It’s Friday, July 29th, 2016…but before we begin, a few quick thoughts on recent events in the blighted burg immediately east of us directly resulting from Progressives’ purposefully divisive politics of race. First, a question: now that the trio of gutless twits…
As evidenced by this video, Hell hath no fury like an ambitious politician scorned…not to mention completely and utterly embarrassed…and about to be sued herself for knowingly filing false charges by the very officers she so outrageously indicted:
In other words, like any good Progressive politician, the fault lies anywhere but on the shoulders of the individual directly responsible!
Welcome to the Dimocratic Party’s…
…brave, new world, in which cops and law-abiding gun owners are the problem, and career-criminals like Freddie Grey and Michael “The Gentle Giant” Brown are innocent victims.
Dan Feeney suggests, a view we wholeheartedly endorse, that the latest from Walter Williams effectively exposes the facts which lie at the heart of the fiction White racism is responsible for what ails a large segment of Black America:
“A guiding principle for physicians is primum non nocere, the Latin expression for “first, do no harm.” In order not to do harm, whether it’s with medicine or with public policy, the first order of business is accurate diagnostics.
Racial discrimination is seen as the cause of many problems of black Americans. No one argues that racial discrimination does not exist or does not have effects. The relevant question, as far as policy and resource allocation are concerned, is: How much of what we see is caused by current racial discrimination?
From the late 1940s to the mid-1950s, black youth unemployment was slightly less than or equal to white youth unemployment. Today black youth unemployment is at least double that of white youth unemployment. Would anyone try to explain the difference with the argument that there was less racial discrimination during the ’40s and ’50s than today?
Some argue that it is the “legacy of slavery” and societal racism that now explain the social pathology in many black neighborhoods. Today’s black illegitimacy rate is about 73 percent. When I was a youngster, during the 1940s, illegitimacy was around 15 percent. In the same period, about 80 percent of black children were born inside marriage. In fact, historian Herbert Gutman, in an article titled “Persistent Myths about the Afro-American Family” in the Journal of Interdisciplinary History (Autumn 1975), reported the percentage of black two-parent families, depending on the city, ranged from 75 to 90 percent. Today only a little over 30 percent of black children are raised in two-parent households. The importance of these and other statistics showing greater stability and less pathology among blacks in earlier periods is that they put a lie to today’s excuses. Namely, at a time when blacks were closer to slavery, faced far more discrimination, faced more poverty and had fewer opportunities, there was not the kind of social pathology and weak family structure we see today.
According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, sometimes referred to as The Nation’s Report Card, nationally, the average black 12th-grader’s test scores are either basic or below basic in reading, writing, math and science. “Below basic” is the score received when a student is unable to demonstrate even partial mastery of knowledge and skills fundamental for proficient work at his grade level. “Basic” indicates only partial mastery. Put another way, the average black 12th-grader has the academic achievement level of the average white seventh- or eighth-grader. In some cities, there’s even a larger achievement gap.
Is this a result of racial discrimination? Hardly. The cities where black academic achievement is the lowest are the very cities where Democrats have been in charge for decades and where blacks have been mayors, city councilors, superintendents, school principals and teachers. Plus, these cities have large educational budgets.I am not arguing a causal relationship between black political control and poor performance. I am arguing that one would be hard put to blame the academic rot on racial discrimination. If the Ku Klux Klan wanted to destroy black academic achievement, it could not find a better means for doing so than encouraging the educational status quo in most cities…”
By the way, Blacks may be the canaries in America’s moral coal mine…
…but the rest of the country ain’t far behind!
And as this forward from The Puffington Host via our old West Virginny buddy Doug Burr details, as The Left cannot afford for the facts to made known, they attempt to mute even the merest voice of reason:
“Richard Sherman is one of the most intelligent and eloquent athletes in professional sports today. He has smart things to say about the NCAA and poverty and issues of police brutality ― not to mention football.
Which is what makes it so odd that he continues to stand by his use of the phrase “All Lives Matter.” In an interview with ESPN’s The Undefeated published Tuesday, the Seattle Seahawks cornerback spouted and then defended his continued use of the three highly politicized words. “I stand by what I said: that All Lives Matter and that we are human beings [first and foremost],” the former Stanford Cardinal said.
Sherman was referencing comments he made last year, when he first uttered the phrase during a press conference. “I think a person saying that we should celebrate our humanity and that all lives matter, if that turns off an advertiser or turns off a company, then more power to you,” he said in September.
The thing is, Sherman repeatedly uttering the phrase “All Lives Matter” would be fine in a vacuum. After all, all lives do matter.But we don’t live in a vacuum. We live in the U.S. in 2016 ― a world in which black men and women are systematically mistreated by the police and the phrase “All Lives Matter” is put forth as a way to belittle attempts to correct that mistreatment…”
And here we thought we lived in a country which valued and promoted promulgation of the truth, not the perpetuation of a bald-faced LIE!!!
