All along we should have been fearing the new Confederacy?
Why yes, according to the left wing website ABC is quoting, whose study purports that "right wing" terrorists have killed more than the American Jihad since 2001.
Now, this has come up before and it was just as silly back then. What this group is doing is pretty much mixing data to get their desired result (attack their real enemies on the right) and they do it by pretending certain events are terrorism attacks, all carried out by the new confederacy conspiracy. In reality they are comparing a global cause, jihadism in the furtherance of Islamic Shariah world control, with a series of unconnected crimes. It's amazing too, because for years the left wanted Islamic terrorism treated like an unconnected series of crimes, now it's no longer convenient to do that.
If one is unconvinced one need not look beyond the attack on the Austin Texas IRS building, which they consider "right wing" terrorism (not only them). The guy who flew into the building was 1) crazier than a bedbug and 2) left a manifesto praising Marx.
ABC "News" could have researched this a little and come to a similar conclusion but it was apparently "too good to check". Or they checked it, understood the above, and decided they themselves wouldn't attach 'right wing' to their story, only leave it hanging as an inference (for plausible deniability).
Thank Heaven for the internet. Can anyone imagine a world where all we got was ABC News reports like this without the ability to double-check anything or make our voices heard far and wide? Well, at least far.
Since Obama has no more elections to win he's of no mind to give pre-Superbowl interviews to anyone who might ask tough questions. It's all about controlling the national narrative now.
To help, CNN broadcast an interview yesterday with the plagiarist, a preview of the attack strategy to be used in defining the narrative. Discussing the threat of Islamic terrorism, Obama basically downplayed the whole thing then blamed Bush... again (shown in bold)...
"The truth of the matter is that they can do harm. But we have the capacity to control how we respond in ways that do not undercut what's the essence of who we are. That means that we don't torture, for example, and thereby undermine our values and credibility around the world," Obama said.
"It means that we don't approach this with a strategy of sending out occupying armies and playing whack-a-mole wherever a terrorist group appears because that drains our economic strength and it puts enormous burdens on our military."
Blaming Bush is the gift that keeps on giving with his base, but Democrats as a whole need to downplay terrorism. Clinton did it in the 90s despite bombings, attacks and bin Laden's multiple declarations of war against America. When challenged on it later by Fox's Chris Wallace he went ballistic, all while trying to make sure ABC News spiked its terrorism docudrama "the Path to 9/11". It's hard to focus the country on taxing the rich and downsizing the Defense Department if Islamist terrorists are posing an existential threat against Western Civilization.
In 2004 John Kerry tried the tactic again, suggesting to the NY Times that terrorism should be treated as kind of nuisance. That's one reason why the Dems don't want Bibi Netanyahu coming to Congress to remind people of the harsh realities. It's also likely one of the main reasons Obama sent nobody to the anti-terrorism march in Paris. In his old new narrative AQ is a nuisance, still on the run, and we need to fight them with smart power, using pinpricks and FBI agents like Clinton, and hey, deploying lots of troops to combat this diminishing threat is hard on the troops not to mention stupid like Bush. That's basically his foreign policy in a nutshell.
But Zakaria wasn't the annual pre-Superbowl interview, it was with the most friendly Obama mirror of all--NBC News. Savannah Guthrie, a nice pleasant female anchor, was chosen to ask the questions. Yet she seemed to put a small chink in the narrative by daring to call it a 'strawman argument'. Watch the reaction around the 1:35 mark...
He looked rather peeved at this interruption, after all, he was getting to the crux of the narrative. Oddly enough he mentioned that leaving (Iraq) caused the problem because the country wasn't ready to fight for itself, without blaming himself for leaving. Suddenly now staying for years is the right thing to do. Later in the interview the CinC actually said he is NOT downplaying terrorism by downplaying terrorism, but in a much more nuanced way than in the Zakaria interview (after the 11 minute mark).
Perhaps he felt like Guthrie might actually challenge him a little more and re-calibrated, although he did get in his "shoot first aim later" Bush-McCain-Romney bash comment in both interviews without challenge.
As to the strawman, not only Zakaria carried this theme on Sunday, but the Washington Post also featured a touching story on how Obama is deeply affected by the casualties of war:
Discussions of war and peace in Washington often revolve around abstract questions of policy and national interest. Rarely mentioned are the human costs of war and how they weigh on a commander in chief. “It’s probably the least appreciated and most difficult part of leadership,” said Michele Flournoy, who served at the top levels of Obama’s Pentagon. “It’s not an abstraction, and, if you have any doubt, it eats at you, because the human costs are very real.”
At the end of Zakaria's interview he had asked Obama to recommend a book. Without hesitation Obama recommended a book called "Redeployment" by
Phil Klay. This was clearly not spontaneous, evident by the way Obama
reacted to the question and the fact CNN put a cover of the book on the
screen while they were talking. Sorry, the control room isn't that
good, so they were helping him make his point.
The book happens to be about a soldier's
perspective on the cost of war. Clearly a good thing for a
Commander-in-Chief to be reading and promoting, right? Right, unless
he's doing it in cahoots with the MSM to fight a war against domestic
political foes critical of his response to increasing terrorism.
So based on Obama's reaction one has to wonder if Guthrie went off the script when she blurted out 'strawman', which forced an abrupt interruption by the president, while later asking tough questions about whether terrorism was as defeated as he claims.
Meanwhile, the 2016 budget came out today. It has no chance of passage, but we'll see if media puppets the talking points of the wise and caring president trying to help the 'middle class' despite the same guy hardly mentioning the middle class before the mid-terms last November.
Back then the WH needed the black vote, so the press focused on Ferguson and New York and "reverend" Al coming in and out of the White House and pounding his fist, all while his fellow Democrats kept a 10 foot pole between themselves and the White House because they were so afraid of how the middle class might vote. Where is Ferguson now?
