If the NAACP was ever actually an organization dedicated to the advancement of colored people, I am certainly too young to remember. Throughout my adult life it seems the NAACP is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the liberal/progressive political wing. If “colored people” happen to align with their politics, great. But anything not part of the official Democrat platform is ignored or outright opposed.
A great example of this last is the NAACP opposition to school choice laws, which have been shown as fairly successful for black children in many communities. You would think an organization supposedly dedicated to helping advance black people would actually want to help advance black children, but since Democrats oppose school choice, you would be wrong to assume so.
In the latest bit of whacky weirdness, the NAACP organized a march to protest voter ID laws. Prior to the march, they distributed a flyer with DOs and DON’Ts. One of the DOs? “Bring photo identification and keep it on you at all times”
In my present state of mind, I am beyond the point of feeling angry about this. The hypocrisy among political power players is so rampant, so obvious, so egregious that I just can’t help but laugh.
Maybe I am laughing the laugh of the damned.
One of the many interesting sub-plots of the 2014 election year is the possibility that Congress may welcome its first openly gay Republican.
Dan Innis is running for a House seat in New Hampshire. He is a businessman, entrepreneur, Dean of the Whittemore School of Business and Economics, and is married to a man. It was his husband who convinced him to run, saying “You’ve got to do this” to see if Innis could “make a difference.”
Richard Tisei is running again for a House seat in Massachusetts. He lost by just 1 point in the general election to John Tierney, and will face him again this time around. He has already served as a state senator. He is also married to a man.
Carl DeMaio is running for a House seat in California. He is a businessman who provided training and consulting specifically to financially-troubled government entities to help them become more efficient. He has also served as a city councilman for San Diego. At the time of writing this I do not know if DeMaio is married to his partner, but it is my understanding they have been together for six years.
None of these men are making their sexuality part of their campaign. It will be interesting to see what the liberals do, should these men make it through the GOP primaries. Kevin has often pointed out that liberals reveal their ultimate hypocrisy when faced with an opponent who would traditionally be a liberal. As a living example, DeMaio and his partner were booed while walking in the Gay Pride parade, because DeMaio is a Republican and was running for Mayor.
I decided to post this because of two stories I heard last week.
The first was about Keith Olbermann dejectedly wandering Central Park. Obviously the article is making many assumptions about Olbermann’s state of mind with very little direct evidence. However, Olbermann has certainly had a turbulent career, and his firing from CurrentTV (not to mention his failure to draw the expected viewers) was just the latest in a long string of fiery exits.
I can’t say that Olbermann has “hit rock bottom,” But his career does seem to be coming unglued. The interesting thing to me is that Olbermann is worth tens of millions of dollars. Yet here he is, wandering through Central Park almost as if he’s seeking the validation of being recognized by a random stranger. “Am I still relevant?” he might be wondering.
Normally I wouldn’t be focusing on a rich person who might be depressed. But Olbermann is a progressive. A believer in social justice. A redistributionist. A man who seems to think we can solve all the country’s problems by taking money from the wealthy and giving it to progressive government to redistribute as they see fit. And yet here he is, more money than 99.999% of the world, and still unhappy. It just goes to show you that if you think money is the answer to your problems, you’re wrong.
The second story was about Mel Gibson absolutely losing his mind (language warning). Mel Gibson is a very talented actor. Anyone who hasn’t seen it should pick up We Were Soldiers for a great movie and a great performance by Gibson. It’s one of those films that brings tears to a grown man’s eyes.
Unfortunately for Mel, being a rich, famous, talented actor is not enough to maintain even the most basic level of rational behavior. In his latest rant, he sounded like the grown-up version of a child throwing a giant temper tantrum, as if yelling and using entire breaths to say a single word somehow makes his point more relevant.
Was it fueled by alcohol? Is Mel Gibson psychotic? I can’t say for sure, but it would certainly seem that after a very messy breakup and so many tapes of insane rage coming to light that Mel is well on his way to rock bottom, at least in terms of human behavior.
