It’s Friday, July 15th, 2016,…but before we begin, a study in stark contrasts: Exhibit “A”: The Great Divider:
Exhibit “B”: Texas Governor Greg Abbott:
Any questions; any questions at ALL?!?
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, courtesy of the WSJ, more irrefutable facts which belie the prevarications peddled by The Dear Misleader and his Progressive puppets, as Heather Mac Donald declares it’s…
Two years of corrosive rhetoric about racist cops, based on falsehoods—with disastrous effects.
“…Make no mistake: Assertions about systemic, deadly police racism are false. That has been true throughout the period following the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., in 2014; recall that the cop involved was ultimately exonerated by the Justice Department. But no number of studies debunking this fiction has penetrated the conventional story line.
A “deadly force” lab study at Washington State University by researcher Lois James found that participants were biased in favor of black suspects, over white or Hispanic ones, in simulated threat scenarios. The research, published in 2014 in the Journal of Experimental Criminology, confirmed what Ms. James had found previously in studying active police officers, military personnel and the general public.
In 2015 a Justice Department analysis of the Philadelphia Police Department found that white police officers were less likely than black or Hispanic officers to shoot unarmed black suspects. And this month “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force” by Harvard economics professor Roland G. Fryer Jr., analyzing more than 1,000 officer-involved shootings across the country, reports that there is zero evidence of racial bias in police shootings.
All of which brings us to President Obama’s extraordinary statement last week alleging systemic racism in American law enforcement. He was speaking in the aftermath of two highly publicized fatal police shootings. Viral video captured the shooting of Alton Sterling in Baton Rouge, La., as officers attempted to disarm him, and the aftermath of the shooting of Philando Castile during a car stop outside St. Paul, Minn.
Those shootings look horribly unjustified based on the videos alone; but information may emerge to explain the officers’ belief that the victims were reaching for a gun. A few hours after President Obama made his remarks, the Dallas gunman assassinated five police officers, in a rampage that police officials later reported was driven by hatred of white officers and white people generally.
Mr. Obama’s statement undoubtedly had no causal relationship to the Dallas slaughter. But it certainly added to the record of distortion and falsehood that has stoked widespread animus toward the police.
It bears repeating: Unjustified shootings by police officers are an aberration, not the norm, and there is no evidence that racism drives police actions…”
That bears repeating: all the noise coming from The Left notwithstanding, feelings cannot trump facts; there is NO evidence…none, nada, zero…that racism drives police actions!!! After all, if the facts were at all debatable, does anyone really think we’d agree…
…with Bill O’Reilly?!?
For more on the truth just waiting to set American Blacks free from the lies and repression of their Liberal “allies”, we turn to Townhall.com and this two-part column from the great Thomas Sowell:
The War on Cops Part I
“…In addition to the murderers who have killed people they don’t even know, there are those who created the atmosphere of blind hatred in which such killers flourish.
Chief among those who generate this poisonous atmosphere are career race hustlers like Al Sharpton and racist institutions like the “Black Lives Matter” movement. All such demagogues need is a situation where there has been a confrontation where someone was white and someone else was black. The facts don’t matter to them.
The same is true of the more upscale, genteel and sophisticated race panderers, including the President of the United States. During his first year in the White House, Barack Obama chastised a white policeman over his handling of an incident with a black professor at Harvard — after admitting that he didn’t know the specific facts.
Nor did he know the specifics when he publicly announced that, if he had a son, that son would look like Trayvon Martin. Are we to decide who is right and who is wrong on the basis of skin color? There was a long history of that in the days of the old Jim Crow South. Are we fighting against racism today or do we just want to put it under new management?
No one should imagine that any of this is helping the black community. The surge in murder rates across the country, in the wake of the anarchy unleashed after the Ferguson, Missouri and Baltimore riots, has taken a wholly disproportionate number of black lives.
But, to the race hustlers, black lives don’t really matter nearly as much as their chance to get publicity, power, money, votes or whatever else serves their own interests.
The mainstream media play a large, and largely irresponsible, role in the creation and maintenance of a poisonous racial atmosphere that has claimed the lives of policemen around the country...”
“…The difference between the percentage of blacks in the general population and the percentage of blacks in the particular activity being discussed is the key to the fraudulent use of “disparate impact” statistics in many other contexts.
Hillary Clinton, for example, decried a “disgrace of a criminal-justice system that incarcerates so many more African-Americans proportionately than whites.” The most reliable crime statistics are statistics on murders, 52 percent of which were committed by blacks over the period from 1976 to 2005. If blacks are convicted of far more than 13 percent of all murders, does that mean that racism in the courts must be the reason?