Now the WH needs to tamp down the threat of terrorism again, just like 2012 before Benghazi, so we'll see if the press comes along and helps like Candy Crowley did in the second debate. The CNN and the WaPo examples would suggest that yes, nothing will change, but perhaps Savannah Guthrie's small but surprising 'truth to power' moment indicates that a few networks might try salvage a smidgen of credibility going into 2016. Yes, right, we've been fooled before.
Jack Cashill highlights the seminal question everyone should be asking about Ferguson--what should officer Wilson NOT have done? His step by step analysis is laughably logical and should be obvious to anyone with a functioning brain (with the exception of the parents of a lost child, who deserve slack), ie, the Ferguson shooting was not controversial. An 18 year old man was shot after robbing a convenience store, then refusing a police officer's instruction, then assaulting him and grabbing for his gun.
A rookie officer pulled the trigger, said Jeffrey Follmer, president of the Cleveland Police Patrolmen's Association.
Police were sent to the Cudell Recreation Center at Detroit Avenue and West Boulevard about 3:30 p.m. when someone called 9-1-1 to report a "guy with a gun pointing it at people."
The caller told dispatchers twice that the gun was "probably fake," but that detail was not relayed to the responding officers, Follmer said.
The protesters need to mobilize in Cleveland around this case, which is not only heartbreaking but also raises much more pertinent questions about policing in America especially in minority neighborhoods.
The Land of Fruits and Nuts. That's what they used to call California before that term became politically incorrect. But when they do nutty things they deserve it..
A bill that would prohibit California from displaying or selling merchandise with the Confederate flag is headed to Gov. Jerry Brown's desk, after getting final legislative approval in the Assembly on Thursday.
The measure by Assemblyman Isadore Hall III (D-Compton) would prohibit the state from displaying or selling merchandise emblazoned with the Confederate flag. The ban would not apply to images of the flag found in books, digital media or state museums if displayed for educational or historical purposes.
Speaking of nuts, a lot of people are going nuts on talk radio around here because they think the bill outright prohibits the flag, even private possession (or things like tattoos), but notice the explanation--the bill only applies to sales or display by the State of California.
How many rebel flags were being sold by the state in the first place? How many state offices were flying the flag? The bill doesn't apply to books or digital media or other displays deemed 'educational'. And it's not clear whether it applies to the "Stars and Bars" or the "Battle Flag", which are different, but it really doesn't make a difference on the ignorance/idiocy scale.
So there seems to be no point, other than maybe causing a national stir. Throw up a meaningless bill about banning the Confederate Flag and hope it causes a north versus south, civil war wasn't about slavery yes it was racial brouhaha in the press. The Dems know they need black turnout in November.
At any rate, if Governor Brown signs the bill into law that will mean he's banned a flag in the same week he welcomed illegal aliens into his state with open arms. Pretty nutty, overall.
It's Sunday, so it's time for CNN to use religion to push for social justice...
Such a model allows us to feel good about our diverse congregations while nothing meaningful is being done to make significant changes in society.
It ignores the fact that we have to do more than call sinners to repentance, we have to call societies, systems and structures to repentance as well.
Jesus discouraged the accumulation of wealth, worried about its effects on those who had it, and took special pleasure in helping the poor, dedicating his efforts to them. He must have shaken his head at the large gaps between rich and poor throughout ancient Palestine in the first century.
Forget that this clown doesn't know the difference between the system the Jews lived under 2000+ years ago and the concept of America, where an obscure black man from Hawaii (and certainly not from wealth) rose to become president. If so he might have stumbled upon an analogy whereupon Obama's rise to power might be akin to a Jew rising to become Emperor of Rome. But no, he chose to only focus on the current racial money divide.
It doesn't matter, it's all about demonizing whitey to achieve a political end, no matter how it's done. Nice job, CNN. The White House press office must be proud of your work today.
Is this perhaps part of the reason Obama mysteriously flew back to DC for a couple of days during the middle of his vaca?
A disturbing video posted online appears to show the beheading of American journalist James Foley, who was kidnapped while covering the Syrian conflict in 2012.
They claim to have at least one more journalist in captivity, mentioned in the story, whom they are threatening to kill if Obama drops more bombs. There is also McClatchy reporter Austin Tice, a former US Marine also captured in Syria in 2012--whereabouts unknown. Oddly enough during yesterday's State Dept briefing a question was asked about Mr. Tice. Watch the strange way it was handled by spokeslady Marie Harf:
As she stumbles around looking for something she blurts out "we're moving on after this?", as if not wanting to field anymore questions about it. In today's briefing the same question was asked about Tice, provoking this reply by Harf:
QUESTION: Marie, yesterday I asked you about Austin Tice and the anniversary.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: Do you have something on that?
MS. HARF: I do. It has been now over two years since the disappearance of Austin Tice in Syria. We are in close contact with the Tice family. We share their concerns for Austin’s safety and well-being. We continue to work through our Czech protecting power in Syria to get information on his welfare and whereabouts and appreciate the efforts of the Czech mission on behalf of our citizens. We have long expressed concern about the safety of journalists in Syria and strongly urge all sides to ensure their safety. I don’t have anything more than that at this point.
Again, very brief and vague. Was she deflecting to avoid bad publicity or in an attempt to protect
the life of Foley and others, who for all anyone knows might have been
part of sensitive negotiations between the White House and IS, maybe prompting some high level meetings? After
all, we negotiate with terrorists now, officially. One would think US citizens/journalists/soldiers being beheaded might
prompt at least a quick cabinet meeting.
Clearly, red lines are being
drawn around the world. Tragically, with this terrorist group, they are not afraid
to uphold theirs. Put all the politics aside for a moment--the Commander-in-Chief has some serious presidenting to do. This is not an easy gambit.
As if that's not enough, the US media has largely ignored this weird bombing in Libya:
Air raids carried out last night over Tripoli on the positions of Misratan-led forces could not have been made by Libyan warplanes the General Chief of Staff has said.
In a statement made this afternoon the leader of the armed forces, Major General Suleiman Obeidi, said no Libyan-based force had the technology nor the capacity to carry out the attacks.
Obeidi said the missiles, one of which had been identified as a US made Mark 83 general purpose bomb, could only have been dropped using in-flight targeting technology, unavailable to the Libyan Airforce.
He added that the weapons had been used with extreme precision and had hit only the Grad missiles and howitzers they were intended to destroy.
Not sure if this alone would have been enough to get Obama off his unisex bike or the first tee, unless something else was tied to this Libya event. Rumors do have it the other IS captive was actually transferred from Libya, suggesting a terror nexus between the war-torn regions.
Yet it's questionable as to whether anything out of the country can tear Americans away from the Ferguson story, even with ISIS signs in the parade, as a war-weary public has tuned out. If it doesn't resonate it's obviously bad news for the country but also bad news for any other western captives, because the terrorists will likely keep escalating their YouTube barbarity to get our attention. If the barbarism gets bad enough a kneejerk reaction might occur with the public clamoring for another can of whoopass over there--that is if our own country isn't involved in a race war by then. If the St. Louis Grand Jury doesn't return an indictment of officer Wilson, who knows. But at least that monster Rick Perry was indicted. The country is safe.
MORE 8/20/14
Obama managed to squeeze in a 5 minute response to the headchoppers before his afternoon tee time. It was a typical uninspiring collegial speech, more of a eulogy than a forceful reply, and it will scare no one. Then again, with this passage maybe it's not really designed to scare anyone:
...they may claim out of expediency that they are at war with the United States or the west, but the fact is they terrorize their neighbors and offer them nothing.... etc
In other words, we here in Crusader-land have nothing to worry about because despite just chopping the head off a US citizen and lining up others, IS is just a regional threat. He basically called them dead-enders.
Speaking of Saddam, IS's thug tactics and military organization lean more towards his kind of gangster-ocracy as opposed to pure Islamic jihad, explaining in part why even Zawahiri denounced them last year. But it makes perfect sense seeing as how the group was mentored by former Saddam regime elements (duh, General Vallely).
Meanwhile, the White House this afternoon released a report about a failed rescue mission of the hostages that took place earlier in the summer. No details of significance other than dozens of forces were involved across the DoD spectrum. No Situation Room photos, either.
The release of this data seems to say a few things; 1) we were evidently not negotiating recently, despite some emails to the contrary, and 2) they are giving up on the remaining hostages. Both are speculation, it's hard to say anything with certainty but the release about the raid seems designed to protect political fanny rather than scare anyone or set up another raid. Then again, with this president nothing is clear-cut. Did anyone get any kind of concrete message out of his speech today? Even the terrorists must be wondering what's really going on, watching the prez scurry back out to the course.
MORE.. 8/20/14
Lots of details being leaked by anonymous administration officials to the WaPo and Times, but they aren't the only ones leaking..
Two Defense Department officials, who spoke separately on the condition of anonymity because of the operation’s delicate nature, expressed anger at the administration for revealing the mission. One of the officials said the aborted raid had alerted the militants to the Americans’ desire and willingness to try to rescue the hostages, and, in the aftermath, had probably forced the captors to tighten their security.
But, the official said, the conference call on Wednesday revealed new details that ISIS is not likely to have known. “This only makes our job harder,” the official said. “I’m very disappointed this was released. We knew any second operation would be a lot harder.”
Seems self-evident. Let's hope they have a massive rescue raid going on RIGHT NOW before these thugs can react, otherwise this release simply smacks of raw ass-covering politics.
By the way, hopefully it's also self-evident to some of the clueless just how stupid the Twitter "bring back our girls" campaign was in light of recent revelations.
That pretty much describes most of the loud-mouths on social media and the real media on the Mike Brown mess in St. Louis, along with the so-called witness (otherwise known as a co-conspirator), city spokesmen, governor of Missouri and PD officials, not to mention the solider wannabes who harrassed the media.
And of course the president, who has no business saying much other than 'everyone please let justice take its course and refrain from violence'. But he just couldn't stop at that, he had to plow forward and lecture everyone on both sides, per usual. He did everything but tell Bill O'Reilly whether there were any smidgens of corruption involved.
This is the kind of 'never let a crisis go to waste' piece that can transcend the Ferguson facts, be they for or against the police officer. Against a backdrop of Obama redistribution initiatives, it may work pretty well as a Democrat theme for the mid-terms to get out the needed vote.
The story of the New Hampshire police commissioner who called the President of the United States the "n word" is getting major attention. The old white racist initially refused to apologize, then today--following an appeal by Mitt Romney--submitted his resignation. This made big headline news at CNN.com:
Last Thursday, Copeland, 82, sat with his arms crossed at a packed town meeting while a crowd of angry residents in the predominantly white town called for his resignation. Copeland acknowledged in an email to his fellow police commissioners that he used the racial slur to describe Obama.
So he resigned. The idiot got what he deserved.
But what about this idiot:
Brooks got into a heated dispute over race relations with a Hispanic business owner at Tuesday’s meeting, and lashed out at other commissioners, referring to Caucasian member as “the man in the sheet.”
Similar situation. She made racist comments at a council meeting then refused to apologize. But calling a fellow council member a Klansman was not all she said:
Pablo Pereya with the Hispanic Republic Alliance was at the meeting to discuss something else, but took the opportunity to speak up when he heard this debate.