Although I’ve used two celebrities in this post, it’s not just the rich and famous who suffer from this sort of behavior. Every now and then you hear stories about rich folks who throw their lives away on foolishness, or even commit suicide for no apparent reason. I bet it happens a lot more than anyone realizes, but we don’t hear about it because the people aren’t famous.
Which brings me back to my original point. Progressives would have us believe that money is the key to happiness. Class warfare is their game. They try to make it a fight between the “haves” and the “have-nots”. But “what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Or in Mel’s case, his mind? If progressives are correct that redistributing money is the key to happiness, then why are so many rich people unhappy?
It’s actually dehumanizing to suggest that happiness can be purchased like a commodity. If you have a hole in your heart, you can’t fill it with “stuff”. Sure, being poor can be stressful. I know, I used to be fairly poor. I used to have debt. But by God I worked my way out of that hole and I’m a better man for it. I dare say that if Uncle Sam had been there to bail me out with someone else’s money, he would have stolen a piece of my humanity at the same time.
What say you?
Did she call House Republicans demons?
Did she say that she would be the next Chairman of the Financial Services Committee?
That should scare the hell out of all of us.
We can not allow the democrats to take back the House….or keep the Senate…or the White House. The thought of Maxine Waters (who was investigated by a congressional ethics panel for steering federal dollars to her husband’s failing bank) taking over the chair of the financial services committee is unbelievable. Isn’t that like having the fox guard the hen house?
We’ve got to get off our butts and start campaigning for Republican candidates. ASAP!
Here’s a little picture that’s sure to give you nightmares tonight….
Yikes….now that’s scary!
Now get out there and join a Republican campaign.
“Do-It-Yourself-Deportation” in NYT Article: A Critical Look at One Illegal Alien’s Bunk Argument for Amnesty
The following article, entitled Do-It-Yourself-Deportation, appeared in the February 1st, 2012 edition of the New York Times — and was written by NYC high school student Antonio Alarcon (who wrote it in Spanish, which the Times translated into English for him, in much the same way that Spanish-speaking people marching in parades demanding amnesty waive Mexican, and not American, flags in the air). For someone who makes a plea to stay in this country despite not arriving here legally, young Antonio doesn’t seem to be making much effort to learn English or participate in non-Spanish-speaking endeavors in New York. I wanted to analyze what this one illegal alien thinks about amnesty because the bunk the Tolerant Left repeatedly peddles on this issue is glaringly apparent in the talking points he parrots.
This is my translation of the translation that the Times did for Antonio. His words are bolded, with my analysis beneath.
[ Click above to embiggen: British parents Beck Laxton and Kieran Cooper dressed their son Sasha up as a girl and hid his true gender for the first five years of his life as a sociological experiment ]
I’ll warn you right now that when I read the article above this morning I got so angry that I’m really glad the parents involved live in England…because if they were in the US I’d be online right now looking for a number to call the local police wherever they lived to report these people for abusing their little boy. My boyfriend Justin gets a little embarrassed when I call the police, the Governor’s office, or Congress on people when they’re doing something terrible but I figure that somebody has to and I’m indeed somebody (as, incidentally, are YOU, too).
The child these people in the article are abusing is a boy — despite the fact the parents, two fools named Beck Laxton and Kieran Cooper, proudly hid his gender from the outside world for five years…by playing a weird guessing game with anyone who would ask “is your child a boy or a girl?” as some sort of sociological experiment. To throw people off, the mother admits to calling the boy “The Infant” until he was too old for her to get away with that anymore.
This is where I really want the British equivalents of Elliot Stabler and Olivia Benson to burst in, with Ice-T in tow, to start cracking some skulls and saving that little boy from his abusers.
The mother’s named Beck (but, not the singer “Beck”, who in a world of chimpanzees would be a monkey…she’s just a crazy person named “Beck”). She is very much a loser though (baby), and has maintained a website documenting the abuse of her son — I have no doubt this will serve as evidence someday, or at the very least be a treasure trove for the guy’s psychiatrist to mine when he’s spending his entire adult life in therapy asking why his mother raised him as a genderless “infant” until his first day of kindergarten.
