I just put on MSNBC for about three minutes. During that time I heard a report that there was less activity in Ferguson, Missouri last night than in previous nights (what is there left to loot? It's not like delivery trucks are rolling in to restock the shelves while this is going on).
Next, I heard Amanda Terkel, a "reporter" from the Huffington Post, telling us that what is happening in the streets of Ferguson is "a family-friendly event".
I then turned off my TV and considered taking a shower.
As someone who, along with my wife, dumped a bucket of ice water on my head for the privilege of donating money to a worthy cause, I laughed when I saw this funny cartoon from Steve Kelley. Maybe you will too:
Jay Nixon, the current Governor of Missouri, was the state's Attorney General for 16 years.
I have a feeling that the Jay Nixon who existed at that time would be sickened by what the Jay Nixon of today has become.
Yesterday, Nixon called for "A vigorous prosecution" of Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson. He did so before any evidence has been presented to a Grand Jury - thus before he has any actual knowledge of whether Officer Wilson committed a crime or acted unprofessionally in any way.
But Jay Nixon has not called for the "vigorous prosecution" of the rioters and looters who, with the police cowed into submission and largely standing by while it happens, have turned Ferguson into a paradigm of anarchy and lawlessness; a testament to the premise that crime pays. Unlike Officer Wilson's actions, there is no doubt whatsoever about the rioting and looting; we have all seen the video footage night after night.
In this regard, I would like to congratulate al sharpton and jessie Jackson. They have done well here. Their incendiary racial agitation has not only inhibited the police from clearing the streets, but also apparently scared the crap out of Governor Nixon, turning him into their de facto mouthpiece.
What is the Governor afraid of? That if he tells the truth - i.e. we should be waiting for the evidence to come out about Officer Wilson's actions, while immediately stopping the rioting and looting which is taking place right in front of our faces - he'll be called a racist?
The sharptons and jacksons of the world have made careers out of calling people racists. That is what they do. But truth is truth, no matter what epithets they, or any of their likeminded pals, toss out there. And the Governor of a state is, at least on paper, supposed to deal in truth.
If Nixon had the guts to be honest, he would be telling us that only a tiny fraction of Black people in Ferguson, Missouri have had anything to do with the rioting and looting. But, as people see night after night of these crimes being committed exclusively or almost exclusively by Blacks, countless numbers of them are likely to associate these actions with Blacks in general. And he would go after Sharpton, Jackson, and the suckups who cheer them, for facilitating what is taking place in Ferguson by pouring rhetorical gasoline on the flames.
Is it unfair to blame Black people in general for what these idiots are doing? Is it wrong? You bet it is. But do you doubt that it is happening?
Standing up against these street thugs means standing up for every Black person who is not committing their crimes. It is telling the world that it is ridiculous to judge all by the actions of a few. But other than several vague, political-BS mouthings, where has Nixon done that?
The one thin silver lining in this ugly cloud is that Missourians now know how weak, unprincipled and cowardly Governor Nixon is when the chips are down.
I hope, for their sake, they remember it next election day.
Today's quote comes to us from Jason Riley of the Wall Street Journal.
I will post it below, without further comment - partly because it doesn't need any and partly because it so completely represents what I have already said in this blog:
not pretend that our morgues and cemeteries are full of young black
men because cops are shooting them. The reality is that it's
because other black people are shooting them. And we need to talk
about black criminality. Blacks are only 13 percent of the
population. But they're 50 percent of homicide victims in this
country and 90 percent of those victims are killed by other black
people. We need to talk about that...the same weekend that this went
down in Ferguson, we had 26 shootings in Chicago. But Al Sharpton
didn't head to Chicago. He headed to St. Louis because he has an
entirely different agenda, which is to continue to blame whites."
Mr. Riley wins Quote Of The Day honors for doing what countless media whores posing as "journalists" are to dishonest, and/or unprofessional, and/or scared to do. Tell the truth.
Congratulations, sir. May your honesty, professionalism and courage be contagious.
Proving, again, that the only meaning of a cease-fire to hamas is that it is an opportunity to reorganize and restock, the terrorists have broken the latest truce, as they did the others, by firing dozens of rockets into southern Israel.
Will Israel be told to answer with a "proportionate response"- which means that hamas is dictating when and how much Israel fights?
