A few pics from the modern consequences of the other side’s long ago victory in the civil rights movement.
They wanted to be free, and they got what they wanted.
A few pics from the modern consequences of the other side’s long ago victory in the civil rights movement.
They wanted to be free, and they got what they wanted.
Your Blogmeister’s Desk
A few more rundown items about YKW before I have to drive back to Jeff City.
Though I don’t know why I’m bothering — You know what you’re going to see.
But here, he has a photo from 1963, back when it was Easton Avenue.
If these things ever worked, why not call for at truce that lasts for longer than just one day?
In reality, the most dangerous days are days when civil rights leaders and cracker jack box theology degree black preachers call for truces.
* To wit. So much for that truce.
This was at 10th and Convention Plaza. If you go north on 10th Street one block from that point, guess what street you encounter.
Obvious naked emperor white elephant question: Why do conservative students even want to go to events honoring YKW, when YKW was no kind of conservative when He was alive and would not be today? He wouldn’t even be comfortable in the ranks of watered down YKW-loving neo and lamer cons.
* Not YKW related as such, but all over Twitter all weekend, people have been talking about “These black gay dads and their three kids have the cutest Instagram ever.” Without having to click on it, I just knew it was Atlanta, because Atlanta is practically the capital of black LGBTQMIAPDLOLPLPLTH not just in Amurrika, but the whole world. And we all know which city YKW got His start.
P-D asks: What if MLK were alive today?
And they pretty much get it right. He would do little more than parrot DNC talking points.
We do know that he wouldn’t be any kind of conservative, neo, lamer, right-libertarian or otherwise. (Sorry, Rand Paul.)
Chocolate City St. Louis
None of this is a shock to the typical person reading these words:
The template can be found just a mile away. Delmar Boulevard, which saw a similar decline, is now a vibrant retail corridor packed with restaurants, nightclubs, a renovated movie theater and a boutique hotel. The renaissance earned Delmar recognition in 2007 as one of “10 Great Streets in America” by the American Planning Association.
What they’re talking about is the U-City Loop along Delmar west of the city limits gradually spreading east of the city limits eastward along Delmar in the general direction of the MissingLink stop. But that’s not a result of black people, those are the doings of SWPL leftist white people. And remember, The Loop on both sides of the city limits have seen several outbreaks of mahogany mobs in a recent handful of years.
Journalist Jonathan Tilove, who wrote a 2003 book based on visits to 650 King streets nationwide, called the King byways “black America’s Main Street.”
“Map them and you map a nation within a nation, a place where white America seldom goes and black America can be itself,” he wrote. “It is a parallel universe with a different center of gravity and distinctive sensibilities. … There is no other street like it.”
“Where white America seldom goes” because of black crime, and “where black America can be itself,” and therefore you see the results.
More than 50 years after King led his march on Washington, communities large and small still debate whether to rename local streets in his honor. In Harrisonburg, Va., city leaders recently agreed to rename a street for King over protests by some residents. A similar debate continues in High Point, N.C., where a King street proposal first suggested two decades ago remains up in the air.
But in the rare circumstances where white people get to vote on such things, they tend to reject naming any streets after Martin Luther King.
Don’t rest on your laurels just yet. Wait until we start getting a glut of ghetto boulevards renamed for Barack Obama. Already, a part of Washington Avenue through Midtown is secondarily named for him. The point is, we know to stay away from Martin Luther King street, and we will soon know to stay away from Barack Obama street.
For the record, the original name for St. Louis’s Martin Luther King Drive was Easton Avenue from the city limits eastward to where it shifts diagonally toward Downtown, and through Downtown it was named Franklin Avenue. The Martin Luther King Bridge was the Veterans Bridge, and Martin Luther King Drive through Wellston, which is actually the same drag as the city’s MLK Drive, was St. Charles Rock Road, which it still becomes once you get west of Wellston.
Wentzville, which has been booming in population in recent years because white people are trying to avoid the black undertow and creating a new whitopia, is celebrating the birth of the God of the black undertow.
This would have been like the legendary Hebrew slaves in Egypt worshiping Amon-Re instead of Jehovah.
And yes, peanut gallery, I know there’s a mini-ghetto in Wentzville, entirely a result of the GM plant and transplanted black employees from the old North City plant long ago. But none of these events seem to be taking place in the mini-ghetto.
They’re both wrong, BTW. Which is usually the case when the Stupid Party and the kook left start “arguing” about race.
T-shirt sold @ MLK+50.
Which Rush predicted. Only he thought it would be said from the podium.
At least this time, the half that’s Trayvon uses the Trayvon of 17, not of 12.