These two Leftists have been dressing their son in girl’s clothes since he was born, taking pictures of him wearing sparkly pink swimsuits, and denying him any clothing that is “hyper-masculine” (you know, like tee shirts with pirates and superheroes and knights in shining armor on them…like little boys would be happy to wear). Instead, Beck and her idiot husband have been dressing their son up like Esther Williams.
Why aren’t these people in jail?
Is there no jail nearby?
I’ve noticed that Leftists are really big on emasculating boys, but I’ve never understood what that’s all about. I know they aren’t trying to make the boys gay, because the Left hates gays as much as it hates all minorities (while simultaneously finding them useful as identity voting blocs comprising the Democrat Party’s coalition). Loons like Beck and Kieran don’t seem interested in setting their son up to like other boys…but they want to make him as wimpy and fey as possible (so he’ll have the stuffing beat out of him by other boys when he goes to school).
That’s child abuse.
While required to send her son to kindergarten dressed in a boy’s uniform, Beck insists on forcing him to wear a pink blouse while all the other boys have white ones. But, this woman insists he start school dolled up like Molly Ringwald, so pretty in pink.
This is the sort of thing the Left’s magazines and papers here in Chicago celebrate as “forward thinking” and “progressive parenting”.
I call it child abuse.
Am I wrong?
Before we get to what you think — and I am dying to hear it — I want to repeat an anecdote from here in Boystown that sums up the mental illness of people like Beck and Kieran.
A year or two ago I opened Gay Chicago Magazine (now defunct) and read a profile they ran of a local “activist” who appeared to be a woman from the picture they used. Being Gay Chicago Magazine, I figured the woman was a lesbian and imagined being an “activist” meant she was unemployed and opinionated about something that got her negative attention. I was right about most of it, except that she didn’t consider herself a woman because she insisted that gender didn’t exist and she was instead just ‘queer”.
The article explained that this person had been born a woman and had lived her life until about age 15 as a straight female.
From 15-20 or so she decided she was a lesbian.
Then at 20 she woke up one day and decided she was a man trapped in a woman’s body and began living as a straight man, ultimately having a double mastectomy a few years later so she could more easily pass as male.
Around 24 or 25 this person decided “he” was now a gay male because he liked gay men better than hanging around straight men because gay men were more fun.
Three years or so of that, he decided that gay men weren’t fun anymore and he wished he was a woman again, so he let his hair grow long and started wearing women’s clothes again though he wanted to keep dating gay men — who now wanted nothing to do with “her”, since “she” was back to female-identifying again.
That brought things current to Gay Chicago’s profile, more or less, with the woman now a lesbian again (and possibly just restarting her cycle of gender confusion).
I distinctly remember reading that article thinking “this person should be seeing a whole staff of psychologists” because clearly she was disturbed to be putting herself through so much back and forth…but the writer who put this profile in Gay Chicago Magazine went on and on about how WONDERFUL and LIBERATING it was for this woman to be slipping in and out of gender roles and sexual identities like this.
I won’t mince words: the reason this woman did most of this back and forth, in my opinion, is because she got so much attention for doing it from the Left…because the more of a train wreck she makes her life the more likely she’ll get a big profile in a gay publication praising her for her “honesty” and “courage” in being “herself”.
Or is it himself?
I wish I had saved that article or had written down that woman’s name because I’d love to interview her someday — though I can imagine it would end up being something like they do on The Daily Show when they get someone like this in front of a camera and ask them what’s wrong with them.
I’ve gone way out onto a tangent this morning, but I’m just so disgusted with the things “The Tolerant Left” does to mess up innocent people’s lives just to prove some point or create attractions for their political circus.
What think you?
