(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
Obama plans to nationalize State and local police forces to make them focus on fighting white “racism” in much the same way that his “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) farce focuses on attacking “Islamophobia” rather than Islamist terrorism. Under Obama’s plan, black violence and its causes will be ignored if possible; if they can’t be ignored, they will continue to be minimized.
In response to public concerns about potential Islamist terror attacks, Obama turned the nation’s “war on terror” into a “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) farce, the focus of which has been largely on promoting the agenda of CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamist organizations. To that end, the Department of Homeland Security has stricken the study of Islam from its teaching materials and banned the use of words such a “jihad” from the lexicon of Federal law enforcement officials. Its primary focus has been on combating “Islamophobia,” rather than on preventing Islamic terror attacks.
As I also noted in the same article, The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is closely allied with Black Lives Matter and other racist Black groups.
It seems quite likely that CAIR, et al, are assisting Obama in structuring His program to federalize State and local law enforcements to make it focus on white “racism,” while continuing to encourage or at least to ignore black racism and violence.
President Barack Obama is warning his angry supporters that more violence and “rhetoric” by the Black Lives Matter movement could derail his campaign to federalize state and local police forces. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
For the moment, Obama and his deputies are simply pretending that the Dallas attack had nothing to do the Black Lives Matter movement, despite the killer’s decision to explain his anti-cop, anti-white motives to Dallas police. “The shooter is not reflective of the large movement to bring about change that was out in Dallas to peacefully demonstrate,” Jeh Johnson, Obama’s loyal head of the Department of Homeland Security, told a CBS interviewer on Sunday. [Emphasis added.]
But the growing wave of attacks on cops has put Obama on the political defense, and his supporters may spin further out of control to create more riots or attack that would delegitimize his campaign to federalize state and local police forces — and also damage Hillary Clinton’s election chances. [Emphasis added.]
Although Obama condemned violence against law enforcement personnel, he said this as well:
The flip side of that … [I] would hope that police organizations are also respectful of the frustration that people in these communities feel and not just dismiss these protests and these complaints as political correctness, or as politics or attacks on police. There are legitimate issues that have been raised, and there’s data and evidence to back up the concerns that are being expressed by these protesters. [Emphasis added.]
Victor Davis Hanson, in an article titled Have we reached a point of no return? published today by National Review, traces Obama’s promotion of and reliance on racial disharmony to suit His political ambitions.
“Punish our enemies” characterized Obama’s approach to race and bloc voting. Each time an explosive racial confrontation appeared on the national scene, Obama — always in his accustomed academic intonations — did his best to exploit the issue. So the Skip Gates farce was leveraged into commentary about police stereotyping and profiling on a national level. The police officer in the Ferguson shooting was eventually exonerated by Obama’s own Justice Department, but not before Obama had already exploited the shooting for political advantage, as part of a larger false narrative of out-of-control racist cops who recklessly shoot black suspects at inordinate rates to the population (rather than in the context of their national incidence of contact with police). [Emphasis added.]
Yep.
When the full video of Obama’s Dallas address is available at YouTube, I’ll update this post. In the meantime, here’s a summary from The Washington Times.
President Obama defended the Black Lives Matter movement Tuesday at a memorial service for five slain Dallas police officers, saying bigotry remains in police departments across the U.S.
While paying tribute to the fallen officers for sacrificing their lives to protect others from a sniper, Mr. Obama also called on law-enforcement agencies to root out bigotry.
“We have all seen this bigotry in our lives at some point,” Mr. Obama told an audience of several hundred at a concert hall in Dallas.
“None of us is entirely innocent. No institution is entirely immune. And that includes our police departments. We know this.”
Here’s the only video I have found thus far; it focuses on gun control.
[T]he growing wave of attacks on cops has put Obama on the political defense, and his supporters may spin further out of control to create more riots or attack that would delegitimize his campaign to federalize state and local police forces — and also damage Hillary Clinton’s election chances.
*********************
President Barack Obama is warning his angry supporters that more violence and “rhetoric” by the Black Lives Matter movement could derail his campaign to federalize state and local police forces.
“In a movement like Black Lives Matter, there’s always going to be some folks who say things that are stupid, or imprudent, or overgeneralized, or harsh,” Obama told reporters at a Sunday press conference, just three days after an African-American cop-hating racist murdered five police officers who were guarding a Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas.
“Everybody involved in the Black Lives Matter movement … I want all of them to maintain a respectful, thoughtful tone — because, as a practical matter, that’s what’s going to get change done,” Obama said.
The shocking attack in Dallas has wrecked the political momentum gained by the Obama-backed movement when stressed police killed two African-American suspects during that first week of July, in Minnesota and Louisiana. Immediately after those shootings, Obama had sought to use the two shootings to push his campaign to get more federal regulatory control over state and local police forces.
But because his campaign has been accompanied by a growing number of riots and of attacks on police, including in Dallas, Obama is being forced to defend and calm his angry allies, amid growing criticism that his anti-cop rhetoric has ignored a nationwide, low-level “War on Cops.”
So far this year, 26 police have been killed in shootings, marking a 63 percent increase over 2015, according to the Officer Down Memorial Page. After the Dallas shooting, gunman shot at three more policemen in Tennessee, Missouri, and Georgia. On Sunday, in Missouri, an African-American man was shot and killed as he broke into a police officers’ home following an argument on Facebook.
The anger among Obama’s allies was recorded July 9, when a BLM activist in St. Paul, Minn., frantically berated a TV reporter, while others shouted ‘Get Out of Here,’ and urged each other to attack him. “He is the face of white supremacy,” the activist shouted.
The African-American anti-cop movement also put rioters on the streets of several cities over the weekend. In 2014 and 2015, African-American rioters wrecked the town of Ferguson, Mo., and damaged the center of Baltimore.
For the moment, Obama and his deputies are simply pretending that the Dallas attack had nothing to do the Black Lives Matter movement, despite the killer’s decision to explain his anti-cop, anti-white motives to Dallas police. “The shooter is not reflective of the large movement to bring about change that was out in Dallas to peacefully demonstrate,” Jeh Johnson, Obama’s loyal head of the Department of Homeland Security, told a CBS interviewer on Sunday.
But the growing wave of attacks on cops has put Obama on the political defense, and his supporters may spin further out of control to create more riots or attack that would delegitimize his campaign to federalize state and local police forces — and also damage Hillary Clinton’s election chances.
“I would just say to everybody who’s concerned about the issue of police shootings or racial bias in the criminal justice system that maintaining a truthful and serious and respectful tone is going to help mobilize American society to bring about real change. And that is our ultimate objective,” he said at the Sunday press conference.
Obama did briefly condemn attacks on police, but spent much of the Sunday press conference repeatedly telling his African-American allies that angry rhetoric against police is counterproductive to his political goals.