Race and Poverty, Fifty Years After the March
Fifty years later, that gulf hasn’t changed much. By some measures it has widened. In 2011, the median income for black households was about fifty-nine per cent of the median income for white households, up slightly from fifty-five per cent in 1967, according to Census data analyzed by the Pew Research Center. But when you consider wealth—that is, everything a family owns, including a home and retirement savings—the difference seems to have grown. Pew found that the median black household had about seven per cent of the wealth of its white counterpart in 2011, down from nine per cent in 1984, when a Census survey first began tracking this sort of data.
The trend is unsettling—hard to believe, even—particularly given the progress black Americans have seen on some fronts. In a 1961 poll, forty-one per cent of respondents said they wouldn’t vote for a “generally well-qualified man” from their party if he happened to be black; five years ago, Americans elected a black President. In 1964, white students graduated high school at almost double the rate of their black peers; today, graduation rates for blacks are only a couple of percentage points lower than for whites. Yet black Americans have moved ahead little—and by some measures have fallen behind—with regard to the one standard that matters most to Americans: making money. How did this happen? How do we fix it?
Back in 1963, the Washington marchers made these four economic demands: a higher federal minimum wage, a law barring discrimination by employers, a massive job-training program, and an increase in the areas of employment covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938—the law that established standards such as overtime pay. The policy changes brought about by the protesters’ demands, and the civil-rights movement at large, were significant, if not as numerous as King and his allies sought. In January of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the policies that became known as the War on Poverty; that July, Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Through the sixties and into the seventies, the government started job-training programs and deliberately hired more black people into government jobs, among other measures.
African-Americans increasingly found white-collar and skilled blue-collar work that provided decent wages—not only in northern cities like Baltimore and Detroit, which had drawn black workers earlier in the century, but also in the South. Black Americans seemed to be getting a foothold in the economy; by 1978, the black median income rose to fifty-eight per cent of the white median income, according to Pew.
These are pieces in a puzzle.
One for the “I make you think” file, I’ve put a lot of pieces to this puzzle together. Now, you tell me what you think the entire puzzle is going to look like.
Just two days after “I Have a Dream” in Washington, D.C., the local “I Have a Dreamers” started in on their marching in front of Jefferson Bank.
And the P-D is right: Even now, a half century later, the legacy lives on. One of the marchers, a 32-year old St. Louis City alderman by the name of William Lacy Clay, rode the publicity of doing that into running for and winning a race for Congress in 1968. He’d stay in Congress until 2000, when he essentially willed the seat to his eponymous son, who is still there.
Maybe one day, we’ll be able to overcome constant overcoming.
You civil rights leftists: I have a recommendation for you.
If you really want to do right by your cause, you’ll give up celebrating January 15 as a national holiday and start celebrating August 27 as a national holiday. And notice I said August 27, not August 28.
The first person to translate that into English gets a gold star.
Screenshots in two parts of the relevant sections of what’s on Drudge as I write this. Click to enlarge.
If this doesn’t sum up the hypocrisy, lunacy and idiocy of this day and the one precisely 50 years ago, then nothing does.
BTW, the second image cuts off too soon, but directly underneath the MLK Day +50 link list on the left column, there’s a story about China going to the moon by the end of this year. Ironic, considering Paul Kersey’s latest.
I would have a big problem with him coming back.
New York City
NAACP et al.: NO IN THUNDER to armed school security.
Chocolate City St. Louis
The city and county NAACP chapters aren’t getting along, (blacks fighting with each other — how insightful), and the P-D is upset.
To me, this is a feature, not a bug. Let ‘em fight with each other. The more they fight with each other, the less they can pick on us.
Miss Manning is right for the wrong reasons.
NAACP leader accuses Romney of favoring white people after speech
The response from one NAACP leader after Mitt Romney’s speech before the organization on Wednesday? He favors white people.
“I believe his vested interests are in white Americans,” Charlette Stoker Manning, the chairwoman of Women in NAACP, told the website BuzzFeed following the Republican candidate’s Wednesday speech in Houston.
“You cannot possibly talk about jobs for black people at the level he’s coming from. He’s talking about entrepreneurship, savings accounts — black people can barely find a way to get back and forth from work,” Manning said.
You don’t have to take my word for it. Hunter Wallace and Paul Kersey have said it over and over again — The average net worth of a single black woman in the United States can be had on the denomination which contains the image of the President that “freed” their ancestors.
Many, maybe a majority, of blacks never have enough money at any one time to open a savings account at most banks. The kind that has that kind of money don’t want to get their money “on the grid.”
When I was young, many of the lessons my elders tried to teach me was that poor people have poor ways. It took me a long time to grok what that really meant, but I did figure it out. What that phrase means is that most people who are poor are poor because they have rotten habits. The average net worth of a single black woman is $5 for much the same reason that so many black athletes blow through tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars of professional earnings and wind up bankrupt by 45. They were temporarily rich, but their poor ways eventually turned them into poor people once again.