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Was A Republican — And He’d Be A Pro-Life Social Conservative If He Was Alive Today
Ed Morrissey at HotAir has a nice piece up today on Dr. Alveda King, the niece of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King. Please take the time to read it in full, because it’s important that more people out there appreciate the fact that Dr. King was a Republican — whose real-life living equivalent today is someone like Congressman Allen West, not shameless, race-baiting huckster Jesse Jackson (as the Left would have you believe).
If you’ve ever heard Dr. Alveda King speak you’d know that at the time of his death Dr. King was planning on firing Jackson because he personally disgusted him and no longer wanted him anywhere near the work he was doing; if he’d lived, and the firing had taken place, you would have never heard of Jesse Jackson…or his repugnant son Jesse Jackson Jr…or his horrible daughter-in-law, Sandi Jackson. Not only did the world lose a great man when Dr. King was murdered, but the non-musical and terrible Jackson family was forced on American politics because Dr. King wasn’t alive to send Jesse into exile where he belongs.
I’ve benefited greatly from listening to some of Dr. Alveda King’s speeches, including those on abortion, and find her to be very much a torch-carrier for Dr. King’s legacy. As a gay man, I honestly never devoted much thought to abortion because it’s never touched me personally. I’m gold star gay and have never dated a woman and have never remotely come close to impregnating anyone. I have two very good friends who had abortions, though — and both of them were the victims of rape who conceived during their attacks; one friend was also given HIV by her rapist and the pregnancy was life-threatening to her in itself. So there were both medical and psychological reasons for those abortions.
In December, my boyfriend Justin’s sister had a baby after an at-risk pregnancy that resulted from her diabetes; the little baby, Astor, that she had is still on heart and breathing machines and will be in a special children’s hospital for several more weeks. I’ve never met the little girl, but I am just torn up inside every day hoping she can get off the machines and come home to her very anxious parents.
I just can’t imagine someone choosing an abortion as a means of birth control when I’ve seen how special a tiny, precious life is such as Astor’s. I don’t think I would hesitate for second to volunteer to adopt the baby of a friend who knew she couldn’t care for the child — and I know I’m not alone in feeling that way, so there’s just no reason aside from rape or life-threatening medical conditions to murder the unborn.
When you grow up a Democrat, you are taught to keep quiet about this, however. You’re taught to keep quiet about a lot of evil things the Democrat Party does, actually. The list is long but it includes turning a blind eye to voter fraud that various thugs like ACORN commit to benefit Democrats; it involves saying nothing about how Labor Unions destroy communities and drive businesses overseas; and it means allowing the harpies of the Pro-Choice
bowl movement to get away with calling themselves that — instead of what they really are: Pro-Abortion.
The Democrat Party’s internal politics are messy. Since the Party’s comprised of sundry identity voting blocs that are deliberately pitted against one another, the way the Left controls these different kinds of people is by keeping them revved up with either stoked hatred for one of the other groups (the way the Left keeps blacks hating gays or blacks hating Hispanics or blacks hating Jews) or by convincing one identity group that there’s some issue out there that they must irrationally defend against some imaginary “enemy”. To keep women voters on the Democrats’ infernal plantation and prevent them from ever thinking logically about why, exactly, they must keep voting Democrat when Democrats’ policies do nothing of value for them the Party has used abortion as this wedge issue. If you grow up Democrat you’re taught that it’s a woman’s right to murder a child that’s developing inside her, whenever she wants, and face no moral or societal consequences for doing so.
For most of my adult life I was very uncomfortable wading into any of this because I’m not a woman and will never know what it’s like to be pregnant. As noted, I also understand some of the horror women who’ve been raped go through so I can’t imagine a world where someone would be forced to carry her rapists’ child to term and spend nine months believing Rosemary-grade evil was growing inside her. But, the Left promotes abortion so aggressively that it starts to feel like Leftists believe it’s a fun and good thing for any occasion. For a time, the DNC actually sold tee shirts on its website that said “I Had An Abortion And Am Proud of It”. I’m ashamed to have ever been a member of a Party where someone thought that was an appropriate item to offer for sale on their official website. Abortion is never something to be proud of, no matter why someone did it.
