Tag Archives: white privilege


A few days ago, a link to an article from some liberal feminist website appeared on my Facebook news feed. In the article a black woman was outlining the trials and tribulations of being black. She didn’t grown up in the ghetto living in a three room house with 6 siblings, all being raised by a single mother. Instead, she grew up in a middle class neighborhood with a Mom, Dad, and a swimming pool. She attended good secondary schools and received a scholarship to Harvard. Everything had fallen into place in her life, including marriage and career. Yet, she was griping about racism and white privilege.

It seems as though when someone would ask her where she was going to college and she answered, “Harvard,” folks would ask her, “Is that the one in Massachusetts?” She further observed that white people weren’t getting this type of treatment.

In addition to the above, she claimed that a high school algebra teacher indicated that she was the only “spook” in the class. She also described an incident where a black classmate was accepted to UCLA. A white student, who was rejected indicated that the black student must have gotten in unfairly because of affirmative action. If there was ever a good reason for repealing affirmative action policies, which are discriminatory to minorities, this is one.

I grew up in Cullman, Alabama and currently live in the greater Birmingham, Alabama area. I am somewhat skeptical about this woman’s claims because in this area, being the hotbed of racism, according to the mainstream media and the left, the stuff she’s claiming was said to her and about her just isn’t said where the person talked about can hear it. I’ve heard things said in private, but not to a person’s face. I can only remember a few times when I heard the word, “spook,” said while referring to blacks and that was a long time ago.

I realize some things can get annoying. I have a friend from up north who thinks all southerners eat grits three times a day, when in fact, I’m not a big grits eater at all. For me to enjoy them, they have to be “dressed up,” with items such as shrimp, cheese, smoked sausage, and other good stuff. If they’re on my breakfast plate, I’ll eat one or two bites, but that’s about it. If we’re in a restaurant and a grits entre is on the menu, she will ask me if I’m going to order than. One time at a breakfast buffet, she asked me, “Are you getting grits?” This annoys me, but like Jesus said in First Peter, you should accept what was said, forgive, and not retaliate. In fact, this is something that’s really laughable.

A few weeks ago, I was sitting in the waiting room of the Express Oil Change close to my home. I was in there with an elderly gentleman and another lady who looked to be in her twenties or early thirties. ESPN was on the tube, and they were talking about Alabama’s game with Southern Cal that was coming up the next day. The gentleman said to me and the other lady, I know y’all aren’t happy about football season starting because and that would be all we were going to hear about for the next 4-1/2 months. I replied to him, “Oh contraire. I’m an Alabama alum, a season ticket holder, and own and manage an Alabama sports information website. I gave him a business card and invited him to visit my site. He then asked me if this was a clothing site. I explained the site to him and even showed it to him on my phone. He was obviously surprised that a woman would be well-versed in football. It was a fun thing to see the surprised look on his face and I laughed about it. However, after telling a few of my women friends about this, they were shocked and considered the old gentleman a sexist.

Why not be glad and enjoy the surprised look on someone’s face when you don’t fit in the square hole, to which they think you belong. In fact, I get a lot of surprised looks from guys when I tell them about my website. Some left wing feminists probably think I should get my nose out of joint and act offended. Now why would I do that, I want everyone with whom I speak to visit my Alabama sports website, make it their homepage, and click on the ads.

By getting puffed up and wearing her feelings on her sleeve every time something with a racial connotation is said to her by folks who are surprised that she doesn’t fit the stereotype they had in their heads for blacks, she is masking incidents of true and hurtful racism, and they are out there, that should be dealt with and corrected.

This particular woman who wrote this article has a good life. She should enjoy it and enjoy to a certain extent surprising folks with her outstanding credentials. I did note that she is a native of Los Angeles. Well, maybe folks in in the liberal city of Los Angeles act in the manner she describes, but we don’t act like that here in Alabama. We also know where Harvard is. Guess in Los Angeles, they don’t.



Perhaps it was required reading for you at some point when you were in school. Are you a child of the sixties who felt that nothing like that could ever happen in America? Or, you a child of the nineties who thinks that we’re not there yet, but could be in a decade or so? Or, are you someone like me, a conservative, who liberals often refer to as an unenlightened oaf. Are you thinking that many aspects of George Orwell’s novel, published in the 1940s, reflects the times we’re living in now?

