0 comment Friday, November 7, 2014 | admin
I don't even know where to begin with this piece.
It makes you feel as though you've gone through the looking-glass. Sure, the PC Republicans have been doing this kind of thing for a while, this playing of the race card, this ''who's the Real Racist'' game. But this is beyond that. Heaven knows the Democrats are low enough, but this bizarre competing as to who is the ''real racist'' or who is the real friend of African-Americans is just childish, and all it does is leave America with two pandering, race-card playing, politically correct parties, instead of one. And one is too many.
The GOP is becoming one huge embarrassing joke.
But there's one bright ray of hope: when this piece was posted at Free Republic, the first couple of comments were negative. Maybe some out there are not hopelessly mired in trying to outdo the Democrats at their own game.
From one of those comments:
''Yet this piece mirrors the Marxists' tactics in attempting to put Southerners, Democrats, especially white people, people of color, and everyone else at odds.
To call this screed historically accurate is beyond a stretch. There are shreds of truth woven in with ridiculous distortions.
Textbooks? Feh!
To blame the 'scientific' view of the relative intelligence and other characteristics of the races on Democrats demonstrates a real lack of knowledge of the development of scientific thought. The writer should obtain a copy of Ackerman's Natural History (1848), written before Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, and get a handle on what everyone learned in Anthropology thought.
Compare and contrast with The Bell Curve and see how that works out.
The bottom line is that the New Left has used historical distortion and identity politics to twist the fabric of American culture over a few decades into the current 'devil take the hindmost' political attitude held by the current party in power in DC.
If Republicans in general and Conservatives in particular cannot get beyond that methodology in order to gain and maintain control of the Federal Leviathan to rein it in and put it on a massive weight loss program, then nothing will really change and this nation will continue down the road to ruin, just driving on the other side of the center line.
5 posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2010 2:15:05 AM by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
Maybe there are others who are weary of this schoolyard taunting, this using of the race card by both parties. It's beyond ridiculous, and it's damaging to the country.
It makes you feel as though you've gone through the looking-glass. Sure, the PC Republicans have been doing this kind of thing for a while, this playing of the race card, this ''who's the Real Racist'' game. But this is beyond that. Heaven knows the Democrats are low enough, but this bizarre competing as to who is the ''real racist'' or who is the real friend of African-Americans is just childish, and all it does is leave America with two pandering, race-card playing, politically correct parties, instead of one. And one is too many.
The GOP is becoming one huge embarrassing joke.
But there's one bright ray of hope: when this piece was posted at Free Republic, the first couple of comments were negative. Maybe some out there are not hopelessly mired in trying to outdo the Democrats at their own game.
From one of those comments:
''Yet this piece mirrors the Marxists' tactics in attempting to put Southerners, Democrats, especially white people, people of color, and everyone else at odds.
To call this screed historically accurate is beyond a stretch. There are shreds of truth woven in with ridiculous distortions.
Textbooks? Feh!
To blame the 'scientific' view of the relative intelligence and other characteristics of the races on Democrats demonstrates a real lack of knowledge of the development of scientific thought. The writer should obtain a copy of Ackerman's Natural History (1848), written before Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, and get a handle on what everyone learned in Anthropology thought.
Compare and contrast with The Bell Curve and see how that works out.
The bottom line is that the New Left has used historical distortion and identity politics to twist the fabric of American culture over a few decades into the current 'devil take the hindmost' political attitude held by the current party in power in DC.
If Republicans in general and Conservatives in particular cannot get beyond that methodology in order to gain and maintain control of the Federal Leviathan to rein it in and put it on a massive weight loss program, then nothing will really change and this nation will continue down the road to ruin, just driving on the other side of the center line.
5 posted on Tuesday, October 26, 2010 2:15:05 AM by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
Maybe there are others who are weary of this schoolyard taunting, this using of the race card by both parties. It's beyond ridiculous, and it's damaging to the country.