Every presidential election year the Left glorifies abortion and revs female Democrats up into a blind frenzy that “unless you vote Democrat the evil Republicans are going to take abortions away from you!”. The way this is phrased, it’s like the Left sees abortions in the same category as Disneyland: a fun and wonderful thing that conservatives want to take from women out of spite — instead of the worst possible thing anyone could ever be forced to do for any reason.
I’m really tired of this.
And I’m tired of the Left operating as if it’s every woman’s life dream to murder a child developing inside her, as if that’s fun.
And I’m tired of the agenda-driven media not calling the Left out on the hypocrisy related to abortion, since it’s black babies who are aborted the most and the Democrat Party embraces a unique form of racism when it so aggressively promotes its Pro-Abortion agenda.
The Reverand Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the bravest men who ever lived. It’s a damn shame his legacy has been hijacked by the Democrat Party and Jesse Jackson…and that Martin Luther King Day is a sort of “Democrat” holiday the way holidays honoring our military seem like “Republican” holidays.
Martin Luther King Day should be celebrated with gusto by the GOP as a “Republican” and an AMERICAN holiday because it’s a day to think about the life and courage of a remarkable man who had the strength to tell things like they are and to point out the terrible in those around him. If he were alive today, Dr. King would raise his hand and point straight at the Democrat Party and call it out for the wicked things it does on a daily basis. Dr. King would be against the voter fraud, he’d rail against the identity politics, he’d condemn the wedge issues that pit one group against another just so they all stay on the Democrats’ plantation.
Dr. King, much like Allen West, would chide black people for continuing to vote against their own economic and familial interests by pulling that lever for Democrats over and over again — when it’s the Democrat Party, through its Pro-Abortion and pro-entitlement programs policies, that have kept black people poor, broken, and dependent on the state.
It’s an immense national tragedy that Dr. King is not here with us today to speak truth to power and excoriate the Democrat Party for how terrible it has truly become. At least we have Dr. King’s niece Alveda, though.
If you’re not following her career and speeches with great interest, then I suggest you do so immediately.
No better day than today to start.
QUESTION: Just how many black people need to be included in anything for the Left to not make a racial issue of it?
This morning, I ran across this article by Clark Collis on Entertainment Weekly’s site, purportedly about the latest inductions into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum.
Instead of actually focusing on the inductions (which this year includes the Beastie Boys, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, the Small Faces/The Faces, the late singer-songwriter Laura Nyro, and Donovan), Collis racialized the article, insinuating the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame selection committee is racist because there were no black people inducted this year (and misogynist too, apparently, since there was only one woman inducted (and she’s dead)).
Just how many black people have to — by the Leftist standards employed by hacks like Collis at EW.com — be included in anything to spare us from another lazy “America is so RAAACIST!” rambling like this?
Two? Three? Can we get a definitive and set number?
In the case of something like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductions, where there were only 5 inductees total, how many of the induction slots needed to be reserved exclusively for black people in the worldview employed by Collis?
Better question: would the black people nominated have to actually be talented and deserving of the nomination, or would the fact that their skin passed a Sherwin Williams “dark enough” visual scan appease Collis?
Blacks make up 13% of the US population, but are already disproportionately represented in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame — and deservedly so, considering the roots of Rock run through R&B, Soul, and other heavily-black genres.
I’m originally from Cleveland — where the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame stands — and can assure you artists like Tina Turner, Aretha Franklin, The Jackson Five, James Brown, and many others are given immense respect for their contributions to Rock and Roll…though they are presented and honored as artists, not as “black people” who’ve been included just because their skin colors were needed to meet some sort of arbitrary quota assigned by Clark Collis and the editors of Entertainment Weakly (spelling intended).