There we go thinking again.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, everything you always wanted to know about the Dimocratic National Convention but didn’t really need to ask ‘cuz you already knew the answer, in one easy-to-read graphic:
In a related item, it’s our Hypocrisy Personified segment, courtesy today of one of the most deliberately misleading and hypocritical comments we’ve ever had the displeasure to hear:
We find Panetta particularly odious because, though an incredibly partisan Progressive, he’s been allowed by the MSM to skate under the radar in the guise of Mr. Middle-of-the-Road. Allow us to put Leon’s outrage in proper perspective:
(1). Did Panetta ever express similar outrage when the other presidential candidate put personal political and pecuniary interests above national security concerns by utilizing a series of private, unsecured email servers, in direct contravention of the law?!?
(2). What about when the other presidential candidate directly solicited funds for her private slush fund from foreign governments while serving as Secretary of State?!?
(3). What do these and similarly unseemly acts and conduct say about Hillary‘s qualifications to be President?!?
Leave it to Christiana Amanpour, one of the MSM’s mostbiased Progressive mouthpieces, to leave those three questions unasked. We for one hope the Russkies uncover Obama’s collegiate transcripts while they’re at it!
Forgetting for the moment her emails, miraculous investment in cattle futures or landing in Bosnia under a hail of sniper fire; consider these two examples of why some 68% of Americans don’t trust this harpy: Exhibit “A”, courtesy of Matt Vespa at Townhall.com as regards the…
“…sale of Uranium One to the Russian Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation. The chairman of Uranium One would give the Clinton Foundation over $2 million, while Bill would receive $500,000 for a speech given to a bank selling Uranium One stock. Then-Secretary Clinton was one of the principal actors to sign off on the sale through the Committee on Foreign Investment, which is “charged with reviewing any deal that could result in foreign control of an American business or asset deemed important to national security.” At the time, Uranium One had mining sites in the United States. The deal was approved, with Russia coming that much closer to controlling most of the world’s uranium supply…”
Then there’s Exhibit “B”, brought to us by our go-to guy, Victor Davis Hanson, who damns the Dynamic Duo with the faintest of praise…along with one rather unpleasant truth:
“…The Clintons are unique — like no other first couple in recent American history. Not the Carters, not the Reagans, not the two Bush couples, not any first family emeritus has so unapologetically charged banks, foreign governments, corporations, and universities so much money for overtly so little, but on the expectation of clandestinely offering so much.
The Clinton ethical miasma is emblemized by the Laureate International Universities scandal — the highbrow version of Trump University, but a public not a private debacle. Between 2010 and 2015 “Chancellor” Bill Clinton was paid $16.5 million by the for-profit Laureate — but for what services he was to become one of the highest-paid university officials in history is not clear.Mirabile dictu, an educational affiliate of Laureate saw its support from the State Departmentmore than triple from a pre-Clinton $15.1 million.
True, Hillary Clinton, who deleted over 30,000 of her private-server e-mails, can demand hard proof of such payola, but she still cannot rationalize why her husband was paid so much for so little demonstrable work, while she, after stepping down as the nation’s top diplomatic official, followed his reprehensible cue in her retirement…”
Rest assured neither Christiana Amanpour, nor any other Socialist sycophant in the MSM, will bother to ask for an explanation. Hells bells; the Clintons are so certain they’re above the law they don’t even try to hide their nefarious dealings. Yet Leon Panetta saves his outrage for Donald Trump’s half-witted attempt at humor!
In other words…
And let’s not forget, as James Taranto observes at Best of the Web., Trump is truly a creature of Der Schlickmeister’s own creation:
“Did Bill Clinton give an effective speech on behalf of his wife last night? We have no idea. We know too much.
That is, we were working in political journalism during Mr. Clinton’s time in the White House, and at The Wall Street Journal for his last 4½ years. A couple of our bylined articles even appeared in the Journal’s six-volume “Whitewater” compilation.
We find it impossible to imagine how we’d have received the speech if we hadn’t followed politics so closely during the Clinton years, or if we were too young to remember them. (Someone who is 30 now was 12 when Monica Lewinsky became a public figure. Lewinsky herself turned 43 Sunday.) We are not the sort of voter to which the speech was intended to appeal.(Educated and, more importantly, informed!)
Mr. Clinton certainly succeeded in not appealing to us. His overall theme was that he loves the Democratic nominee madly because she is such an astute analyst and maker of public policy. If it were a poem, it could have been titled “Ode to a Wonk.” The idea was doubly preposterous given the deep but (in the speech) unacknowledged strangeness of the Clinton marriage. But again, maybe it came across better to someone blessed by the good sense or youth not to have paid such close attention to the Clintons.