“I see you guys smirking and laughing, like I’m not a minority,” Pereya said, addressing the commissioners.
“I know what it’s like to be a minority. I grew up in Memphis, and I can tell you being a Hispanic in Memphis is definitely the minority of the minority.”
Commissioner Brooks fired back at Pereya, saying the struggles of Hispanics and African Americans are not the same in this country.
“Don’t ever let that come out of your mouth again, because you know what? That only hurts your case,” she told Pereya. “Don’t compare the two. They’re not comparable.”
Emphasis added throughout to point out that Ms Brooks, a black lady, inferred that a Hispanic citizen was somehow not an authentic minority because his ancestors weren't slaves. Then she told him to basically never to consider himself a minority again as long as she's around. And this woman has power.
Wow. But there's even more. A local conservative black talk radio host criticized the remarks. Later, he was a guest on a TV show discussing community blight and said the following. The local NAACP called for him to be fired or resign. So they defend her then ask him to quit. Later they gave a press conference to defend Ms Brooks and the black radio talk show host showed up asking why he should be fired. One of the guys running the presser was overheard saying this at the podium...
I would like to know why WREG has not released the audio of one of the leaders saying “we can’t let this NEGRO take over the press conference.” I find that the most offensive. Way to not tell the whole story WREG shame on the station. And many people wonder why news media cannot be trusted.
Notice the above is a comment to the story. Even the local TV news stations would not publish the "negro" comment. It was pretty clear when played over the air this morning. There's really no need to make this stuff up--it's Memphis.
But what happens in Memphis apparently stays in Memphis. The idiot old white racist in New Hampshire calls the President the N word during a public meeting, Romney gets involved, he has to resign, and CNN and other mainstream outlets blare the headline. Idiot black politician makes racist comment at a Memphis public meeting, she refuses to apologize, NAACP compares politician to Malcolm X, and the national media is nowhere to be found. Meanwhile Ms Brooks continues her campaign to win a seat as Juvenile County Court Clerk.
And that’s really my challenge to all of you today. As you go forth, when you encounter folks who still hold the old prejudices because they’ve only been around folks like themselves, when you meet folks who think they know all the answers because they’ve never heard any other viewpoints, it’s up to you to help them see things differently . . .
Will she weigh in here? Maybe pigs will fly. But we're still waiting on the president to decide whether the Abramson firing was part of the war on women, the war on income inequality, or just cause because it's the New York Times.
Just another day in the non-Fox media. But it's like a sport pointing things out. For instance, is there any guess as to the identity of these brave patriots standing up to the Republicans haters and deniers? Gasp--Michelle Obama, Bill Nye the science guy, and Eric Holder. Conservatives--do you really think these same people will cover any Obama scandal fairly?
Not to be outdone, a sub-link within the article pointed to more commencement wisdom from the likes of Puff-Daddy, Tiger Woods' ex, and Joe Biden. They also liked astronaut Rick Mastracchio's speech, so much so they placed at the very end of page 2 in their report. Later in the morning their scrolling top page banner headline invited visitors to watch Maddy Albright's commencement speech, live. And a video on their page showed clips of ABC's (and former Clinton guy) George Stephanpoulis' address.
Not available for review: Condi Rice and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. These women of color were denied speaking engagements (and in Ali's case, an honorary degree) at prestigious universities due to hounding from the tolerant and diverse left on their campuses, including some professors.
Ali, an atheist, uses more than a hashtag to describe the embedded discrimination against women in some Islamic countries, having lived it herself, but apparently too graphically for some on the left. And Rice is, well, a Nazi or something. Neither woman will officially be called victims of the war on woman and neither can claim discrimination due to race. They are simply graduates of the unprotected class of the United States of America in 2014.
But perhaps the oddest duck of the season is former New York Times editor Jill Abramson. She was also to receive an honorary degree from Brandeis, but backed out after the brouhaha. All she did was claim pay discrimination at the Times--right up Obama's rhetorical alley--but wound up being fired and called a bitch and worse by the whisper campaigners. So a liberal Jewish woman may now find herself out of the protected class because she dared to speak out against the house organ of liberalism. If it had been Fox News she'd have received a ticker tape parade down Madison Avenue and bold coverage on ABC News.
BANNER DAY FOR ABC 5/18/14
Wow, ABC outdid themselves. Underneath a headline feature on Karl Rove calling for Hillary to 'cough up' her medical records--but without repeating Bill Clinton's admission that Hillary was on the shelf for 6 months recovering from a severe concussion that the State Dept made sound like a little bump on the head (in a story written by a person named "Dukakis"), they went for broke:
Although the scientists concede that there are exceptions, “the really well-to-do have lost a little of their moral character,” psychologist Dacher Keltner, coauthor of a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said in a telephone interview.
Keltner, who led the research along with fellow psychologist Paul K. Piff, said his inbox has been jammed with feedback, mostly from working class citizens who say “it’s about time” someone paid attention to this problem.
“People are just feeling there’s an imbalance in our culture,” he said.
They actually pass this advocacy off as 'news'? That it happens to blend in nicely with the administration's mid-term political strategy is of course totally coincidental.
But someone should ask ABC what we should do with those unethical scoundrels George Soros, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet. Wait what? They are the good rich? Never mind. Onward with pitchforks to the Koch Brothers' house!
After 45 days of almost nothing but MH370 headlines--including a 'breaking news' version the other day over a piece of random sheet metal floating off the coast of Australia--the Communist News Network has finally found the Bundy ranch story..
Racist comments from Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy – who earlier this month appeared to win a highly publicized standoff against federal authorities over his two-decade long illegal grazing of cattle on public land – are giving Democrats a new weapon to attack some top Republicans who earlier came to Bundy's defense.
To be fair, CNN did sorta cover the story when the BLM special agents had their dogs and guns staring down the various men, women, and children, but as more an afterthought. None of the other networks covered the ranch story when it was breaking, now every network is headlining Bundy's racism. Dog bites man.
As to Bundy, evidently he was crudely trying to make a point about Johnson's Great Welfare Society and its effects on the black community, ie, single mother homes/babies out of wedlock, crime, unemployment, etc. Personally I don't care if he's a racist. Hell, Harry Reid had to apologize for his 'racist remarks' about Obama. Any support I had for Bundy wasn't personal, it was because there was an overreaction. I had the same feeling when Elian Gonzales was ripped out of that Miami home by federal agents carrying automatic weapons and sent safely back to Castro so he could be used as a propaganda tool.
Nothing Bundy says about race changes the fact that federal agents were removing his cattle and threatening him with weapons over a past due bill. They weren't doing it because he wasn't politically correct. It's almost as if some liberals are saying, 'see, he deserved to be gunned down by a BLM sniper because he's a racist!" Meanwhile Al Sharpton has a show on NBC and gets to hobnob with the President while owing over a million in back taxes. Yes, the same guy who has made many a racist remark in his time.
But OK, the left/media has their story now. They'll try to connect Bundy to every GOP politician from here through the midterms, probably using his comments about race as some kind of litmus test in the debates, or maybe even trying to tie supporters to Ted Bundy. After all, they are terrorists.
MORE 4/26/14
It's tempting to kneejerk a reply to Dana Milbank's WaPo hit piece on the Bundy ranch racist fallout. But isn't it true, to some degree? There are racists out there and they do tend to associate themselves with conservatism. Those on the right would do well to stand back and take a look at some of their bedfellows without the emotion of the Bundy cause.
Yeah, one can easily point to the left and criticize their bad behavior in the same area, such as embracing people like Bill Ayers, Mumia Abu Jamal and other known radicals, or Pelosi kissing up to the Occupy Wall St movement (who unlike the Tea Party contains some actual domestic terrorists).
But for the conservative movement to advance within a biased climate of left wing media and the low information attention spans they try to manipulate, conservative leaders need to acknowledge racism and some of the other nuttiness that occasionally gets lumped with the right in general. No, it's not fair--the current president hobnobbed with an actual domestic terrorist and the media yawned, which would not have happened had McCain been associated with a figure in the Sovereign Citizens movement. But it is what it is.
Remaining silent will simply further the disinformation and allow the left to smear the entire movement. Speaking out will give conservative leaders the credibility to point out bad behavior of the same stripe on the other side, knowing the media will not.
The teen violence problem largely explained, without experts, politicians or race-hustlers..
In this case society is to blame, that is, the tendency to provide a social program instead of advocating personal responsibility. It's so much easier just to send a check.
The national outrage over the justice system and the white racists who run it was egged on today by the president, who sauntered into the White House propaganda room and weighed in.
Taking no questions, he hinted that while there might not be a Justice Department persecution, some of us out here in flyover country have some soul-searching to do. On something (he was rather vague on who and what, but left some clues).
In doing so the prez put himself in his son's shoes and talked about his own travails as a scary black man in America, not quite pinning down a time or location of these experiences. Were they in Hawaii? Indonesia? Chicago? Columbia? Harvard? He also didn't give any examples of other races experiencing the same thing, such as Hispanic or East Asians being targeted or profiled or made fun of (Wee Tu Low) but since nobody in the post-verdict universe is mentioning anyone but white people presumably he wasn't talking about them. Not all whites mind you--white liberals helped elect him twice it's safe to assume he wasn't referring to them either. They are cool. That leaves what, the Tea Party?
Meanwhile here in reality world, Zimmerman is 50 percent Latino on his mother's side, who appears to have some black ancestry as well. Obama is 50 percent white on his mother's side. They are both mixed race. The Martins have implicitly stated all along that race was not a factor in the case. Apparently the president hasn't been listening.
It's hard to say whether the Hispanic "community" even considers Zimmerman authentic. They certainly seem to be silent on the whole thing. No word from LaRaza or Juan Gonzales or the like.
But the more likely reason we are not getting a hue and cry is because the major Latino organizations are no different than the NAACP or NOW--they are first and foremost liberal advocacy groups. Race is just their tool. There is no win in defending a half-white Jewish Latino because it means taking on the half-white president who is fighting for amnesty. So like the media they simply pretend Zimmerman is a white guy.
Speaking of the fawning media, including Chris Wallace at Fox, they will no doubt continue to applaud the post-racial president for stepping up and adding his important two cents to the never-ending national conversation on GOP white racism, er, race. The first opinionator will remain in his holding pattern high over Mount Teflon, looking down on the sinners and rubes, smiling as the plan comes together.
WHODUNIT? 7/20/13
The Daily Mail has a tattletale from a WSJ reporter who claims she was at a snazzy book launch party in 2003 in Tina Brown's home that Obama was also attending when some "established author" (presumably white but she didn't say) mistook Barry for a waiter and asked him to go "fetch a drink". Since the party was held for former Clintonite Sidney Blumenthal we must ask, who was it? We already know that Bill Clinton himself admitted that Obama was at the level of fetching coffee just a few years before he rose to power.
Punk-gate? As if the NTSB needs anymore controversy. They've admitted to being party to the punking of a San Francisco Fox News TV affiliate regards the names of the flight crew on Asiana 214 by blaming a "summer intern":
The statement said that an NTSB summer intern, in response to the station’s inquiry, “acted outside the scope of his authority when he erroneously confirmed the names of the flight crew on the aircraft.”