Labels: American History, Gop, Pandering, Party Politics, Political Correctness, Race Card, Race-Baiting, Republicans, Stupid Party
0 comment Friday, July 25, 2014 | admin
I suspect we're all tired of reading and hearing about this story, but we turn away from it at our peril. It's indicative of how bad things have become here in the former United States between blacks and Whites.
The woman who called the police to report a possible crime in progress is now distraught because she has been accused ''unfairly'' of being a racist.
I suppose I sympathize with her because she is the target of the loathsome PC vigilantes, most probably White, who take it upon themselves to sniff out any political incorrectness and to bring the 'offender' into line, by threats and harassment if need be. On the other hand, her reaction to the (no doubt unpleasant) treatment she's gotten illustrates that she, too, is a believer in political correctness and all its works and pomps.
Her reaction reminds me somewhat of the response by an arch-liberal friend who reported troublesome neighbors in her apartment building, and was accused by said neighbors of 'racism.' She was mortified and aggrieved because she has spent her entire adult life doing and saying everything 'right', playing by the rules of PC, being so careful not to utter a wrong word or offend anyone of a victim group. This friend never dreamt she would be called 'racist' one day; I can only think she imagined that somehow, minorities could divine that she was ''on their side'' and that she was one of the 'good' Whites, not to be confused with those evil racist Whites who lurk around every corner in America. I think she was quite indignant that she was not immediately recognizable as 'friend' and not 'foe.'
I don't know Mrs. Whelan, but her statement seems to show that she is very much a liberal.
When I was called racist and I was a target of scorn and ridicule because of the things I never said, the criticisms hurt me as a person, but it also hurt the community of Cambridge," Whalen said. "Now that the tapes are out, I hope people can see that I tried to be careful and honest with my words," she said.''
Bless her heart, I am sure she is an honest and decent woman, and she was doing a citizen's duty in calling police, but she does not seem to understand the rules of PC. Under those rules, the minority is always the victim, the White always the guilty party. Always. No exceptions.
Whites, in these interracial situations, are to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise, contrary to our general 'innocent until proven guilty' principle. Of course most of us who think at all about these things know that there is literally no way to disprove one's ''racism'', when one has been accused by an offended 'victim.' Guilty. Off with his head, is the instant verdict.
Will James Crowley stand his ground, or will he become another 'typical White person' who is used as an object lesson?
It is through incidents like this, ''teachable moments'' so-called, that the politically correct dogma is reinforced and further driven home to Whites. The fact that a woman can be driven to tears by name-calling and 'unfair' accusations of something called 'racism' is proof that the PC vigilantes are far too powerful.
And yet, how much power do they have, if we no longer react to their threats and their name-calling? They have only the power we accord them. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in getting more 'hate' legislation passed, which will potentially give authorities power to prosecute people for their thought crimes or 'hate speech', but for now, we still have the ability to stand up to these bullies and petty tyrants, and to stop their coercion.
As to the ''unfair'' accusation of racism, I have a big problem with Whites who go on the defensive in cases like this, protesting that they are not 'racists'. I would instead love to see Whites stand up and reject the whole category of thoughtcrimes called 'racism' or 'prejudice.' I would like to see more people simply shrug off the label, or better yet, to challenge it, to dismiss it as an invented 'crime'.
There was no word 'racism' or 'racist' in the English language before the World War II era, at least. We did just fine without an invented word to describe the various and sundry behaviors that are now lumped together as 'racism.' When the word did enter our vocabulary, it meant more strictly acts of violence or physical harm, based on the race of the victim. The word 'racism' is one of the most elastic words in the English language, expanding to include any number of behaviors, thoughts, acts, and words, or even looks. The word has been rendered absurd by its overuse and its increasingly arbitrary and subjective use.
Maybe this is why some well-intentioned liberal Whites get caught in their own trap: it has become increasingly likely, given the expanding definition of 'racism', that every White will be accused/convicted of it at some point. It's almost reached those absurd, almost comic, proportions now. But I think very few liberals realize that they will unwittingly transgress the constantly-changing PC codes, and be hauled before the PC police for it. Even then, they don't seem to get it.
So is there such a thing as a 'fair' accusation of racism? Mrs. Whelan apparently did not violate the unwritten rule 'thou shalt not mention the race of a suspect unless he be White.' She did not refer to Gates and his unnamed companion (what happened to the second man, anyway?) in her 911 call. But if she had, would she then be a 'racist'? No, she would just be doing what a citizen should do: giving a description of the people in question.
I think what bothers me the most about situations like this is that too many Whites have no instinct to stick together and defend their own; even worse, there are too many who will actually point at another White while proclaiming their own ideologically pure views on race.
Even on the right this happens. Just read any thread on a rightwing forum on the issue of slavery or reparations. Most will protest their innocence: ''my ancestors didn't own slaves! I'm not from the South! My ancestors were still over in Europe then! My ancestors fought for the Union to free the slaves! Not guilty!' The implicit message is ''not me! That other guy over there is the one who's guilty.''
Why do so many Whites feel the compulsion to essentially throw some of our own to the wolves as a kind of sacrifice, and expiation for our (subjective) guilt? Why not show some solidarity? Yes, that too would be called racism, but then it's unavoidable. You will be called that at some time or another, and in fact, you've already been tried and found guilty simply by heredity.
Once we realize that we're considered guilty anyway by virtue of who we are, and who our ancestors were, that should free us considerably from the ''need'' to prove our moral rectitude and PC bonafides.
The woman who called the police to report a possible crime in progress is now distraught because she has been accused ''unfairly'' of being a racist.
I suppose I sympathize with her because she is the target of the loathsome PC vigilantes, most probably White, who take it upon themselves to sniff out any political incorrectness and to bring the 'offender' into line, by threats and harassment if need be. On the other hand, her reaction to the (no doubt unpleasant) treatment she's gotten illustrates that she, too, is a believer in political correctness and all its works and pomps.
Her reaction reminds me somewhat of the response by an arch-liberal friend who reported troublesome neighbors in her apartment building, and was accused by said neighbors of 'racism.' She was mortified and aggrieved because she has spent her entire adult life doing and saying everything 'right', playing by the rules of PC, being so careful not to utter a wrong word or offend anyone of a victim group. This friend never dreamt she would be called 'racist' one day; I can only think she imagined that somehow, minorities could divine that she was ''on their side'' and that she was one of the 'good' Whites, not to be confused with those evil racist Whites who lurk around every corner in America. I think she was quite indignant that she was not immediately recognizable as 'friend' and not 'foe.'
I don't know Mrs. Whelan, but her statement seems to show that she is very much a liberal.
When I was called racist and I was a target of scorn and ridicule because of the things I never said, the criticisms hurt me as a person, but it also hurt the community of Cambridge," Whalen said. "Now that the tapes are out, I hope people can see that I tried to be careful and honest with my words," she said.''
Bless her heart, I am sure she is an honest and decent woman, and she was doing a citizen's duty in calling police, but she does not seem to understand the rules of PC. Under those rules, the minority is always the victim, the White always the guilty party. Always. No exceptions.
Whites, in these interracial situations, are to be presumed guilty until proven otherwise, contrary to our general 'innocent until proven guilty' principle. Of course most of us who think at all about these things know that there is literally no way to disprove one's ''racism'', when one has been accused by an offended 'victim.' Guilty. Off with his head, is the instant verdict.
Will James Crowley stand his ground, or will he become another 'typical White person' who is used as an object lesson?
It is through incidents like this, ''teachable moments'' so-called, that the politically correct dogma is reinforced and further driven home to Whites. The fact that a woman can be driven to tears by name-calling and 'unfair' accusations of something called 'racism' is proof that the PC vigilantes are far too powerful.
And yet, how much power do they have, if we no longer react to their threats and their name-calling? They have only the power we accord them. Unfortunately, they have succeeded in getting more 'hate' legislation passed, which will potentially give authorities power to prosecute people for their thought crimes or 'hate speech', but for now, we still have the ability to stand up to these bullies and petty tyrants, and to stop their coercion.
As to the ''unfair'' accusation of racism, I have a big problem with Whites who go on the defensive in cases like this, protesting that they are not 'racists'. I would instead love to see Whites stand up and reject the whole category of thoughtcrimes called 'racism' or 'prejudice.' I would like to see more people simply shrug off the label, or better yet, to challenge it, to dismiss it as an invented 'crime'.
There was no word 'racism' or 'racist' in the English language before the World War II era, at least. We did just fine without an invented word to describe the various and sundry behaviors that are now lumped together as 'racism.' When the word did enter our vocabulary, it meant more strictly acts of violence or physical harm, based on the race of the victim. The word 'racism' is one of the most elastic words in the English language, expanding to include any number of behaviors, thoughts, acts, and words, or even looks. The word has been rendered absurd by its overuse and its increasingly arbitrary and subjective use.
Maybe this is why some well-intentioned liberal Whites get caught in their own trap: it has become increasingly likely, given the expanding definition of 'racism', that every White will be accused/convicted of it at some point. It's almost reached those absurd, almost comic, proportions now. But I think very few liberals realize that they will unwittingly transgress the constantly-changing PC codes, and be hauled before the PC police for it. Even then, they don't seem to get it.
So is there such a thing as a 'fair' accusation of racism? Mrs. Whelan apparently did not violate the unwritten rule 'thou shalt not mention the race of a suspect unless he be White.' She did not refer to Gates and his unnamed companion (what happened to the second man, anyway?) in her 911 call. But if she had, would she then be a 'racist'? No, she would just be doing what a citizen should do: giving a description of the people in question.
I think what bothers me the most about situations like this is that too many Whites have no instinct to stick together and defend their own; even worse, there are too many who will actually point at another White while proclaiming their own ideologically pure views on race.
Even on the right this happens. Just read any thread on a rightwing forum on the issue of slavery or reparations. Most will protest their innocence: ''my ancestors didn't own slaves! I'm not from the South! My ancestors were still over in Europe then! My ancestors fought for the Union to free the slaves! Not guilty!' The implicit message is ''not me! That other guy over there is the one who's guilty.''
Why do so many Whites feel the compulsion to essentially throw some of our own to the wolves as a kind of sacrifice, and expiation for our (subjective) guilt? Why not show some solidarity? Yes, that too would be called racism, but then it's unavoidable. You will be called that at some time or another, and in fact, you've already been tried and found guilty simply by heredity.
Once we realize that we're considered guilty anyway by virtue of who we are, and who our ancestors were, that should free us considerably from the ''need'' to prove our moral rectitude and PC bonafides.
Labels: Ethnic Division, Free Speech, Liberal Intolerance, Media Bias, Political Correctness, Race Card, Race-Baiting
0 comment Tuesday, June 10, 2014 | admin
But who's being taught, and who's doing the teaching? Is anybody learning anything?
Does anyone else get the impression that this Gates incident is being used opportunistically to hammer us some more with guilt and to further instill political correctness in the population?
I was disgusted to see that it was all over the news channels today. Early in the day there was coverage of the Cambridge police press conference in which the White House was requested to apologize. Later on in the day we heard that the president had summoned Sgt. Crowley, the latest victim of this race-baiting scam, to a private conversation in which things were smoothed over.
Lou Dobbs, who is one of the more reliable news personalities (though not free of political correctness) said that the president was turning this into a ''teachable moment'', and I thought: uh-oh. That means more lectures, more guilt, about 'racism', 'Jim Crow', 'the legacy of slavery' and Dixie Peach pomade. Please, spare us from such ''teaching.''
So in this typically witty piece from Mark Steyn, we learn that yes, some of that all-too-familiar 'teaching' is part of the script that's now being written for our edification:
Professor Gates is now saying that, if Sgt. Crowley publicly apologizes for his racism, the prof will graciously agree to "educate him about the history of racism in America." Which is a helluva deal. I mean, Ivy League parents remortgage their homes to pay Gates for the privilege of lecturing their kids, and here he is offering to hector it away to some no-name lunkhead for free.''
Maybe Steyn is kidding, but I would not bet on that; it sounds too plausible, and nothing is too silly to be believed these last seven months. More from Steyn's piece:
For everyone other than the president, what happened at professor Gates' house is not entirely clear. The Harvard prof returned home without his keys and, as Obama put it, "jimmied his way into the house." A neighbor, witnessing the "break-in," called the cops, and things, ah, escalated from there.
[...]
As to the differences between the professor's and the cops' version of events, I confess I've been wary of taking Henry Louis Gates at his word ever since, almost two decades back, the literary scholar compared the lyrics of the rap group 2 Live Crew to those of the Bard of Avon. "It's like Shakespeare's 'My love is like a red, red rose,'" he declared, authoritatively, to a court in Fort Lauderdale.
As it happens, "My luv's like a red, red rose" was written by Robbie Burns, a couple of centuries after Shakespeare. Oh, well. 16th century English playwright, 18th century Scottish poet: What's the diff? Evidently being within the same quarter-millennium and right general patch of the North-East Atlantic is close enough for a professor of English and Afro-American Studies appearing as an expert witness in a court case. Certainly no journalist reporting Gates' testimony was boorish enough to point out the misattribution.
[...]
In the Sixties, the great English satirist Peter Simple invented the Prejudometer, which simply by being pointed at any individual could calculate degrees of racism to the nearest prejudon, "the internationally recognized scientific unit of racial prejudice." Professor Gates seems to go around with his Prejudometer permanently cranked up to 11: When Sgt. Crowley announced through the glass-paneled front door that he was here to investigate a break-in, Gates opened it up and roared back: "Why? Because I'm a black man in America?"
Note: If there is no ''prejudometer'' in real life, I am sure there are even now some deranged liberals somewhere trying to develop one. Actually, I suppose it would be superfluous for White liberals and race-baiting minorities -- they already have a foolproof way of detecting 'prejudice': look for White folks, and there you have prejudice.
A side note: I wish 'Peter Simple's' columns might be published in book form; most of us have not had the opportunity to read them in the UK Telegraph over the years. Those of us who enjoy that kind of British whimsy combined with satire would enjoy his writings in book form.
Gates then told him, "I'll speak with your mama outside." Outside, Sgt. Crowley's mama failed to show. But among his colleagues were a black officer and a Hispanic officer. Which is an odd kind of posse for what the Rev. Al Sharpton calls, inevitably, "the highest example of racial profiling I have seen." But what of our post-racial president? After noting that "'Skip' Gates is a friend" of his, President Obama said that "there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately." But, if they're being "disproportionately" stopped by African American and Latino cops, does that really fall under the category of systemic racism? Short of dispatching one of those Uighur Muslims from China recently liberated from Gitmo by Obama to frolic and gambol on the beaches of Bermuda, the assembled officers were a veritable rainbow coalition. The photograph of the arrest shows a bullet-headed black cop � Sgt. Leon Lashley, I believe � standing in front of the porch while behind him a handcuffed Gates yells accusations of racism. This is the pitiful state the Bull
Connors of the 21st century are reduced to, forced to take along a squad recruited from the nearest Benetton ad when they go out to whup some uppity Negro boy.''
Does a grown, senior-citizen, college-educated, Harvard professor make comments like the 'yo mama' remark? I thought that was middle-school stuff. And yes, the policemen who responded to this call did look like one of those multicult TV commercials, with 'one of each' distributed among the group. It's absurd that we run our society on such a basis.
This incident might have, if handled rightly, represented a possible turning point, an opportunity for someone in a nationally-publicized case to refuse to cave in and apologize, to admit wrong where no wrong was done. What the ultimate resolution (if any) will be, isn't clear yet, but it appears that the White House and the race-grievance industry are manipulating this incident to their advantage. If we have to see more 'news' coverage, including the pompous, pretentious 'academic' holding forth on 'racism in America', while Whites once again sit meekly listening and offering mea culpas, I hope that it will perhaps be the cause of a few more people becoming fed up and finally proclaiming the PC emperor has no clothes.
Instead of feeble and futile protests of ''I'm not a racist!" I wish someone of note, someone with the world's attention, might break the ice and reject the whole rigged concept of 'racism' and all the cant and lies it has fostered over the last half century or so.
Does anyone else get the impression that this Gates incident is being used opportunistically to hammer us some more with guilt and to further instill political correctness in the population?
I was disgusted to see that it was all over the news channels today. Early in the day there was coverage of the Cambridge police press conference in which the White House was requested to apologize. Later on in the day we heard that the president had summoned Sgt. Crowley, the latest victim of this race-baiting scam, to a private conversation in which things were smoothed over.
Lou Dobbs, who is one of the more reliable news personalities (though not free of political correctness) said that the president was turning this into a ''teachable moment'', and I thought: uh-oh. That means more lectures, more guilt, about 'racism', 'Jim Crow', 'the legacy of slavery' and Dixie Peach pomade. Please, spare us from such ''teaching.''
So in this typically witty piece from Mark Steyn, we learn that yes, some of that all-too-familiar 'teaching' is part of the script that's now being written for our edification:
Professor Gates is now saying that, if Sgt. Crowley publicly apologizes for his racism, the prof will graciously agree to "educate him about the history of racism in America." Which is a helluva deal. I mean, Ivy League parents remortgage their homes to pay Gates for the privilege of lecturing their kids, and here he is offering to hector it away to some no-name lunkhead for free.''
Maybe Steyn is kidding, but I would not bet on that; it sounds too plausible, and nothing is too silly to be believed these last seven months. More from Steyn's piece:
For everyone other than the president, what happened at professor Gates' house is not entirely clear. The Harvard prof returned home without his keys and, as Obama put it, "jimmied his way into the house." A neighbor, witnessing the "break-in," called the cops, and things, ah, escalated from there.
[...]
As to the differences between the professor's and the cops' version of events, I confess I've been wary of taking Henry Louis Gates at his word ever since, almost two decades back, the literary scholar compared the lyrics of the rap group 2 Live Crew to those of the Bard of Avon. "It's like Shakespeare's 'My love is like a red, red rose,'" he declared, authoritatively, to a court in Fort Lauderdale.
As it happens, "My luv's like a red, red rose" was written by Robbie Burns, a couple of centuries after Shakespeare. Oh, well. 16th century English playwright, 18th century Scottish poet: What's the diff? Evidently being within the same quarter-millennium and right general patch of the North-East Atlantic is close enough for a professor of English and Afro-American Studies appearing as an expert witness in a court case. Certainly no journalist reporting Gates' testimony was boorish enough to point out the misattribution.
[...]
In the Sixties, the great English satirist Peter Simple invented the Prejudometer, which simply by being pointed at any individual could calculate degrees of racism to the nearest prejudon, "the internationally recognized scientific unit of racial prejudice." Professor Gates seems to go around with his Prejudometer permanently cranked up to 11: When Sgt. Crowley announced through the glass-paneled front door that he was here to investigate a break-in, Gates opened it up and roared back: "Why? Because I'm a black man in America?"
Note: If there is no ''prejudometer'' in real life, I am sure there are even now some deranged liberals somewhere trying to develop one. Actually, I suppose it would be superfluous for White liberals and race-baiting minorities -- they already have a foolproof way of detecting 'prejudice': look for White folks, and there you have prejudice.
A side note: I wish 'Peter Simple's' columns might be published in book form; most of us have not had the opportunity to read them in the UK Telegraph over the years. Those of us who enjoy that kind of British whimsy combined with satire would enjoy his writings in book form.
Gates then told him, "I'll speak with your mama outside." Outside, Sgt. Crowley's mama failed to show. But among his colleagues were a black officer and a Hispanic officer. Which is an odd kind of posse for what the Rev. Al Sharpton calls, inevitably, "the highest example of racial profiling I have seen." But what of our post-racial president? After noting that "'Skip' Gates is a friend" of his, President Obama said that "there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately." But, if they're being "disproportionately" stopped by African American and Latino cops, does that really fall under the category of systemic racism? Short of dispatching one of those Uighur Muslims from China recently liberated from Gitmo by Obama to frolic and gambol on the beaches of Bermuda, the assembled officers were a veritable rainbow coalition. The photograph of the arrest shows a bullet-headed black cop � Sgt. Leon Lashley, I believe � standing in front of the porch while behind him a handcuffed Gates yells accusations of racism. This is the pitiful state the Bull
Connors of the 21st century are reduced to, forced to take along a squad recruited from the nearest Benetton ad when they go out to whup some uppity Negro boy.''
Does a grown, senior-citizen, college-educated, Harvard professor make comments like the 'yo mama' remark? I thought that was middle-school stuff. And yes, the policemen who responded to this call did look like one of those multicult TV commercials, with 'one of each' distributed among the group. It's absurd that we run our society on such a basis.
This incident might have, if handled rightly, represented a possible turning point, an opportunity for someone in a nationally-publicized case to refuse to cave in and apologize, to admit wrong where no wrong was done. What the ultimate resolution (if any) will be, isn't clear yet, but it appears that the White House and the race-grievance industry are manipulating this incident to their advantage. If we have to see more 'news' coverage, including the pompous, pretentious 'academic' holding forth on 'racism in America', while Whites once again sit meekly listening and offering mea culpas, I hope that it will perhaps be the cause of a few more people becoming fed up and finally proclaiming the PC emperor has no clothes.
Instead of feeble and futile protests of ''I'm not a racist!" I wish someone of note, someone with the world's attention, might break the ice and reject the whole rigged concept of 'racism' and all the cant and lies it has fostered over the last half century or so.
Labels: Ethnic Division, Grievance-Mongering, Liberalism, Media Bias, Media Manipulation, Political Correctness, Race Card, Race-Baiting, White Guilt
0 comment Monday, June 2, 2014 | admin
That part is right, but the rest of the remarks are just more of the same old, same old, which got us where we are now.
Cambridge Mayor: 'We will never have a perfect society'
I am very pleased that the charges of disorderly conduct levied against Harvard University Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. have been dropped. The City of Cambridge, the Cambridge Police Department, and Professor Gates have released a joint statement that acknowledges "�.the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate." As the parties involved have placed this matter behind them, it seems appropriate for our community to do the same.
[...]
I genuinely believe that by bringing people together, by airing our differences, and by challenging our attitudes, we can foster a more tolerant, more inclusive society. I shall continue my efforts to help bring that about, and while we will never have a perfect society, we should never stop striving.
And as for dropping the charges -- well, I suppose it was predictable.
Cambridge Mayor: 'We will never have a perfect society'
I am very pleased that the charges of disorderly conduct levied against Harvard University Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. have been dropped. The City of Cambridge, the Cambridge Police Department, and Professor Gates have released a joint statement that acknowledges "�.the incident of July 16, 2009 was regrettable and unfortunate." As the parties involved have placed this matter behind them, it seems appropriate for our community to do the same.
[...]
I genuinely believe that by bringing people together, by airing our differences, and by challenging our attitudes, we can foster a more tolerant, more inclusive society. I shall continue my efforts to help bring that about, and while we will never have a perfect society, we should never stop striving.
And as for dropping the charges -- well, I suppose it was predictable.
Labels: Cutlural Marxism, Political Correctness, Race Card, Race-Baiting