As for the substance, we were driven to distraction by what Mr. Clinton didn’t mention—namely, anything that wouldn’t have been politically expedient…
…It did occur to us after the speech, though, that Bill Clinton played an underappreciated part in setting the stage for Trump.As we observed yesterday, one of the Democrats’ strategies against the Republican nominee has been to present him as R-rated, somebody from whom you want to shield your children. As Michelle Obama put it Monday night, “we know that our words and actions matter . . . [to] children across this country.”
Many Nevertrump Republicans, and more than few reluctantly pro-Trump ones, find this line of argument convincing. Trump is surely the most vulgar man ever nominated for the presidency of a major party.
But he would not be the first vulgarian president.That distinction belongs to Bill Clinton, the man whose sexual misconduct led to situations like the one described by Shawn Hubler in the Los Angeles Times in September 1998:
It was Friday midmorning. The house was quiet. The 6-year-old turned the TV on. The camera was zoomed in on someone’s computer, and there was a breathless voice: “Monica Lewinsky” . . . “Oval Office” . . . “sex with the president.”
“Mama,” she said in confusion, cuddling her kitten, “I thought the president was married. Does this mean Monica Lewinsky is having a baby now?”
I stood there, flat-footed.
“Mama, why do you have that look on your face?Did something bad happen?”
“Kinda. Not really. Let’s turn off this dumb TV. I’ll explain later, sweetie-pie.”
Mrs. Clinton’s political career was a reward for her role as her husband’s enabler. And most Republican politicians—who, as we observed last week, tend to be highly concerned about respectability—were determined to steer clear of the subject.
GOP voters turned to Trump in partbecause of his willingness to breach decorum and tell the ugly truth about the Clintons.(As well as a lot of other things!)And Trump turns out to be a plausible candidate in partbecause Bill Clinton so lowered the bar for presidential comportment…”
What, inquiring minds want to know, is Bill’s bottom line?
“Except of course when it comes to women with whom I come into even the most casual contact!”
Moving on, our long-time friend and Annapolis classmate Jim “Cool Breeze” Gould offers the truth on one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the U.S. Navy:
Cowardice and Incompetence in the Persian Gulf – The US Navy has Severe Problems
“Last week, the Navy released the results of a lengthy investigation it had completed, concerning the conduct of one officer and nine enlisted sailors after they willingly surrendered their two Riverine Patrol Craft to the Iranians and were subsequently detained for 15 hours in the Persian Gulf last January.
The Navy’s findings should have generated a media frenzy, but instead were quickly buried by the 300 foot rogue waves generated by the storm called the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal.
Here are some highlights from the investigation as reported by theStars and Stripes; the findings from the investigation are frightening and should concern all Americans about the state of our armed forces under President Obama:
The engine on one of the two Navy patrol craft was broken before it ever left port.
The crews had failed their most recent navigation exams. Several of the crew, including both captains, had either recently failed or not taken a required navigation exam and none of the crew had more than two hours of training on the navigation system.
Navigation is a sailor’s bread and butter. Not knowing navigation is tantamount to a hockey player not knowing how to skate.
The radios weren’t working. The two craft, Riverine Command Boats 802 and 805, left four hours late for their mission because they could not get their radios to work.
This speaks volumes about poor non-commissioned officers, aka chiefs, who obviously weren’t ensuring that the radios had proper maintenance or were replaced. One wonders what the officer in charge, Lieutenant David Nartker was doing instead of checking on his boats’ equipment.
None of the 10 sailors on either vessel had ever participated in a mission this long.
When the military spends all of its time on sensitivity training and other PC insanity, you lack time to conduct real training for war.
And when the chips were down the crews displayed a lack of “war-fighting toughness.”
As US Defense Watch has reported before, the US military is not focused on its mission, creating an organization that is internally feeble and projects weakness abroad.
Boat 805 never bothered to log their route.
No one looked at a paper map before departing, though it is required.
The crews had already voiced their concerns: they weren’t ready for this mission. It would be the longest mission they’d conducted, and would require a nighttime refueling – another thing that they’d never done.
Obviously, a real world mission in the Persian Gulfisa lot tougherthan attending one of the military’s classes on why the Bible is a sexist document or conducting physical training with pregnancy simulators.