Any violence directed at police officers is a reprehensible crime and needs to be prosecuted. But even rhetorically, if we paint police in broad brush, without recognizing that the vast majority of police officers are doing a really good job and are trying to protect people and do so fairly and without racial bias, if our rhetoric does not recognize that, then we’re going to lose allies in the reform cause.
Yet Obama simultaneously raised the political temperature by portraying the anti-cop movement as similar to the prior nation-changing political groups, some of which have include violent campaigns, such as the attacks launched by the terrorist groups, such as the Black Panthers, the Weathermen and violence by union members. Obama even cited the abolitionist movement, whose work was completed by the very bloody U.S. Civil War.
One of the great things about America is that individual citizens and groups of citizens can petition their government, can protest, can speak truth to power. And that is sometimes messy and controversial. But because of that ability to protest and engage in free speech, America, over time, has gotten better. We’ve all benefited from that.
The abolition movement was contentious. The effort for women to get the right to vote was contentious and messy. There were times when activists might have engaged in rhetoric that was overheated and occasionally counterproductive. But the point was to raise issues so that we, as a society, could grapple with it. The same was true with the Civil Rights Movement, the union movement, the environmental movement, the anti-war movement during Vietnam. And I think what you’re seeing now is part of that longstanding tradition.
Obama also said that the “flip side” of non-violence by his allies is for the cops to admit they’re in the wrong.
The flip side of that …would hope that police organizations are also respectful of the frustration that people in these communities feel and not just dismiss these protests and these complaints as political correctness, or as politics or attacks on police. There are legitimate issues that have been raised, and there’s data and evidence to back up the concerns that are being expressed by these protesters.
“If police organizations and departments acknowledge that there’s a problem and there’s an issue, then that, too, is going to contribute to real solutions,” he said, without describing what would happen if police organizations do not submit to his political demands.
“Punish our enemies” characterized Obama’s approach to race and bloc voting. Each time an explosive racial confrontation appeared on the national scene, Obama — always in his accustomed academic intonations — did his best to exploit the issue. So the Skip Gates farce was leveraged into commentary about police stereotyping and profiling on a national level. The police officer in the Ferguson shooting was eventually exonerated by Obama’s own Justice Department, but not before Obama had already exploited the shooting for political advantage, as part of a larger false narrative of out-of-control racist cops who recklessly shoot black suspects at inordinate rates to the population (rather than in the context of their national incidence of contact with police).
**************************
Multicultural societies — from 19th-century Austria–Hungary to contemporary Iraq, Lebanon, the former Yugoslavia, and Rwanda — have a poor record of keeping the peace between competing tribes. They usually end up mired in nihilistic and endemic violence.
The only hope for history’s rare multiracial, multiethnic, and multireligious nations is to adopt a common culture, one that artificially suppresses the natural instinct of humans to identify first with their particular tribe. America, in the logical spirit of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, was exceptional among modern societies in slowly evolving from its original, largely European immigrant population to a 21st-century assimilated, integrated, and intermarried multiracial society, in which religious and racial affiliations were incidental, not essential, to one’s public character and identity.
But such a bold experiment was always tenuous and against the cruel grain of history, in which the hard work of centuries could be easily torn apart by the brief demagoguery of the moment. Unfortunately, President Obama, ever since he first appeared on the national political scene in 2008, has systematically adopted a rhetoric and an agenda that is predicated on dividing up the country according to tribal grievances, in hopes of recalibrating various factions into a majority grievance culture. In large part, he has succeeded politically. But in doing so he has nearly torn the country apart. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to suggest that no other recent president has offered such a level of polarizing and divisive racial bombast.
Most recently, without citing any facts about the circumstances of the police shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana, Barack Obama castigated the police and the citizenry on their culpability for racial disparity and prejudicial violence. “[T]hese fatal shootings are not isolated incidents. They are symptomatic of the broader challenges within our criminal-justice system, the racial disparities that appear across the system year after year, and the resulting lack of trust that exists between law enforcement and too many of the communities they serve.” Obama did not yet know the race of the policemen involved (as in the case of Baltimore, the Minnesota shooting involved non-white officers), the circumstances that led to the shootings, or the backgrounds of either the officers or their victims.
Shortly afterwards, twelve Dallas law-enforcement officers were shot, and five of them killed, by a black assassin who declared solidarity with Black Lives Matter and proclaimed his hatred for white law enforcement. That outbreak prompted Obama to take to the podium again to recalibrate his earlier message. This time he amplified his gun-control message, and somewhat delusionally added that the upswing in racial polarization did not imperil national unity — in much the same way that, in years past, he had announced that al-Qaeda was on the run, we were leaving behind a stable Iraq, and ISIS was a jayvee organization. Note the Obama editorial method in the case of police incidents, from Skip Gates to Louisiana and Minnesota: He typically speaks before he has the facts, and when subsequent information calls into question his talking points and theorizing, he never goes back and makes the corrections. Nor does he address facts — from Ferguson to Dallas — that do not fit his political agenda. Finally, a police shooting of an African-American suspect is never an “isolated event,” while the shooting of an officer by a black assassin is isolated and never really thematic of any larger racial pathology.
We were introduced to Obama’s idea of career enhancement through racial polarization during the 2008 political campaign. Obama had earlier, when he saw it as being to his advantage, emphasized to the Chicago Sun-Times that as a devout Christian he dutifully attended Rev. Wright’s church: “Yep. Every week. Eleven o’clock service.” Indeed, Wright offered inspiration to Obama with his trite “Audacity of Hope” refrain, which Obama borrowed for the title of his 2008 campaign booklet.
Once Wright was exposed on video as an uncouth racist and anti-Semite, Obama made the necessary adjustments, as “every week” transmogrified into spotty attendance that explained why Obama was shocked — in Casablanca style — when his spiritual mentor was publicly exposed. In that era of Obamamania, most people shrugged that Obama surely never bought into Wright’s racist and anti-American sermonizing, but simply put up with the venom spewed every week at Trinity United as a political investment, both establishing his radical street credentials and bolstering support among the members of Chicago’s black churches.
But there were plenty of markers in Obama’s own turns of phrase to indicate that racial tranquility is not where we were headed: “Typical white person” and a litany of divisive campaign sloganeering followed (“bring a gun to a knife fight” and “get in their faces,” along with the stereotyping of the white working class of Pennsylvania, who had failed to appreciate Obama’s singular brilliance in the state’s Democratic primary).
Nothing much changed when Obama entered the Oval Office (and why should it, when Obama won record majorities of minority voters in 2008 and would again in 2012?). Attorney General Eric Holder, who almost immediately dropped a likely successful voter-intimidation prosecution against the New Black Panther Party (a group to which the Dallas police assassin at one time claimed affinity), set the new tone of the Obama Justice Department by referring to African-Americans as “my people” and deriding Americans in general as “a nation of cowards.”