As Jim Goad said, there’s a reason the third world finished in third.
Did I say unfortunate? I might have meant appropriate.
Should NAACP Teach Detroit Kids How To Interact With Police?
DETROIT (1270 Talk Radio) The NAACP hosted a seminar Saturday at Cobo Center called “A Youth Survival Guide for Police Encounters,” meant to train young black people to interact with police without escalation into violence and arrest.
All 200 participants left with a wallet-size sheet with 10 tips for handling police stops.
So, was it a good idea?
Were the media allowed into this seminar?
Because if they weren’t, I have a theory.
Oh yes, the participants left with these wallet-sized crib sheets, which they can show to the media and the media can eat up, all to engineer good PR for the NAACP.
But where there is an NAACP, there is an NAACP-LDF. And where there are NAACP lawyers, there are lawyers and an LDF that directly benefit from the fact that the Federal government pays the legal fees for those who file civil rights lawsuits.
I think I know what really went on in that seminar: The NAACP was coaching these “young black people” on how to provoke a cop just enough to generate a lawsuit, but not too much to generate a good hard whack of the baton.
One more thing — The whole thing was supposedly about teaching black kids in Detroit to deal with the big bad bully po-leeceseses. But what is the racial composition of the Detroit Police Department?
NAACP leader says country’s eyes are on NC
DURHAM, N.C. — The largest annual gathering of left-leaning and civil rights groups in North Carolina will have as one of its main goals the opposition to a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, organizers said Saturday. That effort could be a test of how much influence they wield among traditionally Democratic voters with socially conservative views.
At a news conference organized by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Durham, leaders including the civil rights group’s national president said the gay marriage vote joins a long list of concerns and causes ranging from poverty to the state budget. North Carolina’s position as a swing state and the site of the Democratic Party’s presidential nominating convention makes it a uniquely high-profile location for a showdown on those issues.
“Swing state.” That’s all you need to know. The NAACP really doesn’t much care about gay “marriage” per se, they just want the issue not to be on the November ballot to keep conservative voters at home so Zilch-bama can have a chance to win it again.
Unfortunately, Bev Perdue falling on her sword probably means that ship is well out to sea.
I’m surprised something like this didn’t happen sooner. After all, I’m sure the white people that live in far South County and in eastern Jefferson County that use that stretch of 55 often are really delighted to see that sign staring at their snoot every day. Ironically, they live in far South County or Jefferson County and not closer to the City because of black crime.
Some of the first real suburban development of Jefferson County a long time ago actually came from North St. Louis City whites who were driven out of their homes by black crime. That is a bit unusual in the history of St. Louis urban sprawl, because most white flight around here was directionally consistent to where one was in the city. North City whites generally fled northward and South City whites fled southward.
Sorry. The KC Occutards didn’t “co-opt” MLK Day, because if MLK were still alive today, he would be the Occutard of Occutards.
DO YOU THINK MLK WOULD HAVE ENDORSED THE HOBBIES OF A BUNCH OF HOBOS AND HIPSTERS WHO HAVE MADE MORE NEWS FOR HOOKERS & HERB @ THEIR CAMPSITE THAN ANY OF THEIR LOCAL POLITICAL MOVES?!?!?!
Would MLK have endorsed a movement known for hookers? Hmm. That’s a tough one, unless it isn’t.
I have said it before, and I’ll use the opportunity of the day to say it again: Neo-cons and lamestream conservatives are full of shit when they peddle the notion that Martin Luther King was one of them or would be one if he were still alive today. Even as watered down as “conservatism” has become, MLK would still be on the hard to far left, and he would vote and endorse Democrats virtually 100% of the time. The ONLY Republican to whom a hypothetical post-1968 MLK would have given the time of day was Jack Kemp.
Want proof? See one of MLK’s proteges, Jesse Jackson.
Controversy brews around bridge: Minority contractors’ group threatens to shut down project
EAST ST. LOUIS — The Metro-East Black Contractors Organization said it will shut down the Mississippi River bridge construction project if more minority contractors are not hired.
Bill Mason, president of the group, said he wants the Illinois Department of Transportation “to meet with us and sort things out or we’re going to shut the Mississippi River bridge project down.”
Flanked by graduates of the Highway Construction Preparatory Training Program, Mason said Friday he is tired of the excuses when it comes to putting minority contractors to work.
“These men and women are ready, eager and willing to work. They have certifications that show they’re acclimated to work in trades. They’re being denied by the unions. The union is putting pressure on IDOT and IDOT is reneging,” Mason said.