On the benefits side, there was instant condemnation of mortgage lenders when statistics showed blacks being turned down for prime mortgage loans in 2000 at twice the rate that whites were turned down. Seldom, if ever, did the media report that whites were turned down at nearly twice the rate that Asian Americans were turned down — or that Asian Americans’ average credit scores were higher than the average credit scores of whites, which were higher than the average credit scores of blacks.
Such facts would have spoiled the prevailing preconceptions. Many facts reported in “The War on Cops” spoil many notions that all too many people choose to believe. We need to stop this nonsense, before there is a race war that no one can win.“
Oh no; somebody‘s gonna win it. It just won’t be…
…these racist clowns.
And by the way…
In a related item, another must-read offering from the amazing Victor Davis Hanson, who wonders whether American society has already been…
Have we reached a point of no return?
“Multicultural societies — from 19th-century Austria–Hungary to contemporary Iraq, Lebanon, the former Yugoslavia, and Rwanda — have a poor record of keeping the peace between competing tribes. They usually end up mired in nihilistic and endemic violence.
The only hope for history’s rare multiracial, multiethnic, and multireligious nations is to adopt a common culture, one that artificially suppresses the natural instinct of humans to identify first with their particular tribe. America, in the logical spirit of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, was exceptional among modern societies in slowly evolving from its original, largely European immigrant population to a 21st-century assimilated, integrated, and intermarried multiracial society, in which religious and racial affiliations were incidental, not essential, to one’s public character and identity.
But such a bold experiment was always tenuous and against the cruel grain of history, in which the hard work of centuries could be easily torn apart by the brief demagoguery of the moment. Unfortunately, President Obama, ever since he first appeared on the national political scene in 2008, has systematically adopted a rhetoric and an agenda that is predicated on dividing up the country according to tribal grievances, in hopes of recalibrating various factions into a majority grievance culture. In large part, he has succeeded politically. But in doing so he has nearly torn the country apart. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to suggest that no other recent president has offered such a level of polarizing and divisive racial bombast.
…We were introduced to Obama’s idea of career enhancement through racial polarization during the 2008 political campaign. Obama had earlier, when he saw it as being to his advantage, emphasized to the Chicago Sun-Times that as a devout Christian he dutifully attended Rev. Wright’s church: “Yep. Every week. Eleven o’clock service.” Indeed, Wright offered inspiration to Obama with his trite “Audacity of Hope” refrain, which Obama borrowed for the title of his 2008 campaign booklet.
Once Wright was exposed on video as an uncouth racist and anti-Semite, Obama made the necessary adjustments, as “every week” transmogrified into spotty attendance that explained why Obama was shocked — in Casablanca style — when his spiritual mentor was publicly exposed. In that era of Obamamania, most people shrugged that Obama surely never bought into Wright’s racist and anti-American sermonizing, but simply put up with the venom spewed every week at Trinity United as a political investment, both establishing his radical street credentials and bolstering support among the members of Chicago’s black churches.
But there were plenty of markers in Obama’s own turns of phrase to indicate that racial tranquility is not where we were headed: “Typical white person” and a litany of divisive campaign sloganeering followed (“bring a gun to a knife fight” and “get in their faces,” along with the stereotyping of the white working class of Pennsylvania, who had failed to appreciate Obama’s singular brilliance in the state’s Democratic primary).
Nothing much changed when Obama entered the Oval Office (and why should it, when Obama won record majorities of minority voters in 2008 and would again in 2012?). Attorney General Eric Holder, who almost immediately dropped a likely successful voter-intimidation prosecution against the New Black Panther Party (a group to which the Dallas police assassin at one time claimed affinity), set the new tone of the Obama Justice Department by referring to African-Americans as “my people” and deriding Americans in general as “a nation of cowards.” (Demonstrating the precise nature of the “racial dialogue” for which Liberals are looking!)
“Punish our enemies” characterized Obama’s approach to race and bloc voting. Each time an explosive racial confrontation appeared on the national scene, Obama — always in his accustomed academic intonations — did his best to exploit the issue. So the Skip Gates farce was leveraged into commentary about police stereotyping and profiling on a national level. The police officer in the Ferguson shooting was eventually exonerated by Obama’s own Justice Department, but not before Obama had already exploited the shooting for political advantage, as part of a larger false narrative of out-of-control racist cops who recklessly shoot black suspects at inordinate rates to the population (rather than in the context of their national incidence of contact with police).
It mattered nothing that the signature line of Ferguson, and the founding motto of Black Lives Matter — “Hands up, don’t shoot” — was exposed as a myth by Eric Holder’s investigators. Right in the midst of the ongoing Trayvon Martin shooting trial, the president of the United States, in carrion fashion, weighed in by speculating whether the son he had never had would have looked like young Martin — not merely risking prejudicing the case (although the newly dubbed “white Hispanic” George Zimmerman was nevertheless exonerated by a jury of his peers), but reminding the country that our racial heritages are the basis of tribal resonance.