“Punish our enemies” characterized Obama’s approach to race and bloc voting. Each time an explosive racial confrontation appeared on the national scene, Obama — always in his accustomed academic intonations — did his best to exploit the issue. So the Skip Gates farce was leveraged into commentary about police stereotyping and profiling on a national level. The police officer in the Ferguson shooting was eventually exonerated by Obama’s own Justice Department, but not before Obama had already exploited the shooting for political advantage, as part of a larger false narrative of out-of-control racist cops who recklessly shoot black suspects at inordinate rates to the population (rather than in the context of their national incidence of contact with police).
It mattered nothing that the signature line of Ferguson, and the founding motto of Black Lives Matter — “Hands up, don’t shoot” — was exposed as a myth by Eric Holder’s investigators. Right in the midst of the ongoing Trayvon Martin shooting trial, the president of the United States, in carrion fashion, weighed in by speculating whether the son he had never had would have looked like young Martin — not merely risking prejudicing the case (although the newly dubbed “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman was nevertheless exonerated by a jury of his peers), but reminding the country that our racial heritages are the basis of tribal resonance.
Black Lives Matter was founded on a separatist and radical racialism. When an inept Bernie Sanders tried to suggest that “All lives matter,” he was bullied into silence by activists who rushed the podium. “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” became a Black Lives Matter marching slogan last summer in Minnesota — rhetoric amplifying the calls for “Dead Cops” in an earlier New York City march that was in turn logically reified in Dallas by the assassin who “dead copped” white policemen.
When Obama invited Black Lives Matter founders to the White House in February, he praised them by asserting that they were “much better organizers” than he had been at a comparable age, adding that he was “confident that they are going to take America to new heights.” Prior Black Lives Matter marching death chants to police should have been known to Obama at the time.
Every problem has a resolution — but often not a good one. In the case of widely publicized shootings of black suspects by police, regardless of the landscapes involved, police already have proven less likely to respond promptly to inner-city calls for help, rightly or wrongly convinced that they either will be shot at by assassins, or will be forced to use force to protect themselves in a manner that will end their careers, or will hesitate and pay a lethal price for losing deterrence. They likewise assume that their politically appointed high-profile superiors will not support them under media and political pressures, and that society at large has no stomach for a candid conversation — ranging from history to culture to public policy to economics — about the dilemma of young black males, who constitute about 3 to 4 percent of the general population, and are responsible for between 25 and 50 percent of some categories of violent crime.
This spring Obama invited a series of rappers and activists to the White House, whose careers and rhetoric were often violent and divisive. Rapper Rick Ross — on bail pending trial on kidnapping and assault charges — had his ankle bracelet go off at a White House ceremony. Black Lives Matter and Ferguson activist Charles Wade abruptly declined his White House invitation, apparently because he had been recently arrested for pimping and human trafficking. Marquee rapper Kendrick Lamar’s Pimp a Butterfly album cover portrayed black men hoisting champagne bottles and displaying hundred-dollar bills on the White House lawn, in merriment over the corpse of a white judge with his eyes X’d out. Reality mimicked art when Lamar (whose video sets include singing from a vandalized police car) was invited to the White House — or perhaps when five fatally shot policemen on the ground in Dallas superseded Lamar’s image of a prone and eyeless dead judge. Obama, remember, has cited the police-hating Lamar (e.g., “And we hate Popo, wanna kill us dead in the street for sure, nigga”) as his favorite rapper and the dead-judge album “as best album of the year.”
As the president has reminded us, words matter. So far in 2016 the shootings of police are up 44 percent over 2015. If celebrating the image of a murdered judge is no impediment to an Oval Office visit and a presidential endorsement, why would the more reckless activists see any real social odium in escalating the hatred? What does one have to do to be disqualified from a White House visit or earn the president’s disapproval? Be under indictment for a felony? Commercialize a picture of a judge’s corpse? That more police may have been targeted in Tennessee, Georgia, and Missouri following the Dallas carnage was the logical result of more than a year of contextualizing Black Lives Matter rhetoric and expressing pseudo-hip adulation of purveyors of anti-police and anti-judicial venom — but always from a safe distance. What does a Secret Service agent think when Lamar, who became a multimillionaire from lyrics like “We hate Popo,” comes to visit the Oval Office?
Obama predicates such no-consequences racial trafficking on four astute assumptions: First, he believes that promoting racial identity, and the more raw the better, is good politics — that it will solidify his new Democratic coalition, energizing grievances to ensure record turnout and bloc voting. Second, he assumes that most of
Second, he assumes that most of America is still locked into an anachronistic 1960s dialectic of a white/black binary in the context of continuing bitterness over the racism of Jim Crow — rather than the complex reality of a 21st-century society of multiple races and ethnicities, well into our sixth decade of affirmative action and racial compensation.
Third, Obama assumes that his Ivy League metrosexual and teleprompted image, in wink-and-nod fashion, reassures white liberals that while he flirts with and manipulates the uncouth rhetoric and imagery that the cruder rappers or Rev. Wright routinely peddle, he could not possibly buy into their full progam.
Fourth, Obama assumes that his own racial heritage exempts his sloppy rhetoric and actions from the sort of accountability that would doom a non-minority politician who had compiled a similar oeuvre of tolerating racial incendiarism.
Yet when a society reaches a point at which the remedy — honest dialogue and debate — is considered worse than the disease — racial animosity — then chaos and disintegration are the prognoses. Up to now, the war zones in Chicago and Philadelphia and other inner cities that routinely experience abject killing each week have been largely ignored by progressives, given the nature of black-on-black violence in cities with strict gun-control laws, liberal governments, and ample social-welfare programs. Yet it may be that these recent shootings in Dallas and various other cities, rather than signaling a new dialogue, mark a strategy of exporting gun violence to purported white purveyors of racism. If that happens, then we are back to the 1960s — but worse. Read the online racist comments posted on any major news agency’s accounts of a crime involving
Up to now, the war zones in Chicago and Philadelphia and other inner cities that routinely experience abject killing each week have been largely ignored by progressives, given the nature of black-on-black violence in cities with strict gun-control laws, liberal governments, and ample social-welfare programs. Yet it may be that these recent shootings in Dallas and various other cities, rather than signaling a new dialogue, mark a strategy of exporting gun violence to purported white purveyors of racism. If that happens, then we are back to the 1960s — but worse. Read the online racist comments posted on any major news agency’s accounts of a crime involving race to sense the polarization that has intensified since 2008.
Meanwhile, abroad, the world looks not just at the tearing apart of American society under Obama, but at that society’s collective inability to even discuss the catalysts for either Islamic terrorism of the Orlando and San Bernardino sort, or the recent racial violence. When this is collated with seven years of failed reset with Russia, the Iranian deal, the rise of ISIS, the implosion of the Middle East, and the new belligerency in China and North Korea, we may be facing a final six months of a lame-duck presidency the likes of which have never been seen in modern political history.
Perhaps Obama has been prescient after all about American sins and the need for apologizing, contextualization, and reset. A 21st-century society that celebrates separatism and violence and that pardons the venom of Black Lives Matter and its more extreme manifestations, or that exempts Hillary Clinton from all legal accountability, may simply not be able to exercise a position of world moral authority after all.