A representative of Union Local 100 could not be reached for comment. A reporter went to the office at 9339 Lebanon Road on Friday but no one was there.
Mason said he and the graduates have grown tired of watching white workers come into East St. Louis and surrounding communities from all many places doing all the high-dollar work while blacks can only sit and watch.
Mason wouldn’t divulge what the group would do in an effort to shut down the project, which is slated to be finished in 2014.
Eric Vickers, legal counsel for the Metro-East Black Contractors Organization said in June the state did two projects that came right through First Street that were worth about $40 million. “And, they’ve done nothing to make sure the graduates of this program get the work.
In July 1999, a similar group of black “contractors” on this side of the river “shut down” Interstate 70 in North St. Louis City for a few hours, protesting the same things. The problem is, they were only able to get away with it because the black St. Louis City Police Chief at the time, Ron Henderson, deliberately shut down the highway in advance of their protest, because he agreed with them politically. Ordinarily, it’s a state crime to block or impede traffic on state-owned right of way, (in spite of Interstate 70 being a Federal interstate route, MoDOT owns the right-of-way), but Mel Carnahan was Governor and Jay Nixon was Attorney General and Dee Joyce-Hayes was Circuit Attorney at the time, so neither Ron Henderson nor these protesters had anything to fear from that front. If there were fears about Federal prosecution, they were allayed because Bill Clinton was President and Janet Reno was Attorney General, and a Clinton flunky was the U.S. Attorney for St. Louis.
This same milieu wanted to turn the same trick on Highway 40 in Richmond Heights in advance of the reconstruction on 40. They only mouthed off but didn’t do anything because the white Police Chief in RH essentially said “make my day.”
Now, they want to “shut down” the bridge project on the Illinois side of the river, and only the Illinois side of the river. Why? Pat Quinn is Governor, and he only got to stay on as Governor because of Crook County’s vote, so they think he “owes” them.
Before you think about hiring any of these “graduates” of the “highway construction preparatory training program,” look at this.
Related: Eric Vickers = Radical Islam
She explicitly defended the Council of Conservative Citizens in her last book, Guilty. My esteem of her went way up because of that. Now, I’ve been an appointment reader of hers for as long as I’ve heard of her, just for the snark alone. However, as someone who is perpetually working toward a Ph.D. in sarcasm and snarkology, one that I will never attain, I can attest that most people either don’t understand much less grok sarcasm, or it is repugnant to them from a personality standpoint. I suppose the closest Coulter analogue the left ever had was Keith Olbermann, but he gave up on his clever snark years ago to become an unhinged deranged leftist.
She has a new book out, entitled Demonic. Now, before I carve these conclusions in stone, I’ll have to read the whole thing, just in case the author of this review is taking things out of context. However, just based on this, she just popped her esteem balloon in my eyes.
7.) Republican “Southern Strategy” was not racist
“The entire basis of the liberals’ ‘Southern Strategy’ myth is the sophisticated belief that anyone who votes Republican must be a racist,” Coulter writes.
“If Nixon had planned to appeal to white racists, speeding up desegregation was not an effective strategy. But he turned around and won an even bigger landslide in 1972, running against George McGovern and the party of acid, abortion, and amnesty,” she argues.
She’s right about Nixon, but halfway around about the S/S. Its purpose was to dog whistle around race to trick white formerly Democrat Southerners into voting Republican as a matter of habit, all the while the Republicans that won public office on the backs of the white South had almost no intent on following through, either with the half-assed dog whistling promises on race, much less any “full monty” racial agenda. Point of fact, Nixon’s ’72 landslide was because there was no Wallace on an indy or third party ticket sucking votes away from him, (Nixon deliberately sicked the Justice Department and the IRS around Wallace’s inner circle, to try and smear Wallace out of credibility for 1972, or at the very least get him to run as a Democrat because Nixon knew that the Democrats by that time had gone so far left that they would never let him be their Presidential nominee, even if Wallace would have never been shot and gotten a majority of the delegates — Hint: Superdelegates. Before that, Nixon directed a river of dirty money into the campaign coffers of Albert Brewer, the man who took over as Governor when Lurleen Wallace died in the Spring of 1968, and who Wallace faced and toppled to win the Democrat nomination for his second term as Governor — Nixon wanted a Brewer firewall to defeat Wallace and keep him out of credible contention for ’72. The great untold story about Nixon isn’t how cruel he was to the left, it was how cruel he was to his right flank. See also: John Schmitz, whom Nixon torpedoed at about the same time.), and McGovern was a bit too left-wing for the country to handle.
4.) The GOP has always been the party supporting civil rights, not the Democratic Party
“Angry violent mobs are always Democratic: Code Pink, SDS, The Weathermen, Earth First!, anti-war protesters, and union protesters in Wisconsin,” Coulter writes.
“Like them, the Ku Klux Klan was, of course, another Democratic undertaking, originally formed to terrorize Republicans, but later switching to terrorize blacks. It was Democratic juries that acquitted Klansman after Klansman. It was Democratic politicians who supported segregation, Democratic governors who called out the National Guard to stop desegregation, Democratic commissioners of public safety who turned police dogs and water hoses on civil rights protesters.”
Also: “Democrats only came around on civil rights when blacks were voting in high enough numbers to make a difference at the ballot box – and then they claimed credit for everything their party had ferociously blocked since the Civil War.”
Crack a book other than your own every once in awhile, will you, Ann? The original purpose of the Forrest-founded Klan in the 1870s was to deter black crime, (because the occupying Union troops wouldn’t, and in fact, encouraged it), by dressing up as the ghosts of dead Confederate soldiers, and quite a bit more. Now, when it had free time, it also terrorized white Republicans, but that was purely optional “cake icing.” And there’s no way in hell any credible historian of any ideological stripe worth his salt would consider the Klan in remotely the same box as 1960s and later far left rabble rousers. After the 1876 Presidential election and the deal to settle it that involved the end of Union occupation of the South, state governments in the South gradually re-assumed the responsibility to police and punish black crime, without the need for white sheets and cross burnings. Therefore, the first Klan withered and died because it wasn’t needed. The 1920s Klan, while anti-black, was more oriented toward the anti-Catholic and anti-Jewish, and opposition to white ethnics. In fact, the 1920s immigration restriction legislation that was eventually passed, the “national origins” scheme, while passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a Republican President, was largely due to Klan and labor union support, two constituencies that at the time heavily favored the Democrats of the time.
I’m so tired of this business about equating an 1870s white Democrat to a 2010s white Democrat that my fingers are blue. Most people know better, especially people who have read at least one book not written by themselves in their lives, so I don’t need to repeat.
She is right that the Republican Party at its elite core is just as egalitarian and “civil rightsey” now as they were during the peak of Reconstruction mania.
2.) Coulter takes on the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr.
“Martin Luther King Jr. was the heir to Rousseau. He used images in order to win publicity and goodwill for his cause, deploying children in the streets for a pointless, violent confrontation with a lame-duck lunatic: Theophilus Eugene ‘Bull’ Connor,” she writes.
In attacking King’s legacy, Coulter uses the words of liberal icon Thurgood Marshall, who became the first black justice of the Supreme Court, to aid her in tarnishing King’s reputation. “Thurgood Marshall had always disdained King’s methods, calling him an ‘opportunist’ and ‘first rate rabble-rouser,’” Coulter writes. “Indeed, when asked about King’s suggestion that street protests could help advance desegregation, Marshall replied that school desegregation was men’s work and should not be entrusted to children. King, he said, was ‘a boy on a man’s errand.’”
Coulter concludes, “The civil rights movement had made mobs respectable, to the great misfortune of the nation. In no time, liberals began engaging in what I believe Gandhi called ‘active resistance’ every time they didn’t get their way through legitimate legal processes.”
In a later chapter, she says, “If Nixon had been elected in 1960, instead of Kennedy, we could have skipped the bloodshed of the civil rights marches and today we’d be celebrating Thurgood Marshall Day, rather than Martin Luther King Day.”
Yeah, and, so? The only difference between Marhsall and King is that Marshall wanted to dispossess whites through quasi-legal means using legal methods, shredding the Constitution while acting as an agent of the Constitution, while MLK wanted to gin up street rabble (on that, Coulter is correct — In spite of all his rhetoric about “nonviolence,” everywhere MLK went and preached “nonviolence,” black violence went through the roof, and that was MLK’s intent, IMHO. White locals joined the Citizens Councils, the John Birch Society and other similar organizations in droves in reaction.). However, in my opinion, better the devil you can see (MLK) than the devil you can’t (Marshall). Better a ridiculous enemy that is nothing like you than a sublime enemy who infiltrates you. Believe me, they both hated white people just the same.
Marshall may not have approved of King’s methods before the infamous Bull Connor hosegate, but it is my understanding that the only reason was that Marshall was worried that the public would turn against “civil rights” if King’s street theater went badly. Now, it did go badly, but the media spin led most of the non-Southern public into the hands of the civil rights cause, something for which I understand Marshall was very pleased. As far as this business of Bull Connor vs “Children,” the MLK-led Rousseauean branch of the civil rights movement deliberately used teenagers (not “children”) in a lot of their street theater, because they knew they would get arrested, and real black adults had too much to lose — Most of them were gainfully employed, even though they were part of a civil rights movement that wanted to trick people into thinking that the white bigots in the Deep South wouldn’t let them have jobs.