To say the least, I hope not.
Much of the world is going to hate Israel no matter how it responds. Might as well do it right and put hamas out of commission for as long as possible.
St. Louis city police officers shot and killed a black man who came
within several feet of them brandishing a knife on Tuesday a few
miles from the turbulent suburb of Ferguson, authorities said.
crowd of at least 100 people quickly gathered at the scene. Some
people chanted, "Hands up! Don't shoot!" - the refrain from a
week of protests over the police killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed
black teenager, three miles away.
man in the St. Louis shooting, 23, had taken energy drinks and a
package of pastries from a nearby convenience store, Police Chief Sam
Dotson told reporters. He said that the man was "acting
erratically, walking back and forth, up and down the street."
chief said that the officers repeatedly ordered the man to drop the
knife and drew their weapons after he did not drop it. The chief said
the man told the police: "Shoot me now. Kill me now."
said the two officers fired after the man moved toward one of them
and came within 3 to 4 feet.
of the witnesses described it as a suicide by cop," Dotson said.
"Hands up! Don't shoot"?
"Suicide by cop"?
What, I would love to know, would the people making these idiotic comments have done if they were in the same situation?
This is the mindset police are dealing with. For some (not all) Ferguson protesters, the circumstances are irrelevant. If police shoot a Black perp (and we don't even know the color of the officers from this story, do we?), it must be a racial outrage. Period, end of story. Even if he is coming toward them with a knife and ignoring their orders to stop.
Is that why some of the people protesting Michael Brown's killing do not seem to care that the autopsy debunks some of the stories going around about how it happened (as opposed to the looters and rioters, who couldn't care less what happened, and see his death as nothing more than an opportunity?)
I don't envy the police what they're dealing with in that sad part of the world.
Michelle Bernard is a former Republican/now "independent" women's rights activist who is, among other things, a contributor to the Washington Post, Huffington Post and is a legal analysis for MSNBC (that certainly verifies the "former Republican" part, doesn't it?).
She also is a Black woman, who, on Monday's "Hardball" show, told us that her 11 year old had asked her if someone was going to shoot him (like they did Michael Brown)....which probably is a good indication of how the Michael Brown incident has been related to this young man.
Here is what Ms. Bernard told him:
don't have an answer that is palatable to be able to look my
children in the face and say there are people in this country who -
not only do not like African-Americans, but they despise Black men. There is a war on Black boys in this country. In my
opinion, there is a war on African-American men...it's going to turn
into a genocide if it doesn't stop."
The good news (in terms of accuracy, not content) is that everything Michelle Bernard said is true. The bad news is that the first sentence is almost completely unrelated to the rest of her statement.
Here is how I would answer Ms. Bernard's son:
"There are people in this country who do not like anyone who is Black, and they especially don't like Black males - both men and boys.
"Part of the reason is that there are people who are just haters. They come in all colors and they hate all colors. There are White people who hate Black people, Black people who hate White people, and haters of every other kind you can think of.
"It is impossible to explain why they have this hatred, because there is no good reason for it. But they do, and they are out there - lots of them.
"Black males - even Black boys your age - are a special target. One of the reasons is that Black males - even Black boys your age - commit much more crime than non-Blacks - including violent crime such as beating other people up or even killing them.
"I know you don't do any of those things, and I'm sure you never will. Most Black men and boys don't. But, because so many do, a White person who does not know you may be afraid you are one of them.
This is very, very unfair to you. But, fair or not, that is the way the world is, and you will have to deal with it now, and probably all your life.
"Another fact that is very unfair to you but you will have to deal with, is that, if you are worried about someone hurting you, your greatest fear should not be White people, it should be other Black people.
"Again, this does not mean that you have done a thing wrong, or ever will. But it does mean - and I say this with a very heavy heart - you stand a much greater chance of being hurt by someone who is Black than someone who is White, or a police officer, or just about anyone else.
So how can you stay as safe as possible?
"Though you can never know for sure, one way of deciding whether you are safe or not is to see how people dress, talk and generally behave. For example, if you see someone in funky street clothes, with his pants down below his butt, talking trash and using a lot of bad language, I don't care what color he is, you probably should be more concerned about him than someone who is dressed, more normally and is acting in a less threatening way.