The clown show known as Black Lives Matter is akin to a paranoid maniac who: (a) dreams that his spouse is having a torrid, illicit affair; (b) then berates and beats his spouse upon waking up; and (c) finally, when reminded that it was all just a dream, becomes even more enraged at the betrayal he supposedly suffered while he slept. There’s really no point to continuing the charade of calling Black Lives Matter by the phony name it has exploited since its inception. If black lives truly mattered to the know-nothings who comprise this movement, they would have something—anything—to say about the fact that approximately 5,500 of the 6,095 black victims of homicide in 2014 were killed not by white devils, not by satanic ghouls in blue uniforms, but by other blacks. Instead, all they give us is a silent, collective yawn punctuated with a raised middle finger. So from this point forward, Black Lives Matter will be called by its correct name, “Facts Don’t Matter.”
The mouthpieces of Facts Don’t Matter say their mission is to demand “an immediate end” to “the murder of Black people” by the hordes of racists who purportedly comprise our nation’s police forces. They tell us that African Americans are a hunted and endangered species, mowed down by blue-uniformed white sadists who are animated by bloodlust, bigotry, and dreams of genocide. But wait. It turns out that of all the people who have been killed by police in the United States in recent years, about 42% were white, 20% were Hispanic, and 32% were black—even as blacks committed nearly 39% of the types of serious crimes most likely to result in a violent confrontation with police. Last year was typical: 494 whites and 258 blacks were killed by police. And what do the race-obsessed demagogues at Facts Don’t Matter have to say about this? Nothing. Facts Don’t Matter.
Facts Don’t Matter tells us that police are particularly inclined to gun down, in cold blood, African Americans who are unarmed and pose no threat to anyone. Of course, “unarmed” victims are sometimes shot while they’re physically assaulting an officer or trying to take away his gun. But still, let’s play along and look at—if you’ll excuse the expression—the facts. In 2015, there were 38 unarmed blacks and 32 unarmed whites who were shot and killed by police. These figures are roughly proportional to the respective numbers of violent crimes committed by blacks and whites nationwide. So why the outrage? Because Facts Don’t Matter. Remember?
And does it matter that statistically, the likelihood of a police officer being killed by a black male is 18.5 times greater than the likelihood of an unarmed black male being killed by a cop? Nope. Facts Don’t … well, you know how it goes.
The plain truth is that if you search for evidence of systemic racism in police shootings, you won’t find it anywhere outside the imaginations of the Facts Don’t Matter racists and the imbeciles who support them. The premise underlying Facts Don’t Matter’s mission is a lie, founded on a fantasy, stapled to a hallucination, wrapped inside a fairy tale, strapped to the wing of a unicorn.
But naturally, none of this prevented Barack Obama—in the aftermath of the recent police shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana—from doing what he does best: lament America’s intransigent white racism, and foment black hatred and mistrust of police officers. This is where the President always shines, and dutifully he trotted out several old favorites from his well-worn collection of hackneyed platitudes:
“[T]here’s a big chunk of our citizenry that feels as if, because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same.”
“[T]he data shows that black folks are more vulnerable to these kinds of incidents. There is a particular burden that is being placed on a group of our fellow citizens.”
“[T]hese fatal shootings are not isolated incidents. They are symptomatic of the broader challenges within our criminal justice system, the racial disparities that appear across the system year after year, and the resulting lack of trust that exists between law enforcement and too many of the communities they serve.
A few hours later, a dozen officers were gunned down at a Facts Don’t Matter rally in Dallas, and five of them lay lifeless in pools of their own blood.
This atrocity was just a natural extension of the toxic and deadly anti-police climate that Obama had previously helped cultivate with many similar statements over the years. And not surprisingly, law-enforcement officers throughout urban America have responded to this troubling climate by becoming less proactive in apprehending criminal suspects, particularly for low-level offenses. This, in turn, has led to a dramatic rise in crime rates in a number of U.S. cities. For 2015 as a whole, America’s 56 largest cities experienced a 17% rise in homicides; in 10 heavily black cities, murders increased by more than 60%. During the first quarter of this year, homicides in the nation’s 63 largest cities increased by another 9%, while non-fatal shootings were up 21%. In other words, immense harm has been done to the very same “black lives” on whose behalf Facts Don’t Matter claims to work.
If Barack Obama were something other than a racist Marxist revolutionary, he would state clearly and unequivocally that the Facts Don’t Matter movement is nothing more than a horde of know-nothing degenerates who should be ostracized as the moral equivalents of cross-burning Klansmen. But that’s a bit much to expect from a man who has made yet another prominent racist, Al Sharpton, his leading adviser on matters of race. So instead, Obama doffs his hat to the Facts Don’t Matter clowns, and treats them like dignitaries. Leaders of Facts Don’t Matter have visited the Obama White House many times since 2013, meeting with not only the President, but also with the First Lady and a number of high-level administration officials.
In September 2015, for instance, Facts Don’t Matter leader Brittany Packnett—fresh off her seventh visit to the Obama White House—told reporters that the President had “offered us a lot of encouragement” while urging the activists to “‘keep speaking truth to power.’” The following month, Obama lauded Facts Don’t Matter for addressing “a specific problem that’s happening in the African-American community that’s not happening in other communities.” Two months after that, he described Facts Don’t Matter as a positive force that was shining “sunlight” on the fact that “there’s no black family that hasn’t had a conversation around the kitchen table about driving while black and being profiled or being stopped” by police. And at a Black History Month event at the White House this past February, Obama welcomed Facts Don’t Matter representatives and extolled their “outstanding work.”
This is the pathetic condition to which our nation has sunk under Barack Obama: The President of the United States openly and unequivocally supports a racist terror group that is committed to the slaughter of police officers and the breakdown of law-and-order—and, by logical extension, to a steep and swift rise in death-by-homicide rates among civilians in dozens of cities across the country. And he’s done it all in the name of “racial justice.” People don’t get any uglier—or dumber—than this.
Before he received his just reward, Micah Johnson left no doubt about why he had gone on his killing spree in Dallas. Johnson wanted to kill white people, especially white officers, he told the police officers who were closing in on him.
Clearly, Johnson hated white people. He was driven by racism.
Johnson’s statement wasn’t good enough for President Obama, though. According to Obama, it is “very hard to untangle the motives of this shooter.”
Nonsense. One might discuss the origins of Johnson’s intense hatred for whites and whether mental illness contributed, as Obama seemed to suggest. But Johnson’s motive is clear. It’s as clear as Dylann Roof’s motive for killing blacks in Charleston, South Carolina — a motive no one had trouble untangling.
By making such a foolish statement, Obama loses credibility. He creates the impression that he’s glossing over obvious black racism, which ought to disqualify him from being taken seriously when he talks about race relations, and will disqualify him in the view of many whites. (This may be why the mainstream media doesn’t seem to be reporting Obama’s statement.)
Not to be outdone, Jeh Johnson, Obama’s head of DHS, stated today that “it’s still relatively early” to conclude that Micah Johnson’s shooting were a hate crime. CBS’s John Dickerson asked:
You said there’s no link to a terrorist organization here, but the shooting in Dallas was by any definition terrorism and a hate crime, wasn’t it.
Johnson replied:
Well, there’s still an investigation being conducted by the Dallas police department and the FBI supported by many resources from the local government and the federal government. So it’s still relatively early.
What does Johnson think will occur in the investigation to show that Johnson didn’t commit a hate crime? Will the “many resources” of the government put the killer back together again so he can take back his acknowledgment that he wanted to kill whites?
Jeh Johnson isn’t stupid and neither is President Obama. They deny the obvious because they are unwilling to speak honestly about race when black racism is involved.
I won’t try to untangle the motives behind this dishonesty. I do know this: racially motivated dishonesty by national leaders won’t improve race relations; it will only make them worse.
(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
The contempt for America held by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama rivals that of Black Lives Matter, The New Black Panther Party, The Nation of Islam, The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and similar Islamist groups. Obama has tried to remake America in His own foul image. Now Hillary wants Her turn. Will we give it to Her?
In the following video, Michael Cutler speaks about the Obama-Clinton contempt for America. Rather than try to summarize the points Mr. Cutler makes, I’ll let the video speak for itself.
Leadership comes from the top, and the leadership that Obama has provided has been deadly to America.
As noted by Sheriff Clarke, Obama has been a powerful force for the racial polarization of America. The Dallas shooting gave Him a splendid opportunity to ramp up the polarization.
Judge Jeanine’s favorable comments about Black Lives Matter reflect common misconceptions, which I had shared until recently. The El Paso police chief made the comments on Black Lives Matter quoted below:
“Black Lives Matter, as far as I am concerned, is a radical hate group,” he said. “And for that purpose alone, I think the leadership of this country needs to look a little bit harder at that particular group. The consequences of what we saw in Dallas is due to their efforts.” [Emphasis added.]
According to the El Paso Times, Allen is the first black police chief in the city’s history. He’s been in charge of the department—one of the country’s largest—since 2007. And during his tenure, the city has been consistently ranked as one of the safest large cities in America. [Emphasis added.]
BATON ROUGE, La./MINNEAPOLIS (Reuters) – Protests against the shootings of two black men by police officers shut down main arteries in a number of U.S. cities on Saturday, leading to numerous arrests, scuffles and injuries in confrontations between police and demonstrators.
Undeterred by heightened concerns about safety at protests after a lone gunman killed five police officers in Dallas Thursday night, organizers went ahead with marches in the biggest metropolis, New York City, and Washington D.C., the nation’s capital, among other cities.
It was the third straight day of widespread protests after the fatal shooting of Alton Sterling, 37, by police in Baton Rouge on Tuesday and the death of Philando Castile, 32, on Wednesday night in a St. Paul, Minnesota suburb, cities which both saw heated protests on Saturday.
The most recent shooting deaths by police come after several years of contentious killings by law enforcement officers, including that of Michael Brown, a teenager whose death in the summer of 2014 caused riots and weeks of protests in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson.
On Saturday evening, hundreds of protesters shut down I-94, a major thoroughfare linking the Twin Cities, snarling traffic.
Protesters, told to disperse, threw rocks, bottles and construction rebar at officers, injuring at least three, St. Paul police said. Police made arrests and used smoke bombs and marking rounds to disperse the crowd. [Emphasis added.]
Here is a link to an article about the roots of Black Lives Matter. It’s fascinating and I hope you will read the whole thing. Here just three introductory paragraphs:
The Black Lives Matter movement (BLM) casts itself as a spontaneous uprising born of inner city frustration, but is, in fact, the latest and most dangerous face of a web of well-funded communist/socialist organizations that have been agitating against America for decades. Its agitation has provoked police killings and other violence, lawlessness and unrest in minority communities throughout the U.S. [Emphasis added.]
Nevertheless, BLM appears to be exercising considerable leverage over the Democratic Party, in part by pressuring and intimidating Democratic candidates such as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders (VT) into embracing their cause. The movement could also assist President Obama’s exploitation of racial divisions in society beyond his final term in office. [Emphasis added.]
This report examines in detail, for the first time, how communist groups have manipulated the cause of Black Lives Matter, and how money from liberal foundations has made it all possible.
Organizations supportive of and related to Black Lives Matter
The “lead organizer” of the Dallas Black Lives Matter protest at which five police officers were murdered and others killed was apparently a quasi Muslim convert who combined “Christian” and Islamist teachings in his sermons.
A Breitbart News review of Jeff Hood’s internet footprint revealed regular posts about the apocalypse, violent retribution to police, and Hood even recently posted about the 2013 death of a self proclaimed “social justice warrior” who committed suicide by lighting himself on fire in front of a shopping mall in Texas.
Breitbart Texas’ Brandon Darby tweeted about protest organizer Jeff Hood wanting to “create a space for anger and rage” at the Dallas protest.
Reverend Hood closely follows police shootings and state executions and regularly prays for divine retribution for police, like this post in response to a police shooting in Dallas from April 24, 2015:
For now, the blood of black men will continue to roll down driveways, streets and sidewalks with impunity. However, God is not mocked. The judgment is coming. Those police who continue to spill the blood of black men will be held accountable…for black blood matters just as much as any other blood to God.
According to Pamela Geller, the shooter (Micah Johnson) “was a Facebook member of The Nation of Islam and Black Liberation Party, Obama’s old stomping grounds.” His Arabic name was “Fahed Hassen, according to Denver Police Department.”
The Nation of Islam is not an orthodox Muslim group, and subscribes to a great deal of racial mythology that is nowhere in Islamic tradition. It is, however, also true that many black Americans first enter the Nation, and then become orthodox Sunni Muslims. And given the increased racial tensions of the Obama era, many people in both the NOI and among mainstream Sunnis have a taste for the “revolution” that is brought about by means of jihad. [Emphasis added.]
In his post linked immediately above, Mr. Spencer quotes from an article posted at The Australian [subscription required] on July 9, 2016:
As the FBI and local authorities launched an investigation, their focus was expected to probe militant black rights groups set up in Dallas. Anti-police groups include the New Black Panther Party and Huey P. Newton Gun Club, named after the founder of the 1960s activist Black Panther Party.
I wonder whether the FBI, et al, focused as expected but which CAIR, et al, would have resisted.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), as well as other Islamist groups, have been quite supportive of Black Lives Matter.
The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other Islamic supremacist groups have assiduously courted Black Lives Matter, and linked their propaganda efforts against “Islamophobia” to the Black Lives Matter stand against perceived racism. In Dallas last night, we see where this is tending. . . . [Emphasis added,]
Once the dust settled, last week’s protest of a Donad Trump rally in Chicago demonstrated a growing nexus between Islamist groups in the United States and the radical leftist “Black Lives Matter” movement.