I bring all of this up because it’s apparent to me that hacks like Collis have no real idea what they’re writing most of the time when it comes to race. Collis appears to be in his 20s, and no doubt went to Leftist schools where agenda-driven professors taught him that black people must be viewed by those in the media as perpetual victims and that racial quotas must exist in everything.
If you read EW.com for any length of time, you’ll see that Collis is not the only hack there who feels this way.
If there are five slots open for something and a black person didn’t get one of those slots that year, then too bad.
I’m sure there are some years where black people get two or three of the slots; would Clark Collis complain that white people were not well enough represented in those years? Of course not, because Collis has been programmed never to see racism when scenarios exist where blacks are given the majority share of something disproportionate to their percentage in the population.
Take the BET Awards for instance, or Miss Black America, or the Congressional Black Caucus. All of these have in-your-face racial prejudice built glaringly into them. It’s BLACK Entertainment Television (no whites allowed!), the Miss BLACK America pageant (sorry blondie, no room for you!), and the Congressional BLACK Caucus (where YOUR tax dollars fund a racist private club smack in the heart of the nation’s Capitol).
I can’t recall Clark Collis or anyone at EW.com ever writing about any of this.
What do you think about that?
(this is part 1 of last nights show)
I wanted to get these videos up earlier today but didn’t have time before work. You guys have been talking about it in the Open Thread so I thought I’d get something “official” posted on it. I watched the entire thing last night on MSNBC….it’s hard for me to watch Lawrence O’Donnell because I always expect him to sprout horns and grab his pitchfork. I think he’s a very evil person and he gives me the creeps but I will always watch Herman Cain so I tuned in last night. Herman was simply awesome. This man knows his stuff and he has a very natural way of explaining his plan to get this country out of the hell hole we’ve fallen into. There’s so many parts of this interview to talk about that I’ll leave it up to you guys to comment below on your favorite parts but I’ll just say one thing that I got out of it…. Herman Cain is a very smart man. I don’t think the liberals know quite how to deal with a black man who is so personable, engaging, pro-America and NOT liberal.
Here’s part 2 and 3 of last nights show…..
I can’t find the ending of the interview ( nobody has posted it yet on YouTube) but let me just sum it up for you. Herman Cain left Lawrence O’Donnell wishing that he had chosen to interview Mitt Romney….who would have kowtowed and apologized about everything and basically made himself and the Republican party look mushy-gushy and weak. Herman gave Lawrence hell and did it with a smile on his face. You can’t help but like him and his ideas are very sound and sensible. He’s someone that most Americans can connect with and this must scare Obama and his re-election campaign.
Growing up and living in the South my whole life…I have been listening to Herman Cain for years on WSB 750 and I have been a BIG Herman fan for a very long time. He is the man with the plan…plain and simple.
I just ordered my Cain 2012 bumper sticker.
I’m joining his campaign.
Obama has lost support from many of the people that helped elect him in 2008. When he took office in January of 2009, he had a 92% approval rating among blacks, 75% among Hispanics and a 58% among whites (according to Gallup). Since then, his rating has steadily declined thanks to an abysmal economy and sky-high unemployment rate…especially among the black community. He’s been a big disappointment among Latinos because he hasn’t shoved immigration reform down America’s throat (yet) and many of the young white ideologues who voted for him in ’08 have moved on to other things…mainly trying to find employment in this horrible Obama economy.
There is one group that is still very much in love with the chosen One. Muslims. Pew Research Center did a survey last month that showed that 76% of Muslim-Americans approve of Obama (only 15% approved of President Bush). Why the love affair? According to the survey, many Muslims see Obama as one of their own…1 in 10 believe that he’s a Muslim while 1/3 say they don’t know or they refused to answer. He’s also the president of BIG government which is just what the Muslim community is all about. In fact, they would like to see Obama push for an even BIGGER government. They are big fans of entitlement programs and have very little interest in such things as capitalism or freedom. I’m sure that throwing Israel under the bus repeatedly has helped boost his standing among Muslims as well.
So…Obama may very well continue to make history…
The first black President….the first Muslim President and…
The worst President in American history.