Black Lives Matter was founded on a separatist and radical racialism. When an inept Bernie Sanders tried to suggest that “All lives matter,” he was bullied into silence by activists who rushed the podium. “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” became a Black Lives Matter marching slogan last summer in Minnesota — rhetoric amplifying the calls for “Dead Cops” in an earlier New York City march that was in turn logically reified in Dallas by the assassin who “dead copped” white policemen.
When Obama invited Black Lives Matter founders to the White House in February, he praised them by asserting that they were “much better organizers” than he had been at a comparable age, adding that he was “confident that they are going to take America to new heights.” Prior Black Lives Matter marching death chants to police should have been known to Obama at the time.
…As the president has reminded us, words matter. So far in 2016 the shootings of police are up 44 percent over 2015. If celebrating the image of a murdered judge is no impediment to an Oval Office visit and a presidential endorsement, why would the more reckless activists see any real social odium in escalating the hatred? What does one have to do to be disqualified from a White House visit or earn the president’s disapproval? Be under indictment for a felony? (No.) Commercialize a picture of a judge’s corpse? (Not hardly.) That more police may have been targeted in Tennessee, Georgia, and Missouri following the Dallas carnage was the logical result of more than a year of contextualizing Black Lives Matter rhetoric and expressing pseudo-hip adulation of purveyors of anti-police and anti-judicial venom — but always from a safe distance. What does a Secret Service agent think when Lamar, who became a multimillionaire from lyrics like “We hate Popo,” comes to visit the Oval Office?
…Yet when a society reaches a point at which the remedy — honest dialogue and debate — is considered worse than the disease — racial animosity — then chaos and disintegration are the prognoses.
Up to now, the war zones in Chicago and Philadelphia and other inner cities that routinely experience abject killing each week have been largely ignored by progressives, given the nature of black-on-black violence in cities with strict gun-control laws, liberal governments, and ample social-welfare programs. Yet it may be that these recent shootings in Dallas and various other cities, rather than signaling a new dialogue, mark a strategy of exporting gun violence to purported white purveyors of racism. If that happens, then we are back to the 1960s — but worse. Read the online racist comments posted on any major news agency’s accounts of a crime involving race to sense the polarization that has intensified since 2008.
…Perhaps Obama has been prescient after all about American sins and the need for apologizing, contextualization, and reset. A 21st-century society that celebrates separatism and violence and that pardons the venom of Black Lives Matter and its more extreme manifestations, or that exempts Hillary Clinton from all legal accountability, may simply not be able to exercise a position of world moral authority after all.
Meanwhile, the seeds The Great Divider has sown over the last 7-1/2 years continue to bear his intended fruit:
Witnesses describe sheer panic as vehicle ploughed through people ‘like a bowling ball’ in Nice
A manhunt was under way for a fourth suspect, police officials say
Reports Barry may skip golf this weekend…
…to attend a memorial service for the latest victims of Islamic terror (which he STILL refuses to reference by its proper name) remain unsubstantiated. We can only hope if he breaks from his earlier pattern of disinterest he isn’t a featured speaker.
Then there’s this from Henry Scanlon writing at The Federalist, courtesy of Jeff Foutch:
“See if you can spot the difference between these two sentences: I didn’t do it. There’s no evidence I did it. Now Google this: Hillary no evidence.
Notice anything? Never in the history of world has a human being been so completely buried under a mountain of no evidence. Hillary Clinton can say there’s no evidence she sent classified emails until the evidence shows up, at which point there is no evidence she knew they were classified, until evidence of that shows up, at which point there is no evidence anyone got hold of it, until 400 people are willing to stake their lives that it was certainly compromised by sophisticated bad actors, at which point there is no evidence that it mattered.
This came to mind listening to FBI Director James Comey’s interesting phraseology, carefully formulated, no doubt: “We found no evidence” and “We did not find clear evidence” and “[Hillary’s lawyers] deleted all emails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery” (emphasis mine).
That’s why Comey’s construct—“we found no evidence”—resonated. It’s also why there’s a big difference between “I didn’t do it” and “There’s no evidence I did it.” There could be any number of reasons for no evidence, only one of which involves the target not having done it; it could also be because someone got rid of the evidence. Or maybe the evidence is buried in such a mountain of irrelevancies that it can’t be teased out, or the dog chewed it up.