This rhetoric of unity between these movements was clearly on display at the 2015 joint conference of the 2015 Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). MAS was described by federal prosecutors as the “overt arm” of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, and ICNA is recognized as the front for the Pakistani Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) founded by one of the foremost thinkers on modern Jihad, Syed Abul A’la Maududi.
At the event, MAS leader Khalilah Sabra openly discussed the importance of Muslim support for Black Lives Matter, and urged “revolution.” Comparing the situation in the United States to the Muslim Brotherhood-led Arab Spring revolutions, she asked, “We are the community that staged a revolution across the world; if we can do that, why can’t we have that revolution in America?” [Emphasis added.]
CAIR joined other groups named by federal law enforcement as Muslim Brotherhood organizations and lined up behind the Ferguson protests.
In November of 2014, Fox News reported on an effort by CAIR Michigan Director Dawud Walid to link the death of Michael Brown at the hands of police and the death of Luqman Abdullah, a Detroit imam shot during an FBI raid. [Emphasis added.]
Abdullah was described by the FBI as a leader of a nationwide Islamic organization known as “The Ummah,” run by convicted cop-killer Jamil Abdullah Amin. Abdullah’s group engaged in criminal activity in order to raise funds in order for an effort to establish Sharia law in opposition to the U.S. government. [Emphasis added.]
Amin and CAIR have a long association together, with CAIR providing funding for Amin’s legal defense, and issuing numerous press releases in support of the Georgia radical imam and former Black Panther.
While this linkage of Islamist front groups to radical racial politics may seem a relatively new development, the reality is it has been the result of a nearly four decade long effort by Islamist groups. A major thinker on this effort was a Pakistani immigrant and ICNA leader named Shamim A. Siddiqui, who knew JeI founder Maududi personally. Siddiqui wrote his work, Methodology of Dawah Il Allah in American Perspective in 1989.
The shooter in Dallas who killed five policemen and wounded others had been a member of the New Black Panther Party, about which the Obama administration has simply laughed.
In 2009 and 2010, lawyers working at the United States Justice Department warned top Obama political appointees and other Justice Department officials about the dangerous threats of New Black Panthers to kill police officers and other whites. I was one of those lawyers who delivered those warnings. [Emphasis added.]
Our warnings came in the context of the Voting Rights Act case I and other lawyers brought against the New Black Panthers on behalf of the United States in 2009, a case the Obama administration ultimately abandoned. Both top DOJ officials, including now Labor Secretary Tom Perez, as well as rank and file employees in the Civil Rights Division, were warned but did not take the New Black Panther threat seriously or otherwise considered the organization to be a laughable joke. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
As President Obama’s pastor put it, these chickens may have come home to roost.
Bob Price has this piece: Confirmed: Dallas Shooter was Member of Houston New Black Panther Party. The story has a disturbing video of an armed New Black Panther march in Texas where the armed uniformed panthers chant – “Off the pig,” and “Oink, oink, bang, bang.” They also note “Revolution has come. Time to pick up the gun.” The piece states:
One of the members holding an AR-15 style rifle appears to be Micah Xavier Johnson. During the march, the armed members of the New Black Panther Party stood off against Harris County Sheriff’s Deputies who came to Waller County responding to a request for assistance from Sheriff Glenn Smith
You can see the full video here of the Houston New Black Panthers armed formation and chants to “off the pig” with the individual armed with an M-16 with his finger positioned above the trigger guard as someone trained in firearms would do.
More recently, Dallas shooter Johnson “liked” the Face Book page of the African-American Defense League. Here are a few posts from its now deleted Face Book page, copied just before the page was taken down:
Obama’s plans
In response to public concerns about potential Islamist terror attacks, Obama turned the nation’s “war on terror” into a “Countering Violent Extremism” (CVE) farce, the focus of which has been largely on promoting the agenda of CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamist organizations. To that end, the Department of Homeland Security has stricken the study of Islam from its teaching materials and banned the use of words such a “jihad” from the lexicon of Federal law enforcement officials. Its primary focus has been on combating “Islamophobia,” rather than on preventing Islamic terror attacks.
Obama appears to have comparable plans to deal with public concerns about potential attacks by members of Black Lives Matter and other racist groups.
President Barack Obama is harnessing the increasing attacks on police in Dallas — and the periodic shootings of people by stressed cops — to push his agenda to federalize state and local police forces. [Emphasis added.]
“I want to start moving on constructive actions that are actually going to make a difference,” he said during his evening press conference in Poland when he was asked about the Dallas attack.
Those actions, he said, wouldbe based on the recommendations of the panel that he picked after the 2014 street riots in Ferguson, Missouri. The panel offered “practical concrete solutions that can reduce — if not eliminate — the problems of racial bias,” Obama said. [Emphasis added.]
Racial bias on the part of whom? Police? The public at large? Or racist organizations such as The Nation of Islam, the New Black Panther Party and Black Lives Matter?
The dramatic shootings are an opportunity to push that agenda, Obama said. “If my voice has been true and positive, my hope would be that… [the panel] surfaces problems, it frames them, it allows us to wrestle with these issue and try to come up with practical solutions,” he said. [Emphasis added.]
The report urges the federal government to federalize police training and practices, via the use of federal lawsuits, grants and threats to cut federal aid. So far, Obama’s deputies have cajoled and sued more than 30 police jurisdictions to adopt federal rules in a slow-motion creation of a national police system, similar to the slow-motion creation of a federal-run health-sector via Obamacare. [Emphasis added.]
Obama also used the press conference to insulate his federalized police program — and his allies in the Black Live Matter movement — from popular rejection after the five police were murdered by the anti-cop African-American in Dallas. [Emphasis added.]
“The danger is that we somehow think the act of a troubled person speaks to some larger political statement across the country — it doesn’t,” Obama insisted. [Emphasis added.]
The ambush-style mass shooting of cops in Dallas, Texas, last night makes it clear that it is time for the dangerous, anti-American insurgency called Black Lives Matter to be designated a terrorist organization for fomenting a war against the nation’s law enforcement officers.
. . . .
President Barack Obama . . . has long tried to provoke civil unrest here in the U.S. with his hateful anti-cop rhetoric and his relentless demonization of opponents. His goal is fundamental transformation of the United States. A Red diaper baby who identifies violence-espousing communist Frantz Fanon as an intellectual influence, he has also steadfastly refused to condemn the explicitly racist, violent Black Lives Matter movement. In fact Obama has lavished attention on the movement’s leaders and invited them to the White House over and over again. [Emphasis added.]
Obama has done the same for the Islamist movement CAIR
Members of the Democratic National Committee expressly endorsed Black Lives Matter, throwing their lot in with black racists and radical Black Power militants. The DNC officially embraced a statement that slams the U.S. for allegedly systemic police violence against black people. A resolution passed by hundreds of delegates at the DNC meeting in Minneapolis last year accuses the nation’s police of “extrajudicial killings of unarmed African American men, women and children.” [Emphasis addes.]
