To call someone a racist is a serious charge. A racist is someone who believes that one person is superior (or inferior) to another person simply based on their skin color. It’s a belief that is both foolish and stupid. But conservatives are accused by progressives of being racist on an almost daily basis. Is it a fair accusation? Or, is it just political posturing? And, if it is political posturing, what does it say about the people making the charge? Derryck Green of Project 21 has some provocative answers.
From CBS New York…
A grand jury decision is expected to come soon, in the case of the apparent police chokehold that killed Eric Garner on Staten Island this past summer.
Garner, a father of six, died in July after being placed in an apparent chokehold by Officer Daniel Pantaleo. Garner was being arrested for allegedly selling loose, untaxed cigarettes.
The grand jury began hearing evidence in the case Sept. 29.
But the grand jury is expected to review a range of charges, including manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, and reckless endangerment.
Here are the real differences between Ferguson and NYC…
A. Mike Brown was an obvious thug, attacking an officer when he was killed. Eric Garner was a law-abiding father of six, who was vocally, but not physically defending another person from police abuse when he was killed.
B. The Ferguson Grand Jury chose to not indict Officer Wilson. Few people find Daniel Pantaleo’s action defensible. While the jury hasn’t returned a verdict yet, it’s unreasonable that once it’s gone this far, the Grand Jury would not indict him on at least manslaughter. The way most cops escape responsibility for killing innocent civilians is by an internal review board finding the killing “justifiable”, so it never gets to the Grand Jury.
C. Liberals entice and encourage race riots based on specific criteria. It must be an incident where the “victim” is very unsympathetic to most people (bullying, white-hating thugs) therefore the “perpetrator” can be demonized for one group (absent real facts) while the rest look at the facts. The result is a deepened division between the majority of Blacks, and “sympathetic” Liberals, and people who actually think for themselves. The NY case does not fit the mold.
These riots are not about “justice” they are about continuing racial division, and they are fueled by Liberals that thrive on racial division. The same Liberals that give cops more and more power, but then encourage Blacks to respond to that power with more and more violence. If the Grand Jury fails to indict Pantaleo, or fails to return a reasonable indictment (reckless endangerment) then it won’t be hoodlums and trouble-makers protesting, it will be average everyday folk, Black and white, who oppose injustice. The Liberals won’t want that. that would bring unity, not division, and would weaken their hold of Blacks. They must maintain the fiction that Blacks can only trust white Liberals to be on their side.
Mike Brown, Trayvon Martin, Rodney King,
John Crawford III–Shot by a white cop while carrying a toy gun, in the toy section, pointed at the ground, in Wal-Mart. The shooting was ruled “justified” by local law enforcement.
Amadou Diallo–23-year-old immigrant from Guinea. Outside his apartment he was surrounded by white cops who asked his identity, he reached for his wallet to show them his ID and was the cops opened fire. Of the 41 shots fired, 19 hit Diallo. The cops were cleared of any wrongdoing.
Kendrec McDade–19 was chased by cops looking for an armed robber. McDade, on foot, was shot by a white officer who was driving his squad car. Once stopped the other white officer approached McDade and fired several more shots at the kneeling victim. McDade’s family reports that he still didn’t die immediately, but bled to death as he lay handcuffed, while the officers refused to call for an ambulance.
New Beginnings Church member, Bruce Rauner and Pastor Corey Brooks. New Beginnings Church was vandalized and Pastor Brooks received death threats after he announced his support for Republican candidate for governor of Illinois, Bruce Rauner.
Harvard University’s affirmative action policies, which the school says are aimed at achieving diversity on the vaunted campus of Cambridge, discriminate against Asians who often can’t get in despite having higher test scores and grade-point averages than black and Hispanic students who are accepted, according to a lawsuit filed Monday.
Edward Blum, who runs the Project on Fair Representation, which filed the suit on behalf of Asian students who were rejected by the school, said it is a clear case of favoring certain racial groups over others.
“Quotas and racial balancing are strictly against the law,” said Blum, whose group sued the University of Texas on behalf of a white applicant over its affirmative action admissions policies in a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court last year.
In the Texas case, the high court reversed a lower court’s ruling in that case and remanded it with orders to apply the standard of strict scrutiny to the school’s race-conscious admissions policy. That decision is pending, but the Harvard case is different because it focuses on affirmative action’s negative impact on a minority group.
Read the full story at FoxNews.com.
It was one sentence in a letter sent home from Smith Elementary School in Hampton that took parent Cheriss Pasini by surprise, stating “White Students” didn’t meet last year’s reading requirements on the SOLs.
“The kids brought it home. My boyfriend was like, ‘Wait a minute. White kids? White students?’ I was like ‘What wait?’ I have never seen anything like that before in my life.
A school spokesperson explained the email by saying, “Hampton City Schools follows federal guidelines that specify that parents must be notified of the school’s identification as a Title I school that has missed one or more annual measurable objectives. The two specific objectives were ones that were not met by Smith Elementary.”
“What are they teaching the kids in school? Are they segregating them? Whites? Blacks? I just didn`t like it one bit,” Pasini said. “I understand it’s done by the federal whatever, I just wish there was a better way to word it moving forward.”
SOURCE: WTKR – Hampton.Va.
The Chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus said Democrats got walloped in the midterm elections because white Southern voters are racists.
“We lost because of ideological differences within the Democratic Party and with our Administration. We lost because our party has, to some extent, lost white Southerners due in part to the race of our President,” Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH) said, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
As the Plain Dealer noted, Republicans received 10 percent of the black vote in 2014 compared to the six percent that Mitt Romney received in 2012. It was the best showing among black voters for the GOP since Republicans received 11 percent of the black vote nationwide in 2006.
Southerners, and perhaps black voters, disapproved of President Barack Obama’s plans for his plans to enact a massive executive amnesty. Exit polling found that 75% of voters in the midterms opposed Obama’s executive amnesty. A plurality of voters in pre-election polls said they would be less likely to support candidates who favored giving a pathway to citizenship to all of the country’s illegal immigrants, and every Democrat who was up for reelection voted for the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” comprehensive amnesty bill that would have done just that.
Read the full article at Breitbart.com.