Category Archives: Racism

MICROAGGRESSION OF THE MONTH

Microaggression: a subtle but offensive comment or action directed at a minority or other non-dominant group that is often unintentional or unconsciously reinforces a stereotype. The act of discriminating against a non-dominant group by means of such comments or actions. (According to dictionary.com) Also, according to dictionary.com, the term has been around since 1970, and was “coined” by psychiatrist, Chester M. Pierce.

Because I don’t use the term and have no use for the term, I have to look its meaning up in the dictionary to refresh my memory.

I have a friend who is not from the south, and has it in her head that every southerner eats grits three times a day. I’ve indicated to her many times that I’m not a big grits eater, but she always asks me if I’m going to order grits whenever they’re on the menu. She one time ask me if I wanted her grits when they came with the breakfast she had ordered. Could this be a microaggression? I’ll admit it’s a little aggravating, but it certainly doesn’t offend me.

Another time, a fellow southerner asked me if I liked barbecue. Because I don’t like to use the word, “offend,” I’m not going to say that offended me, but it did sort of make me mad.  If you’re from the south, you like barbecue. That’s a given. In fact, I only know of two people on the planet, excluding the vegetarians I know, who don’t like barbecue. Neither are from the south and one of them is dead. Could that be considered a microaggression?

Also, I had a black friend years ago who always wanted to know if I was going to see Jeff Foxworthy (a southern white comedian whose material is about the south). Not being the biggest Jeff Foxworthy fan, my answer was always no. Then one time I turned it on my black friend and asked her if she was going to see him. And guess what? It made her mad that I would even ask her if she was going to see a white red-neck performer.

The above examples are silly, but so is the concept of microaggression in general. And we all know who invented microaggression? The left, of course.

An article from dailycaller.com on September 1, 2017, told of two professors who claim to have discovered a new form of politically incorrect offense called “invisibility microaggressions,” which are said to be even more subtle than regular microaggressions. Their proposed solution for these invisible microaggressions is to get rid of meritocracy. Not knowing what meritocracy meant, I looked it up. The meaning according to dictionary.com: an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class, privilege, or wealth. A system in which such persons are awarded and advanced. Leadership by able and talented persons.

The Daily Caller refers to a publication called Campus Reform which reported that a recent study by two professors, Jasmine Mena of Bucknell University and Annemarie Vaccaro of the University of Rhode Island, claimed that they are the first academics to discover that “invisibility” is a form of microaggressions not previously described in feminist academia.

Publishing their findings in the NASPA Journal about Women in Higher Education, these two women claim that the environment-based “invisibility microaggressions” occur when they are among the few or only non-whites in a workplace or communal context. Meanwhile, interpersonal “invisibility microaggressions” are said to hinder non-white people in everyday work roles because their ethnicity or gender is being ignored or because they don’t see other non-white people there.

The professors state that unlike regular microaggressions, which require at least two parties for them to occur, invisibility microaggressions only need for one person to feel invisible in an environment. A long black person among a sea of white faces could qualify as one of these invisibility microaggressions, especially if he or she isn’t singled out for being black. But if that happens, then can it possibly be a macroaggression? When I entered the term, “macroaggression” in dictionary.com, it asked me if I meant “microaggression.”

These women further say that the only way to deal with invisibility microaggressions is for campuses and workplaces to single out minorities and shower them with positive attention, to make them feel less invisible.

The women go on to say, rather than commend them on the merits of their work like any other employee, employers and colleges should deliberately select non-white women for high-profile awards and celebrate them on alumni magazines, newsletters, and other materials. These two women also recommend that campus leaders must be especially vigilant in considering and recommending Women of Color for leadership roles.

I thought the passage and signing into law of the 1963 Civil Rights Act was supposed to render a color-blind society where things like being the only black among all whites or the only woman among all men was meaningless. Guess I thought wrong, or I’m just an unenlightened oaf, a deplorable, an uneducated redneck, a bitter clinger. (Have I left anything out?) That’s what I’ve wanted to see all these years and I thought that’s what everyone else, including the left, wanted to see take place.

I think the left may have wanted the above at one time, also. But what happened? What made the left change? In a generation, the United States of America made great strides in becoming a color-blind society when it comes down to skin color. Racism or any other sin, will never be fully eliminated, of course, until Jesus returns and sets up his 1,000-year kingdom on earth.

Again, why is the left doing an about face from what they were advocating for the past forty years? Like I’ve said many times, it is the Democrats/liberals/progressives who are the read racists in this world. From the moment that the 1963 Civil Rights Act was passed, liberals, while in favor of the legislation, felt that blacks were inferior to white folks and thus, needed hand-outs and help in order to succeed. So, liberals made having children out of wedlock routine by giving single women money for each out of wedlock child they birthed. Furthermore, liberals initiated Affirmative Action because they felt that blacks were too stupid to “make it” in the “white man’s world.” The Democrat party is 100 percent responsible for the problems incurred by blacks, and in my opinion, Democrats have destroyed blacks in America. In their new philosophy of promoting segregation, Democrats/liberals/progressives have not changed their minds about blacks being inferior, they’re just continuing to promote those thoughts through different mechanisms.

Academics Discover New Way to Get Offended: ‘Invisibility Microaggressions’

Again, thanks to dailycaller.com and contributor, Ian Miles Cheong for the information contained in this article.

Facebooktwitter

MORE ABOUT WHITE SUPREMACY IN THE UNITED STATES

Rush Limbaugh does it, Sean Hannity does it, Tucker Carlson does it, Bill O’Reilly does it and most every conservative pundit and talking head does it. What do they do? Before beginning a discussion on the recent demonstrations and protests such as Charlottesville, Boston, and Berkley, all folks participating in the discussion must first denounce white supremacy, white nationalism, neo-Nazism. For to not do so, would signal to the left in this country that you are not only a hater, but a white supremacy/white nationalist/neo-nazi yourself.  And once the left labels you as such, lack of evidence notwithstanding, you’re done.

As I indicated in my August 16 article, entitled, “Condemn the white groups first, forget the rest,” the citizens of the United States of America have been conditioned by the left that racism by whites or white groups, particularly white nationalists/white supremacists if the sin that can possible be committed on the planet, and anyone found guilty of this sin must die.

If a white nationalist group and a left wing radical group such as Antifa which has its roots in the old Occupy Wall Street movement and is a communist based organization, collide, you sure can’t blame both sides and let it go at that. You must first denounce the white supremacists/white nationalists/neo-Nazis as the biggest threat this country faces, forget about Kim Jung Un and a nuclear Korea, or the Islamic terrorist state of Iran and their continued violations of the treaty former President, Barack Obama made with them.

I also mentioned in my previous article that I had heard some talking head indicating that the number of white supremacists/white nationalists/neo-Nazis in this country numbered about 100,000. Plus, if there are regular cross-burnings and lynchings taking place in the country, I haven’t heard about it, and I live in central Alabama, the Birmingham area, to be exact. Furthermore, I’m not hearing of any Jewish people being rounded up and sent to concentration camps, have you? If cross burnings, lynchings, and the imprisonment of Jews are common place in this country, wouldn’t CNN, MSNBC, or other left-leaning media outlets be broadcasting it instead of Russia, Russia, Russia, and first lady, Melania Trump’s choice of shoes?

My point is that I don’t see these white supremacist/white nationalist/neo-Nazi groups as that prevalent or dangerous. Could they become dangerous and a threat to Americans? I’m sure, if provoked enough, they could. But right now, Antifa, the MS-13 gangs, and even Black Lives Matter are a bigger domestic threat to Americans than any of the various white supremacist/white nationalist/neo-Nazi groups. And let’s not forget ISIS or also known as the Islamic State, which had its origins in the vacuum created in Iraq when former President Barack Obama pulled troops out of that country. To date, ISIS is the evilest terrorist group on the planet, and they have a presence in the United States. Also worth mention are the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood (a favorite of former President Barack Obama), and Al Qaeda.

While we are all familiar with the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, and now MS-13 and Antifa, before the Charlottesville melee and “Unite the Right,” except for the Ku Klux Klan, I couldn’t name any individual white supremacist groups. Once again, they are just not that prevalent and practically no incidents of a national news level can be contributed to these groups.

We have recently discovered that the son of Vice Presidential nominee, Tim Kaine, is a member of Antifa, and was arrested at the Minnesota State Capitol in March after disrupting a pro-Trump rally (According to Gateway Pundit). Children, even raised in the best of homes often go astray as did young Linwood Kaine. But, can you imagine if it had been discovered that the son or daughter of a prominent Republican was participating in a so-called White Nationalist group. CNN, MSNBC, and other MSM outlets would have a field day. Most likely, half of their time would be spent on “Russia, Russia, Russia, and the other half spent on the Republican’s son or daughter. And this would take place after the prominent Republican condemned, condemned, and condemned the actions of his offspring. To date, I am not aware That Tim Kaine has condemned the behavior of his son.

It’s hard to find statistics on White Nationalist groups. Cursory Google searches virtually turn up nothing. While searches for statistics on international terrorism, including acts committed on U.S. soil by individuals linked to foreign terrorist organizations, yields a gold mine, according to Sarah Tate Chambers in an August 17, 2017 article in lawfareblog.com. In Search of Data on White Supremacist Violent Crime.

Left wing smear merchant, Slate.com, in an article entitled “The Long List of Killings Committed by White Extremists Since the Oklahoma City Bombing,” published on August 14, 2017, tells us that in the two decades since Timothy McVeigh’s attack killing 168 in Oklahoma City, the Southern Poverty Law Center has created a list of thirty-five deadly attacks, rending 74 victims, carried or believed to be carried out by white extremists. You can read the list for yourself. The Long List of Killings Committed by White Extremists Since the Oklahoma City Bombing.  Key words here are “carried or believed to be carried out.” We don’t know if all of these killings were white supremacist based. Furthermore, these are single incidents carried by either one person or only a few people It’s not surprise that Slate pontificates on how egregious this is, thirty-five attacks in twenty years. I wonder if Slate has ever written about the bloodshed in the south side of Chicago that occurs on a nightly basis where scores of black lives have been taken and continue to be taken.

In an article on revealnews.org, a piece was written outlining an interview Reveal’s host, Al Letson had with known and admitted White Nationalist, Richard Spencer. Of course, to the left, Spencer is Adolph Hitler incarnate. Without dissecting the article, my take is that Richard Spencer indeed believes that those of white European descent are superior to those who are not. He doesn’t believe in the mixing of the races and believes that the so-called mixing has not worked well. Thus, he claims to have a long-term dream of an “ethnostate,” a territory set aside for people of European descent.

The piece on Reveal links to another article on Mother Jones, another far left smear merchant site. Among other things, the article in Mother Jones indicates that Spencer envisions a future for the United States along the lines of a “renewed Roman Empire,” a dictatorship where the main criteria for citizenship would be whiteness. Meet the White Nationalist Trying to Ride the Trump Train to Lasting Power.

While this Mother Jones article is replete with lies and half-truths, particularly about President Trump, the writing does not paint Richard Spencer as a violent or otherwise dangerous person. And if he were, I have no doubt that Mother Jones would get that in there somehow, or perhaps devote the entire piece to it. If he walked into a restaurant where I was dining, would I be scared that he would pull out a gun and start shooting? No. Would I want him seated at a table or booth next to me? No, again. If I were a non-white, how would I feel. I can’t answer that because I am white. But I think I would feel much the same way. Spencer has extreme weird philosophies that are not shared by most Americans. In other words, they are out of the mainstream of thought. But again, there is no indication that he is violent or dangerous. And for his statement in Reveal that he sees “the election of President Trump as a precursor to white identity politics becoming an overt and welcome part of mainstream conversation in America for the first time,” is a red herring. How many pot-smoking, anti-establishment former “long haired hippie-type,” baby-boomers saw the election of former President, Bill Clinton, as way to re-establish their sixties’ radicalism? How many supporters of former President, Barack Obama, felt that, as America’s first black president, even though he was only half-black, they could undeniably declare their hatred for the United States of America and be given credence?