The Left persists in these lies because, well, that’s what these people do.
Hillary would bring us at least one more term of Obama. As He has stated, She is the best qualified candidate to continue His fundamental transformation of America.
Will “we the vulgarians people” give Hitlary that opportunity? Do we hold America in as profound contempt as do Obama and Clinton, as well as the various racist and Islamist organizations they favor?
We still have our grand old flag.
After November 8th, will we deserve her? Or will we have to lower her for the last time? Doing so would doubtless make Obama truly “proud” of His fundamentally transformed “America.”
In 2009 and 2010, lawyers working at the United States Justice Department warned top Obama political appointees and other Justice Department officials about the dangerous threats of New Black Panthers to kill police officers and other whites. I was one of those lawyers who delivered those warnings.
Our warnings came in the context of the Voting Rights Act case I and other lawyers brought against the New Black Panthers on behalf of the United States in 2009, a case the Obama administration ultimately abandoned. Both top DOJ officials, including now Labor Secretary Tom Perez, as well as rank and file employees in the Civil Rights Division, were warned but did not take the New Black Panther threat seriously or otherwise considered the organization to be a laughable joke.
Allies in the media echoed the narrative that the defendants in the voter intimidation case were harmless clowns.
Among the information presented to top officials was a video produced by the New Black Panthers entitled “Training Day.” The video proposes killing police officers by ambush. I wrote about the video:
Another New Black Panther posing in the above photo and kneeling with a shotgun is “Field Marshal” Najee Muhammad. As I wrote in my book Injustice: One of them was Panther “Field Marshal” Najee Muhammad, who is seen in a Panther video called “Training Day” in which he encourages blacks in DeKalb County, Georgia, to don ski masks, lie in wait behind shrubs, and kill police officers with AK-47s. Following that exhortation he mocks the hypothetical victims’ grieving widows.
Justice Department employees ridiculed the video and noted very few were in the video’s audience, apparently oblivious of the role and power of social media to reach people not sitting in an auditorium.
Attorneys working on the voter intimidation case made an effort to broadly educate employees of the Civil Rights Division about the murderous rhetoric of the New Black Panthers. We planned a screening of a National Geographic special on the New Black Panthers where members could be heard threatening to kill white babies. We widely disseminated information about the screening in a Justice Department conference room. On a floor with nearly one hundred employees, exactly two DOJ employees showed up to watch the screening, and one of them was the paralegal on the case.
As we shall see, Obama allies in the media could also be counted on to ridicule the seriousness of the New Black Panther organization.
The Obama Justice Department has also continued to give New Black Panthers who are in possession of illegal firearms a pass. I wrote here about New Black Panther (and Democrat) Jerry Jackson:
Jackson has a long violent criminal history. He is also a Democratic Party elected official in Philadelphia, not that those two facts have anything in common, of course. He was elected in May 2010 to a seat on the Philadelphia Democratic City Committee in the 14th Ward. … It is illegal under federal law (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1)) for any felon to possess a firearm. As one federal prosecutor told me, “these cases are among the simplest to win. It’s like taking candy from a baby. Did a felon hold a gun, or not? Period. It matters not if the gun was loaded, or even works.” So, is the Democrat New Black Panther Jerry Jackson indeed a felon? . . . According to this criminal complaint, in 1978, Jackson “with another black man did stab and rob comp[lainant] on the highway 4024 W. Girard Ave. . . Charged: robbery, theft, possession of an instrument of a crime, probation offense with a weapon, criminal conspiracy, simple assault and aggravated assault.” On January 10, 1979, Jackson was sentenced for robbery and criminal conspiracy convictions, both first degree felonies under Pennsylvania law.
The Justice Department surely must be aware of the fact that Jackson and other New Black Panthers are felons in possession of firearms given the attention the matter has received. I have talked about this fact on Fox News repeatedly. Yet nothing has happened to them. Is it because, like Hillary, they are Democrats?
As President Obama’s pastor put it, these chickens may have come home to roost.
Bob Price has this piece: Confirmed: Dallas Shooter was Member of Houston New Black Panther Party. The story has a disturbing video of an armed New Black Panther march in Texas where the armed uniformed panthers chant – “Off the pig,” and “Oink, oink, bang, bang.” They also note “Revolution has come. Time to pick up the gun.” The piece states:
One of the members holding an AR-15 style rifle appears to be Micah Xavier Johnson. During the march, the armed members of the New Black Panther Party stood off against Harris County Sheriff’s Deputies who came to Waller County responding to a request for assistance from Sheriff Glenn Smith
You can see the full video here of the Houston New Black Panthers armed formation and chants to “off the pig” with the individual armed with an M-16 with his finger positioned above the trigger guard as someone trained in firearms would do.
Since the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panthers was dismissed in 2009, racial violence in the country has spiked – on the streets of Baltimore, Dallas and cities in between. A phalanx of sycophantic media have done all they can to decouple the violence from the Black Lives Matter movement. No amount of snark or spin can decouple the violent rhetoric chanted at Black Lives Matter rallies from the violence that has followed. Americans watching on TV have ears.
The Black Lives Matter movement lost whatever moral authority it had on the streets of Dallas this week.
But that won’t stop the smart set from keeping the movement going. It reminds me of all the bloggers and columnists who spent so much time back in 2009 and 2010 ridiculing me, Megyn Kelly and any discussion of the New Black Panthers as a comic minstrel act.
That’s precisely what race-guilt addled Dave Weigel called it in the Atlantic:Megyn Kelly’s Minstrel Show. “No one cares what the NBPP thinks about anything,” Weigel quipped. “This is minstrelsy, with a fringe moron set up like a bowling pin for Hannity to knock down. And that’s the role the NBPP plays on Fox, frequently.”
Too bad Dave Weigel didn’t care a bit more about what the New Black Panthers thought about killing cops. Instead of giving rhetorical cover to the gangsters, we should have had a healthy discussion about the existence of violent black racism.
But Weigel was giving no quarter back in 2010. We were fools to devote air time to the New Black Panthers. Megyn Kelly was making monsters out of clowns. Weigel:
Watch her broadcasts and you become convinced that the New Black Panthers are a powerful group that hate white people and operate under the protection of Eric Holder’s DOJ. … They’ve been driven to fear and distrust of their DOJ by round-the-clock videos of one racist idiot brandishing a nightstick for a couple hours in 2008.
Will they admit their mistake now that one “racist idiot brandishing a nightstick” has become a racist monster with a high powered rifle and body armor? Based on what I know about this crowd, I doubt it. They are better at doubling down than expressing contrition.
It wasn’t just Weigel. The esteemed Clarence Page wrote at the Chicago Tribunethe New Black Panther “party’s membership could probably squeeze into a small SUV.” Hopefull Clarence watches the video linked in this story.
That’s how they ridiculed the whole affair – make them crazy, make them small, make them harmless and make them clownish.
Bill Maher attacked anyone talking about the New Black Panthers:
Look, Republicans, I know this picture from Election Day 2008 scared you. . . . And now it’s two years later, and that picture still scares you. . . . But, it’s time you understood something: every black person scares you unless they look like Urkel, talk like Colin Powell and wear Bill Cosby sweaters, you fill your adult diaper.
A lie, but that’s how these people roll when it comes to race. Alex Pareene at Salon criticized the coverage of the New Black Panthers because they “were a couple of clowns.” The racialist Adam Serwer at least increased their membership to a “bunch of clowns.”
All of this snark is because the existence of threatening violent black racism must never be discussed in sophisticated circles.
When voter intimidation lawsuits are brought against an organization that produces “Training Day” videos describing how to ambush and kill cops, it is important to write it off as a couple of cranks. When a New Black Panther member threatens to kill white babies, that certainly must be a single nut. Surely uniformed black racists with weapons at polling sites couldn’t violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Anyone who would say otherwise can’t be taken seriously.
The truth is that everyone is fallen and imperfect, both black and white and every race in between. The law is designed to protect everyone equally.
Pay close attention to whether people like Maher and Page continue to use their talents to excuse evil. If they feel comfortable holding their course after Dallas and attacking anyone who would dare discuss the problem, it will say a great deal about where we are headed as as nation.
(“Islamophobia” is regarded as “racist” for some of the same reasons. Under leftist perspectives, Islamic terrorism is our fault for being “racist” and has nothing to do with Islam. Similarly, Israeli racism is shown by Palestinian attacks on Jews. — DM)
There are two ways to look at the problems of the black community. Either there’s something wrong within the community. Or America is racist.
The sensible liberals who used to be able to split the difference are dead or purged. The Moynihan Report is inconceivable in a Democratic Party which has gone all in on freeing drug dealers and bulking up the welfare state. Obama mentioned fatherlessness briefly in his Brother’s Keeper speech before pivoting to a call to dismantle the criminal justice system and school discipline policies.
Obama admitted that, “We won’t be living up to our ideals when their parents are struggling with substance abuse, or are in prison, or unemployed, and when fathers are absent.” But his solution is freeing drug dealers “who could be good fathers and good neighbors and good fellow citizens” if only they weren’t “languishing in prison over minor, nonviolent drug offenses.”
Some recent examples of such potential “good fathers” whom he freed include Vander Keith Gore, the son of a Democratic councilman who ran a drug ring which threatened to murder a cooperating witness’ baby. He freed Isadore Gennings, whose “minor nonviolent drug offenses” involved helping move $2.5 million in cocaine, Carmel Bretous, who helped smuggle in 110 pounds of cocaine, and Tommie Sand Tyree, who was described as having “a lot of blood on his hands.”
Freeing drug dealers also means that that there will be more parents “struggling with substance abuse” and that “drugs are plentiful.” But making matters in the black community worse was always the plan.
Last year, Obama called for going easy on violent criminals just like in Europe where 10 years for murder is considered a severe sentence. The length of prison sentences for rape would also have to be cut by at least 20 percent to comply with European standards. And when these “good fellow citizens” get out, they have a right to be your “good murderer neighbor” or “good rapist neighbor.”
Obama’s HUD has warned landlords that criminals are protected under the Fair Housing Act since due to “widespread racial and ethnic disparities in the U.S. criminal justice system, criminal history-based restrictions on access to housing are likely disproportionately to burden African-Americans and Hispanics”. Freeing black drug dealers also disproportionately burdens the African-American communities where they do business and shoot each other, and denying safe homes to black families living in the areas where criminals are most likely to set up shop is equally terrible.
But there is no moral logic at work here. Only the remorseless political logic of progressive power.
Disparate impact is the monster lurking in the cellar of civil rights. Once you reject the idea that black communities and individuals bear any responsibility for their actions, any disparate impact can only be due to racism. Poverty, broken families, higher crime rates and school discipline rates are purely the products of racial bias. And their existence justifies unlimited government intervention.
Inflicting misery on black people empowers government. This is the twisted liberal version of slavery.
Many black reformers understood that civil rights was less about helping them than about endowing white liberals with unlimited power in a world where the nationwide economic disaster that allowed FDR to impose the New Deal’s drastic economic authority no longer seemed likely to recur. Sensible reformers like Senator Moynihan who actually wanted to holistically tackle the problems of the black community would always be outnumbered by fake outraged reformers who wanted to worsen them.
If everything is racist, then everything must be controlled. We can see that on campuses where political correctness has outlawed everything from Halloween costumes to raising your hand in safe spaces. But disparate impact is the perfect weapon for imposing unlimited control over everything nationwide.
Disparate impact is the perfect Swiss Army Knife of the totalitarian left because it can be applied to anything. Disparate effect can be used to argue that crime rates are the product of racism and that the entire criminal justice system must be overhauled until arrest, trial and conviction rates are equal across racial lines. And until this impossible outcome can be achieved, it also means that anything that disproportionately impacts criminals is also racist.
That means background checks for jobs and apartment rentals. And of course it doesn’t stop there.
School graduation rates must also be made equivalent. And until that somehow happens, hiring only high school or college graduates is a policy that also has a disproportionate racial impact. If you think this is farfetched, the Supreme Court in 1971 ruled that a high school diploma requirement is racist. A few years ago the EEOC claimed that requiring a high school diploma might also violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. A year earlier, the EEOC insisted that a trucking company was in violation of the ADA for suspending an alcoholic truck driver and referring him to substance abuse counseling.
Define a persecuted class, whether it’s drug dealers or alcoholics, then reverse cause and effect, and even the most common sense courses of action become forms of discrimination to be controlled.
And then we end up with a right for rapists to rent your ground floor and drivers with a drinking problem to drive eighteen-wheelers next to your compact car.
As long as a problem exists, it will have a disparate impact. And the worse the disparate impact, the more power can be amassed in addressing it. But the disparate impact is the effect, not the cause. Reversing cause and effect allows the government to go into business fighting the various outcomes of problems, whether it’s alcoholism or fatherlessness, without ever addressing the actual causes.
And to worsen those causes to increase misery and inflate their own power whenever they can.
An Urban Institute report a few years ago found that, “The percentage of black children born to unmarried mothers… tripled between the early 1960s and 2009.” The findings in the Moynihan Report have only grown worse and the fundamental causes have not changed. Without healthy families, there can be no healthy communities. And without healthy families and communities, there will be far fewer healthy individuals. Crime and unemployment rates will continue to be “disproportionately” high.
And that’s a free gift to a political movement built on destroying the black community for fun and profit, expanding the scope of its own power and organizations by creating and feeding off human misery.
The road ahead is simple. Worsen the problems in the black community. Promise to treat them by expanding the scope of disparate impact to address any interaction between the negative social outcomes and the rest of the country until everything is racist and everything is controlled.
That’s the way to deprive everyone of their rights and their futures under the guise of civil rights.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments