Well, its time to piss some more people off. I listened to all the usual hot air today. This was dominated by intra-Black verbal wars over the extent of the unforgivable nature of White guilt, not Zimmerman's supposed guilt, but White guilt.
My favorite was a program hosted by a bautiful cafe au lait woman professor from Princeton. She is committed to the "Tawana" Al Sharpton view of history and likes to talk endlessy of "oppression" whether it be actual oppression or notional oppression. She looks to me to be about 1/8th Black but somehow never speaks of her White ancestors as opposed to Professor Skip Gates who glories in his mixed ancestry.
On FNS, a somewhat Black congresswoman who is usually a pillar of rationality flew into a rage aginst a Black neurosurgeon interviewed at his Sun Valley vacation home. He had the temerity to opine that "if you think people love you then all they do is seen as loving, but if you think they hate you, all they do is seen as hateful." "Why don't we stop yelling at each other?" he asked. This pissed the congresswoman off so much that she started yelling, interrupting him and telling him that he was a "child of privilege" even though he assured her that he was raised in an inner city environment. She forgot the phrase "Uncle Tom."
And then there was the president's speech on Friday. I am convinced that most Americans do not mind having a president who happens to be Black. I do not. I voted for this one twice faute de mieux. I would have prefered to vote Republican but... Unfortunately for race relations "progress," Obama spoke on Friday as a spokesman for African Americans even though he has not a drop of African American blood in him. I do not think most Americans want a spokesman for Black America as president. They want someone they can identify with and Obama on Friday was not that.
IMO the Democrats will suffer from a backlash against all this in 2014. pl
I disagree. Travon Martin will be forgotten by all American voters in 2014 except for a few "ethnic entrepreneurs".(I really love that description. Whoever made it up needs to copyright it).
Posted by: r whitman | 21 July 2013 at 07:56 PM
Saw the same interview on FNC and had
a similiar reaction. It does not fit the
narrative of the aggreived parties. Chris
Wallace tried to shift the conversation to
statistical realities of black on black
murders and neither party would acknowledge
their relavancy. Until the ethiic steppin-manures
admit this factual representation the dialogue
of race will continually hit the wall.
Posted by: steve g | 21 July 2013 at 09:11 PM
i don't know how you do it. Most of these media shows are in the perpetual outrage business.
The percentage of blackness raises an interesting point. Barack Obama is culturally black, out of choice, even though he is not originally of the African-American community. Melissa Harris-Perry probably identifies better with black culture. The black community generally accepts people like them as authentically "black" in the American sense.
Lastly, I often regret having voted for Obama once, in 2008, but I don't consider him a stupid person. He wants blacks motivated to vote in 2014 during a midterm election when their numbers are usually lower in turnout. An off-year election when both sides are equally motivated isn't likely to be a repeat of 2010. If Pat is right I will, of course, give credit to his analysis.
Posted by: Will Reks | 21 July 2013 at 09:11 PM
IMO, only an incompetent Republican party would lose the mid-terms and the next presidency.
Obama/Clinton Democrats vs GWB/Reagan Republicans. What's the real difference in policy and actions? For registered independents like me the lesser evil has not and does not work anymore. We are consigned to unrepresented minority status for the foreseeable future!
Hopefully, when my great-grandchildren are voting adults there will be a party where the founding values and the Constitution are not just rhetoric and platitudes but the basis for sovereignty and governance.
Posted by: zanzibar | 21 July 2013 at 09:19 PM
I only voted for him once. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice . . . . ."
Posted by: Ex-PFC Chuck | 21 July 2013 at 09:23 PM
I listened to the President's speech and then read the text. What I heard is that if you are white, you are racist. From the trial we learned if you are hispanic, you are white - and thus racist. If you are Black, you are a victim; white people made you the way you are and only the Federal Government can make it better.
The president gave the African American community a speech. Meanwhile for those 200,000 or so pensioners in Detroit, many being African American, Mr. Orr, a major Obama fundraisers, is about to gut your pension plan. Does anyone believe Obama has your best interest at heart, truly, by giving a speech and keeping Trayvon on the front page (while your being robbed will be on page 9 - a few months from now)?
For you Liberals, well you can shout your defiance at 'those people' and prove your worth one more time by rallying to the President. Meanwhile the lawyer and former Constitutional Law Professor in the Oval Office is still directing the NSA to violate the Fourth Amendment. Remember your outrage Liberals? Do you remember his line in this speech: "You know, when I was in Illinois I passed racial profiling legislation..." Didn't that data do wonders in training police officers and eliminate all racial profiling in Illinois? Just think what all that NSA data will be able to do once the Executive Branch decides just what the 'racist' profile is.
Members of Congress, remember when Clapper and Alexander perjured themselves under oath? Well, they'll keep on doing as the head of the Executive Branch directs. But think of the campaign contributions the Travon imbroglio will bring in, especially as you keep in mind all the dirty goods the NSA has on you, your relatives and campaign contributors, so discretion being the better part of valor and all we'll expect you to do - well, just about nothing.
It appears to me that Trayvon Martin is more important to Obama dead than he ever was alive. Justice for Trayvon is the theme of the day; Justice for All? Apparently that went out of fashion along with upholding the Constitution of the Republic. But you are absolutely right, there will be an election year backlash in 2014.
Posted by: Fred | 21 July 2013 at 09:56 PM
Obama was the better of 2 bad choices both times?
If you could put Israel into a corner for a moment, you might see the huge difference between this inept (thankfully) community organizer playing at President and a successful - and, as it turned out, a good man
Romney is a stiff with the personality of a....very competent capitalist, but he seems to be a genuine person.
Obama is an extension of a teleprompter.
You bet he's America's first black President.
On Friday, he declared himself President of black America.
Posted by: twv | 21 July 2013 at 11:50 PM
twv
IMO Romnay would have been worse. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 22 July 2013 at 07:59 AM
So the Prez, sequesture and budget cuts be damned, heads for Martha's Vineyard. I wasn't aware it was such a hangout for "his people".
Despite the ravings from the lunatic fringe in the Department of "Justice" the laws throughout the various states covering the idea of "Stand Your Ground" seem to be on a solid footing.
Except in Arizona?, where McCain has announced it maybe should be reconsidered. His dwindling support and relevance even more apparent there.
Romney was not the man for the job, but I could not bring myself to give Obama my vote.
Meanwhile Detroit collapses on itself and things get crazier and crazier.
Posted by: John Minnerath | 22 July 2013 at 09:04 AM
Sir:
You've consistently said that.
Explain?
Posted by: twv | 22 July 2013 at 09:26 AM
Get ready for it.
Calling the Republicans "incompetent" is mildly complimentary.
Stupid is more accurate.
Posted by: twv | 22 July 2013 at 09:29 AM
Fred
Do you believe the ruling by the state judge saying that the Emergency Manager Orr bankruptcy plan is unconstitutional will have any impact on the Detroit situation ?
Posted by: Alba Etie | 22 July 2013 at 10:00 AM
TWV
IMO AIPAC and assorted hasbara Cohorts makes it impossible to put Israel in a box - in the context of American Politics & Foreign Policy . Mitt & BiBi were personal friends & corporate raiders together on Wall Street . I am absolutely convinced if we had elected Romney we would now be engaged with our 'best ally ' Israel in ongoing military operations against Iran . And that we would also have a no fly /boots on the ground in Syria . This would be in spite of what both the military /security /intelligence leadership would have advised in both Israel & USA . It would have been 'Operation Clean Break " on steriods ..
Posted by: Alba Etie | 22 July 2013 at 10:09 AM
r whitman: I agree. The economy is slowing again. That is the real risk to the Democrats.
Posted by: Matthew | 22 July 2013 at 10:20 AM
twv. Better that to candidate Romney who openly declared himself the potential President of Israel?
Few things absolutely disqualify someone from government service in my mind. But having a candidate openly declare that our foreign policy will be whatever Netanyahu advises, is clearly one.
Posted by: Matthew | 22 July 2013 at 10:23 AM
twv
I answered your question long ago. http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2012/09/romney-business-and-the-presidency.html
pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 22 July 2013 at 11:09 AM
I don't know what it feels to be black so the fact that a careful-to-timid guy like Obama (IMO anyway) chose to wade in suggests that the pain being felt in the black community over this entire episode is pretty real and pretty raw and needed to be addressed. Maybe it will hurt him politically -- he probably has a better idea about that than anyone here does -- but he thought it important enough to publicly acknowledge that he shares that pain anyway. I'm giving him points for the courage of his convictions.
Posted by: Edward Amame | 22 July 2013 at 11:27 AM
r Whitman
Martin will be a footnote to history but the resentment felt by the White blue collar base of the Republicans will be a factor. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 22 July 2013 at 12:09 PM
David Kirkpatrick, Cairo bureau chief for the NYT is on NPR (Fresh Air), arguing that the military ginned up the recent revolt to oust a duly-elected civilian government and democracy. Morsi did everything he could, despite a couple small mistakes, apparently. Egyptians had been whipped into an irrational hysteria against poor Morsi. Military bad, Morsi good, the Islamists never did any of the things they were accused of regarding imposing their religious views on the country.
Objective commercial journalism is a failed experiment.
Posted by: herb | 22 July 2013 at 12:39 PM
Given the brutal and painful history of this nation it is perfectly understandable that the 'black community' was feeling the way you note. But none of that changes the fact that in many cases, the 'black community', and the nation, were fed a load of bullshit, pure bullshit, about this entire tragic episode.
From the decision by the initial DA not to bring charges--to the bringing in of a 'special prosecutor' who promptly decided NOT to seek a grand jury indictment (because she thought she could not get it?), to the altered transcript by NBC News, and shown to the nation, insinuating Zimmerman's was a racist....and all the way up through the trial reporting....lies and false narratives, and more lies and and false narratives, the MSM got this wrong. Dead wrong. And keeps repeating it that way.
Obama had a choice....he could have kept repeating the false narrative, in a soothing and reassuring manner. Or he could have spoke to people like grown ups. All the people. Or he could have remained silent. Like most things he does...he took the easy way out.
'I could have been Travyon Martin' indeed. Yes, perhaps you could have Mr President. If you chose to charge at someone, in the dark, and sucker punch the person, and then bang his head in the concrete. If you had done that Mr President, you certainly could have been Travyon. That is what this case was--most likely, so the circumstantial evidence indicates, about.
I grant the President "the courage of HIS convictions), no doubt. I only wish he just had courage. Period. It could have been a 'teaching moment', instead of a 'touching moment'. As understandable as the latter was...it was the former that the nation needed. my two cents, anyway.
Posted by: jonst | 22 July 2013 at 01:37 PM
I disagree that being African American is a matter of blood. It's a matter of bearing the mark of an underclass, one that has existed so long it has developed distinct culture. Whether one is a member of that culture or not, when one is stripped of the benefit of the doubt simply because of that mark, one has earned their stripes.
Posted by: Mark Logan | 22 July 2013 at 02:08 PM
I so agree with you. I've always liked the saying concerning not judging until you've walked a mile in someone else's shoes. I also give Obama points for having the courage to say what he feels even though it will be unpopular with some people. If Democrats lose the coming elections because our president had the courage to speak his mind, than so be it, but I hope and yes pray, that Americans are wiser than that.
Posted by: Nancy K | 22 July 2013 at 02:12 PM
NancyK
That makes you sound foolish. You've never walked a mile in John Wilkes Booth's shoes. Do you judge him. You need to think clearly about politics. It is not a matter of "good intentions." pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 22 July 2013 at 02:16 PM
Mark Logan
Obama? He has never been oppressed a day in his life. He is the ultimate child of privilege. Fancy school in Hawaii, great school in California followed by Columbia and Harvard, what are you selling? He shares American Black culture? If so that is because he chose to do so. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 22 July 2013 at 02:20 PM
AE,
The Michigan legislature passed a second emergency financial manager law immediately after the voters over turned, via ballot initiative, the first one. I think both the Governor and the EFM are going to try and have the Federal courts overturn, or take precedence over, the state constituion. (not sure of the legal terminology).
I think this is a very bad precident. Both in superceding state constitutions, but in doing so on behalf of corporate entities. The second reason is this will be the same manufactured 'crisis' that will be used in an effort to 'fix' social security and generate billions in fees and commissions etc for WallStreet.
Posted by: Fred | 22 July 2013 at 02:33 PM