Tag Archives: Michael Brown

BARAK OBAMA HAS DIVIDED THIS COUNTRY ALONG MANY LINES

A meme from “Go Left” appeared on my Facebook news feed stating the following: “People yell that President Obama has divided America. But Obama didn’t divide our country, their unwarranted hatred of him did. Electing him was like turning on a light in a dark room and exposing the cockroaches.”

GoLeftMeme

There are differences of opinion on how we should govern ourselves because our founding fathers set up our nation that way. Because of the way this nation was set up, we have the right to voice our opinions without fear of government reprisal.

There’s not one issue with which I agree with Barak Obama, and I have the right to say that. Since Obama has been in office, he has “trashed” Republicans repeatedly. Plus in the first term of his presidency, he called upon folks to listen for any comments that disparaged his policies and agenda. This is in contrast to former President George W. Bush, who, many times indicated that Americans had the right to disagree with him. President Bush even met with parents, spouses, and other family members of those military personnel who were deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, but were against the wars.

Barak Obama was elected to the presidency to be the president of all Americans, not just Democrats, not just blacks and other minorities. Instead of being the president of the United States, Barak Obama didn’t waste any time in interjecting himself into a local level dust-up in which he had no business becoming involved. This incident involved Professor Louis Gates, Jr., a black professor, who was returning to his Cambridge, Massachusetts home after a trip to China. Finding the door to his house jammed, he was trying to open it when he was arrested by police Sargent James Crowley. Sargent Crowley was responding to a 911 call in which the caller reported there were men breaking and entering Gates’ residence. Gates was never charged.

On July 22, 2009, six days after the incident, Barak Obama said the following: “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that…the police acted stupidly…there is a history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” Subsequently a “beer summit” was held at the White House where Professor Gates and Officer Crowley were treated to beers with Obama.

Again, this was something in which the current president should have never involved himself. It was a low-level local matter. If the local NAACP wanted to get involved, that would probably be okay, but the incident was nothing close to the level where the leader of the free world should be putting his priorities, including protecting the people of this country, aside to become involved in a local dust-up.

The cases of Treyvon Martin and Michael Brown were also local level incidents where the president had no business interjecting himself into, much less sending a representative to the funeral of Michael Brown, a thug who, before he was shot, robbed a convenience store and then while being apprehended, tried to take Police Officer Darren Wilson’s gun away. Subsequently, representatives of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, which arose out of the Michael Brown shooting, was predicated on a lie, and currently advocates the killing of law enforcement officers and the destruction of property, were invited to the White House.

Not only has this president sought to divide this country along racial lines, he has sought to divide us along socio-economic lines. He has constantly harped that the rich don’t pay enough in taxes and has told low and middle income individuals that the rich are evil and anyone who is rich somehow became that through nefarious actions. He has further indicated that the rich, particularly the rich Republicans hate the poor and want them to suffer when, in reality, it is the other way around. Because no one ever got rich receiving entitlements such as food stamps and welfare from the government, we want as many folks as possible to be off these programs so they can prosper.

The president and his henchmen have also led lower and middle income individuals to believe that the Republicans don’t care about the environment by constantly preaching the doctrine of man-made climate change. This administration and its followers have also indicated that Republicans want dirty air, dirty water, and to throw Grandma off the cliff (a phrase often used by conservative commentator, Sean Hannity). In the liberals’ quest to gain as much control over our lives as they possibly can, they have demonized fossil fuels and fracking, an innovative way to safely and efficiently extract oil natural gas from beneath the earth’s surface. Fracking was developed by the private sector oil companies…the government had nothing to do with it, except for trying to shut the process down. Because of this innovation, energy prices have decreased, giving low income and middle income individuals some much needed relief.

Of course, the liberals would have you believe that they are champions of lower and middle class individuals and that the Republicans only champion the rich. Well, the “tolerant” left won’t even acknowledge that there is information available that refutes man-made climate change. They are so anxious to cram that theory down our throats and to preach to the American people that unless we immediately get off fossil fuels and go to green energy, we’re doomed. But as President Obama indicated, the price of energy will necessarily rise. The president wants energy costs to rise so we’ll use less of it. If this president and the liberals were really champions of the poor and the middle class, they would be anxious for any discovery out there which would delineate the climate change theory.

