Tuesday, July 19, 2016

The Bankster-Funded La Raza Supremacist Democrat Party's WAR ON AMERICA'S BLACKS!




"We also know that elitist progressives are nothing if not master liars and puppeteers.  They have spent years tailoring and refining their manipulation of the black communities, inflaming their resentment, bitterness and hopelessness by reminding them of how little progress they have been able to make, without reminding them that the Democrats have led them for decades to this dead end and made sure they stayed there."

'Shakedown Sharpton' up to his old tricks

In some alternate universe, Al Sharpton would be wearing prison stripes and punching out license plates somewhere in upstate New York.

Instead, he is feted as an icon of the civil rights movement and celebrated as an upstanding citizen.  He has a TV show and a radio show, he pens op-eds in leading newspapers and websites, and he is a heavy hitter in the Democratic Party.


Except he's a crook, a charlatan, and a flim-flam man all rolled into one.

New York Post:
“He’s a crook, he’s a fraud, and that’s all he is,” complains Reggie Anders Sr., who sought out the Rev. Al Sharpton for help resolving a 2009 discrimination dispute with Verizon.

“He didn’t do anything he promised,” Anders said Saturday by phone from Mesa, Ariz. “Absolutely nothing.”

Anders reached out to Sharpton early last year on the advice of his own minister, the Rev. David Wade of Phoenix. Wade knew Franklyn Richards, the chairman of Sharpton’s National Action Network, and set up a meeting. Anders and his pastor flew east for the sitdown at NAN headquarters in Harlem in March 2015.

“I thought he was an honest guy,” Anders said of meeting Sharpton. “I thought he would do what he said he would do.”

Sharpton promised to go to bat for him against Verizon, a trucking client of Anders he had accused of discrimination and breach of contract in a federal suit that was dismissed in 2014.

Sharpton would “set up mediation meetings” and if need be “put the matter to the media” and even blast the telecom giant on his weekly radio broadcast, according to Anders’ lawsuit, filed Friday in Manhattan federal court. All Anders had to do was hand over $16,000. Sharpton was very clear about how he wished to be paid, Anders told The Post. “He wanted cash only. He didn’t say why.”
But The Rev was not clear at all about one thing — that Verizon and other major corporations had been paying Sharpton and NAN thousands of dollars in donations.

Anders said he was shocked to read a Post exclusive in August 2015 about how companies paid Sharpton what amounted to “protection” money, and companies that didn’t donate, such as GM, were threatened with bad press or NAN-promoted boycotts.

“I had no idea that he was in bed with Verizon,” Anders told The Post. When Anders called to ask about the inaction on his case, and about the Post exposé, Sharpton went ballistic, the trucker said.
“He said people write stuff about him all the time,” Anders said. “Then for a year and a half he strung us along.”
So where's the cash, Al?  Almost certainly it's been spent on fancy clothes, five-star hotel rooms, and A-list restaurants.  Working for poverty-stricken blacks is hard work, so why not reward yourself with some luxury perks?  And considering how long Sharpton has spit in the face of the IRS by avoiding paying his "fair share" of taxes, the chances of Sharpton having reported that cash "donation" to the taxman are slim and none.

The "Sharpton Shakedown" is familiar to most major American corporations, who see nothing to gain by challenging him.  You have to wonder how much illicit cash is passed on to the the good reverend from America's public-spirited companies, given Sharton's standard operating procedure of boycott threats and unfavorable media coverage.

Exposé after exposé has been written about Sharpton, only to have the networks and media outlets ignore the proof of his criminality.  His victims are strewn across the landscape of American society – forgotten and ignored.  He is easily the most despicable person in public life and will no doubt be allowed to continue his nefarious schemes to defraud the public.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/shakedown_sharpton_up_to_his_old_tricks.html#ixzz4EnOioZcY

Obama’s Divide-and-Rule Presidency


The president is near the end of an eight year train wreck presidency, the result of which is that every social issue is more divisive, more unsolvable, and more dishonestly framed than ever before.  It is no secret that he has done nothing for the black community, whose unemployment and crime rates are rising every day, while he demonizes police and lauds racist activists who condone assassination and lawlessness.  Hillary Clinton has promised to be Barack Obama in a pantsuit, which means the downward trend will continue as the Democrat practice of “Promise Everything, Deliver Nothing, Blame Others” goes on in perpetuity.

The black community allows itself to be played this way each and every election cycle, and reliably elects progressive politicians who care more about the profitability of corruption than about their lives or hardships.  Indeed, we know that the majority of these individuals live in Democrat controlled cities and states, where Democrat policies ensure that nothing changes for the better, but will often change for the worse if given minimal time.  Somehow, the dots remain unconnected.   Nevertheless, the party can’t afford to allow the black community to consider other options, including the message of success and advancement via the content of one’s character and work ethic.  The party motto ought to be “Strength Through Failure”.

Thankfully for the Democrats, there are groups like Black Lives Matter, the New Black Panthers, and every organization that preaches Black Liberation Theory or Theology.  Trinity United Church comes to mind, but the Dallas racist didn’t need a church when he had so many other pan-African hate groups to follow.  History tells us that nothing stirs the supposedly big hearts and closed minds of leftists like race-based radical hate groups. 

It is no longer chic for the party to support the old Klan, which was entirely peopled by Democrats in its heyday, and was used as an enforcement tool by the local Democrats to keep people in their predetermined social places.  Fortunately for the Democrats, there is a new Klan on the block: Black Lives Matter.  It’s still populated by Democrats and is still prepared to use violence and assassination to keep people in their social slots.  Ironically, the old Klan and the new Klan are both devices to keep blacks in their predetermined places, just exactly where the Democrat party wants them.  The self-inflicted damage being done to the image of black Americans by this group is incalculable, and is ensuring that restoring trust is now generations away, if it happens at all.  It is not lost on whites that there is racial hatred toward them for merely existing, hardly a starting point for dialogue.  Lies and hatred don’t presage a healing process.

In a country of 340 Million people, we periodically see stories on the news about a police shooting, sometimes a couple within a short period, usually of a suspect who we end up finding out was far from random, far from peaceful, and far from innocent.  Of course, we don’t find that out until well after the left has framed the narrative with lies about the reasons for the confrontation or the risks to the police.  Given the extent to which such events, as unfortunate as they are when erroneous, serve the left’s agenda it is safe to conclude that we would hear about more of them if there were more of them.  That so much is made of the ones that do occur is testament to the fact that they are not a daily occurrence, as the progressives would have us believe.  If such events were as common as they claim, we would hear about them every day, all day, non-stop, and there would be in inexhaustible supply of them.

Needless to say, we already know that.  We all live in the same country as the propagandists.  If they had evidence of rampant and systemic murder by police, they would do anything to publish it.  When such evidence does not exist, however, it becomes necessary to lie.  This is a tactic of other leftist special interest groups, as well.  There are countless stories of activists for gay rights, or women’s rights, or race frauds, who fabricate stories of abuse, violence, gang rape, etc. because there are so few truthful examples of these events occurring in a country the activists hate for the bigotry it continually fails to demonstrate.  Sometimes it’s a Tawanna Brawley scam, other times a slur on a cake from Whole Foods, and yet other times it’s college gang rapes that never happened.  If the systemic hatred and violence was so common, the elaborate frauds would be needless overkill.

We also know that elitist progressives are nothing if not master liars and puppeteers.  They have spent years tailoring and refining their manipulation of the black communities, inflaming their resentment, bitterness and hopelessness by reminding them of how little progress they have been able to make, without reminding them that the Democrats have led them for decades to this dead end and made sure they stayed there.  You will never hear the Democrat mayor or governor of a blue city or state admit that they have been so busy nurturing and feeding their own corruption that they simply never got around to bothering to try to make things better.  You will certainly never hear them remind their dependents that black men and women occupy the highest offices of the country, proving systemic racism has long since been defeated, and the fault lies elsewhere.  Something must be done to distract them, to prevent them from pausing long enough to think, to discourage them from any critical thinking whatsoever, hopefully while enraging them.  They must be played.

So, here we go again.  An election is coming up, and the Democrats can’t afford for their minority captives to stray.  What better way to ensure allegiance than to fabricate a false narrative of wholesale murder, support it with infuriating lies and half-truths that will eventually be dispelled too late to make a difference, and step back while the inevitable violence escalates?  The president can claim to support police because he mouths words to that effect, while actually throwing his entire support behind the radicals, whose leaders he entertains at the White House, and whose actions he enables by faulting the police for his loyalists’ violence and murder.  He can claim to have the cops’ backs, while elevating Al Sharpton, and holding planning conferences with professional agitators, protestors and anarchists, as he has done throughout his presidency, whether during the “Occupy” phase, or the Ferguson phase, or now. 

Of course, those emotional votes are paid for with the innocent lives of Honest to God American patriots.  The president is coldly unconcerned that the upheaval and violence he condones brings with it the loss of selfless American men and women who do more in one day to serve their country and the president’s voters than this president has done in his entire life.  They risk their lives, and their families’ futures, while the president risks being exposed as nothing more than the radical community organizer and race profiteer he never stopped being.  If the president did nothing for a day, the world would be a better place.  If the police did nothing for a day, it would take years to catalogue all the crimes that would be done by those who will vote for the Democrat party candidates this fall.  At the hands of this president’s voters, more police will die to irreparably change America.  It is a price the president is prepared to have others pay. 

America’s Worst President?

I nominate Barack Obama, the anti-Lincoln.
July 10, 2016
Public safety
Politics and law

After Thursday’s terrorist slaughter of policemen in Dallas, it’s fair to say that Barack Obama might well be the worst president in U.S. history. Here’s why.
The keynote of America’s domestic politics for the last 60 or 70 years—from sometime between the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown v Board of Education school desegregation decision and the 1964 Civil Rights Act—has been the nation’s effort to undo the heinous wrongs that slavery and Jim Crow perpetrated on black Americans ever since the first slave was brought here in the 1640s. I am old enough to have had friends who were Freedom Riders, white college kids who went to Mississippi to register black citizens to vote. One I’ll never forget returned with tales of old people, whom legal chicanery had blocked from voting all their lives, marveling in almost Biblical language that such a miracle could be occurring in their own lifetimes, in their own towns. I remember how Sherriff Bull Connor turned the fire hoses and German Shepherds on those civil rights protesters, black and white, in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963, and how that same year governor George Wallace stood at the door of the University of Alabama to prevent the enrollment of two black students, proclaiming himself Jefferson Davis’s spiritual heir and vowing “segregation forever!” But what I most remember is skinny Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach walking heroically down that hostile Alabama street—alone, but followed by federal marshals—to force Wallace to stand aside and let the two students enter. It was as heart stopping as Gary Cooper walking toward the showdown on Main Street in High Noon.
I also remember how civil rights zeal turned into zealotry. We made the integration of our schools, and then the closing of the black-white achievement gap, our principal educational goal for half a century, with the unintended consequence that we neglected actual education and turned urban schools into machines for perpetuating black failure. Judge-ordained busing in Boston, completely contrary to the terms of the Civil Rights Act, made the schools more segregated than ever. A judge-ordained Kansas City school-funding-equalization order, forcing local taxpayers to shell out $2 billion  over  a decade, including building a bizarrely unnecessary Olympic swimming pool, produced no educational gains whatsoever and proved to anyone with eyes to see that money was not the key to racial equality in education.
Then, the colleges turned to affirmative action in admissions, the ed schools taught their students not how to teach or what facts they needed to transmit but only “social-justice” ideology, and deans of diversity began to outnumber actual teachers on college campuses. The professors themselves brought the stupendous achievements of Western culture under the suspicion of creating nothing but racial inequality (and later an unimaginably broad smorgasbord of inequity). They replaced Plato with Ta-Nehisi Coates.


Obama’s Biggest Failure

The president has substantially set back race relations in the United States.
July 9, 2016
Politics and law