I can’t envision the current White Nationalist/neo-Nazi movement as anything to quake and shake over. In Charlottesville, the group “Unite the Right” had a permit to protest both Friday night and Saturday. It wasn’t until Saturday when Antifa and Black Lives Matter got into the mix that things deteriorated and one woman was killed. Yes, “Unite the Right” carried tiki torches and shouted pro-Nazi rhetoric on Friday night, and did the same, sans the tiki torches on Saturday. Had these white nationalists been left alone to protest the removal of Robert E Lee’s statute and the renaming of that park, I firmly believe they would have “done their thing” and dispersed.

Antifa has participated in many demonstrations where violence and the destroying of property and the injuring human beings was intentional. So has Black Lives Matter. And to the left, these groups should be given accolades because they dared to take on white nationalists who were legally parading around and chanting slogans, but not destroying property or injuring other people.

The average liberal might say to me, “the white nationalists, while marching in Klan-like fashion and chanting pro-Nazi rhetoric, even though they were not destroying property or physically injuring people, were offending many people to the point where their victims could be emotionally damaged for life.” Cry me a river. While I certainly don’t desire to downplay that people can be damaged by emotional abuse, particularly when the abuse comes from a loved one such as a parent or a spouse, or by situations of constant, over the years, bullying by peers or classmates, a couple of hours of listening to chants where you might be the subject of those chants, especially when you can leave the scene and not listen or watch anymore, pales in comparison.

Is it a sin to hate, even if the hate doesn’t manifest itself in the form of physical violence? Absolutely. Is it a sin to offend someone/hurt someone’s feelings? Absolutely again. We’re all going to be judged on these things one fine day, though. In the meantime, why are we wasting all this media time on white nationalist groups when most people can’t name even one specific group, and violence collectively by these groups doesn’t really exist? When, on the other hand, groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, the Black Panthers, ISIS, etc. have histories of destroying property and injuring people, but the left, including the MSM, and even some conservatives tout these groups as being admirable?

Facebooktwitter

DEMOCRATS WHO CELEBRATE THE BIRTHDAY of MARTIN LUTHER KING ARE HYPOCRITES

With all this white privilege garbage being bantered around by the left and something new added to the definition of racism almost on an hourly basis, I was thinking about the words of Dr. Martin Luther King in his “I Have a Dream” speech.

While we’re five months away from celebrating Dr. King’s birthday, I can’t help but be saddened at how far away we have deviated from his dream.

In reviewing the text of his speech, I was searching for the following: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” “I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave-owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.”

In searching for the above, I also came across this: “We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protests to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force. The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn our back.”

All my life, I have interpreted these words of Dr. King and the Civil Rights movement in its entirety to have as a goal a near color-blind society, where skin color is likened to hair color or eye color, used predominantly for identification purposes. Having said the above we can’t ignore the facts that the disease, sickle cell anemia strikes only blacks and melanoma/skin cancer strikes mostly whites.

Approximately 44 years after modern day civil rights legislation was passed, the United States of America elected its first black president, Barack Obama. I didn’t like Barack Obama, and I still don’t. He’s a Democrat and I don’t identify with Democrat party politics. I oppose the major expansion of government entitlement programs, including the government takeover of one-sixth of the nation’s economy (the health care industry). I oppose punishing and demonizing the wealthiest Americans just because they are rich, and don’t adhere to the Democrat theory that anybody who has money obtained it off the backs of those less fortunate. I believe that it is necessary to have a strong military to protect American citizens from the invasion of foreign regimes intent on destroying this country. I believe that it is necessary that Americans have the right to bear firearms in order to protect themselves from those who intend to harm. I could, of course, write more, but I’ll end it here.

But the fact that I, along with millions of others, didn’t like Barack Obama, doesn’t change the fact that in 2008, we elected a black president. This event should have signaled to the nation and the rest of the world that we’ve achieved a society in which skin color, with few exceptions, holds little more importance than hair color or eye color.

With blacks making up only 13% of the United States population, Barack Obama had to have some white votes to get elected.

After the 2008 election, and to some extent after the 2012 election, Obama supporters/Democrats demonstrated their hatred for those who didn’t march in lockstep with their policies regarding how this country should be governed. The typical Democrat rant went as follows: “You lost, get over it. We’re in charge now, we’re going to do what we’re going to do. We don’t care what you think.”

Instead of being proud that the nation’s first black president was a Democrat, and looking forward to the probability that their dreams of a socialist utopia would be closer to becoming a reality, Democrats/liberals/progressives displayed their fangs and claws in numerous attempts to “beat down” those on the other side of the political spectrum.

To be labeled a racist during this time was the worst thing that could happen to a person, something from which he or she would never survive. Thus, everyone took extreme measures to avoid having this label slapped on them.

Unlike former Democrat presidential candidate, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, during his campaign made it clear that the United States would no longer be a red country or a blue country. Instead it would be a purple country. He was going to be a president to all Americans. And that’s how it should be.

There was one little thing wrong with this. He didn’t mean it. From early on in his presidency, Obama flaunted his racism and disdain for those who weren’t in lockstep with what he wanted to accomplish as president. While most presidents, including previous president, George W. Bush, recognized that in America, we have the right to disagree with our leaders and the right to express those disagreements, Barack Obama vehemently resented all those who were against his governing philosophies.

The hate of Barack Obama toward his political opponents, gave license to the left wingers of this nation to continue the hate toward those who failed to toe their political line. Thus, anyone who didn’t go along with Obama and the Democrats was a racist. I witnessed the plight of many of my conservative friends attempting to explain to liberals that their differences with former President Barack Obama had nothing to do with his skin color, but where he stood on the issues facing this country. To these explanations, the left was deaf, dumb, and blind, continuing to hammer home that anyone who didn’t like or agree with Obama had to be a racist. Seeing that explaining to liberals about why I didn’t care for Obama was an exercise in futility, I simply referred them to this website and challenged them to find anywhere in any of my writings where I belittled Barack Obama because of the color of his skin. Of course, there are not any.

Even after visiting my blog and admitting there’s nothing in my writings where I’ve besmirched BHO with regard to his skin color, liberals will still accuse you of being a racist. They’ll say you’ve used certain “buzz” or “code” words that connect to racism. When a liberal does attempt to do this, I let him or her know that our conversation is now over. I don’t deal with “buzz words.” End of conversation.

Since the election of Donald Trump to the presidency and his subsequent inauguration, the left has been on a tear regarding not only racism, but sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia. And I understand that misogyny is the new term for sexism. White people are to acknowledge they are privileged because they are white and can’t possibly comment or have any opinions where race is concerned because they haven’t experienced the “black experience” or “the people of color” experience. It sounds like we’re on a collision course to punish white people, particularly white men and render whites powerless. Liberals seem to think that’s okay.

Tell a liberal that you don’t see things in terms of race and seek to judge people by the content of their character as opposed to the color of their skin and see what all things will get said to you. Here’s an example: “Nancy Graham do you feel better now telling us all you don’t see color? You’re a liar and that should make you feel kinda awful. Because you are awful.”

In recent months, we have witnessed a wave of accepted segregation from the left. According to the Washington Examiner, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/black-lives-matter-group-bans-all-other-races-from-their-open-meeting/article/2619392, The Black Lives Matter organization based in Philadelphia created a public event on Facebook for a gathering they were hosting which they marketed as an “open meeting.” As many know, the supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement are very diverse. However, for the Philly chapter of BLM, their meetings and events are strictly “black spaces” according to their FB event announcement. When pressed via Twitter, the official account of BLM Philly explained that anyone is free to support the movement from a distance, however, their meetings are only for black people. They even cited Malcom X, the human’s rights activist who advocated for segregation.

And remember, Evergreen College, that liberal bastion in Washington state? The students sponsored a “Day of Absence & Day of Presence demonstration for which white students, faculty, and staff were asked to leave campus for one day. Biology professor, Bret Weinstein was berated by dozens of students outside his classroom on the day of the event for refusing to participate in the event.

It seems that liberals are poised to steer the American culture toward a culture that supports segregation and judging people by the color of their skin. It’s perfectly okay to call someone a racist, or for that matter, a misogynist, a xenophobe, homophobe, etc. with no concrete proof. We’re liberals, we’re superior, we make up definitions to suit our needs of the moment, and if we say you’re something, then you are. The end.

Dr. King said in “I Have a Dream,” “We must not allow our creative protests to degenerate into physical violence.” Well, so much for that. According to liberals, it is okay to riot, destroy property, injure, or even assassinate or murder when something happens that we don’t like.

“The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.” Again, so much for Dr. King’s dream. We’re now told that all white people, especially white males are evil. Even those who stand with us in our efforts to destroy property, injure, maim, and even kill, are not to be allowed in our inner circles. They must realize their evilness and submit to whatever punishments we wish to inflict upon them.

“We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.” This instruction from Dr. Martin Luther King is obviously out the window with the left advocating separation of the races and the banning of whites from anything and everything involving “people of color.”

And yet, in five months when Martin Luther King’s birthday rolls around, we’ll be treated to a sickening display of liberal leaders, including Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Sheila Jackson Lee, Maxine Waters, Corey Booker, Keith Ellison, etc. singing the praises of Dr. King. I have a couple of close friends who are black and liberal. They will certainly attend the many local celebrations held in the Birmingham area.

The folks I mentioned above, including my friends are hypocrites, yes hypocrites. If you support what’s currently taking place in this nation with respect to race, you’re a hypocrite. You’re no better than George Wallace in his early years as governor of Alabama. You’re no better than Birmingham Police Commissioner, Bull Conner, of firehose and police dog fame. In fact, you exist on the same plane as the Ku Klux Klan. How can you even celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday when you’re an advocate of today’s racial politics?

Wait! I know! You’re liberals, you have no scruples, no sense of fairness, no sense of wrong and right. It’s whatever suits your needs of the moment and gives you a euphoric complex of superiority. And anyone who dares to disagree with you…well, we know about that.

Facebooktwitter

BACK TO RACISM

President Donald Trump was elected President of the United States five months ago. He was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States two and a half months ago. Yet, Democrats still can’t decide why their candidate, Hillary Roddam Clinton, wife of former president, beloved by all Democrats, Bill Clinton, lost.

During the presidential campaign, we heard all sorts of allegations of sexism, or the trendier term, misogyny, against those who did not support the Democrat nominee. Of course, for the eight previous years of Obama, we heard nothing but racism allegations against those who were not supportive of the 44th President of the United States. So, first it is racism for which the right is guilty, then enters candidate Clinton, and it is sexism for which the right is guilty.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. Does anybody focus on issues? It is evident that the Democrats are not focused on issues. Some of them do have enough smarts to know they cannot win on issues, but the rest of the Democrats are too ignorant to focus on the issues. So, there we go. I have called Democrats ignorant, and I am not taking it back. They are ignorant. Notice, I said ignorant, not stupid. If you do not know the difference, look it up in Webster’s.

An article came across my news feed from theintercept.com, a website with which I was not familiar, entitled: Top Democrats are Wrong: Trump Supporters were more Motivated by Racism than Economic Issues. Truth be known, I was not aware that Democrats were even entertaining the idea that their beloved Hillary Clinton lost the President election except for us racist, sexist Republicans.

According to the author of the article, Mehdi Hasan, Bernie Sanders, de facto leader of the Resistance stated, “Some people think that those who voted for Trump are racists, sexists, homophobes and deplorable folks.”

This statement was made at a rally in Boston, alongside socialist/communist Senator, Elizabeth Warren. Can’t believe that Fauxkahontas was silent on this one. Mr. Hasan does not agree with Senators Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren. Hasan further indicates that, in the New York Times, three days after the November election, the Vermont Senator claimed that Trump voters were “expressing their fierce opposition to an economic and political system that puts wealthy and corporate interests over their own.”

Mr. Hasan feels that both Sanders and Fauxkahontas, I mean Warren, seem much keener to lay the blame at the feet of the dysfunctional Democratic Party and an ailing economy than at the feet of racist Republican voters. Hasan goes on to state that their deflection is not surprising, nor is their coddling of those who happily embraced an openly xenophobic candidate.

In his article, Hasan says that “He gets it,” and agrees that it is hard to accept that millions of their fellow citizens harbor what political scientists have identified as “racial resentment.” (I have not heard that term before.) He further acknowledges that the reluctance to admit that bigotry, and tolerance of bigotry, is still widespread in society is understandable. Hasan then asks the question, why would senior members of the Democratic leadership want to alienate millions of voters by dismissing them as racist bigots?

What did I get from the above? Some Democrats may be willing to justify Hillary Clinton’s loss to Donald Trump because Democrats are out of touch with middle-class America. With respect to the issues, including the economy, foreign policy, immigration, energy, the environment, and health care, Democrats are diametrically opposite to mainstream America, also known as the fly-over country. However, that is a mighty big but, other Democrats are continuing to hurl accusations of racism, sexism, and whatever else they can throw at those who disagree with them.

I was one of the first pundits to label Democrats/ liberals/progressives or whatever they want to call themselves these days as the “tolerant left.” I am sarcastic. The left is anything but open-minded and tolerant. Later Bill O’Reilly also used that term. Maybe I should have had it copyrighted.

As I have indicated in many of my writings, liberals are the real racists, hypocrites, liars, and bigots. If some left-winger hurls the racism accusation at me, I know that I have won the debate, the argument, or whatever. Liberals change the definition or racism to whatever suits their needs of the moment. If they cannot justify the hurling of other accusations at someone with whom they do not agree, they will resort to racism.

Hasan cites American National Election data and a “plethora” of studies that have concluded that since the start of the 2016 presidential campaign that the race was about race. Philip Klinkner, a political scientist at Hamilton College, and an expert on race relations (that’s what the article said), grabbed headlines last summer when he revealed that the best way to identify a Trump supporter was to ask that person if Obama was a Muslim.  If the person said yes and the person was white, 89% of the time that person would have a higher opinion of Trump than Clinton. So, anyone who thinks Obama is a Muslim and has white skin, probably a racist.

Wow! That’s what I call scientific.

Hasan also indicated that other surveys and polls of Trump voters found “a strong relationship between anti-black attitudes and support for Trump,” with rump supporters being more likely to describe African Americans as criminal, unintelligent, lazy, and violent. Also, Trump voters were most likely to believe that people of color are taking white jobs, and a majority of them rate blacks as less evolved than whites.

My regular readers know that I am from the state of Alabama and currently live in the Birmingham area. Yes, Birmingham, Alabama. I do not hear or observe any of the attitudes or statements that Mr. Hasan makes in the above paragraphs in this, the second half of the second decade of the twenty-first century. These attitudes may have been common in the late sixties/early to mid-seventies. But not now. Alternatively yet, maybe folks up north have these attitudes, but not here in the south.

Because Trump managed to win white votes regardless of age, gender, income, or education, racial identity and attitudes displaced class as the central battleground of American politics as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have espoused.

Hasan does cover the question, “how can racial resentment have motivated Trump supporters when so many of them voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012?” Klinkner covers that by stating that in 2016, Clinton, unlike Obama, faced a Republican candidate who pushed the buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways that John McCain and Mitt Romney were unwilling or unable to do. Did he? I followed the campaign closely, and it did not appear to me that Donald Trump was “pushing buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways.” The comments made about Mexicans who crossed the border illegally being criminals and rapists did not appear racist to me, nor did it to most conservatives. Liberals, of course, went ballistic, but what else is new?

So, based on the above notions, which are abstract at best, Mr. Hasan, concludes: “It isn’t the economy. It’s the racism, stupid.” But wait…is Mrs. Clinton not a white woman? Yes, Mrs. Clinton is indeed a white woman, who campaigned on continuing the policies of Barack Obama. So, if the voters, who overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama were pleased with the direction in which the country was heading, but just did not like Obama because of the color of his skin, they should be ecstatic that someone white was running and was promising to continue Obama-style governance.