Thus, we’re just as divided along socio-economic lines as racial lines.

And let’s not forget religious lines. Even though this president claims to be a Christian, he never misses a change to disparage Christianity. However, when it comes to Islam, he constantly advises the American people to not judge the nation or religion of Islam based on the actions of a few. Of course, after Dylan Roof, the shooter of black church members in Charleston, was seen in a picture on social media with a Confederate battle flag, anyone who so much as owns a Confederate flag belt buckle was labeled a racist, a white supremacist, etc. The president has also referred to Christians and gun owners as “clinging to their guns and their Bibles.”

I don’t see how anyone in their right mind, could say that hatred for Barak Obama divided this country. It was Obama, his administration and liberals at all levels who have divided this country, not the unwarranted hatred of him as the “tolerant” left would have you believe.

Facebooktwitter

THE UNRAVELING OF RACE RELATIONS UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA

There is no doubt that the United States and its citizens have witnessed the unraveling of race relations at the hand of President Barak Obama. But when did it all begin?

First Lady, Michelle Obama, tells blacks to just vote Democrat and have some fried chicken.

First Lady was never proud of her country until hubby, Barak was nominated for President on the Democrat ticket.

In my humble opinion, it began during the 2008 campaign for president when candidate Obama’s wife, Michelle, indicated that for the first time in her life, she was proud of her country. Mrs. Obama uttered these words after hubby and nailed down the Democrat nomination for president of the United States.

This didn’t set well with me and many others. This also indicated to me that she must have a history of anti-Americanism. This combined with her husband’s “hope and change” message further disturbed me. What kind of change was Barak Obama speaking of?

Fast forward to July 16, 2009. Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested outside him home in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The professor had just returned from a trip to China where he was doing research. Finding the door to his home jammed, he was trying to get it open when he was arrested by police Sargent James Crowley. Sargent Crowley was responding to a 911 call in which the caller reported there were men breaking and entering Gates’ residence. Gates was never charged.

Crowley_and_Gates

On July 22, the current president said the following about the incident. “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that…the Cambridge police acted stupidly…there is a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.”

This incident was unfortunate and I would have been made if I had been in Professor Gates’ shoes. Furthermore, this was local and nothing in which the president of the United States should become involved. That was my first reaction when I heard about the situation. Because this was a white police officer and a black man, the question of race was brought into the mix.

The above was six months into Barak Obama’s presidency. Is this a taste of things to come? Unfortunately, yes.

Fast forward again to Treyvon Martin, who was killed in a low level scuffle, two thugs going at each other. Because one was a light-skinned Hispanic, the liberals considered him to be white and Treyvon was black.

Once again, the president of the United States interjected himself into what should have been a local matter and indicated that if he had a son, the son would look just like Treyvon. Then Representative Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) uttered the words, “Treyvon was hunted down like a rabid dog and shot in the street,” before all the facts were in.

Fast forward once more to Michael Brown, a black man who was shot by a white policeman in Ferguson, Missouri after robbing a convenience store. Out of this incident arose the Black Lives Matter movement and the “hands up don’t shoot” mantra. The “hands up don’t shoot” chant arose when it was alleged that the white police officer, Darren Wilson, shot Mr. Brown in the back while his hands were in the air. This was proven false, making “hands up don’t shoot” predicated on a lie. But this didn’t stop the Black Lives Matter movement from continuing the chant, “hands up don’t shoot,” or chanting the following in the streets: “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon,” and “What do we want, dead cops. When do we want them, now.”

To make matters even more ridiculous, the current president sends a representative to Michael Brown’s funeral. He sends a representative to the funeral of a thug, a criminal? At the time, it was almost too much for me to fathom, especially when this president failed to even acknowledge Kate Steinle, a California woman who was murdered by an illegal alien.

The following frustrates me about the above incidents.

  • The current president injecting himself in low level local matters. Isn’t he supposed to be protecting the people of the United States of America (we know how that’s worked out)?
  • That we’re wasting so much time and energy on low level local matters.
  • That folks are refusing to wait until the investigations are complete and the facts are in to begin their protests, which invariably turn into riots and looting.
  • Once the investigations are completed and the facts are in, liberals don’t care about the facts and the investigation results and continue their disruptive ways.

Now, most of us have come to expect rioting and looting by the Black Lives Matter crowd whenever a black person is killed at the hands of a white person. The investigation and ensuing facts are irrelevant. The statistics illustrating that these are isolated incidents and that there is no pattern of whites killing blacks or that white policemen are deliberately hunting blacks to kill them are ignored.

On the Sean Hannity show last night, Geraldo Rivera indicated that the President Obama needs to step forward and unite the American people. Well, he’s spend 7-1/2 years dividing the American people, what makes you think he’s going to have a change of heart and begin uniting this country during the last months of his presidency?

I hear everyone around me, politicians, talking heads, posters on Facebook and Twitter say that we need to stop the hate, we need to sit down and talk, we need to put ourselves in the shoes of someone black. May we choose? I think I’ll put my feet in the shoes of former Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. She’s beautiful, talented, is from my state, and thinks like me. Actually, I don’t think that’s what the liberals meant.

I’m not attempting to diminish the struggles of blacks in the United States who persevered through slavery and Jim Crow laws; not in the least. Every human, every group, every race, etc. has had difficulties, has struggled, and has suffered. While God has blessed me beyond what I deserve, I’ve had my struggles and difficulties. And you know what, they’ve made me strong.

If you were twenty-two years old when Civil Rights Legislation was passed in the sixties, you’re about seventy-five or seventy-six now. If you’re under fifty, segregation was being eliminated before you were born. When Civil Rights legislation was signed into law, things didn’t automatically become perfect. In fact, things will never be perfect. Change of the nature directed by the 1964 Civil Rights Legislation, takes time to fully happen. Since the law’s inception, things have progressed to the point where a black president was elected after forty-four years. Whether you like and/or agree with Barak Obama, the United States seemed to have put racial divisions behind us in one generation. Blacks make up about 13% per the U.S. population and about 91% of those blacks are Democrats. Barak Obama had to have lots of white votes to get elected.

Unfortunately, the black president who promised hope and change has certainly given us change and not good change. He has spear-headed the unraveling of race relations in this country to a point where I sometimes think relations were better when we were segregated.

How are we going to get things back to normal, the way things were in early 2008? Encouraging love and condemning hate are not going to do it. This is something liberals and some conservatives are doing in order to feel good about themselves.  Let’s talk, let’s discuss. Let’s have a beer summit and invite everyone. Did you see Megyn Kelly last night? I’m not sure about talking either.

So, what I would like to propose is to rid ourselves of any political correctness, if we can. We may have already been brain-washed to the point where this is impossible. Then we need to quit interjecting race into everything. Just don’t mention it, act like it doesn’t exist. If there is an altercation between someone white and someone black, don’t throw in the race card unless you can prove beyond a doubt that race was involved. I’ve already let liberals know that they must find an instance where I’ve disparaged this president because of the color of his skin before they start hurling the racist accusation against me. I think it’s time that we all do this.

I believe that once we do the above, we can perhaps undo all the damage that Barak Obama has done with respect to race relations in the country. Then perhaps, we can clearly see the scenarios where real racism is involved and then take steps to correct those scenarios.

Facebooktwitter

IS THERE NO SATISFYING LIBERALS?

I still have more to say about the tolerant left accusing Fox Cable News of disparaging the poor, but I’m giving that a rest today because I came upon an article on Talking Points Memo that I came upon article that I want to write about. I’ll continue my “Liberals Gone Wild” series next week.

As many of you who read my posts regularly know, I have a folder in my favorites called “Stupid Liberal Articles,” and it is quite large. The article I just added is from talkingpointsmemo.com dated May 21, 2015 and authored by Jesse J. Holland. It is entitled, “Differing Portrayals of Waco, Baltimore Spur Reflection, WTFs.” I’m not going to speculate on what Mr. Holland means by “WTFs”. If it stands for what we all think it stands for, this is just another example of classless liberalism.

Being an unenlightened oaf, I had to read the article through a couple of times and study it to get the gist of what it means and I’m still not sure I have it right, but I’m doing my best to interpret it.

The author appears to be complaining about the riots in Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore, Maryland getting excessive media attention while the gun between police and bikers where nine bikers were killed is getting practically no attention. Mr. Holland indicates that while there were no deaths during the Baltimore and Ferguson protests, people immediately stereotyped all of the protesters as criminals. Holland goes on to say that we haven’t heard the level of disgust and dismay as you did over fires burning in Ferguson and in Baltimore. Civil rights attorney Charles F. Coleman, Jr. said only minority communities get blamed for violence, while no one blames white families or white communities for fatal violence by white men, characterizing such events as “isolated incidents.” Holland also remarked about how the current President of the United States described the Baltimore looters as “thugs,” and the media devoted hours of television and radio airtime to dissecting the social ills that affect the black community.

First of all, there’s a big difference. There were no protesting and no rioting in Waco. The Waco incident was a local matter and is being handled locally as it should be.

Having said all of the above, MR. HOLLAND, HOW CAN YOU BE SO STUPID? You appear to be griping because the media is not covering Waco like they covered Ferguson and Baltimore. Looters in Ferguson and Baltimore were labeled as thugs and were looting and rioting. Most were black and were protesting and rioting because two black men had been shot and killed by two white policeman. When speculation rose regarding the actions of the police, matters should have been handled locally. If they had been handled locally, the media would not have covered these two incidents. Unrest escalated in Ferguson and Baltimore because of the likes of Al Sharpton and other race hustlers moving in and whipping up the folks. Also, it has been alleged that billionaire liberal operative George Soros indirectly funded the protests and riots that took place in both cities. Liberals everywhere rushed to judgment in both incidents, championing Michael Brown and Freddie Gray and demonizing the police. We all know liberals don’t care about facts. They decide how they want an outcome to be and if it doesn’t turn out the way they want it to turn out, they protest and riot, claiming racism, sexism, and whatever other “ism” they can find. Again forget facts and forget fairness. This is how liberals operate.

And to make matters worse, the current President of the United States weighed in and it was not his place to weigh in on either the Ferguson situation or the Baltimore situation. Again, these were local matters and should have been handled locally. But our current President is half black and a racist to boot. He was a community organizer in Chicago before being elected State Senator in Illinois, then U.S. Senator, then President of the United States. He attended a church where anti-American radicalism was preached and hung out with the likes of Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorn of the seventies radical group, Weather Underground. Bill Ayers and members of the Weather Underground bombed the Pentagon and to this day Ayers is not sorry for what he did. We have a president that despises the United States of America and whose goal is to destroy the United States of America through different methods, including following Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals which includes undermining authority which would include our local police forces.

Mr. Holland, if you’re upset because the media focused on Ferguson and Baltimore, depicting the struggles of black Americans, and that certain factions were blaming black Americans for the rioting in these two cities, you need to take things up with the likes of Al Sharpton, George Soros, the tolerant left, and the current President of the United States. They’re the ones who promoted the protesting and rioting, along with the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie. I included the tolerant left in my list of folks to blame for the media coverage of Ferguson and Baltimore. It was the tolerant left that kept the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie going even after it was concluded that Michael Brown never had his hands up, nor was he running from the police.

Why aren’t there protests and riots in Waco after the shootout where nine bikers, labeled thugs, were killed after causing trouble? It’s been indicated that those who were part of the biker gangs were mostly white and Hispanic. The skin color of the Waco police officers involved was not reported and I don’t care about the skin color of the police in Waco. White folks were killed by the police, so Al Sharpton, the current President, George Soros, and the tolerant left don’t care about white folks. In fact, they are waging a war on white folks.

I’m a white woman who lives in central Alabama. I’m working seven days a week to make my small business profitable so that I can be my own boss and not have to go back to working for jerks. Being a conservative, I don’t see things in terms of race. Civil rights legislation was signed into law a half century ago. What do I think about Waco? It was bad, but I’m a police supporter and feel that if any nefarious actions took place, investigation and prosecution of these actions should be handled at the local level.

Facebooktwitter

ARE THEY REALLY THAT CONCERNED?

Just when I think I’ve heard and seen it all from the left, DC Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes-Norton comes out with something so unbelievable that I would think even the left would be embarrassed by her actions.

On Thursday, December 4, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes-Norton, Democrat from Washington D.C. appeared on The Sean Hannity Show on Fox News, purportedly to discuss the Michael Brown shooting. However, she indicated that she had not even read the evidence of the case. And to top that off, she said some things to the effect that she didn’t care about the evidence. Instead, she indicated that she wanted to discuss things on a higher level and also wanted to start a dialog on police-community relations.

Now I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes in acquiring guests for any kind of talk show, no matter what the type of show is. If Ms. Holmes-Norton agreed to appear on Hannity to discuss the Michael Brown shooting, she was clearly out of line in not reviewing the facts of the case. And even if she had a hidden agenda in making an appearance on Hannity,  would it not have been prudent for her to familiarize herself with the facts prior to her appearance?

Ms. Holmes-Norton would have gotten a lot more respect if she had been well-versed on the evidence and acknowledged the Grand Jury’s findings in the Brown case. Then she could have addressed her concerns regarding the relationship between the police and members of the black community; and perhaps she and Sean would have had a meaningful dialogue. But no, the Congresswoman simply looked like a buffoon.

Now that all evidence has revealed that Michael Brown did not put his hands up and attempt to run away from the police officer, liberals are indicating that their “hands up, don’t shoot” gestures are to draw attention to the many deaths of blacks at the hands of white law enforcement.  In other words, their jumping to conclusions found them in the wrong and they’re trying to backtrack.

If the liberals were really concerned about the number of killings of black men by white police officers, they should be doing some investigation. If they’re concerned that more blacks are being “pulled over” by the police than whites are being “pulled over the police”, why don’t they investigate this and make sure their allegations are true and show everyone their findings? Then ask for a dialogue regarding why this is happening and what can be done to minimize the problems.

This reminds me of the democrat friend of mine who indicated that there were hundreds of thousands of black voters who weren’t allowed to vote in Florida in the 2000 presidential election. Had they been allowed to vote, Al Gore would have won the election. To make an allegation such as this, there must have been lists of names that came from somewhere? When I asked my friend to provide me a list of 50 to 100 names of people who weren’t allowed to vote, she couldn’t. In reality, no such list existed and her allegations were not true.

Have I ever known liberals to come to the table prepared to have a reasonable dialogue? A few times, yes. Most of the time they begin by accusing you of racism, sexism, and not caring about healthcare, education, and the poor, etc. Again, aren’t they supposed to know what’s best for you? They’re so smart and they’re so caring. Furthermore, they have the academic elites on their side. Having said all of this, why, oh why can’t they do some research and put together reports on their concerns in order to have meaningful discussions? I’ll tell you why. It’s because they don’t care one bit about the stuff in which they pontificate. They just want to fundamentally change the United States of America into something very scary by dividing us into as many factions as possible and hurting everyone they possibly can.

If they really cared about police-minority relationships, they wouldn’t to around chanting “hand up, don’t shoot,” they would get the facts, do diligent research, present their conclusions, and then ask for a dialog in order to take steps to minimize the problems.

False allegations, emotional rants, name calling, and insult hurling are not going to get you anything. But maybe that’s really what the liberals want.

Facebooktwitter

ON MICHAEL BROWN AND ERIC GARNER

I haven’t written much about these incidents because stuff like this doesn’t interest me. They are both local matters and should be handled locally. It frustrates me when the national media spends so much time on these matters when there is so much more out there should take priority in their reporting of the news. However, a liberal Facebook friend of mine posted something that made me mad. I could say that it offended me, but I don’t get offended, I get mad. The term offended has been used so much by whiners and crybabies when somebody hurts their feelings; so I won’t use it. I hid the post from my wall, but it said something to the effect that if you want to get away with murder kill an unarmed black person and say it was self-defense.

What is frustrating about both of these cases is the rush to judgment, particularly by liberals, before the facts are even investigated. This is racism, pure and simple. Or at least I think it is. Remember, the definition of racism is what the liberals want it to be at whatever moment in time they choose. It could mean something today and mean something totally different tomorrow.

Another thing that is frustrating, and I’ve posted about this previously, is the fact that so many of the folks can’t seem to make a decision on their own, they look to so-called leaders to tell them what to think and how to act. From my observation, it’s mostly liberals that can’t think for themselves. And because liberals include the academic elite, that does strike me as a little strange. Conservatives, on the other hand, generally think for themselves. In situations such as the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, they reserve their judgments until the facts are investigated, remembering that you are innocent until proven guilty. That’s another thing; liberals use innocent until proven guilty only when it suits their purpose.

I’m not going to go into the facts of these individual cases, enough is out there already. Instead, through this post, my purpose is to discuss these matters at a higher level.

When I was in the ninth grade, a long, long time ago, my Civics teacher was a conservative. Remember, that was very long ago. He stressed to us that our police were fine people and the punks that were out there yelling “police brutality” were nothing but trouble-makers. The cold war was raging and Mr. Petty felt that it might be the communists who were infiltrating the country, deliberately causing racial strife. This way they could seek to divide this nation and conquer it.

We’ve come a long way and communism is not the threat that it used to be and whether or not the civil rights movement was fueled by communism for the purpose of divide and conquer has never been proven or exposed.

I’m not going to discuss the American justice system in this post except to say that it’s like everything else on this planet…not perfect, flawed. You never know what you’re going to get with a jury, you just don’t. But, keep in mind, there are many ways to adjudicate cases, both criminal and civil.

In examining what’s going on with respect to the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, it’s the liberal factions in the nation that are encouraging the protests. It’s the liberals that are seeking to bring back the phrase, “white supremacy,” something we haven’t heard in many decades. It’s the liberals that have introduced a new phrase, “white privilege,” the meaning of which is so abstract that none of us really understand what it means. Of course, the liberals will change the meaning to suit themselves when they deem it necessary. It’s the liberals that are rushing to judgment and seek to deviate from our judicial system whenever it suits their interests.

I’ve indicated this many times and I’m indicating it again. I, along with other conservatives, strive to live by the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King and his dream that we judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Is Dr. King weeping in heaven because a half century after the civil rights movement there are those who still judge people by the color of their skin? I think he may be.

The next time a liberal indicates to me that he or she is a follower of Dr. Martin Luther King. I’m going to tell them, no, you are not a follower of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Liberals do not like the United States of America and want to fundamentally change this country to be something totally opposite to what our founding fathers intended this country should be.

I told a liberal just the other day if they want to be cared for womb to tomb by the government, if they want massive re-distribution of wealth, and if they want to live in a politically correct society where thought control is exercised, there are plenty of places on this planet where you can go. I might even be willing to kick in a few dollars to fund your one-way ticket.

Here are a few differences between liberals and conservatives with respect to the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases.

  • Conservatives want to know the facts of these cases before rushing to judgment. Skin color is irrelevant. Liberals look first at skin color, then decide how they will think, facts be damned.
  • Conservatives tend to support our police officers, liberal do not and never miss an opportunity to put down our nation’s police force.
  • Even though our justice system is flawed, just like everything else on the planet, conservatives realize that it’s the best and fairest that it can be. Liberals like our justice system when they get an outcome that they like. When they get an outcome they don’t like, they protest and even riot.

Am I going to drill down any further in this post to discuss how I feel about each of these cases? No. Do I have opinions? Yes. If you want my opinions, contact me.

Facebooktwitter