealing with persons exhibiting ‘excited delirium,’ a dangerous, often fatal, condition brought about by too much fentanyl with one’s afternoon tea. According to the medical examiner, Chauvin did not appear to have obstructed Floyd’s airway — Floyd would not have been able to speak if he had — and Floyd did not die from strangulation. Bottom line, George Floyd died from the effects of a self-administered drug overdose, effects that might have been exacerbated by his interactions with the police, i.e., his exertions in resisting arrest. For their part, the police were trying to help Floyd. It was they who called the ambulance because they recognized that Floyd was in extremis.

Many people are afraid to speak frankly about this man. Some have. Tucker Carlson has. And so has Candace Owens. After one reads the autopsy reports and watches the police bodycam footage, suddenly a murder charge against Chauvin seems extraordinarily excessive.