When the country elected Barack Obama president in 2008, those of us who disagreed with many of his policy ideas were nonetheless consoled by the fact that his victory illustrated that America had moved well beyond institutional racism. Certainly the fact that Obama had succeeded in both a hard-fought Democratic primary and a general election meant that the country was ready to move past the intense focus on race in our national politics. Boy, were we wrong! Rather than seeing his own victory as a significant advance in American social life, Obama and those he appointed to his administration vigorously put forward the idea that America remains a deeply racist country, and they have redefined racism in the broadest terms possible. It’s not a coincidence, then, that more than seven years into the administration of the nation’s first black president, Americans are more deeply divided on race then they have been in decades. Their own president has fostered the divide.
Several Obama administration initiatives have distorted the national conversation on race. In 2010, for instance, the administration’s education and justice departments launched investigations against school districts around the country for disciplining black students more often, proportionately, than students of other races. A Department of Education study observed that black students were three and a half times more likely to be disciplined. The study alleged that, “everyday educational experience for many students of color violates the principle of equity.” In making its charges, the department ignored compelling data showing that black students were more likely to misbehave in and around school—including crime statistics revealing that blacks were 25 times more likely than their white counterparts to be arrested at schools for serious offenses like battery.
Similarly, the administration’s Department of Housing and Urban Development, through a policy known as Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, now is essentially charging wealthier suburban communities like those in Westchester County, New York, with housing discrimination if their populations are not diverse enough for the administration’s taste. Under the new rules, the federal government no longer must prove that these communities are actively engaging in racial discrimination in order to compel them to cast aside local zoning rules and build housing that would attract low-income residents. The mere fact that a town’s population is not diverse suffices for the Obama administration to demand that the community make efforts to transform itself. “HUD’s power grab is based on the mistaken belief that zoning and discrimination are the same,” Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino wrote in 2013. What’s particularly ironic about this implication of racism in Westchester’s case is that the county voted by nearly a two-to-one margin for Obama in 2012.
The president himself has sadly made significant contributions to the notion that America remains deeply racist with his consistent attacks on the police, even in cases where officers’ actions against black perpetrators have subsequently been demonstrated to have been justified. “Too many young men of color,” the president said in November of 2014, “feel targeted by law enforcement, guilty of walking while black, or driving while black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness. We know that, statistically, in everything from enforcing drug policy to applying the death penalty to pulling people over, there are significant racial disparities.” Later, he added that, “Communities of color aren’t just making these problems up. . . . These are real issues.” But the president has launched the charges while ignoring significant facts. As Heather Mac Donald has observed, more than 6,000 blacks die of homicides yearly, the overwhelming majority of which are committed by other blacks in minority neighborhoods. The police are more likely to patrol these neighborhoods because that’s where the crime is. And as the Dallas killings sadly illustrate, cops are far more likely to die at the hands of black perpetrators than black men are to be killed by cops. About 40 percent of all cop killings, in fact, are committed by black males. Data also reveal no significant racial component to police shootings. Black officers are far more likely to fire their guns at black citizens than are white officers.
The Obama administration’s tendency to see discrimination in so many crevices and corners of American life has created a new standard for what constitutes racism, as demonstrated by Minnesota governor Mark Dayton’s remarks in the wake of the tragic shooting of a black man, Philando Castile, by police in suburban Minneapolis last week. Implying that race played a role in the killing of Castile, who was legally licensed to carry a firearm, Dayton said that he doubted the shooting would have occurred if Castile had been white. But while the horrific video, taken by Castile’s girlfriend in the immediate aftermath of his shooting, shows that the officer was highly agitated, and the woman claims that the cop overreacted in firing on Castile, there is nothing in the video that is overly racist, and there is no reason to conclude that the outcome would have been different if Castile had been of another race. In America today, however, when a black man is killed by an officer of another color, that fact alone is prima facie evidence for some people that the killing was racially motivated.
Perhaps the most damning evidence against the president and his administration is that in the last four years alone, the percentage of Americans who believe racism is on the rise has nearly doubled. That sharp increase has come even amid little evidence that verified incidents of racism are on the rise. Indeed, efforts by the media to document a significant increase in police shootings of minorities have yielded little. New York City data, for instance, show that the number of times that police discharge their weapons every year has been declining for decades. And a close analysis of a Washington Postdatabase on current shootings by police across America, which describes them in detail, reveals that many were justified.
It’s difficult now to ignore the role that President Obama has played in our growing racial divisions. Elected on themes of hope and renewal, his very ascendancy a powerful statement about the country’s racial journey, he chose to use the White House as a vehicle to introduce a new era of racial grievance into our national discourse. Unfortunately, he succeeded in this effort—and failed America.
Believing that welfare payments constituted well-deserved reparations for 300 years of slavery and oppression, we New Yorkers created a come-and-get-it dole that ended up with one in eight of our neighbors on the welfare rolls—paid for by the rest of us and resulting in a multi-generational underclass. We entertained the foolish notion that black crime was a manly revolt against oppression—that black criminals were only protesting against the closure of all avenues of honest advancement for their race, as well as against the daily humiliation heaped on African-Americans.