However, in a subsequent phone interview with the SFGate’s Jeff Elder, NTSB spokeswoman Kelly Nantel made clear that the names “originated at the media outlet” and that the intern — unaware of the offensive names — was “acting in good faith and trying to be helpful” by confirming names he didn’t know.
Since this summer intern wasn't identified the media and public are left to take the NTSB's word that it was indeed an intern and not some staffer trying to cover rear by blaming an intern. No word on whether the offending young lad has been sent home or not. Maybe they will begin a 30 day top-down review to identify the problem and report back to Obama (who is no doubt outraged).
“Even if the NTSB confirmed the information, the names originated from somewhere – and we fail to understand how those obviously phony names could escape detection before appearing on the broadcast.”
Yes, the lingering question...which goofball in the Fox newsroom either sourced it or put someone else up to calling the NTSB to confirm these phony names. If it was a prank it's not hard to imagine an intern in the Fox station being told the fake names and told to call the NTSB to confirm, only to have an intern there either dumber than the Fox person or one who sensed the most awesome Faux News punk ever and simply confirmed the names.
Or maybe he felt like someone was trying to punk him and simply agreed and hung up. Or maybe interns weren't involved at all. Maybe the source of the names came from some semi-reputable source and the Fox outlet decided to double-check by calling the government, who helped lead them astray. It's hard to say.
Perhaps the CIA will produce a video explaining everything. Or maybe Holder can check the phone records.
The left keeps screaming that "the tape was already released in 2007". Sure, back when Hillary, Dodd, Biden, and Edwards were also culling headlines. The fact that the entire contents weren't made public back then seems a hard sell on many of them today, along with an almost unreal denial from a few about the fake black accent. If Obama was caught trying to speak with a British dialect would that raise their eyebrows?
The deeper thing here is message--what in the world was he trying to say? Why was he saying that more roads should not be built in the "suburbs"?
Well, other than it being a dog whistle for a certain segment of the population it's not hard to divine a meaning---not building more roads in the 'burbs clearly means not allowing the 'burbs to keep expanding, with a funneling of that money back to the cities. It's not surprising a Chicago pol would say it, as well as using Katrina and Los Angeles as part of the same theme.. The 'quiet riot' was caused by too much money flowing out of the city to the rich crackers in the bedroom cities. Not fair!
One person sitting up and taking notice should be Stanley Kurtz...
They amount to an entire gamut of initiatives, some well underway, to redistribute wealth not from the fabled 1% — who really do not have enough to save us from fiscal Armageddon even if the government took 80% of their profits — but from the average, middle-class, hardworking citizens who sought better lives and realized the American dream by moving to the suburbs, where the air is cleaner, the schools are decent, and life is peaceful and integrated.
Read the book--the suburbs comment will make perfect sense. It won't run ya that many dollas. But if you are a new parent just be sure to put your baybuh to bed first.
MORE 10/3/12
CNN is running a current top headline on their website about "conservative media coordinating" on the Obama Hampton tape, which they claim was "widely reported" at the time. They offered this story from their "Political Ticker" blog as proof. Nowhere in the story did they comment on "suburbs" or even mention that O had voted against a bill containing elements of his demagoguery just 10 days prior to the speech. Of course they also ignored his pandering cadence.
So what was going on in the political world around June 5, 2007? Looking back, this blog was reporting on the Scooter Libby sentencing. CNN also claimed that Obama was right up there with Hillary in the polls at the time, although according to Gallup she had double digit leads for most of June and Edwards was polling in double digits behind O. There was also a GOP debate on that night along with a lot of speculation about Fred Thompson. The speech may have been widely reported (in some biased fashion, leaving out context and content) but it certainly wasn't big news at the time. They are only indicting themselves by trying to pretend it was.
Several stories have popped out lately and all appear to have a possible link: baiting the GOP into predictable reactions for exploitation.
Take the Romney speech at the NAACP. It was probably designed to get Mitt into a situation where he could be booed by minorities--basically for being a white conservative--whereupon conservatives would react to the booing and their reaction could then be used against them (racists).
The 18 year old Texas Latina from San Antonio called to testify by the DOJ in Washington about the Texas voter ID law was likely designed to not only tug at Hispanic heartstrings but also perhaps to lure conservatives into bashing a young Hispanic woman, which could be used to anger other Hispanics and draw more votes for Obama. We still don't know how the woman managed to get past TSA without a picture ID so she could give her Fluke-like testimony.
The Spanish-language soap opera commercials advertising food stamps is the same thing--designed to provoke a reaction.
Of course the Bain felony 'you lie!' story was probably designed to both pull Romney into defense mode for being a capitalist again (something the Obamabots will be doing repeatedly the next four months because they have no other play) while countering Mitt's own 'you lie' commercial regarding previous allegations about him being...a capitalist.
Even Obama's personal Twitter account linked the Atlantic Wire story today, followed by numerous mainstream stories, some using question marks as if they were bloggers. If only they'd had as much curiosity about Obama's lies regarding Ayers and Dreams but the notion of the president's campaign lying about the big guy once palling around with a communist domestic terrorist is of course just cwazy whackadoodle conspiracy fodder.
All together they could have also been strategically timed to undermine what looks to be an early VP announcement with Drudge now headlining Condi as a possible pick. If true the Bot rocket launchers will be reloaded promptly for 'Iraq war WMD lies' stories about Condi, probably even from the likes of the NAACP. Nobody will be calling anyone a racist over that stuff.
Meanwhile we have about five carrier groups swarming around the Strait of Hormuz with troop buildups in Kuwait while Syria goes nuts and Egypt morphs into Taliban 2.0 and nobody has noticed. Maybe Condi will make them notice.
Several stories to play with today, all with spin.
One, Blunt Romney visiting the NAACP. Seriously, "Blunt Romney"? Is that some kind of secret street language nickname for Mittens leaked by his staff to give him street cred or just business as usual for the Paper of Record? If you chose latter come collect your prize. Their counterparts mainly hit with he was booed. No doubt the booed headline saturated most mainstream coverage as in, how dare Romney campaign against the current president. That's a personal insult. What next, claiming Obama drove the economic bus into a ditch? Or spitting on Emanuel Cleaver?
The other spin came from a potentially embarrassing story that broke connecting Occupy Wall Street with murder. Early reports said DNA taken from a chain used at an OWS New York event matched that found on the personal effects of a 2004 murder victim. Early reports also said that all forensic personnel in the NYPD crime lab had been cleared of contaminating the evidence. Suddenly the main headline has now transformed into "Possible Lab Contamination...", all thanks to a 'source' in the lab, not the PD. Fit to print with massive font headlines apparently based on one source!
These same folks have held onto the Tea Party spitting story (alluded to above) forever despite Breitbart's cash award for anyone who could actually provide evidence (nobody did) and his later attempt to show up the NAACP as dishonest and bigoted in their approach to the event and the Tea Party in general via the Shirley Sherrod debacle. No surprise, the very same folks also pushed a dishonest and erroneous narrative against noted white Hispanic George Zimmerman by creatively splicing a 911 tape to make him appear racist. No source needed.
Finally, the absentee Jesse Jackson, Jr. story. Early reports said he was being treated for substance abuse, perhaps for alcohol. Now it has changed to "a mood disorder". Give the mainstreamers some credit here, the spin is coming from the congressman's staff. However, reporters by nature are trained to be skeptics and not swallow press releases verbatim, at least theoretically. Or maybe that was just in Bogie movies. Wait, no, they still do that with Sarah Palin. And every other Republican. So let's see if this new explanation satisfies these notorious hungry dogs just like that dog training exercise story back in the 90s gave them reason to shut down another potentially embarrassing investigation.
It's been pointed out on the web already.. now we learn that certain fine educational establishments once celebrated diversity by considering Elizabeth Warren a "person of color". The same intelligensia probably believes George Zimmerman is whiter. Does anyone really need to point out the preposterousness?
Yet here we go again--in a story MSNBC is heralding about Martin being shot at "an intermediate range" (they don't define intermediate) the writer actually penned the following:
But after questions about possible racial motivation for the slaying – Martin was black; Zimmerman is a white man of Hispanic heritage – a special prosecutor took over the case and, on April 11, Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder. He was released on April 23 on a $150,000 bond and has been out of the public eye since then.
Bold to back up what Tom Maguire points out--some lefty memes never die. Even now Warren is saying she's still proud of her "Native American" (not American Indian, as they prefer) heritage.
MORE 5/17/12
The New York Times is out with information sure to run tingles up a few legs in the higher educational warrens of America:
After years of speculation, estimates and projections, the Census Bureau has made it official: White births are no longer a majority in the United States. Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 49.6 percent of all births in the 12-month period that ended last July, according to Census Bureau data made public on Thursday, while minorities — including Hispanics, blacks, Asians and those of mixed race — reached 50.4 percent, representing a majority for the first time in the country’s history.
So the Census folks don't count White Hispanics as white, preferring to count them as minorities. The media will of course make a big deal out of this 'tipping point' without realizing the irony.
KENYAN? 5/17/12
Breitbart has the scoop, of course the answer is that it was a mistake. The person who edited the circular says it was a "fact checking error". That will probably satisfy the elite media and who knows, maybe it was an error. But perhaps the question should be asked, "where did the initial facts come from"? In her statement Goderich says Obama had nothing to do with his own bio, the remainder of which looks legit. So where did the erroneous info originate? Of course anyone who asks will be labeled a birther, so there ya go.
Oddly enough the Breitbart piece anticipated this response and mentioned Goderich:
According to the booklet itself, the text was edited by Miriam Goderich, who has since become Dystel's partner at Dystel & Goderich, an agency founded in 1994. Breitbart News attempted to reach Goderich by telephone several times over several days. Her calls are screened by an automated service that requires callers to state their name and company, which we did. She never answered
Ms. Dystel remains dummied up, and why not--probably a big payoff coming for her one day. But since this is a blog we can simply be dummies by WAGing aimlessly, so here goes. The evidence O was born in Hawaii is sufficient sans pure fraud, which is something Hillary would have exploited had it been there. But the lockdown on grades, transcripts and other literary accomplishments has always been strange, especially for a man who prides himself on such accomplishments. Did those people in Minnesota Iowa get prosecuted for sneaking a peak at Obama's student loan records because it was illegal, or because they looked at the wrong person? The woman in Ohio who went after personal records on Joe the Plumber got off much easier--and is now back working for the state again, of course that wasn't a federal matter.
Maybe if there's any there there it's more about academic exaggerations with the birth cert being a convenient red herring. Or maybe this is just another attempt to feed the conservative press information to change the narrative off the economy. Romney was out today insisting that Rev Wright is a non-story.
Drudge is trying to sensationalize Farrakhan's comments made at LeMoyne-Owen college in Memphis Saturday night by linking Breitbart's clip. Not to defend Calypso Louie but he was probably not talking about actionable intelligence. Then again, it's hard to say, we're talking about a guy who just called Jesus a Muslim.
The local paper doesn't provide much context, mentioning his visit and pointing out his past comments about the H1N1 virus conspiracy but nothing about leaders being imminently killed. They did quote an event organizer as follows:
Saturday, LeMoyne-Owen student government president SimmieRay Dinkins said Farrakhan's sometimes-provocative remarks were no deterrent in the school's pursuit of him as the conference's keynote speaker.