Things quickly went from SNAFU to TARFU to FUBAR as they drifted into Iranian waters…”
Here’s the juice: we’d like to take a moment to thank Secretaries of Defense Bob Gates, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel and Ashole Carter, SecNav Ray Mabus, Admirals Mike Mullen, Jim Stavridis and Joe Sestak, and last but not least, Generals J.R. Allen, George Casey and Martin Dempsey…along with every other senior officer and Defense Department bureaucrat whose politically-correct subservience…and love of self rather than country…made such a fiasco possible. They’ve sold their country and its fighting men, along with their souls, straight down the sh*tter.
What Joe Dunsford is thinking we cannot surmise…though John Paul Jones, James Lawrence and Oliver Hazard Perry…
…are most certainly rolling over in their graves!
Since we’re on the subject of cowardice and incompetence, the current occupant of Vatican City gives us yet another reason to be thankful we’re not Roman Catholic:
“Pope Francis, starting a trip to Poland overshadowed by the killing of an elderly priest in France by suspected Islamist militants, said on Wednesday this and a string of other attacks were proof the “world is at war”.
After his arrival under heavy security in Krakow, the pope also took on Poland’s conservative government, implicitly criticizing its anti-immigration stance.(After all, unrestricted Islamic immigration makes infinite sense!!!) But his strongest words of the day came while talking to reporters about the killing of Father Jacques Hamel, who on Tuesday was forced to his knees by suspected militants who then slit his throat. “The word that is being repeated often is insecurity, but the real word is war,” he said.
“Let’s recognize it. The world is in a state of war in bits and pieces,” he said, adding that the attacks could be seen as another world war, specifically mentioning World War One and Two. “Now there is this one (war). It is perhaps not organic but it is organized and it is war. We should not be afraid to speak this truth. The world is at war because it has lost peace.”
About 15 minutes later, after an adviser spoke to him, Francis took the microphone again as he was leaving the journalists’ section in the plane and said he wanted “to clarify” that he was not referring to a war of religion. “Not a war of religion. There is a war of interests.There is a war for money. There is a war for natural resources.There is a war for domination of peoples. This is the war,” he said. “All religions want peace. Others want war.Do you understand?”…”
Uhh,…to be honest…
Then again, we’ve never been able to understand either the appeal of Socialism or the thought processes of it adherents!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch with the would-be leader of The Gang Who Still Can’t Shoot Straight, writing at Townhall.com, Jonah Goldberg describes how the…
Media Has A ‘Cry Wolf’ Problem With Trump
“Dear Mainstream Media and Democrats: It’s your turn. Now that Donald Trump has been formally nominated, the formal responsibility to stop him passes from the right to the left, from Republicans to Democrats and the journalists who amplify their values.
You’re going to find it a very tough slog. And it’s your own damn fault.
During the primaries, the task of exposing the true nature of the Trump takeover fell disproportionately to a few conservative magazines, columnists, renegade radio hosts and behind-the-scenes activists.We all failed.(And we proudly include ourselves in that number)There will be plenty of time for recriminations and “we happy few” speeches later. (If you detect a note of bitterness on my part, I’m not being clear enough: I contain symphonies of bitterness.)
We failed in part because the mainstream media was having too good of a time to help. Last spring, Stop Trump operatives told me they brought damning stories to mainstream outlets. The response was usually: “We’re not interested in covering that — right now.”
By May, Trump had already received roughly $3 billion worth of free media, thanks to ratings-hungry TV networks. CBS chief Les Moonves summarized it well at an investor conference in February: Trump’s rise “may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.”
Many in the media were so willing to put clicks and ratings before country because the conventional wisdom was that Trump would fade or implode eventually. Why not gawk at the spectacle? And if Trump did get the nomination, many journalists calculated, all the better. What fun it will be to watch Hillary Clinton destroy Trump and Trump destroy the GOP.
Only slowly has the media come around to the realization that Trump is an actual threat, but now it may be too late because it has a serious “cry wolf” problem.Millions of Americans firmly believe that journalists are water carriers for the Democrats and will tune out much of what they have to say about Trump now that he’s the nominee. (Besides, we would maintain Hillary as an alternative gives them NO CHOICE!)
…I have no doubt many journalists would defend their smears and professional failures, but that doesn’t change the fact that many Americans outside the mainstream media/Democratic bubble find it all indefensible. More important, they find it all ignorable — because the race card and the demagogue card have been played and replayed so often they’re little more than scraps of lint.
Already, editorial boards are preparing their indictments of what they believe to be Donald Trump’s incompetence, bigotry and authoritarianism. Trump operatives will undoubtedly respond: “That’s what they always say about Republicans.”And they’ll be right.“
We love Jonah Goldberg; but we respectfully disagree with his #NeverTrump line in the sand. To borrow a phrase from Officer Davis in Magnum Force, it’s not just a question of whether to vote for Donald Trump…
Finally, we’ll call it a week with a walk on The Lighter Side…
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.