I’m sure the truthful tidbits plus the snark will make Demonic worth reading. But believe me, I’ll be reading it with eyes wide open.
NumbersUSA, you’re a pretty useful organization. You’re pretty much the “Go To” for grading politicians’ immigration records.
Don’t you realize that what Carlos Santana said and did at the Atlanta Braves (now annual) “Civil Rights” game is perfectly consistent with the vision of “civil rights” promulgated by the many black civil rights leaders, Martin Luther King included, whose careers were based in that city? In the American experience, “civil rights” means almost nothing more than hating white people and dismantling white culture and institutions. Why don’t you think that tan people should be able to get in on the same “fun” that black people can?
Don’t you realize that you’re being too clever by half when you try to use the left’s language against the left itself? All you’re doing is endorsing the left’s game and ground rules.
And don’t you realize that responding to Carlos Santana is doing nothing more than giving that old washed up guitarist credibility? Hell, he’d be an even bigger nobody today if it weren’t for that dozen-year old song he did with the overrated Rob Thomas of the overrated Matchbox 20.
In similar news:
* Mexico is enforcing its own immigration laws — It found two trucks carrying a total of 513 illegal aliens (“illegal” by Mexican standards) on the Mexican side of the Guatemalan border, trucks that were headed for the United States. Almost all of the occupants were from Latin American, China, India, Japan (!) and Nepal. Now, how will Mexico react? Usually, they ship such people northward to sneak across our border.
It should be noted that the “much derided” Arizona SB 1070 has a provision about seizing the vehicles used to transport 10 or more illegal aliens at a time. As of this day, that part of SB 1070 is valid and enforceable — The DOJ/SG wanted both the Federal trial level judge in Phoenix and the 9th Circus Court of Appeals in San Francisco to enjoin that part of the law, but in both cases, the courts found for Arizona.
* B-A-Double-L-S: Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), the son of my preferred Presidential candidate in 2008, who won his father’s House seat after he abandoned it to run for President, has come out against the Navy naming a cargo ship for Cesar Chavez. If Hunter The Younger is right, and Obama is leaning on the Navy to do this because Obama is All-Hispanic-All-The-Time for 2012, then the amazing part is that it’s lost on everybody exactly the point they’re making, and they don’t even know it. Remember, Chavez, Ralph Abernathy and Walter Mondale jointly held a protest at the U.S.-Mexico border in California AGAINST illegal immigration in 1969.
I gleaned over this story a few days ago, but it keeps grinding on me.
Later, describing how he eluded media attention with his wife at McLean, Patrick says he has noticed that, as a black man, if he wears jeans, a casual shirt, and a cap, “people will often look right past you.”
Deval Patrick was the Assistant AG for Civil Rights in the Clinton administration. As you know, I actually predicted that Obama would have made him his Vice-President, and when that didn’t happen, his AG. That didn’t happen either.
So, as someone who has to be an expert in civil rights, and probably versed well enough in the history of the civil rights movement, I would ask of him: Wasn’t that the point of the civil rights movement? That an adult man in public wearing casual clothing indicative of an adult man attracts no curious or creepy attention just based on race alone? Now, if you would have paid extra attention to him and his jeans, casual shirt and ball cap, he would be moaning about the “racism” of your doing so. And with his whiny voice (yeah, I know, glass houses), that is something you don’t want to endure.
The occasion for this is his soon to be released autobiography. I hope they do release it soon, because the ten people that want to buy it just can’t wait any longer.
Other St. Louis media reported that Chief Isom said something along the lines of “youth crime is depriving our children of Dr. King’s dream.”
Sorry, bonk, wrong answer. “Youth crime,” of the kind the befuddles him and his department, (read: black crime) is the fulfillment of “Dr. King’s dream.” That “dream” led to several major legislative packages on the Federal level, any number of decisions on the part of the Federal courts, and various state-level copycats. All of which have had the direct result of ordering official society not to recognize racial differences, and certainly don’t apply the science of racial differences to the law and criminal justice system. This has had the effect (and probably the intent) of making Chief Isom’s cops pretty much impotent in the face of this city’s black criminals.
Newly minted U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt was also present and today’s ceremonies, and made pretty much the same kind of remarks. All I can say is thank God for the Constitution Party.
And, just as the “great” Ronald Reagan, the centennial of his birth is coming up next month, foisted this travesty of a holiday onto all of us on the Federal level, someone very similar to Reagan similarly victimized Missourians twenty-five years ago this month. You might have heard of him — His name is John Ashcroft.
The Memphis Commercial Appeal was able to find out that Ernest Withers, the famous photographer who captured much of the “iconic” imagery of Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement he lead, was an FBI informant. He was doing the spying on MLK/CRM that J. Edgar Hoover and Bobby Kennedy demanded.
Among the goodies he revealed is that the day before he was assassinated, MLK met with a black radical group.
And there’s this little gem:
D’Army Bailey, a retired Memphis judge and former activist once watched by the FBI, told the paper that such covert tactics are “something you would expect in the most ruthless, totalitarian regimes.”
First off, this is confirmation of what an AR poster with the handle “sonofthesouth” said in a recent story at AR, about weird black names. D’Army does exist — Now all we need to know, as he said, is whether there are black lawyers in Memphis named D’Navy, D’Airforce and D’Marines. (There wouldn’t be a D’Coastguard, as another recent story bemoans the lack of blacks at the Coast Guard Academy.)
But the greater point is that D’Army Bailey is being a hypocrite when he denounces FBI spying. He and his modern-day ilk have no problem with Federal law enforcement and prosecutors, in league with certain paranoia-industrial complex organizations (e.g. ADL, SPLC), doing this and much worse to right-wingers. It goes way beyond reporting in this instance — FBIATFADLSPLC have “informants” on/about the right go far beyond just observing and writing down what they see — They have them attempt to provoke acts of violence so that the FBI can swoop in and make arrests for “conspiracy,” and then the ADL/SPLC to raise money in earnest, based on the supposition that their “intelligence gathering exposed these plots.” Hell, voters in New Jersey just made such a creep their Governor, and not a peep from the “civil rights movement” veterans like D’Army here about “ruthlessness and totalitarianism.”
I watched Glenn Beck’s little get together this morning, and before that, I watched C-SPAN’s “pre-game” coverage. Man, I tell you, those were four hours of my life I’ll never get back. I let that schizophrenic pseudo-pious neo-con bullshit kill some of my brain cells, when I could have done that with perfectly good whiskey. Then again, maybe it was worth my time, because it encapsulated everything that’s wrong with lamestream conservatism and the Repugnican Party. If this is all we’ve got to go up against Obama, then we might as well lower our pants and let the communists rape us mercilessly.
I don’t know where to start or end, or whether even to start, so I guess I’ll just run down a few bullet points, as seems to be my habit on this medium these days. James Edwards can handle the tour de force commentary.
* Ralph Reed, who ran the Christian Coalition (into the ground) in the 1990s, was the guest on C-SPAN’s pre-game show. Near the end of his part and the beginning of the rally, Reed said that he encountered an Afghan man in D.C., who was taken aback, and not in a positive way, that people would actually protest their President. (Of course, this Beck rally wasn’t really that). Now, does a good neo-con sicko like Reed have the ability to put the obvious two and the other obvious two together to make the obvious four? There’s no turning these people in their own country into a democratic republic, no matter how many troops you deploy and no matter how much money you spend/waste. Yeah, we should be “in” Afghanistan, but only to kill people and break things. As far as that goes, we should have been done by now.
* Al Sharpton supposedly held a counter-rally. We knew that was going to happen, and I was expecting to see footage from the counter-rally, where black civil rights leaders denounced “white privilege.” I just didn’t expect to to come from the rally itself.
* About that: This niece of MLK that was a feature speaker — She’s no conservative. The only reason she’s running around with lamestream conservatives like Beck is because she’s on the outs with the rest of the King family, and it’s all got to do with money.
* Does Glenn Beck not realize that real freedom and Martin Luther King’s vision on that very soil of 47 years ago are diametric opposites? We lost a whole lot of freedom pursuing MLK’s Dream. Ironically, one of the major bloggers associated with this event today advised people to go nowhere near D.C. neighborhoods and public transit stops that are associated with the people who we just had to extend civil rights to in the last generation. Oh yeah, pander to blacks, but just don’t travel anywhere near them. (UPDATE: Said blogger is a big-time Democrat donor. This article is wrong in stating that Arizona’s Jim Kolbe was the only openly homosexual Republican in the House at the time that Majors made his donation — There was also Mark Foley.)
* Beck implied that MLK/CRM were entirely on the side of the angels, while the opponents were nothing more than moronic knuckle-dragging bigots. I regret to inform you, Mr. Beck, but there was a lot of resistance to the CRM in the 1950s and 60s on the intellectual and cerebral level. As loath as this publication would be to admit it today, half the anti-CRA intellectuals of those years worked for National Review. At least two states in the South declared a certain day on the calendar to be “Race and Reason Day,” titled after Carleton Putnam’s book.