Of course, it’s entirely possible Hillary reeks of no evidence because she didn’t carry out the avalanche of criminal, quasi-criminal, or merely morally reprehensible acts she’s been accused of over the last several decades, from being thrown off the Nixon/Watergate panel for lying, to the financial improprieties (and improbabilities) of the Whitewater scandal, the overreach of authority in Travelgate, the grotesque savaging of the victims of Bill’s “Bimbo Eruptions,” and all the other sorry episodes.
Maybe all this doesn’t represent a preponderance of guilt so much as a preponderance of accusations, with the fault lying not so much in Hillary as in her stars (the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and anyone who doesn’t share her worldview).
But maybe not. It’s not like there’s no reason to believe the Clintons are familiar with how to create magical evidence that disappears when it could be problematic then reappears when the danger has passed, or that their minions are above stuffing their socks with top-secret documents in an almost comically brazen evidence-tampering caper.
How liberating might it be to learn over the years that the important thing isn’t cramping your style by trying to cultivate an aura of scrupulous innocence, it’s making sure along the way that whatever evidence might prove troublesome remains elusive. There’s no need to be Caesar’s Wife if you can be The Artful Dodger.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars for inane 20-minute speeches? She was selling something. There was no product, no enterprise, no goods. She was supposedly selling her words, but, unless the words come from a newly unearthed voice recording of Jesus Christ himself, no words on earth are worth the tens of millions of dollars Hillary Clinton, Inc. has raked in. No, she wasn’t selling a product, she was selling a service, and, as Ross Perot was fond of saying, you know it, I know it and the American people know it. There is just no evidence…
…It is almost impossible to imagine that anyone could look at the Clinton Foundation in parallel with the arc of Hillary’s curriculum vitae and fail to see it is probably the most bloated influence-peddling criminal enterprise in history. But they will, so long as they have a “no evidence” hook to hang their hat on. There is “no evidence” associated with these things not because there is no evidence, but because those in her thrall wish it to be so, and, with the essential help of a complicit media, it becomes so when they declare it so.
This is the world we live in. Let’s just call it “Hillary World.”“
Here’s the juice: The Donald is an imperfect candidate who’s made some mistakes. Okay, he’s an almost completely flawed candidate who’s made more mistakes than the two worst President’s in American history…
…combined, the latest of which is…or soon will be…naming Indiana governor Mike Pence as his running mate.
What Trump should have done is (a) wait ’til the convention; (b) informed America Washington is a swamp desperately in need of draining, a cesspool long overdue for cleansing. Or, as the incomparable Stilton Jarlsberg recently noted, a china shop…
…long overdue for a visit from a bull!
Then, (c) what’s required to drain the swamp, sanitize the cesspool and/or wreak havoc on the china shop is a President beholden to NO ONE!
“Therefore, my fellow Americans, I, Donald Trump, am a candidate for one term as your President. I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for a second term as your president. Now, allow me now to introduce you to Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, who will for the next four years gain the experience and knowledge necessary to lead America after I’ve eviscerated the entrenched bureaucracy which is leading the Founding Fathers’ Republic to ruin.”
Again, that’s what Trump should have done. But any way you cut it, love Trump or hate him, feckless fools such as these…
…are not an option!
Since we’re on the subject of the irreversibly imperfect, across the pond we find the subject of a rather intriguing article via The Old Gray Nag:
Sacre bleu, you stupid Frogs; the jokes on YOU!
Intriguing, mes amis, because this Pillsbury-Dough-Boy-like-Socialist is practically BALD; so why on earth does he need a hairstylist in the first place, let alone one costing $10,000 per month?!?
On The Lighter Side…
Oh,…and yes…Ruth Darth Bader Ginsburg should either resign…
…or recuse herself from any and all cases coming before the SCOTUS.
Finally, courtesy of Bill Meisen, we wrap up the week with another titillating but totally predictable tale torn from the pages of The Crime Blotter:
Transgender woman arrested for voyeurism at Target
“A transgender Idaho Falls woman was arrested Tuesday on one count of felony voyeurism for a report that she took pictures of another woman changing clothes in a dressing room at Target in Ammon. Shauna Patricia Smith, 43, is in custody in the Bonneville County Jail under the name Sean Smith, according to the jail’s active inmate roster. A Bonneville County Sheriff’s Office news release said the suspect also is known as Sean P. Smith.
Sheriff’s deputies responded Monday to the store after a woman reported that someone was taking pictures of her while she was inside a dressing room trying on clothes, the release said. The victim noticed the subject reaching over the wall with a cellphone taking pictures. The victim confronted the suspect who then fled the store on foot, the release said.
Sheriff’s Office Spokesman Sgt. Bryan Lovell said he didn’t know whether the reported victim was wearing underwear when she was photographed.
Uhhh…does that make a difference?!?
Magoo
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.