Great. Maybe they'll invite Herman Cain or Condi Rice in the near future if they haven't already. Meanwhile, as to the man Pastor Jeremiah Wright once bestowed with an award for greatness, it's just another normal speech.
So Jonathan Capehart of the WaPo had his faith restored by the Murder Two charge laid on Zimmerman. Thank heavens. But what about our faith in the mainstream media?
For example here's Capehart, in the column on restored faith, repeating an already debunked ABC News distortion:
Zimmerman would be arrested and released because of his assertion of self-defense and Florida’s insane “Stand Your Ground” law. But nothing about his story made sense. Least of all his claim of having a broken nose or having his head repeatedly basehed into the sidewalk after a video was released of his arrival at the Sanford Police Department just 35 minutes after he killed Trayvon. It would reveal a relatively unscathed Zimmerman, not the man who said he was fighting for his life.
No doubt this has been an emotional issue for people of color but Capehart is a journalist working for a major influential paper, not an MSNBC host. He should at least try to keep up with the latest facts so as not to appear a hack. Just yesterday his own paper was heralding a tale told by Zimmerman's un-hired pro-bono spokeslawyers about being abandoned by George, who was on the run in another state. Title: "where is George Zimmerman"? Sounds dramatic and unhinged--the unstable killer is fleeing!
But again debunked--this time by the same prosecutor who just 'restored faith' in the system. Zimmerman turned himself in--in Florida--and hired a real legal team. The man had death threats and even the POTUS coming down on him. The Attorney General just congratulated one of the guys stirring the racial pot. Maybe Mr. Capehart doesn't actually read newspapers.
Not to say things were initially done correctly in this case, maybe they weren't. Cronyism exists, but cronyism isn't always a racial problem. Take for example the Martha Moxley murder case in Connecticut where the Kennedy's were involved. Pressing for justice in the American way, but becoming an advocate to the point of distorting facts, smearing people or deliberately misleading the public in pursuit of such a thing is not. Maybe now that Mr. Capehart's faith is restored in the justice system he can work to start restoring our faith in the fourth estate.
On this day of good news the country sure needs some. It's amazing that in 2012, with a black president, the United States stands teetering on a racial divide. In the news, it appears they've captured some white suspects in the indiscriminate Tulsa shootings, a good thing.
But notice the description of the neighborhood found in this CNN story:
"For a white male to come that deep into that area and to start indiscriminately shooting, that lends itself for many to believe that it probably was a hate crime," Blakney told CNN.
This made me think of the brouhaha at National Review Online, where editor Rich Lowry has fired writer John Derbyshire for opining--on a non-affiliated blog--about similar things:
(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
First, Derbyshire sounds like a guy who has never lived in the south. Second, his rules are overly harsh and judgmental, but like all such things they are based on vague truthisms. Notice the Tulsa pastor's apparent amazement that whites would be venturing so 'deep' into a certain part of their own city, which seems to confirm the Derbyshire generalization.
Of course the irony is that the poor victims didn't discriminate and were apparently responding to the shooter(s) as any normal human being would respond to a stranger asking for directions. Afterwards, the citizens living in the area were terrorized by the shootings every bit as much as the DC area was when John Allen Mohammed and his sidekick were shooting random people of both races while the FBI was frantically looking for a composite white guy.
But random racial crimes are seemingly becoming more frequent. A rash of stories have dotted the back pages of newspapers for over a year regarding flashmob attacks in cities all around the country, lately in places like Minneapolis, Baltimore and St. Louis. These attacks are not occurring deep in black neighborhood or in areas where blacks are massing for concerts, rather in the downtown entertainment sections common to most cities. Most of the victims seem to be white people. So following Derbyshire's rules 'non-black' people should desist attending downtown entertainment areas under the premise a flashmob might show up. Or just about anywhere. So much for generalizations.
With the Tulsa shooting, the Martin shooting, flashmobs and planned Occupy events we can all guess the likely future--saturation coverage of violence. If it bleeds and is politically correct, it leads.
In times like these we need calm and sober leadership more than ever. What we've seen so far is a leader self-identifying with certain victims and another chastising Americans as cowards for not wanting to discuss the issue. But there's always hope for tomorrow.
______________________
What's going on in Syria? Are innocent people still getting mowed down by a tyrant?
______________________
What's going on in Africa? While the Muslim Brotherhood meets at the White House stories are suggesting that radicals have virtually taken over the heart of the continent and some are worried they may align themselves with al Qaeda. Of course 'some' does not yet include most in the American media.
Also, don't we have troops over there looking for a crackpot Christian-based tyrant? No news on that operation either.
______________________
NBC says they have fired the 'veteran producer' who apparently mis-spliced a 911 call recording to make George Zimmerman appear even more racist than their previous stories and cable commentator had already indicated. That's good, but can't they name names? Maybe they're trying to protect him and family and will release it later but at the same time, maybe they didn't fire anyone at all.
______________________
The Masters final round is today. Golf nirvana. A lot was expected out of Tiger Woods, who hasn't won a major tournament since he was attacked with a nine iron in his front driveway several years ago. He won on tour 2 weeks ago, but this kind of stuff can't help....
The Tour may fine him, although they'd have to fine everyone who ever wacked a club into the ground or tossed it as golfers are prone to do. So they probably won't. But the role model thing is pretty much gone. President Obama weighed in on the Augusta National club not admitting women; will he weigh in now on unsportsmanlike conduct?
Oh well, it's a beautiful day in Augusta and Memphis. Life goes on despite the headlines. Family is coming over for an Easter dinner so this post will mark an end to concerns over current events and the direction of our country and transition to some needed fellowship this afternoon. Peace out and best wishes for a great Easter.