* Just what does Glenn Beck want? Best I can tell is that he advocates God. That’s a really brave stand to make, Glenn. He went on and on about how we’re all supposed to have this unity between churches, synagogues and mosques. (Gonna make it harder for him to be against the G0M, isn’t it?) I certainly believe in God, but I also know there are people who believe that there isn’t any such being, and there are people who are unsure whether there is or isn’t such a being. I also fully recognize that atheists and agnostics have civil liberties and civil rights.
* There were a couple of Vietnam vets featured prominently. Sarah Palin featured one just before MLK’s niece spoke. The irony of that is that the real MLK was opposed to the Vietnam War, and ramped up his vocal criticism in the latter few years of his life. MLK’s two big problems with the Vietnam War were: (1) It was hurting communists, and (2) The cost was “supposedly taking resources” away from social welfare spending. There were right-wing JBS-style neutralitarians who were opposed to the War in Vietnam, but MLK was not one of them.
* On to the local angle: Tony LaRussa wouldn’t know “honor” if it hit him on the head like a ton of bricks. Turn on 1380 AM at 2 PM on weekdays to find out why.
* Ironically, Beck went on and on about how it’s so wrong for kids to turn screen actors and cartoons into heroes, rightly stating that real heroes are regular human beings who do the right thing when doing so is personally hurtful, then gives his hero award to a baseball player.
* Oh, and one more thing? Glenn Beck certainly has a lot of faith in Albert Pujols. (BTW, that “Pujols Family Foundation” of his? Nothing more than a fancy way to shield his baseball and endorsement earnings from income taxes. Ever notice that every professional athlete has one of these “foundations?” A lot of politicians do, too, such as Bill and Hillary Clinton, the same types who want the “rich” to pay more in taxes. Now you know why. Sure, you have to give a few dimes to charity every once in awhile.) He better pray to the God in which he has so much faith that Pujols isn’t ‘roiding. (Which I think he has in the past. Don’t tell me “no positive test.” There is no test for HGH.) If he his, then Beck will be just one in a very long line of people and institutions whose credibility is shot in the direction opposite God.
St. Louis Tea Partiers in general, and Bill Hennessy in particular, are going to pre-condemn the NAACP for its anti-white racism before the NAACP can “officially” condemn the TPM movement in general for its “racism.”
Trouble is, this is Bill Hennessy we’re talking about here. I don’t see why he’s against the NAACP for anti-white racism, because that’s something he seems to share in common with the NAACP.
I know you could use the money.
Tea Party members have used “racial epithets,” have verbally abused black members of Congress and threatened them, and protestors have engaged in “explicitly racist behavior” and “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically,” according to the proposed resolution.
Andrew Breitbart’s still got that 100 kilobuck offer open for anyone who can prove the first part. He’s anxiously awaiting the proof you must have in order to be able to pass this resolution without getting slapped with a libel lawsuit.
“We’re deeply concerned about elements that are trying to move the country back, trying to reverse progress that we’ve made,” NAACP spokeswoman Leila McDowell told ABC News. “We are asking that the law-abiding members of the Tea Party repudiate those racist elements, that they recognize the historic and present racist elements that are within the Tea Party movement.”
Pay attention to the semantics here. She’s implying that white racism is a crime. Which would be news to me if true.
Then again, I wish I had a dime for every person I know who mistakenly thought that handguns had to be registered with some law enforcement authority, simply because it’s said so often on TV crime dramas.
Just when we were all getting comfortable in our hatred of Dan Gilbert and LeBron James, you had to come along and make us sympathetic to both of them again.
The worst part about JJ’s rant is that it now moves a sports issue into the political arena. You watch, conservative talk radio all day today will go on and on about this. Of course, LeBron going to Miami was tangentially a political issue before, because of the state income tax thing. But Jesse Jackson talking about slavery is like a cancer hitting the lymph nodes.
The only place where JJ is right is that this was nothing more than an adult man finishing his contractual obligations to one firm and then signing on with another. IOW, he was finished being an $11 million a year slave, and now he’s a $16 million a year slave. What belies JJ’s contention that Dan Gilbert thinks of LeBron as an escaped slave is that, as you know, Gilbert ultimately agreed to the sign-and-trade. He technically traded his “slave” for several future “slaves.”
I agree that Gilbert let his mouth run ahead of his brain, or fire ready aim, you know how that goes. (So do I; I’ve done this a few times in my life, which is why I compose virtually all of my blog posts in Notepad, then read them, then edit them, then correct all the spelling errors, then post them.) However, that’s Jesse Jackson’s stock-in-trade. Hell, as much as JJ thinks that Gilbert uses the escaped slave prose vis-a-vis his former star player, that’s the attitude that the Democrat Party has about black voters in general. And in that arrangement, JJ is the House Negro.