I read 1984 when I was in Junior High School and didn’t get much out of it because I was really too young to understand governments and social norms. It seemed so far-fetched from the time we were currently living in. I read it again in the year, 1984 and understood it much better. As a young adult and somewhat of a political person, I knew that we were a long way from the culture depicted in Mr. Orwell’s novel. However, I could see it maybe coming to fruition sometime in the twenty-first century.

Fast-forward to the twenty-first century where the United States has elected the most far left president in its 200 plus year history. The mainstream media is in the tank for him and often resorts to blatant lies to push his agenda.

The novel, 1984 was authored by English writer, George Orwell and published in 1949. It is set in a country called Airstrip One which was formerly Great Britain. Airstrip One is a province of the super state, Oceania. Oceania is in a world of perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, and public manipulation, dictated by a political system named, English Socialist, Ingsoc, for short. Oceania is controlled by “the party,” who is headed up by “Big Brother,” who may or may not exist. The party seeks power for its own sake and is not interested in the common good of others.

After reading the novel, in its entirety, and researching the writings of others who might think like me, I was unable to find a writing of any substance which paralleled my thoughts on how we’re living in a culture with similarities to the 1984 culture.

The telescreen is omnipresent all through the novel. It is a device that is strategically position so that every party member can be watched at all times. While there are certain hiding places where one can go to avoid being seen by the powers at be, if one continues to go into hiding for a period of time that is “too lengthy,” the telescreen and the powers behind it will address that person, telling him or her to move to a place where they can be seen. If that person fails to comply, the “thought police” will arrest that person, taking him or her to various torture chambers where that person is whipped, beaten, and brainwashed into submission.

Because independent thought is forbidden on Airstrip One and probably throughout Oceania, the “thought police” are ever present in an effort to determine what thoughts a party member may have. Facial twitches, excessive laughter, scowls, smiles, etc. will serve to indicate that a member’s inner thoughts may be detrimental to the goals of the party.

In other words, the thought police are trying to get into your head and determine what you are thinking. Of course any independent thought will lead to unspeakable things happening to the person guilty of independent thought.

Does this remind you of “hate crime” laws, implemented during the latter part of the twentieth century? The crime of murder is worse if you kill them because of the color of their skin, their ethnicity, their religion, etc. Thus, prosecutors try to get into the murder’s head, try to determine the motivation for the killing. Was the murder out to kill someone just because he or she wanted to kill someone? Or was the murder committed because the perpetrator hated the victim’s skin color, ethnicity, religion, etc.? How do you know, how can you tell?

In 1984, the thought police had a free reign over party members. Anyone they suspected of independent thoughts was imprisoned and subject to torture and brainwashing.

They were trying to get into heads. Same thing, in this day and age. The left, the implementers of hate crime legislation, are trying to get into your head, trying to extract your thoughts, even though no credible way to do that exists.

Moving right along, consider the fact that anyone can be accused of racism by the left at any time and for any reason. And if the left can’t point to something you have said or written where you have besmirched someone because of skin color or ethnicity, they tell you that because you are white, you have that insidious racist gene inside you that must be purged from you by whatever means necessary. I’ve seen this time and time again in the last eight years. Sadly, as the left continues this diatribe against white people and continues to promote the white privilege farce, people will begin to believe their virulent regurgitations.

That’s what was happening in 1984. Subjects were bombarded with lies from Big Brother and the upper party, that they soon came to believe the lies, after being submitted to torture and brain washing. Politicians lie, the media lies. They say if you lie about something enough, it becomes the truth.

The above is just one area in which we can compare our culture to that in the novel, 1984. Additional articles will be published soon.



An article posted to American Thinker, yesterday, June 16, 2015, authored by Christopher Chantrill, entitled “The Only Privilege in America is Liberal Privilege,” says it all.

In the last couple of years, we are hearing the term, “white privilege.” Frankly, I wasn’t sure what it meant, so I googled it, and I’m still not sure if I have a firm grasp on “white privilege.” “White supremacy” was a term used several decades ago with much of its use by the Ku Klux Klan, and the phrase is now surfacing in the 21st century, used by liberals desiring to label all white Americans as inherently racist and bigoted.

In his writing, Mr. Chantrill indicates that “white privilege” and “male privilege” make good catchphrases for community organizers and social justice warriors. They can make anyone who is not a male and who is not white victims and blame the men and the white folks.

I never thought of the term, “liberal privilege” until I read Mr. Chantrill’s article. Liberal privilege exists! A liberal can say anything and get away with it. Remember when the late Senator Robert Byrd, Democrat from West Virginia, used the n-word on the Senate floor? Very little was said about it and the liberals gave him a pass. Also, the late Senator was a former member of the Ku Klux Klan. That little fact very seldom surfaced and when it was brought out, mostly by conservatives, liberals were quick to dismiss it indicating that the Senator was a changed man. If a Republican was running for the House or Senate and had once been a member of the KKK, he would be immediately demonized and forced out of the race.

When speaking at the 100th birthday party of the late Republican Senator Strom Thurmond from South Carolina, Senator Trent Lott, Republican from Mississippi told the attendees that this country would have been much better off if Senator Thurmond had been elected President in 1948 when he campaigned for the presidency under the States’ Rights Democratic (Dixiecrat) party. Senator Thurmond had some personal issues and was a strong segregationist. Senator Lott ultimately had to resign his position as House Majority Leader because of a speech made at a private birthday party honoring a 100 year old gentleman. The movement to demonize Senator Lott was led by liberals, of course.

I have mentioned so many times in my posts that liberals change the definition of racism to meet their needs of the moment. What passes for racism these days is beyond me. But as I’ve indicated many times on many posts, I have not evolved, so I’m an unenlightened oaf and incapable of understanding liberal thought.

A liberal can accuse a conservative of anything and it doesn’t have to be true. Then, the burden of proof is on the conservative to prove what the liberal said is false. When former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney was running for president in 2012, then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, on the Senate floor accused candidate Romney of not paying his taxes. Of course, Governor Romney had paid his taxes and had to show proof that he did. When asked about his lies on the Senate floor about Governor Romney, Senator Reid responded, “He didn’t get elected.” There was no remorse on the part of Senator Reid for his deliberate lies.

If you’re not convinced that liberal privilege is dominant in American political culture, remember Brendan Eich who was forced to resign his position as CEO of Mozilla, because he made a donation to a group that supported traditional marriage (that between one man and one woman).

Liberals “holler” to the top of their lungs that conservatives are ignorant, racists, bigots, uneducated, haters, morons, etc. They get away with it and it’s left to the conservative to prove that what liberals are saying about them s untrue. In fact, I believe it’s the liberals who are the racists, the bigots, and the haters.

How do we stop liberal privilege? It’s hard to do when the main stream media has their back. In addition to being racists, bigots, and haters themselves, liberals are also bullies. And what happens when you turn on a bully and give it right back to him or her? They usually roll over. We have to remember that liberals can’t win argument on the facts, conservatism is much more defendable that liberalism. When liberals begin their usual methods of operation, hurling insults and attempting to force conservatives to lose their train of thought, conservatives must be prepared, stay focused on the issue(s) at hand, and suggest a reasonable debate of the issue(s). That will make a liberal turn and run quicker than anything.

I want to thank Christopher Chantrill for his coinage of the term “liberal privilege” and his valuable insight to the real privileged in America today.



If you don’t already know, in my browser favorite’s folder, I have a subfolder, entitled “stupid liberal articles,” that is filling up fast. Just when I think I’ve seen the stupidest thing possible, something comes along that is even more stupid.

Jaime Grant, PhD., Director, Global Transgender, Research, and Advocacy Project (whatever), wrote an article in the Huffington Post, on December 30, entitled, “18 New Year’s Resolutions to Fight Racism.” As I said, I have some stupid articles, but this one seems to be the watermark. In fact, as I add additional articles to my folder, I am going to compare them to this article to determine their stupidity ranking.

In her post, Dr. Grant sites a 1988 article by Peggy McIntosh entitled, White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack. So I guess the term, “white privilege,” is not something recently coined by liberals. In her article, Ms. McIntosh opines that blacks have the following issues:

  • They cannot arrange to be in the company of other blacks, if they wish to do so.
  • If they have to move, blacks can’t be sure of being able to move to a neighborhood that they can afford and would like to live in.
  • They’re not sure their neighbors in any location in which they might move will be pleasant or neutral to them.
  • They are not sure they can go shopping alone and be able to return safely home.
  • Blacks can’t be assured of turning on their TVs or opening their newspapers to the front page and finding blacks well represented.

Ms. McIntosh goes on to site eight other complaints where she feels that whites have it better than blacks. (Excuse me for putting this is plain English, I’m tired, it’s getting late, and I have a busy day ahead of me tomorrow.) This article was written in 1988, a mere twenty-four years after the passage of the Civil Rights Acts and the Voting Rights Act. Things were changing and she may have had a point that blacks still were not widely represented on TV and in the newpapers. I had black friends in the eighties and many of them were like me, shop-a-holics. I don’t recall one black friend being afraid to go out shopping by herself because she was afraid she wouldn’t make it home safely. The first bulleted point is extremely stupid and could easily have been remedied by Ms. McIntosh throwing a party at her house and inviting only blacks. Whenever anyone has to move to a new location whether across the country or across town, there are always uncertainties.

Dr. Grant opens her article by stating that the destruction of black life in this country is built on white silence, on white heartlessness about black people’s imprisonment and murder. She states that police and others are killing black people in our names, with our safety as their justification. So, let’s take a hypothetical situation. A black man is on drugs and is beating up on his wife and children at their home in a predominantly black community. A policeman goes in and shoots the black man. I guess the policeman is doing that for us white folks and not for the wife and kids and others in the neighborhood who might have to deal with this crazy guy

I’m not going to list Dr. Grant’s eighteen New Year’s resolutions that we white people should incorporate in order to fight systemic racism, you can Google the article and read them yourself. However, here are a couple of the highlights.

  • Dr. Grant indicates that white folks who choose to fight racism by choosing to live in a majority black neighborhood should not expect their black neighbors to embrace them because white people, coming into black neighborhoods might make things worse. She also says that white folks must accept being hated by blacks because it’s okay for blacks to hate whites. By moving in, a white person just might cause the property values to increase. What a horrible thing to do to your neighbors, causing their property values to increase, causing their net worth to increase. Dr. Grant says an increase in property values would keep other “people of color” out. I don’t know about you, but this is about the most racist statement I’ve heard in a long time. She’s stereo-typing, making sweeping statements that all blacks are poor and are unable to procure houses in upscale neighborhoods. RACIST…RACIST…RACIST!
  • Another detriment of whites moving into a predominately black community is that they might bring businesses into the community that don’t reflect the existing culture. So, forget opening a health food grocery store like the current first lady says she wants to see in every neighborhood. Let’s restrict the food establishments allowed in predominately black neighborhoods to restaurants that serve only fried foods and vegetables swimming in grease. Let’s even bring lard back. This is so RACIST and so WRONG. It sickens me, a conservative, who wants more than anything else for us to judge people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
  • Dr. Grant also wants us to revamp the way we celebrate holidays such as Thanksgiving and the Fourth of July. These holidays, she says, glorify our racist past. We need to revamp these holidays so that white children should begin to develop critical skills around the way our nation addresses (or fails to address) its history of colonialism, slavery, and white supremacy. While I get that Dr. Grant thinks we should change the way we celebrate Thanksgiving and the Fourth of July (although she doesn’t make any suggestions for change), I’m not sure what “critical skill around the way our nation addresses…” But again, I’m a southern white conservative Christian, or an unenlightened oaf.

My understanding of this article is that Dr. Grant wants to take us back to the days of de-segregation, perhaps prior to the 1950s. She obviously thinks that blacks are inferior to whites and are not able to make their own way in this world. Therefore, they need the whites to help them and the whites should help them because they (blacks) are inferior. But yet, Dr. Grant thinks that it’s okay for blacks to hate whites and that whites should accept their hatred because of white privilege.

I’ve got to end this post because the more I study Dr. Grant’s writing, the more nauseous I get. DR. JAIME GRANT, PHD, DIRECTOR, GLOBAL TRANSGENDER RESEARCH AND ADVOCACY PROJECT, you are nothing but a RACIST and a BIGOT. You obviously don’t adhere to the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. You’re not fit to wipe his boots!



In my Friday post, I indicated that this administration is at war with everything that is me, a southern, white, conservative Christian. I took “southern” first and outlined an article by Michael Tomasky published in the Daily Beast. Today, I’m going to take “white.” And there is a war on those of us who belong to the white race.

Congressman Mo Brooks, Republican from my state, Alabama, in August of this year conveyed his thoughts that the Democrat party is waging war against white Americans. According to the Congressman, the Democrats are claiming that whites hate everyone that’s not white. We all know that’s not true, but when have Democrats ever cared about the truth? They don’t have to tell the truth, they have majority of the media behind them, a media who will not expose their lies.

The term, “white privilege” has been tossed about frequently during the last several months. According to Wikipedia, white privilege is a term for societal privileges that benefit white people in western countries beyond what is commonly experienced by the non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances. Wikipedia goes on to say that these privileges are unearned and are distributed based on values of the dominant group, which in the west is white people.

That’s a little vague, but I’m going to go with this definition. So, as a white person, I benefit from privileges that non-whites don’t have. After wracking my brain to come up with some areas in which I’ve benefitted because I’m white, only the following comes to mind. During the mid-nineties, I worked with a young black woman who lived in an upscale apartment complex in a trendy part of town. One Saturday afternoon, she stopped by the local super market after playing softball. As you would expect, she wasn’t exactly dressed in her finest garb. Management at the super market gave her a hard time when she tried to write a check. On the following Monday, Angela was telling me about the incident and I told her upfront that if I had gone in the store wearing something similar I probably wouldn’t have been hassled. We then laughed about her protesting that she wanted the right to go out in public looking like a bum. So, I guess it’s a white privilege that I can go in most business establishments looking slovenly whereas as fellow blacks might be given a hard time. Again, though, I don’t know what I can do about it. It’s one of this planet’s many imperfections.

Back to the war on whites, it’s so obvious that democrats demand that we feel guilty because we’re white, and then should accept any bad behavior by blacks because we have to understand their rage at having been considered second class citizens until fifty years ago when civil rights legislation was passed.

In 2012, the University of Minnesota at Duluth sponsored an ad-campaign designed to achieve racial justice by raising awareness of white privilege. According to theblaze.com, the project disseminated its message that society was setup for whites and such is unfair, through an aggressive campaign of online videos, billboards, and lectures. The ads feature a number of Caucasians confessing their guilt for the supposed privilege that comes along with their fair features.

Theblaze.com goes on to further state that the campaign held a series of lectures and events on campus one including a presentation by Tim Wise, author of Dear White America. In his book, Wise confesses to having a fantasy where he turns to someone wearing a “God Bless America” button and asks him, “Why can’t you just get over it?” In another Wise book written after the 2010 mid-term elections entitled, “Letter to the White Right,” quotes are included which dance dangerously close to an open desire for genocide.

While Tim Wise was just one of the featured speakers, the entire campaign indicates that hundreds of millions of people should be labeled racists and unless you go to bed weeping at night because you’re white, you’re one of them.

In April 2014, the fifteenth annual National White Privilege Conference was held in Madison, Wisconsin. According to dailycaller.com, the conference was funded, in part, by hotel tax revenues, the University of Wisconsin, and the City of Madison. In other words…tax payer dollars.

Kim Radersma, a former high school English teacher hosted a session, “Stories from the front lines of education: Confessions of a white high school English teacher.” Radersma indicated that teaching was a purely political act and neutral people should get the #@%& out of education.  The educator went on to say that you can’t choose to be neutral, you are either a pawn used to perpetuate a system of oppression or you are fighting against it. All teachers who do not actively confront the system are promoting white supremacy. Ms. Radersma also said that white people fighting oppression is akin to an alcoholic trying to resist the temptation to drink. The dark sickness or racism is at the heart of all actions of white people.

The purpose of this post is not to pick apart the revelations of Mr. Wise and Ms. Radersma. Instead, I’m simply indicating to those who are reading my post that it sure looks like there is a war on white people. The current president, even though he is half black, was elected to be a president to all United States citizens. However, when  a white vs. black incident takes place, he always takes the side of the black without knowing the facts. Furthermore, the incidents where he’s known for getting involved are local incidents and should be handled at the local level. However, he always bumps these incidents up to a national level. Once again, he’s supposed to be president to all of us.

Do I feel threatened just because I’m white? Not yet. However, a number of years ago, I was discussing a matter with a friend and even though the friend claimed to be conservative, she told me that I was looking at things from a “white perspective.”

Having said the above, I sincerely believe that a war on white people does exist and it’s only going to get worse. Furthermore, electing conservatives to public office is not going to stop it. Just like racism, you can pass as many laws as possible to prevent it, but it’s never going to end until people choose to end it in their hearts.