Mr. Hasan’s reasoning is substantially flawed. Plus, these studies, which he sites sound bogus to me. Remember, though, Mr. Hasan is a liberal, and liberals do not have to be correct. They just have to say something over and over again until the fact that what they are saying is a lie no longer matters. It is now the truth. Liberals no longer have to be consistent. Being hypocritical is accepted in liberal land.

Are liberals ever going to stop hurling false accusations and those who do not agree with them? We all know the answer to that one. Are we ever going to get liberals to change? Of course not! Then why bother? Because we must continue to stand up for what is right. Standing down and letting the left continue to spout forth their lies and hypocrisies, allows them to win in the end.

Facebooktwitter

TO THE ADVOCATES OF THE TALLADEGA COLLEGE MARCHING BAND

By now, most of you know about the Talladega College Marching Band from Talladega College, the marching tornadoes, they’re called, a predominately black college located in Talladega, Alabama. On behalf of the band, Dr. Billy Hawkins, college president, accepted an invitation for the band to perform at the upcoming inauguration of president-elect, Donald Trump. Since accepting on behalf of the band and the college,

TalladegaCollegeTornados-640x480

Dr. Hawkins has been subjected to much harassment from the left. Of course, liberals are much harder on black conservatives than they are on white conservatives, often calling them “Uncle Tom,” “house…n**gas,” and the list goes on.

According to several sources, not one of the band members has opted out as a protest. $75,000 was needed to fund the trip and as of late last week, the group was still short.

On Thursday, Dr. Hawkins appeared on the O’Reilly Factor with Bill. By the end of the week, not only had enough been raised to send the students to the inauguration, there was money left for other needs of the band, such as instruments, uniforms, busses, etc. It was also indicated that money would be available for scholarships. As of this writing (1/17/2017), almost a half-million dollars have been raised.

Bill O’Reilly donated $25,000 from his foundation and Factor viewers made donations through the GoFundMe website. I’ve never examined Bill O’Reilly’s viewers, but it would appear that a majority would have political leanings to the right of center. Also, I am speculating that many of the donors are white. White and to the right of center? Huh!

Not that any of this should matter in this, the latter part of the second decade of the twenty-first century. The 1964 Civil Rights litigation took place over half a century ago and we’re currently celebrating the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, who was shot almost forty-nine years ago.

But it does matter. The liberals of this nation, including the current president and his administration are obsessed with race and make just about everything racial. President Obama, whenever he can fit it into a speech, mentions race and the fact that he is black. We know he’s only half black. Even though Obama campaigned on making the United States, not a red nation, not a blue nation, but a purple nation, it didn’t take long for him to jump into the race fray with the Henry Louis Gates incident, then came Michael Brown, then the rest.

For the ones who donated to send the Talladega College Marching Band to the inauguration, don’t expect liberals to suddenly like you because you donated to a predominately black college. Don’t expect them to quit calling you a racist. The fact that you’re a conservative makes you one in their eyes. Saying…”but, but, but, I have black friends, I patronize black businesses, I voted for Rueben Studdard on American idol,” etc., will get you nowhere.

Liberals don’t care about facts. Liberals are intolerant. They’re also racist and bigots. In fact, if you donated to Talladega College, you will be further demonized by the left.

My liberal Facebook friends have been rather silent on the Talladega College donations. They must be hiding under the table, and I would too. They certainly have egg on their faces. I would think it would be very humiliating for all liberals, not just those in the state of Alabama, to know that white conservatives made it possible for a predominately black college marching band to attend a presidential inauguration, an inauguration your ilk is planning to boycott and to perhaps stir up some mischief.

I suspect that the “tolerant left” will find ways to besmirch these youngsters anyway they possibly can. There’s no viler form of racism than what the left is currently exhibiting toward the Talladega College Marching Band, and the school itself.

Facebooktwitter