At 11 years old I hope you know this last part without my telling you, but I just want to be sure.
Nevada's John Ralston has provided us with a guest editorial about Hillary Clinton - the real Hillary Clinton as opposed to the gossamer image created and nurtured by her adoring media fans.
It seems Ms. Clinton is going to make a speech at the University of Nevada - Las Vegas (UNLV). And she has a stipulation or two in her contract which must be fulfilled or she will not be coming.
Now, I will let Mr. Ralston, who provides news and analysis weekday nights on KSNV-Channel 3, tell you about those stipulations, and what he (and I, and maybe you) thinks about them:
price of Hillary Clinton's scheduled speech and UNLV fundraiser could
be going up. Las Vegas Review Journal, which obtained Clinton's
contract with the UNLV Foundation, reports in addition to her
speaking fee of $225,000, Clinton is demanding a private jet, a
presidential suite and adjoining rooms for her entourage, and Clinton
refuses to mingle with the common folk. She wants to approve any
media types attending the event.
now, a word about royalty. We don't have kings and queens in America,
or at least we shouldn't. But when I see the red carpet UNLV is
rolling out for Hillary Clinton in two months I start to wonder.
Unless you're a mindless partisan, the details of that contract with
the UNLV Foundation should disturb you. They were uncovered, as I
said by the RJ's Lara Myers, and published over the weekend. The
contract reads as if Hillary is being given the, yes, royal
treatment. Now it is bad enough that the UNLV Foundation folks agreed
to that outrageous $225,000 fee as students struggle to make ends
the contract they signed shows they were willing to agree to terms no
self-respecting institution would. She wants a private jet, a
presidential suite, rooms for staff, and, get this, all cell phone
charges for everyone paid for. Oh, and if the $225,000 is not enough
UNLV has to spring for a stenographer, and no one gets to see the
transcription except -- Hillary. No media coverage at all, no
statements, keep the rabble out of the room. The contract also says
Hillary is not -- and this is in all caps -- endorsing the sponsor.
That is, she does not want anyone to think that she actually likes
UNLV. No one can take a picture of Hillary and post it to Facebook or
tweet it unless, of course, you get her agent's permission.
gather UNLV held firm on a provision that no one was allowed to look
her directly in the eye and that men were supposed to bow and women
curtsy before her. I don’t know who should be more embarrassed,
Hillary or UNLV? I only have one question: Who gets to hold her crown
while she speaks?"
That, folks, is the real Hillary Clinton. Are you impressed?
But I beg you to be fair. After all, as Ms. Clinton has told us, she and Bill were dead broke after leaving the White House, and even today she's not "really well off".
Between this, and Clinton's astonishing lack of any accomplishments over the decades she has been in the public eye, it is amazing that anyone would consider voting for her.
But, then again, the world is full of amazements, isn't it?
Suppose the KKK came to Ferguson, Missouri this week. Suppose it rounded up about 1,000 members and sympathizers, to march down the main street of town chanting "Who was Michael Brown?" "A thief and pothead", "How do we like him", "We like him dead".
Do you think they would have been allowed to march? And, if by some amazing confluence of circumstance they did march, do you think media would cover it, complete with articles, editorials, cable news features and panels, etc. condemning them as White racists...and assuring us that they would find a far happier home in the Republican Party than among Democrats?
What do we want? -
Darren Wilson How do we want him? -
All hell is about
to break loose- Reporter Kenny Bahr is on the scene
and took this video:
When did this "event" occur? Saturday night - which has given our media over two days to report it.
But when I googled "New Black Panther Party March Ferguson Missouri" There was not one story on the entire first page from any major news organization, either broadcast (NBC, CBS, ABC) or print.
And on the entire second page, all I found was one article from ABC News - written two days before the march - which mentioned the new black panther party was coming and might be provocative (but, no report after Saturday on what the group chanted) and an article from NBC News mentioning that a woman from the group was using a bullhorn to tell people to clear the street by 12 midnight - again, no report on what the group chanted.
In other words, there is a virtually complete blackout of the fact - and it is a fact as you saw/heard in the above video - that an overtly racist, violent Black group was demanding death for a police officer.
Asking again: if those were White racists chanting that Michael Brown deserved what he got, would the police have broken it up? Would media have reported it?
What this tells you, with crystal clarity, is that, either due to sympathy with their position (i.e. partisanship in favor of a hate group), or fear (one of the racists might call them racist), mainstream media will find a way to give Black racism and death threats against a police officer, who has not been charged with or convicted of anything, a free pass.
Little wonder that they also constantly give a free pass to the disgusting racial arsonists like al sharpton and jessie jackson.
And for people like me, who despise racism and fight it in all its forms? They leave us out in the cold - while, I suspect, congratulating each other on their liberality and tolerance.
MICHAEL BROWN: A VERSION THE SHARPTONS AND JACKSONS OF THE WORLD DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT
Here, excerpted from an article at cnn.com, is a version of what happened between Michael Brown and Officer Darren Wilson that was called into Saint Louis' radio station KFTK. I assure you that the al sharptons and jesse jacksons of the world would rather you don't know a thing about it. But in this blog, we show all sides, so here it is:
to the account on St. Louis radio station KFTK, phoned in by a woman
who identified herself as "Josie," the altercation on
August 9 began after Officer
Darren Wilson rolled down his window to tell Brown and a friend
to stop walking in the street.
Wilson tried to get out of his cruiser, Brown first tried to push the
officer back into the car, then punched him in the face and grabbed
for his gun before breaking free after the gun went off once, the
pursued Brown and his friend, ordering them to freeze, according to
the account. When they turned around, Brown began taunting Wilson,
saying he would not arrest them, then ran at the officer at full
speed, the caller said.
then began shooting. The final shot was to Brown's forehead, and the
teenager fell two or three feet in front of Wilson, said the caller,
who identified herself as the officer's friend.
source with detailed knowledge of the investigation later told CNN
the caller's account is "accurate," in that it matches what
Wilson has told investigators.
true, the account represents the first telling of events from the
perspective of Wilson, whose shooting of Brown has touched off
violent nightly protests in the suburban St. Louis city, and prompted
Gov. Jay Nixon to call out the National Guard.
Do I know whether "Josie" is telling the truth? Nope.
Which puts her account in exactly the same place as every other one.
Why should I believe her "eye-witness" version of what happened any more or less than anyone else's?
And what does this tell you about what is happening in Ferguson, Missouri - other than that a lot of people are making a lot of noise and doing a lot of damage over something they haven't the slightest wisp of verifiable knowledge about.
That may suit the racial arsonists like sharpton and jackson just fine. But I am certain it doesn't suit most of the people in Ferguson - Black or White - one little bit.
One more thing. In case people are getting the wrong idea about Ferguson, Missouri (and I have little doubt there are plenty of them). Let me again remind you, as I have in previous blogs, how few people are causing trouble there.
The TV coverage makes it seem like just about everyone in town is out there. But that could not be further from the truth.
Ferguson, Missouri has about 14,000 Black residents. Watch your TV and note how many are out there rioting, looting or behaving in a disorderly manner (as opposed to protesting, which anyone is entitled to do). Is it 100 or maybe, at most, 200?
I doubt it is as much as 200 - but say that it is even 300.
Now, assuming they are all locals (which probably is not true), subtract 300 from 14,000 and you get 13,700. That is how many Black people in Ferguson out of 14,000 are not rioting, looting or disorderly.
Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site,
third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser,
or using web beacons to collect information.
At "Hopelessly Partisan" we discuss all issues, big and small. Such as:
-Which scandal is worse: the VA mess, or the "deal" that sent five terrorists back into action in return for a deserter?
-Is susan rice trying to set the new world record for lying to our faces (the competition - from her boss - is fierce)?
-How many people really signed up for ObamaCare - and do Democrats really think they can run on it?
-Can the Obama administration - and especially Hillary Clinton - escape accountability for Benghazi?
-When will President Obama stop pretending he cares about the constitution and just declare himself king?
Right down to:
-Based on the decisions he has made since becoming CNN's President, is Jeff Zucker secretly working for Fox News Channel?
-What is causing viewership of MSNBC's prime time shows, poor to begin with, to drop even further?
-Is there a girl 5 - 10 years of age who cannot belt out a complete rendition of "Let It Go"?
In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.
So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of "The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics", and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.
And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!