The resulting depolicing of black neighborhoods and unwillingness of courts to punish black criminals drove crime to Hobbesian levels and turned minority neighborhoods into killing fields, where mothers put their kids to bed in the bathtub, trying to keep them safe from stray bullets. They would never send them out for a bottle of milk or take them into the street to learn to ride a bike. In those days, my upright, churchgoing cleaning lady had to pay the gang who controlled her block $20 of hard-earned money to allow Macy’s deliverymen to go past them to bring her the comfortable bed she had labored so long to earn. She lived, in other words, in something like the Middle Ages, when bands of ruffians ruled the land and extorted tribute from the peasants.
Thomas Jefferson had prophesied that God would punish America for black slavery, but he could never have foreseen how squalid that punishment would be.
As the Civil War, which cost 620,000 American lives, drew to a close, Abraham Lincoln gave his Second Inaugural Address, six weeks before one of the world’s perennial multitude of fanatics, this one opposed to votes for black citizens, blew the great president’s brains out. Lincoln had spoken in his address about the immense cost the country was paying for the sin of slavery. In the final accounting, he said, it might turn out that “all the wealth piled by the bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and . . . every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword.” But as he looked toward the end of the war fought to end these wrongs, he urged reconciliation. He urged forgiveness. “With malice toward none, with charity for all,” he prayed, “let us . . . bind up the nation's wounds.”
Well, we tried. Despite the evil men who derailed Reconstruction, America took up again Lincoln’s charge “to finish the work we are in.” My whole life coincided with that effort. And for all the resistance and unintended negative consequences, the nation had come very close to succeeding by 2008, when Barack Obama, a black man, was elected president of the United States. A friend had called from London shortly before and asked incredulously, “Surely, America would never elect a black man as president?” “Of course it would,” I said. And when it happened, the resounding shout of joy that went up from the buildings of my ultra-left-wing Manhattan neighborhood was something I had never heard before. My wife and daughter wept. And though no admirer of Obama’s politics, I too felt awe at the historical momentousness of it all.
Not everyone shared that sentiment—most notably the new president and his wife, who had sat for more than a decade in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s Chicago church listening to the reverend firebrand pray for God to damn America for its ineradicable racism. Though the new president had sworn his oath of office on Lincoln’s Bible, anyone who thought that his election marked the fulfilment of Lincoln’s dream soon heard him and his even more race-obsessed attorney general lambaste America for a racism so deep that white citizens couldn’t even see it, bred in the bone as it was. Colleges even made up a term for this molecular-level racism: micro-aggression. It was hard not to think of Robespierre’s fanatical vow that the revolution had indeed erased monarchy and aristocracy from France, but it wouldn’t end until it had erased the very idea of them from every man’s heart as well.
Central to the nation’s Herculean effort to end the wrongs of racism was the new determination of police departments, led by New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani and his police commissioner William Bratton, to restore law and order to ghetto neighborhoods, so that civil society could come back to life there, and people wouldn’t have to pay tribute to armed thugs controlling their lives. The old policing had ignored all but the most heinous ghetto crimes. Its spirit was: If they want to kill each other uptown, fine, as long as it stays up there. But for the new policing, all victims deserved police attention, regardless of race. All neighborhoods deserved police protection, regardless of the color of their residents. And since the perpetrators of crime are overwhelmingly young minority men, they properly received a very large proportion of police scrutiny. The alternative, to repeat, was to let them kill each other.
But unlike Lincoln, America’s first black president didn’t bind up the nation’s wounds but scratched them open every time police killed a black man—rightly or sometimes wrongly, because when society arms men with guns and authority, it will inevitably attract some bullies, making a police chief responsible for policing his own men vigilantly, as the NYPD especially has striven to do, and as Plato told us was statecraft’s thorniest problem. Anytime a non-black man killed an African-American, Obama cried racism and said it could have been him or his son, if he’d had one. Every time a cop, white or black, killed a black American, Obama’s reflexive instinct was to blame the cop. About the mayhem of black-on-black murder in the nation’s ghettoes, he gave only a single speech.
When the president praises the Black Lives Matter demonstrators, as if they alone of his fellow countrymen know that platitudinous truth, he is only reinforcing black grievance, when his proper role is to convince ghetto blacks that their lives matter enough for them to take responsibility for them, to stop going around with chips on their shoulders and Glocks in their waistbands, to be fathers to the children they beget, and to set for them an example of the responsible citizenship that is theirs for the asking, thanks to the efforts of so many of their countrymen, white and black, living and dead.
True to form, Obama went into grievance-mongering mode on July 7, commenting on the killings of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile by cops in Louisiana and Minnesota. He noted that “all of us as Americans should be troubled by these shootings, because these are not isolated incidents. They’re symptomatic of a broader set of racial disparities that exist in our criminal justice system.” And he went on to detail law enforcement’s racial disparities, as if there were not even more stark and troubling racial disparities in lawbreaking. His familiar conclusion: “If you add it all up, the African American and Hispanic population, who make up only 30 percent of the general population, make up more than half of the incarcerated population. Now, these are facts. And when incidents like this occur, there’s a big chunk of our fellow citizenry that feels as if because of the color of their skin, they are not being treated the same. And that hurts.”
Later that day, a black former soldier assassinated five Dallas police officers and wounded seven more, sniping from above with a semi-automatic rifle. A sympathizer of the New Black Panther Party, which professes hatred of whites and especially Jews, the sniper, Micah X. Johnson, 25, told police who cornered and killed him that he was avenging cop killings of blacks by killing whites and especially white cops.
If you want to ignite race riots, a sure-fire way to do it is to stir up black hatred and suspicion of cops, which will in turn make cops warier of blacks and more trigger-happy, and so on, until an explosion occurs. So thanks, President Obama. You have set back American race relations by 50 years.

No comments: