History Facts: What the Constitution Really says about race and Slavery

History Facts:

What the Constitution Really says about race and Slavery

David Azarrad

Daily Signal, Heritage Foundation

keyIn no way can the Constitution be said to be pro-slavery. The principles of natural right undergirding it are resolutely anti-slavery. Its language conveys disapproval of slavery. Contrary to a popular misconception, the Constitution also does not say that only white males who owned property could vote.

lincoln-statueOne hundred and fifty years ago this month, the 13th Amendment officially was ratified, and with it, slavery finally was abolished in America. The New York World hailed it as “one of the most important reforms ever accomplished by voluntary human agency.”

The newspaper said the amendment “takes out of politics, and consigns to history, an institution incongruous to our political system, inconsistent with justice and repugnant to the humane sentiments fostered by Christian civilization.”

With the passage of the 13th Amendment—which states that “[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction”—the central contradiction at the heart of the Founding was resolved.

constitution1Eighty-nine years after the Declaration of Independence had proclaimed all men to be free and equal, race-based chattel slavery would be no more in the United States.

While all today recognize this momentous accomplishment, many remain confused about the status of slavery under the original Constitution. Textbooks and history books routinely dismiss the Constitution as racist and pro-slavery. The New York Times, among others, continues to casually assert that the Constitution affirmed African-Americans to be worth only three-fifths of a human being.

Ironically, many Americans who are resolutely opposed to racism unwittingly agree with Chief Justice Roger Taney’s claim in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) that the Founders’ Constitution regarded blacks as “so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit.” In this view, the worst Supreme Court case decision in American history was actually correctly decided.

The argument that the Constitution is racist suffers from one fatal flaw: the concept of race does not exist in the Constitution.

Such arguments have unsettling implications for the health of our republic. They teach citizens to despise their founding charter and to be ashamed of their country’s origins. They make the Constitution an object of contempt rather than reverence. And they foster alienation and resentment among African-American citizens by excluding them from our Constitution.

The received wisdom in this case is wrong. If we turn to the actual text of the Constitution and the debates that gave rise to it, a different picture emerges. The case for a racist, pro-slavery Constitution collapses under closer scrutiny.

Race and the Constitution

The argument that the Constitution is racist suffers from one fatal flaw: the concept of race does not exist in the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution—or in the Declaration of Independence, for that matter—are human beings classified according to race, skin color, or ethnicity (nor, one should add, sex, religion, or any other of the left’s favored groupings). Our founding principles are colorblind (although our history, regrettably, has not been).

The Constitution speaks of people, citizens, persons, other persons (a euphemism for slaves) and Indians not taxed (in which case, it is their tax-exempt status, and not their skin color, that matters). The first references to “race” and “color” occur in the 15th Amendment’s guarantee of the right to vote, ratified in 1870.

The infamous three-fifths clause, which more nonsense has been written than any other clause, does not declare that a black person is worth 60 percent of a white person. It says that for purposes of determining the number of representatives for each state in the House (and direct taxes), the government would count only three-fifths of the slaves, and not all of them, as the Southern states, who wanted to gain more seats, had insisted. The 60,000 or so free blacks in the North and the South were counted on par with whites.

Contrary to a popular misconception, the Constitution also does not say that only white males who owned property could vote. The Constitution defers to the states to determine who shall be eligible to vote (Article I, Section 2, Clause 1). It is a little known fact of American history that black citizens were voting in perhaps as many as 10 states at the time of the founding (the precise number is unclear, but only Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia explicitly restricted suffrage to whites).

Slavery and the Constitution

Not only does the Constitution not mention blacks or whites, but it also doesn’t mention slaves or slavery. Throughout the document, slaves are referred to as persons to underscore their humanity. As James Madison remarked during the constitutional convention, it was “wrong to admit in the Constitution the idea that there could be property in men.”

The Constitution refers to slaves using three different formulations: “other persons” (Article I, Section 2, Clause 3), “such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1), and a “person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof” (Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3).

Although these circumlocutions may not have done much to improve the lot of slaves, they are important, as they denied constitutional legitimacy to the institution of slavery. The practice remained legal, but slaveholders could not invoke the supreme law of the land to defend its legitimacy. These formulations make clear that slavery is a state institution that is tolerated—but not sanctioned—by the national government and the Constitution.

Reading the original Constitution, a visitor from a foreign land would simply have no way of knowing that race-based slavery existed in America. As Abraham Lincoln would later explain:

Thus, the thing is hid away, in the Constitution, just as an afflicted man hides away a wen or a cancer, which he dares not cut out at once, lest he bleed to death.

Frederick Douglass (1818-1895), former slave and abolitionist broke whites' stereotypes about African Americans in the decades prior to the U.S. Civil War. His literary and oratorical excellence, and his dignified bearing, converted many to support the abolition of slavery in the United States. 1855 portrait. (Newscom TagID: evhistorypix007462.jpg) [Photo via Newscom]

Frederick Douglass (1818-1895), former slave and abolitionist broke whites’ stereotypes about African Americans in the decades prior to the U.S. Civil War. His literary and oratorical excellence, and his dignified bearing, converted many to support the abolition of slavery in the United States. 1855 portrait. (Newscom TagID: evhistorypix007462.jpg) [Photo via Newscom]

One could go even further and argue, as Frederick Douglass did in the lead-up to the Civil War, that none of the clauses of the Constitution should be interpreted as applying to slaves. The “language of the law must be construed strictly in favor of justice and liberty,” he argued.

Because the Constitution does not explicitly recognize slavery and does not therefore admit that slaves were property, all the protections it affords to persons could be applied to slaves. “Anyone of these provisions in the hands of abolition statesmen, and backed up by a right moral sentiment, would put an end to slavery in America,” Douglass concluded.

Those who want to see what a racist and pro-slavery Constitution would look like should turn to the Confederate Constitution of 1861. Though it largely mimics the Constitution, it is replete with references to “the institution of negro slavery,” “negroes of the African race,” and “negro slaves.” It specifically forbids the Confederate Congress from passing any “law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves.”

Contrary to a popular misconception, the Constitution also does not say that only white males who owned property could vote.

One can readily imagine any number of clauses that could have been added to our Constitution to enshrine slavery. The manumission of slaves could have been prohibited. A national right to bring one’s slaves to any state could have been recognized. Congress could have been barred from interfering in any way with the transatlantic slave trade.

It is true that the Constitution of 1787 failed to abolish slavery. The constitutional convention was convened not to free the slaves, but to amend the Articles of Confederation. The slave-holding states would have never consented to a new Constitution that struck a blow at their peculiar institution. The Constitution did, however, empower Congress to prevent its spread and set it on a course of extinction, while leaving the states free to abolish it within their own territory at any time.

Regrettably, early Congresses did not pursue a consistent anti-slavery policy. This, however, is not an indictment of the Constitution itself. As Frederick Douglass explained: “A chart is one thing, the course of a vessel is another. The Constitution may be right, the government wrong.”

Congress and the Slave Trade

ThomasJeffersonIn his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson called the African slave trade an “execrable commerce” and an affront “against human nature itself.” Because of a concession to slave-holding interests, the Constitution stipulates that it may not be abolished “prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1).

In the meantime, Congress could discourage the importation of slaves from abroad by imposing a duty “not exceeding 10 dollars on each person” (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1). Although early Congresses considered such measures, they were never enacted.

Early Congresses did, however, regulate the transatlantic slave trade, pursuant to their power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). In 1794, 1800, and 1803, statutes were passed that severely restricted American participation in it. No American shipyard could be used to build ships that would engage in the slave trade, nor could any ship sailing from an American port traffic in slaves abroad. Americans were also prohibited from investing in the slave trade.

Finally, on the very first day on which it was constitutionally permissible to do so—Jan. 1, 1808—the slave trade was abolished by law.

The law, which President Thomas Jefferson signed, stipulated stiff penalties for any American convicted of participating in the slave trade: up to $10,000 in fines and five to 10 years in prison. In 1823, a new law was passed that punished slave-trading with death.

Congress and the Expansion of Slavery

Banning the importation of slaves would not by itself put an end to slavery in the United States. Slavery would grow naturally even if no new slaves were brought into the country.

Although Congress could not prevent this, it could prevent slavery from spreading geographically to the territories from which new states would eventually be created.

Congress has the power “to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States” (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2), to forbid the migration of slaves into the new territories (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1), and to stipulate conditions for statehood (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2).

In no way could the Constitution be said to be pro-slavery. The principles of natural right undergirding it are resolutely anti-slavery. Its language conveys disapproval of slavery.

Regrettably, early Congresses did not prevent the spread of slavery. Between 1798 and 1822, Congress enacted 10 territorial acts. Only half excluded slavery.

As a result, seven slaveholding states and five free states were admitted into the union. The seeds of what Abraham Lincoln would later call the crisis of the house divided were sown.

Slavery in the Existing States

As for the existing slaveholding states that had ratified the Constitution, what could Congress do to restrict the growth of slavery within their borders? Here Congress had more limited options. After 1808, “the migration” of slaves across state lines could have been prohibited (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1). This was never done.

In principle, slavery could have been taxed out of existence. However, the requirement that direct taxes be apportioned among the states made it impossible to exclusively target slaveholders. A capitation or head tax, for example, even though it would have been more costly for Southerners, would also impose a heavy burden on Northerners.

While one could perhaps have circumvented the apportionment requirement by calling for an indirect tax on slaves—as Sen. Charles Sumner, R-Mass., would later do during the Civil War—such arguments were not made in the early republic.

There was one clause in the original Constitution that required cooperation with slaveholders and protected the institution of slavery. Slaves who escaped to freedom were to “be delivered up” to their masters (Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3). The motion to include a fugitive slave clause at the constitutional convention passed unanimously and without debate. This would seem to indicate that all knew it would be futile to try to oppose such a measure.

James Madison

James Madison

The debate instead focused on the wording. Whereas the original draft had referred to a “person legally held to service or labor in one state,” the final version instead refers to a “person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof.” This change, Madison explains in his notes, was to comply “with the wish of some who thought the term legal equivocal,” as it gave the impression “that slavery was legal in a moral view,” rather than merely permissible under the law.

This remark by Madison captures the Constitution’s stance vis-à-vis slavery: permissible, but not moral. Legal, but not legitimate.

In no way can the Constitution be said to be pro-slavery. The principles of natural right undergirding it are resolutely anti-slavery. Its language conveys disapproval of slavery. And it contains within it several provisions that could have been and were at times used to prevent the spread of slavery.

This may not make it an anti-slavery Constitution. But even before the 13th Amendment, it was a Constitution that, if placed in the right hands, could be made to serve the cause of freedom.

 

http://dailysignal.com/2015/12/28/what-the-constitution-really-says-about-race-and-slavery/

Advertisements

Truth vs. Hype: Law, Race and Character

Truth vs. Hype

Truth-Detectors

keyOver 100 years ago, Booker T. Washington said this:  “There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.” ~ Booker T. Washington from 1911

220px-Booker_T_WashingtonBooker T. Washington, 1911, more than a hundred years ago on the grievance industry.  He’s talking about the Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton and you pick your name. Anybody else who does this kind of stuff, he’s talking exactly about them.  They do not want it to stop.  They do not want it to go away.  They “do not want the Negro to lose his grievances” means they don’t want any of this solved because they did not want to lose their jobs.  There were race hustlers even back in the day of Booker T. Washington.  There were race hustlers back in the days of slavery.  This isn’t gonna end.  This is not gonna end until the Democrat Party somehow, some way, is ever held accountable for what they have visited on this country. ~Rush Limbaugh

“The right end of the problem I will tell you, as a law enforcement officer, is not to build larger jails. It’s not to hire more law enforcement officers. It’s to get into our families and our school systems, and yes, into our churches and start to bring back the training of character and integrity to our communities.” ~Sheriff David Morgan

Sheriff Speaks Out on Law, Race, and Character

Some History of Race Relations and Identity Politics

Race Hustlers & Thugs Won’t Like What This Florida Sheriff Has to Say to the Black Community
Escambia County Sheriff David Morgan had some wise words he delivered lately. However, I’m sure some of the race baiters, the Obama administration and others who thrive off of the constant war of ethnic communities in America are going to be going after him once they hear what he had to say. However, he was right on.

flag1“First off, let me take issue with the title ‘African-American,'” Sheriff Morgan said. “We’re Americans. I’m fourth generation Welsh. I, nor my family, do not pretend to say we are ‘Welsh-American.’ We are Americans. I was not born in Wales and the Blacks that currently reside in the united States of America are not from Africa.”
He went on to point out that terms like “African-American” are the kinds of terms that are used to divide Americans. Sheriff Morgan asked what the issues minority communities face in Escambia County.

“Many are real and many are perceived,” he said. “I will tell you that I think most of them are perceived.”

Why would Sheriff Morgan say that? He pointed back to the history of our nation. I will point out that after taking issue with the term “African-American,” he then uses the very term to address the issue he is speaking about.

barack-obama-birth-certificate“Not that many years ago, the thought of electing an ‘African-American’ president would have been unthinkable in the United States of America,” said Sheriff Morgan.

Indeed, it would have since the person must be a natural born citizen in order to be president, but the current usurper-in-chief has all sorts of questions not only about his place of birth, but even about who his mother, father and grandparents are.

Sheriff Morgan reminded the Black community that they are a little less than 13% of the united States.

“Had every one of those people been voter eligible, only 13% could have voted for President Obama,” he noted. “President Obama has won two elections as president of the united States.”

He then pointed to what that meant. It simply means that a wide variety of Americans from various ethnicities voted for him. He then dropped the bomb on the race baiters.

martinlutherkingRacist Nation?

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

“If we are such a ‘racist nation,’ then why do we have…

  • A Black president?
  • Why was General Chappy James the first 4-Star General?
  • Why was General Colin Powell promoted to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and later to Secretary of State?
  • Why do we currently have an Attorney General who is also Black?

Sheriff Morgan then said that anyone making an argument that America is a “racist nation” is “focusing on a specific instances where we may have had problems with race relations, but it certainly does not paint any organization or any individuals or any nation as racist.”

However, he did point out that the Black community has embraced a “thug culture.” This culture, according to Sheriff Morgan, embraces “foul language, shooting cops, abusing women.”

“If you don’t think those things have an effect on our children, you need to get a grip,” he warned.

The video then cuts to clip of Sheriff Morgan addressing the issue of Black on White crime in Florida and asking, “Where is the outrage?”

Sadly, there are crickets from the racist administration of Barack Obama because that would not fit his agenda. However, Sheriff Morgan did have some wise words.

black-family-dinner“The right end of the problem I will tell you, as a law enforcement officer, is not to build larger jails,” he said. “It’s not to hire more law enforcement officers. It’s to get into our families and our school systems, and yes, into our churches and start to bring back the training of character and integrity to our communities.”

“We have raised an a-social generation,” he concluded.

He then pointed to the fact that criminologists had predicted this years ago, referring to this time as “The Rise of the Super Predators.” These are people who are untethered to either faith, family, religion or community. For these kinds of people, it is all about them to the exclusion of anyone else.
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/04/race-hustlers-thugs-wont-like-what-this-florida-sheriff-has-to-say-to-the-black-community/#0M7wdyuUPFVPCJay.99

 

Character, Race, and Law

Dinner Topics for Thursday

Race Relations and Law Enforcement

Reprinted by permission of Hillsdale College

 

keyLet us—all of us—have the courage to defy the consensus, the courage to stand for principle. [May] you have the courage to stand firm for truth and righteousness. ~Thomas S. Monson

Jason L. Riley has great courage and strength of character to stand for truth and principle on this very sensitive and highly controversial issue. He gives valuable counsel, rather than mouthing empty platitudes. ~C.D.

  please-stop-helping-us-how-liberals-make-it-harder-for-blacks-to-succeed

Jason L. Riley
Editorial Board Member, Wall Street Journal

Jason L. Riley is an editorial board member and a senior editorial page writer at the Wall Street Journal, where he writes on politics, economics, education, immigration, and race. He is also a FOX News contributor and appears regularly on Special Report with Bret Baier. Previously, he worked for USA Today and the Buffalo News. He earned a bachelor’s degree in English from the State University of New York at Buffalo. He is the author of Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed.

 

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on January 30, 2015, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series.

I hope to bring more Light than Heat to the Discussion of Race

Thomas Sowell once said that some books you write for pleasure, and others you write out of a sense of duty, because there are things to be said—and other people have better sense than to say them. My new book, Please Stop Helping Us, falls into that latter category.

When I started out as a journalist 20 years ago, I had no expectation of focusing on race-related topics. People like Sowell and Shelby Steele and Walter Williams and a few other independent black thinkers, to my mind at least, had already said what needed to be said, had been saying it for decades, and had been saying it more eloquently than I ever could.

But over the years, and with some prodding from those guys, it occurred to me that not enough younger blacks were following in their footsteps. It also occurred to me that many public policies aimed at the black underclass were just as wrongheaded as ever. The fight wasn’t over. A new generation of black thinkers needed to explain what’s working and what isn’t, and why, to a new generation of readers. And the result is this book, which I hope will help to bring more light than heat to the discussion of race.

Back Home to Buffalo

The book is not an autobiography or a memoir, but I do tell a few stories about growing up black and male in the inner city. And one of the stories involves a trip back home to Buffalo, New York, where I was born and raised. I was visiting my older sister shortly after I had begun working at the Wall Street Journal, and I was chatting with her daughter, my niece, who was maybe in the second grade at the time.

Counterproductive Behavior

I was asking her about school, her favorite subjects, that sort of thing, when she stopped me and said, “Uncle Jason, why you talk white?” Then she turned to her little friend who was there and said, “Don’t my uncle sound white? Why he tryin’ to sound so smart?”

She was just teasing, of course. I smiled and they enjoyed a little chuckle at my expense. But what she said stayed with me. I couldn’t help thinking: Here were two young black girls, seven or eight years old, already linking speech patterns to race and intelligence. They already had a rather sophisticated awareness that, as blacks, white-sounding speech was not only to be avoided in their own speech but mocked in the speech of others.

I shouldn’t have been too surprised by this, and I wasn’t. My siblings, along with countless other black friends and relatives, teased me the same way when I was growing up. And other black professionals have told similar stories. What I had forgotten is just how early these attitudes take hold—how soon this counterproductive thinking and behavior begins.

New York City has the largest school system in America. Eighty percent of black kids in New York public schools are performing below grade level. And a big part of the problem is a black subculture that rejects attitudes and behaviors that are conducive to academic success. Black kids read half as many books and watch twice as much television as their white counterparts, for example. In other words, a big part of the problem is a culture that produces little black girls and boys who are already worried about acting and sounding white by the time they are in second grade.

Fear of being called Racist

PC-Charlie-BrownAnother big part of the problem is a reluctance to speak honestly about these cultural shortcomings. Many whites fear being called racists. And many black leaders have a vested interest in blaming black problems primarily on white racism, so that is the narrative they push regardless of the reality. Racism has become an all-purpose explanation for bad black outcomes, be they social or economic. If you disagree and are white, you’re a bigot. If you disagree and are black, you’re a sell-out.

The shooting death of a young black man by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, last year touched off a national discussion about everything except the aberrant behavior of so many young black men that results in such frequent encounters with police. We talked about racial prejudice, poverty, unemployment, profiling, the tensions between law enforcement and poor black communities, and so forth. Rarely did we hear any discussion of black crime rates.

Crime

Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black men in the U.S., and around 90 percent of the perpetrators are also black. Yet for months we’ve had protesters nationwide pretending that our morgues are full of young black men because cops are shooting them. Around 98 percent of black shooting deaths do not involve police. In fact, a cop is six times more likely to be shot by someone black than the opposite. The protestors are pushing a false anti-cop narrative, and everyone from the president on down has played along.

How can we even begin to address problems if we won’t discuss them honestly?

magnifying-glass-lightoftruthAny candid debate on race and criminal justice in this country would have to start with the fact that blacks commit an astoundingly disproportionate number of crimes. Blacks constitute about 13 percent of the population, yet between 1976 and 2005 they committed more than half of all murders in the U.S.

The black arrest rate for most offenses—including robbery, aggravated assault, and property crimes—is typically two to three times their representation in the population. So long as blacks are committing such an outsized amount of crime, young black men will be viewed suspiciously and tensions between police and crime-ridden communities will persist.

The U.S. criminal justice system, currently headed by a black attorney general who reports to a black president, is a reflection of this reality, not its cause. If we want to change negative perceptions of young black men, we must change the behavior that is driving those perceptions. But pointing this out has become almost taboo. How can we even begin to address problems if we won’t discuss them honestly?

“High rates of black violence in the late twentieth century are a matter of historical fact, not bigoted imagination,” wrote the late Harvard Law professor William Stuntz. “The trends reached their peak not in the land of Jim Crow but in the more civilized North, and not in the age of segregation but in the decades that saw the rise of civil rights for African Americans—and of African American control of city governments.”

The Left wants to blame these outcomes on racial animus and poverty, but back in the 1940s and ’50s, when racial discrimination was legal and black poverty was much higher than today, the black crime rate was lower. The Left wants to blame these outcomes on “the system,” but blacks have long been part of running that system. Black crime and incarceration rates spiked in the 1970s and ’80s in cities such as Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, and Philadelphia under black mayors and black police chiefs. Some of the most violent cities in the U.S. today are run by blacks.

Drug Laws

truth2momentSome insist that our jails and prisons are teeming with young black men due primarily to racist drug laws, but the reality is that the drug laws are neither racist nor driving the black incarceration rate. It’s worth remembering that the harsher penalties for crack cocaine offenses that were passed in the 1980s were supported by most of the Congressional Black Caucus, including Rep. Charles Rangel of Harlem, who at the time headed the House Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control. Crack was destroying black communities and many black political leaders wanted dealers to face longer sentences. In other words, black legislators in Washington led the effort to impose tougher drug laws, a fact often forgotten by critics today.

When these laws passed, even their opponents didn’t claim that they were racist. Those charges came later, as the racially disparate impact of the laws became apparent. What’s been lost in the discussion is whether these laws leave law-abiding blacks better off. Do you make life in the ghetto harder or easier by sending thugs home sooner rather than later? Liberal elites would have us deny what black ghetto residents know to be the truth. These communities aren’t dangerous because of racist cops or judges or sentencing guidelines. They’re dangerous mainly due to black criminals preying on black victims.

Nor is the racial disparity in prison inmates explained by the enforcement of drug laws. Blacks are about 37.5 percent of the population in state prisons, which house nearly 90 percent of the nation’s inmates. Remove drug offenders from that population and the percentage of black prisoners only drops to 37 percent.

What drives black incarceration rates are violent offenses, not drug offenses. Blacks commit violent crimes at seven to ten times the rate that whites do.

The fact that their victims tend to be of the same race suggests that young black men in the ghetto live in danger of being shot by each other, not cops. Nor is this a function of blacks being picked on by cops who are “over-policing” certain neighborhoods. Research has long shown that the rate at which blacks are arrested is nearly identical to the rate at which crime victims identify blacks as their assailants. The police are in these communities because that’s where the 911 calls originate.

How to Reverse these Trends

If liberals want to help reverse these crime trends, they would do better to focus less on supposed racial animus and more on ghetto attitudes towards school, work, marriage, and child-rearing.

2-parentfamily-silhouetteAs recently as the early 1960s, two out of three black children were raised in two-parent households. Today, more than 70 percent are not, and the number can reach as high as 80 or 90 percent in our inner cities. For decades, studies have shown that the likelihood of teen pregnancy, drug abuse, dropping out of school and other bad social outcomes increases dramatically when fathers aren’t around.

Fathers are Vital in the Home

One of the most comprehensive studies ever undertaken in this regard concluded that black boys without a father are 68 percent more likely to be incarcerated than those with a father—that overall, the most critical factor affecting the prospect of young males encountering the criminal justice system is the presence of a father in the home. All other factors, including family income, are much less important.

Importance of Good Character

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

black-family-dinnerAs political scientist James Q. Wilson said, if crime is to a significant degree caused by weak character, if weak character is more likely among children of unmarried mothers, if there are no fathers who will help raise their children, acquire jobs, and protect their neighborhoods, if boys become young men with no preparation for work, if school achievement is regarded as a sign of having sold out—if all these things are true, then the chances of reducing the crime rate among low income blacks anytime soon is slim.

Does Big Government really Help?

Many on the Left sincerely want to help the black underclass. The problem is that liberals believe bigger government is the best way to help. But having looked at the track record of government policies aimed at helping the black underclass, I’m skeptical.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s commencement speech at Howard University. Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act a year earlier and would sign the Voting Rights Act two months later. And he used the speech to talk about what the government should do next on behalf of blacks. These two laws marked merely the end of the beginning, he said:

That beginning is freedom; and the barriers to that freedom are tumbling down. Freedom is the right to share, share fully and equally, in American society—to vote, to hold a job, to enter a public place, to go to school. . . . But freedom is not enough. . . . You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, “you are free to compete with all the others,” and still justly believe that you have been completely fair. . . . The next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights [is] . . . not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result.

truth-meter-falseBut what if Johnson was mistaken? What if there are limits to what government can do beyond removing barriers to freedom? What if the best that we can hope for from our elected officials are policies that promote equal opportunity?

What if public policy makers risk creating more problems and barriers to progress when the goal is equal outcomes?

The civil rights struggles of the mid-20th century exemplified liberalism at its best. The 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act outlawed racial discrimination in employment and education and ensured the ability of blacks to register and vote. All Americans can be proud of these accomplishments.

But what about the social policy and thinking that arose from the ruins of Jim Crow? Good intentions aside, which efforts have facilitated black advancement, and which efforts have impeded it?

The Limits of Social Policy—Good Intentions Not Enough

In 1988, right around the 25th anniversary of the Great Society, Harvard sociologist Nathan Glazer published a book called the The Limits of Social Policy. Glazer analyzed Great Society programs from the perspective of someone who believed that government action was the best way to improve the lot of blacks.

But his assessment humbled him.

He concluded that in many ways, the Great Society programs were causing just as many problems as they were solving—that good intentions aren’t enough.

Unlike Nathan Glazer, many policy makers today are still riding high on good intentions. They don’t seem particularly interested in reconsidering what has been tried, even though 50 years into the war on poverty the result isn’t pretty. While gains have been made, significant racial disparities remain in some areas and black retrogression has occurred in others.

The black-white poverty gap has widened over the past decade and the black poverty rate is no longer falling. The black-white disparity in incarceration rates today is larger than it was in 1960. And the black unemployment rate has, on average, been double the white rate for five decades.

Confronted with these statistics, liberals continue to push for more of the same solutions.

Last year, President Obama announced yet another federal initiative aimed at helping blacks—an increase in preschool education, even though studies (including those released by his own administration) have shown no significant impacts in education from such programs. He said that he wants to increase reading proficiency and graduation rates for minority students, yet he opposes school voucher programs that are doing both. He continues to call for job-training programs of the sort that study after study has shown to be ineffective.

Liberal Flight from Evidence

Fred Siegel, an expert on urban public policy, has written extensively about the liberal flight from evidence and empiricism that began in the 1960s.

The Left, wracked by guilt over America’s diabolical treatment of blacks, decided to hold them to different standards of behavior. Blacks, Siegel writes, were invited to enter the larger society on their own terms. Schools, which had helped poor whites, ceased incorporating poor blacks from the South into the mainstream culture.

Antisocial Behavior Enabled, not Disciplined

Discipline as a prerequisite for adult success was displaced by the authentic self-expression of the ill-educated. Blacks were not culturally deprived but simply differently-abled—more spontaneous and expressive and so forth. Liberals tried to improve conditions for blacks without passing judgment on antisocial black culture.

And this sort of thinking continues to this day. Walter Williams once wrote that he’s glad he grew up in the 1940s and ’50s, before it became fashionable for white people to like black people. He received a more honest assessment of his strengths and weaknesses, he says, than black kids today are likely to receive from white teachers and employers who are more interested in being politically correct.

After George Zimmerman was acquitted in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, President Obama explained the black response to the verdict this way. Blacks understand, he said, that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to that history.

In other words, Obama was doing exactly what the Left has been conditioning blacks to do since the 1960s, which is to blame black pathology on the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

push-backEfforts to Help are Holding down Blacks

This is a dodge. That legacy is not holding down blacks half as much as the legacy of efforts to help.

Underprivileged blacks have become playthings for intellectuals and politicians who care more about reveling in their good intentions or winning votes than advocating behaviors and attitudes that have allowed other groups to get ahead.

Meanwhile, the civil rights movement has become an industry that does little more than monetize white guilt.

Martin Luther King and his contemporaries demanded black self-improvement despite the abundant and overt racism of their day.

PC-criticizeKing’s self-styled successors, living in an era when public policy bends over backwards to accommodate blacks, insist that blacks cannot be held responsible for their plight so long as someone, somewhere in white America, is still prejudiced.

The more fundamental problem with these well-meaning liberal efforts is that they have succeeded, tragically, in convincing blacks to see themselves first and foremost as victims.

Today there is no greater impediment to black advancement than the self-pitying mindset that permeates black culture.

White liberals think they are helping blacks by romanticizing bad behavior. And black liberals are all too happy to hustle guilty whites.

Blacks ultimately must help themselves.

climbupThey must develop the same attitudes and behaviors and habits that other groups had to develop to rise in America. And to the extent that a social policy, however well-intentioned, interferes with this self-development, it does more harm than good.

This concept of self-help and self-development is something that black leaders once understood quite well, and at a time when blacks faced infinitely more obstacles than they face today.

Frederick Douglass

Asked by whites in 1865 what to do for freed blacks, Frederick Douglass responded: “I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! . . . If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength . . . let them fall! . . . And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs!” Douglass was essentially saying, give blacks equal opportunity and then leave them alone.

Booker T. Washington

Booker_T_Washington_portrait_Booker T. Washington, another late 19th century black leader who had been born a slave, once said that it is important and right that all privileges of the law be granted to blacks, but it is vastly more important that they be prepared for the exercise of these privileges.

Douglass and Washington didn’t play down the need for the government to secure equal rights for blacks, and both were optimistic that blacks would get equal rights eventually, although neither man lived to see that day.

But both men also understood the limits of government benevolence.

Blacks would have to ready themselves to meet the challenge of being in a position to take advantage of opportunities once equal rights had been secured. The history of 1960s liberal social policies is largely a history of ignoring this wisdom.

 

Moral Report Item: Race, Repair, and Repentance

Dinner Topics for Thursday

keyToday’s Moral Report items include several that can repair our damaged race relations. One frequently underestimated but very powerful solution—suggested by Martin Luther King’s niece, Alveda King—is Repentance. Unfortunately, everyone in the world seems to “get it” except our current leaders and the American media.~C.D.

1. How our Congress can prevent future Fergusons

Starr Parker

starr-parker-no-more-fergusonsFounder and president of Center for Urban Renewal and Education, (urbancure.org), a nonprofit think tank promoting public policy to fight poverty. Before emerging as a powerful conservative voice, Parker lived seven years in the grip of welfare dependency. Her books include Uncle Sam’s Plantation and White Ghetto. This commentary is reprinted from ONeNewsNow.com

Pain is part of life as is, hopefully, joy. As we read in the Book of Ecclesiastes, there is “a time to cry and a time to laugh.”

But real tragedy is disaster we bring on ourselves – disaster that comes from refusal to learn from mistakes.

How many of us know someone clearly on the path to destruction, but who refuses to listen, to learn? Then the inevitable happens.

This is what we’ve got on our hands with the Ferguson, Missouri, debacle that dominated the news last last year.

Pick your side. From one point of view, a black youth, Michael Brown, is now dead because a white police officer was just doing his job. The problem, in this view, is not about law enforcement, but with outsize and disproportionate black crime and homicide.

Or, no, says the other side, this is about racism. Black citizens are victimized, not protected, by police, and serially abused through racial profiling.

Regardless of where you stand, about one thing we can be sure: racially charged incidents, where death occurs, did not start in Ferguson and will not end there. We’ve been here before and for sure, without change in the conditions that guarantee these sorts of incidents, we’ll be there again.

Bookshelves sag with research that demonstrates, with crystal clarity, the relationship of crime to poverty and of poverty to lack of education, lack of work, and lack of family structure.

Don’t want to be poor in America? Get educated, get a job, get married, and have children after you are married. Do this and your chances of being poor in America are miniscule.

In poor black communities across America, these behavioral checkpoints for a decent life remain overwhelmingly unchecked. We then get crime, particularly among the youth – filled with the energy of life but no way to productively channel it – and we get Ferguson.

Can this change? It sure can. But solving any problem requires honesty and sincerity in defining the problem correctly and total commitment to do what it takes to implement the remedy.

It is no accident that black children today are three times more likely to have been born out of wedlock, and to be living in a single-parent home, than was the case before the War on Poverty launched in 1965.

The post-civil rights movement answer to the black struggle in America – pour government money into these communities – simply subsidized and encouraged destructive behavior.

Government money, government schools, labor and minimum wage laws, create all the conditions to guarantee future Fergusons – lack of education, lack of family, lack of work.

Democrats and black political leadership, because of their vested interest in the status quo, won’t lead change. So it’s up to Republicans. Here are five reforms the new Republican Congress can pass to guarantee no more Fergusons:

1) Pass Welfare Reform 2.0, Congressman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) Opportunity Grant program. This takes almost $1 trillion in annual spending on 11 anti-poverty programs and grants the money to states, allowing them to decide how to use it effectively.

2) Replace HUD housing projects and Section 8 housing with housing vouchers that low-income individuals can use wherever they want.

3) Pass legislation enabling school choice, so low-income parents can get their kids out of union-controlled, failing public schools and into church schools.

4) Allow all citizens age 30 or under and earning $30,000/year (or less) the choice to opt out of Social Security, stop paying the payroll tax, and use those funds to invest in their own private retirement account.

5) Allow for dollar-for-dollar income tax write-off of all charitable contributions that go into designated low income zip code areas.

These reforms will transition chronically poor, poverty-ridden, crime-ridden, mostly minority communities into a new era of education, family, savings, and work. It’s the only way to avoid future Fergusons.

http://www.afajournal.org/recent-issues/2015/february/how-our-congress-can-prevent-future-fergusons/

2. AFA Journal Interviews Martin Luther King’s Niece

The path to easing racial discord must lead to Jesus, says the niece of MLK.

AlvedaKing-repentanceAlveda King: There is a verse in the Bible, “My people perish for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6). That is in the King James Version. If you look in the New Living Translation, God says, “My people are dying because they don’t know me.” We know we are perishing for a lack of knowledge. We know that people are dying because they don’t know God.

AK: We can overcome evil by doing good deeds and good works. We are all called as Christians to care for the least of these, to obey and serve God, and to love one another. And we are called to serve. How can we serve? We can serve in prayer. We can serve by giving. We can serve by being activists. Some Christians will be called, for example, to go out and stand in front of an abortion mill and say, “Don’t abort your baby. God loves you.” Some Christians may be called to start a pregnancy care center. Is every Christian required to be a social activist? No. But if God gives you a calling to do that, then you should do that. We cannot require others to take up the exact same banners that we take up, and I cannot condemn those who do not do what I do.

 

American Family Association Journal: What does reconciliation look like? How do we get there?

AK: What has to occur for there to be racial reconciliation – that means the human race comes together as brothers and sisters – there must first be repentance: “Father, we believed a lie, that we are separate races. We’re sorry. We know we’re of one race. You made all people, of one blood. You made all people to dwell on the face of the earth. So we repent for thinking that we are separate races. We all just need to be Your children.”

God made that clear in 2 Chronicles 7:14, “If My people who are called by My name – ” We’re God’s people. So these separate people groups don’t line up with 2 Chronicles 7:14. We need to realign with the word of God. In the New Testament it says, “Beloved, let us love one another.”

Now, if we are brothers and sisters, we are going to be a little more gracious and kind to one another. We’re not only going to give our brothers and sisters opportunity, we’re going to give brothers and sisters access – to the same jobs we have, the same type of housing we have, the same type of education we have. So when we begin to see each other as broth- ers and sisters, then we are going to find ourselves reconciled.

That reconciliation will impact society. People really need the Lord. We must share the light of Christ. I think that’s very important. That is just the most essential Christian responsibility and obligation. Let that light be very bright. One light can appear to be little, but when all the lights shine, it’s a really bright light – it’s almost like a bonfire. So I think we should just become part of the bonfire.

Read More about Healing Racial Discord

http://www.afajournal.org/recent-issues/2015/february/he-shall-overcome/

3. Round I in Iowa: Scott Walker Emerges

scottwalkerin-iowaWisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s rousing speech  at the Iowa Freedom Summit on Saturday has early speculation favoring his “go big and go bold” call to Republicans.

Walker received multiple standing ovations during his speech, with news outlets reporting that the crowd was more receptive to him than to other potential GOP 2016 hopefuls including Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

“If you’re not afraid to go big and go bold, you can actually get results,” Walker told the enthusiastic crowd.

“There’s a reason we take a day off to celebrate the 4th of July and not the 15th of April,” said Walker, pacing the stage in rolled up shirtsleeves. “Because in America we value our independence from the government, not our dependence on it.”

“In every fight for conservative principles Gov. Scott Walker has stood firm,” David Bossie, president of the conservative group Citizens United, said when he introduced Walker. “This country is a better place because Scott Walker answered the call to lead.”
Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad said Walker is a “proven vote-getter” after he survived a recall election, then was re-elected to a second term in 2014. “I think he will relate well [in Iowa],” Time quoted him as saying.

Walker highlighted his conservative bonafides on abortion and immigration, among other subjects, but he also sees himself as having a better ability to reach voters outside the conservative base.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/Headline/Scott-Walker-presidential-race-appeals/2015/01/25/id/620596/#ixzz3PygN9Zvd

4. Exclusive — Under New Leadership, CPAC Heads in a More Conservative Direction

Matthew Boyle

 

Mike-Lee-AP-ConstitutionThe American Conservative Union (ACU), and its signature annual event the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), are heading in a more conservative direction after previous years when they drifted away from the core values of conservatism.

ACU’s new chairman Matt Schlapp, new executive director Dan Schneider and other staff sat down with Breitbart News for a lengthy interview at the ACU’s headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C., last week—an interview in which they walked through the themes of this year’s conference. A large focus will be discussing how to apply Ronald Reagan’s three legged stool of conservatism–social conservatism, national security conservatism, and fiscal conservatism–to the problems ahead. Reagan’s “Peace Through Strength” doctrine, they say, applies to the entire cultural and political debate, not just in fighting off foreign enemies.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who has been described by the Weekly Standard as the “most important Republican not running for president” because of the ideas and solutions he’s pushing with his Conservative Reform Agenda, will be kicking off the conference with the first major speech on Thursday morning of that week.

“It’s not an accident that he is speaking at the start of CPAC,” Schneider said. “He has a comprehensive approach to conservatism that we think can launch the conference in the right direction.”

Schlapp added that Lee’s vision—which he is now pushing as chairman of the Senate Steering Committee—is “uniquely important” to conservatism.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/16/exclusive-under-new-leadership-cpac-heads-in-a-more-conservative-direction/?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+January+17%2C+2014&utm_campaign=20150217_m124464944_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+January+17%2C+2014&utm_term=More

 

5. Ugandan president leads African nation to repent, resolve, rebuild

Despite Western criticism, President Museveni and his administration continue the work begun at the dedication of the nation, as they seek the best course by which they may honor God, their people and their nation’s future. 

 Stacy Long

AFA Journal staff writer

“At the door the student turned suddenly and his face was no longer empty but furious.

“‘Our whole country is in desolation,’ he cried. ‘Amin’s victims are everywhere. They are lying unburied in the streets and in the forests, and they are rotting before heaven.’

“In a few short years Uganda’s death toll would stand at over 300,000. … From the beginning, the primary target of Amin’s brutality was the Christian church. All of his victims suffered unspeakably. They were tortured and humiliated in front of their families and friends. They were dismembered, decapitated, made to eat their own flesh. … I became convinced that the regime of Idi Amin was not merely tyrannical but demonic.”

So F. Kefa Sempangi, Ugandan professor and pastor, writes in A Distant Grief as he tells of surviving the horrifying massacres that occurred throughout the 1970s.

Coffee possibilities 
Troy Smith went to Uganda in 2012 on behalf of Kabum Coffee and found a land healing from the bloody interlude between its independence from Britain in 1962 and its current administration under President Yoweri Museveni, begun in 1986.

National repentance

uganda_pres-repentSmith’s frequent trips – 11 in 30 months – between Uganda and his home in Sisters, Oregon, took him on an interesting road that ended at the Ugandan president’s Kisozi Ranch and dinner with President Museveni. As a result of that meeting, Smith began to give close attention to events surrounding the president. Most significant was Museveni’s public repentance and dedication of the nation to God in October 2012.

“This was in Uganda’s Year of Jubilee, celebrating 50 years of independence from British rule,” Smith said. “They wanted this Year of Jubilee to be filled with an intentional sequence of solemn prayer and fasting, organized through the different regions by the leaders of the nation. And it all culminated with Museveni’s public prayer.”

The president’s leadership in publicly confessing and repenting of specific sins as a nation represented a clean break from the evil committed by past leaders.

President Museveni’s speech read, “I stand here today to close the evil past.” He went on to name specific sins ranging from corruption and sexual immorality to the shedding of innocent blood and witchcraft, saying, “These sins and many others have characterized our past leadership, especially the last 50 years of our history.”

As Smith explained, witchcraft is prevalent in Africa and was likely embedded in the administrations of earlier leaders.

“I’ve heard from a lot of people that witchcraft had been brought into Uganda’s earlier government administrations,” he said. “I believe those ceremonies included human sacrifice. So the president felt that because of that past covenanting with darkness, and because the evil had been so serious and so deep, there needed to be a public repentance and dedication.”

The president’s speech finished with dedicating the nation to God:

We want to dedicate this nation to You so that You will be our God and guide. We want Uganda to be known as a nation that fears God and as a nation whose foundations are firmly rooted in righteousness and justice to fulfill what the Bible says in Psalm 33:12, “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, a people You have chosen as Your own.”

I renounce all the evil foundations and covenants that were laid in idolatry and witchcraft. I renounce all the satanic influence on this nation. And I hereby covenant Uganda to You, to walk in Your ways and experience all Your blessings forever.

Dedication at work

Since declaring the public dedication of the nation to God, the president and his wife, Janet Museveni, have been spearheading initiatives that particularly focus on strengthening family and moral values.

“They have a population where 50% are under the age of 15,” Smith said. “Addressing the current generation will, of course, impact Uganda’s future. Twenty-two years ago, First Lady Janet Museveni started the Uganda Youth Forum, the purpose of which is to encourage positive development of youth and teach them how to stay away from things that would destroy their lives with disease or corruption.

“One of the primary goals was to address the impact of HIV/AIDS, which has killed 30% of their population,” Smith said. “Her program used the ABC method, which focuses on abstinence and being faithful in marriage, using condoms only as a last precaution.”

That campaign began in the 1990s after more than 6,000 AIDS cases had been reported in Uganda. According to Uganda’s Ministry of Health, the prevalence of AIDS cases dropped from 18% in 1992 to 6% by 2001. Uganda’s program was “one of the world’s earliest and most compelling AIDS prevention successes,” according to research from the National Institutes of Health, a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The same study notes that this program also dramatically affected sexual behavior, with premarital sex among males aged 15-24 decreasing from 60% in 1989 to 23% in 1995.

Unfortunately, in more recent years the program drew criticism for its emphasis on reducing extramarital sexual activity, and Western involvement has somewhat handicapped the success of the program as it had been initially implemented.

Nevertheless, Uganda’s First Family continues working to protect their youth and their future. Specifically, sexual violence is one problem before them.

“Uganda frequently follows the British custom of sending children to live in a boarding school situation,” Smith explained. “There, a sexual offender could intimidate youth into sexual acts through threats, coercion or force. Specific incidents have happened. AIDS is also spread through what they call aggravated homosexuality.

“The president is now exploring options for addressing both of those issues,” he said. “But I believe most people would agree that offending someone sexually through a nonconsensual act – as well as spreading AIDS – should be punished, regardless of the gender of offender or victim and especially if the victim is under 18.”

Despite Western criticism, President Museveni and his administration continue the work begun at the dedication of the nation, as they seek the best course by which they may honor God, their people and their nation’s future. 

http://afajournal.org/recent-issues/2014/december/ugandan-president-leads-african-nation-to-repent-resolve-rebuild/

Ferguson Truth Update: Race War Destroys Minority Business

Most Businesses Destroyed in Ferguson Mob Race War were Minority Owned

Truth Update:

Truth-Detectors

keyWe have to earn our place, just like all the others. There’s no special sun that shines on any man, regardless of religion, philosophy, or the color of his skin. There’s no reason why any man should expect a special dispensation from pope or president. In this country, more than any other, you have to make your mark. You’re not going to be treated like something special until you are. ~Louis L’Amour

Mobs must be anonymous. Most men who make up mobs act under influence of the crowd. Singled out and suddenly alone, they become uncertain and uneasy. Deliberately, he let them know that he knew them. Deliberately, he walked among them, making each man feel known, cut off. He must break their shell of mob thinking and force each man to think of his own plight and the consequences to himself.  As a mass, thinking with one mind, they were dangerous. ~Louis L’Amour

by Kerry Picket

Breitbart News

Ferguson_wlagreensFERGUSON, Missouri—-KMOV-TV reports that the majority of stores that were damaged or completely destroyed during Monday night’s violent riots in Ferguson were minority owned. Fire Departments around the St. Louis County Area put out 25 structural fires caused by vandals and looters following the announcement from the grand jury that Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson would not be indicted in the death of Mike Brown.

More

Dubose, a mother of two, previously told CNN, “If I can’t open my doors every morning, I can’t feed my kids in the evening. Just don’t burn my shop down, don’t destroy it.”

On Wednesday, things were looking up for her as she received more than $113,000 in online donations to rebuild.

Dubose started a crowdfunding campaign, and her donors include “The Middle’s” Patricia Heaton and “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” star Brandi Glanville.

natalie-dubose-ferguson-cakes-600“Thank you to actresses Patricia Heaton and Brandi Glanville for supporting me!” Dubose wrote on her page. “I must have missed thousands of other tweets, and I’m so sorry I can’t mention them all. The sweet lady who offered money from her social security check brought me to tears … Thank you to EVERYONE for the kind words, prayers, and emotional support.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/limbaugh-did-obama-halt-national-guard-in-ferguson/#w8h5Gor08wvgQVhi.99

 

Did Obama halt National Guard in Ferguson?

Rush Limbaugh: ‘Somebody wanted this to happen’

Joe Kovacs

In the aftermath of Monday night’s rioting and looting in Ferguson, Missouri, there’s a question as to why the National Guard was not deployed to quell the violence, and some are speculating President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder may have encouraged the lack of action.

“Somebody wanted this to happen,” declared radio host Rush Limbaugh on his national broadcast Wednesday.

“The ongoing theory is that the White House or Washington – the DOJ, Eric Holder – called the governor of Missouri, Jay Nixon, and told him not to deploy the Guard. Because it looks like they were ready to go. They had been called up and they were placed on ready status. And then they were not used. And the feeling is that the order came from some high authority in Washington not to deploy them. I don’t know why.

“It is a mystery as to why. Speculate is about all we can do. Why would the DOJ, why would Holder, why would Obama not want the Guard in position to stop some of this? Based on everything we know now, why would that be preferred?”
Limbaugh added: “We all knew what was coming. It was scripted. Nobody made a move to stop it! The cameras were in place. The media was in place. The only question was: How many cars will burn? How many stores will be destroyed? How many Molotov cocktails? Just how big the destruction? No effort to stop it. The media didn’t want it stopped. It was great programming. That’s why I say get the cameras out of there and a lot less of this kind of crap goes on but that’s never gonna happen either.”

obamaangryPresident Barack Obama himself, speaking to the nation from the White House after a grand jury cleared Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown, said, “There is inevitably going to be some negative reaction, and it will make for good TV.”

As numerous businesses were being looted or razed Monday night, Ferguson Mayor James Knowles told the local Fox affiliate: “I’ve requested the National Guard troops to come out from their command post to help restore order along the business district. We have not seen that … Those calls have gone unheeded at this point … We need to have the governor step up and give us the resources that he’s promised from the beginning. He said he would have a strong response. The resources necessary would be provided. They have not been provided so far.”
Tuesday morning, Missouri Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, a Republican, asked if the Obama administration pressured Gov. Nixon, a Democrat, to ignore pleas from the mayor to send in the Guard.

“He (Gov. Nixon) declared a state of emergency almost a week ago and mobilized the National Guard. Then they were kept away at the crucial time while Ferguson burned,” Kinder said.

“We know they were kept away because they did not come in and stop that from the get-go. They were deployed in other parts of the St. Louis region … . Why were they not in there at the first sign of an overturned police car or a smashed police car window with a show of force that would have stopped this?

“Here’s my question that the governor must answer: Is the reason that the National Guard was not in there because the Obama Administration and the Holder Justice Department leaned on you to keep them out? I cannot imagine any other reason why the governor who mobilized the National Guard would not have them in there to stop this.”
Wednesday, Kinder pushed on with his concern, telling radio host Laura Ingraham he suspected someone in the Obama White House – Valerie Jarrett or Holder – of pressuring Nixon to have the Guard stand down.

The majority of stores damaged or completely destroyed during Monday’s riots in Ferguson were minority owned, reports KMOV-TV.

Some of the stores suffering severe damage include Walgreens, Little Caesar’s Pizza, Autozone, Beauty Town, Title Max, Family Dollar Store, and O’Reilly Auto Parts.

Media outlets showed cake-shop owner Natalie Dubose in tears when she realized vandals had attacked her small business.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/limbaugh-did-obama-halt-national-guard-in-ferguson/#w8h5Gor08wvgQVhi.99

 

 

 

 

Was Murdered Ferguson Man A Grand Jury Witness?

 

The rioters want to praise the liars and kill those who tell the truth.
Check it out:

Questions are swirling over the unexplained murder of DeAndre Joshua, found dead in his car on Tuesday morning, with some speculating that the 20-year-old may have been the victim of a retribution killing for testifying in front of the grand jury in the Michael Brown shooting case.
Joshua was found dead inside a parked car near Ferguson’s Canfield Green Apartments around 9 a.m. Tuesday, just two blocks from where Brown was gunned down by Officer Darren Wilson.

According to one resident, four individuals were overheard discussing plans to kill somebody on Monday night.

The New York Daily News reports that Joshua’s family is, “positive his death is tied to the demonstrations over a grand jury’s decision not to indict Michael Brown’s killer.”

Joshua was described as a “good kid” who was not into drugs and had a steady job.

“DeAndre Joshua, 20, fits the social profile of an eye-witness who gave a police/FBI statement and testified before the Grand Jury in the Mike Brown shooting case,” writes the Conservative Treehouse blog. “He was an employed black male, with no history of drug use or illicit behavior. He was also a friend of Dorian Johnson who is currently under protection.”

A Facebook post by Johnson, who was with Michael Brown at the time of the shooting, appears to confirm that the two knew each other.
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/11/murdered-ferguson-man-grand-jury-witness/

 

 

 

WND EXCLUSIVE

Famous lawyer races to help Ferguson looting victims

‘Will not stand by idly while the city burns and lives are lost’

Bob Unruh

justiceLarry Klayman, the former Justice Department attorney and founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, has threatened to sue President Obama over flights bringing Ebola patients to the U.S.

He has filed the legal paperwork to try to get Obama deported.

He previously sued the National Security Agency and won at the district court level.

He has sued to get Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

He has sued Hugo Chavez on behalf of torture victims.

He has sued journalists.

He has sued the Taliban and al-Qaida.

He sued Cuba and won a multimillion-dollar judgment.

Now, his newest plan is to offer help to the victims of the riots in Ferguson, Missouri.

He announced Freedom Watch will provide free legal representation for victims of “mob violence” in the town plagued by rioting following the announcement Monday that a grand jury had decided not to indict white police officer Darren Wilson in the Aug. 9 shooting death of a black teen, Michael Brown.

Klayman said he’s turning his attention to helping “those unwillingly caught in the center of this national catastrophe.”

“We must seek justice for the innocent residents of Ferguson who have been harmed by those who do not respect the rule of law,” he said. “Freedom Watch will not stand by idly while the city burns and lives are lost as a result of unwarranted criminal acts that are both harmful and deadly.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/famous-lawyer-races-to-help-ferguson-looting-victims/#OyYeSHzyJz810lZV.99

YouTube Video Truth Update: Barack Obama vs. American Safety

Tea Party Update: YouTube Video Documentary,

The Border States of America

keyThe Border States of America takes viewers from the Rio Grande Valley to towns across the country, telling the story of human smugglers and drug cartels who profit from Barack Obama’s policies; of American citizens whose lives are put at risk; and the social and economic toll on our communities. We cut through the fog to bring you the truth about what is really happening with the border crisis. ~Tea Party Patriots

 Immigration crisis flooding America with criminals and threatening American Safety—Neither Moral nor Compassionate

The Solution: Simply enforce the immigration laws that already exist

flag1“This is not a red thing, this is not a blue thing—it is a red, white, and blue thing.”

Notes from the Documentary

C.A. Davidson

Here is truth about the immigration crisis, including the fact that the 9-11 attacks were based on immigration fraud. Terrorists and criminals are sneaking across the border from all over the world. Drug cartels are taking advantage of Barack Obama’s decrees; brutalizing aliens, and intimidating American citizens by threatening their families. The Obama administration is helping drug and human trafficking with its policies. At drug and human traffic checkpoints, 80% of the entrants are OTM, other than Mexican.

Murders and rapes are occurring in inland counties, including the rape and murder of a 93-year old woman by a 19-year old illegal alien; and countless children, youth, and other innocents of all ages, races: black, Hispanic, or white; residents are leaving, diminishing tax money available for safety.

Many aliens don’t make it to their trafficking contacts; in the last 68 months, 448 bodies have been recovered in Bucks County. Local citizens are making serious efforts to help law enforcement. Because of refusal to honor the Constitution and enforce the laws, the safety of all legal American citizens is seriously threatened, and the truth is that the hands of Barack Obama are drenched in the blood of these people.

Tea Party Documentary

An unprecedented wave of illegal immigration is washing over America, threatening the fabric of our nation. But the Obama Administration refuses to enforce our immigration laws, resulting in tens of thousands of people illegally entering the US. Now, our new film reveals the full scope of this crisis.

The Border States of America takes viewers from the Rio Grande Valley to towns across the country, telling the story of human smugglers and drug cartels who profit from Obama’s policies; of American citizens whose lives are put at risk; and the social and economic toll on our communities. We cut through the fog to bring you the truth about what is really happening with the border crisis.

Television and film star Nick Searcy has come on board to narrate The Border States of America. He is an accomplished actor, director, and producer with a career spanning more than 30 years in cinema, television, and on the stage. With dozens of starring and supporting roles across a wide range of feature films and TV shows under his belt, we couldn’t be more excited to have him help tell this story.

Moral Repair: Republican Party Victory about Character, not Race

1. Beyond Congress: GOP tsunami rips through states

At last, there is hope for true moral repair in our beloved country—

Democrats left at lowest point in nearly 100 years

keyVoters “are aligning their votes with their values and they’re voting for candidates who are simply not their own complexion”. ~Senator-elect Tim Scott
Jerome R. Corsi

NEW YORK – The GOP “wave” Tuesday was not limited to Congress alone.

wave2gopvictory“This was a wave election victory for Republicans in state legislatures across the country, leaving Democrats at their lowest point in state legislatures in nearly a century,” Morgan Cullen, senior policy specialist at the National Conference of State Legislatures in Colorado, told WND.

“Even though the GOP was already at a high-water point in state legislative control, last night was a big night for Republicans in that the 2014 midterm election saw the GOP make important additional gains in legislative control.”

Voters Tuesday were deciding 6,049 state legislative seats in 46 states, nearly 82 percent of all seats.

State legislatures typically are the place where both Republicans and Democrats groom future candidates to run for governor, as well as for Congress.

Cullen noted Republicans have gained a net total of 332 seats in state legislatures nationwide out of the 649 seats up for election, with some outstanding races still too close to call.

Moreover, the GOP added majority control of 10 state legislative chambers, including the Colorado Senate, the Maine Senate, the Maine House, the Nevada Assembly, the Nevada Senate, the New Hampshire House, the New York Senate, the New Mexico House, the Washington Senate and the West Virginia House. The West Virginia Senate is now deadlocked and two chambers still undecided are the Colorado House and the Washington House.

In addition, Democrats lost their super-majorities in the California Senate, the Vermont House and the Maryland House of Delegates.

Republicans now control 67 state chambers while the Democrats control 28. Prior to Tuesday, Republicans had a 57-41 advantage.

Republicans have complete state control – both chambers and the governor’s mansion – in 23 states, compared to six states for the Democrats.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/11/gop-wave-more-massive-than-anyone-realized/#w8DJIQbFh23OABXA.99

 

It’s about Character …

2. Tim Scott: People Are Voting Based on Values, Not Race

TimScottSenator Tim Scott (R-SC) argued that voters “are aligning their votes with their values and they’re voting for candidates who are simply not their own complexion” in an interview broadcast on Wednesday’s “OutFront” on CNN.

Scott talked about his experience last night becoming the first African-American elected to the US Senate since Reconstruction, saying “I’m blessed to have a grandfather that is 94 years old. He’s seen a different America growing up than I have, and here is a fella who was a youngster picking cotton and in his lifetime he’s seen his grandson get elected to Congress and now the Senate. For me, looking at him last night, watching me give a speech was one of the most remarkable experiences of my life.”

He added, “Well I think, if you look around the country and you look at some of the most successful campaigns, you talk about [Rep.] Mia Love from Utah, the first African-American female [Republican] winning in the history of Congress. You look at [Rep.] Will Hurd in Texas or the new Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, Mr. Rutherford. Here is what we see happening throughout the country, is that people are aligning their votes with their values and they’re voting for candidates who are simply not of their own complexion.”

Scott also addressed the issue of mistreatment faced by African-American Republicans, he stated “one of the challenges I do see in the future is this culture of low expectations that are driven by some folks who seem to profit from keeping some folks down and unfortunately sometimes it’s your peers.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/11/05/Tim-Scott-People-Are-Voting-Based-on-Values-Not-Race/

3. Mia Love: ‘I Wasn’t Elected Because of the Color of My Skin’

Character, not Race…

mia-loveLiberals will be saying all kinds of things about her, but we know that truth. Conservatism is what matters.
Check it out:

Congressman elect Mia Love celebrated her surprise victory in Idaho as the first black Republican woman to be elected to the House of Representatives.

But during an interview with CNN this morning, Love was quick to explain that she was not elected because of her race or gender.

“I wasn’t elected because of the color of my skin. I wasn’t elected because of my gender,” she said during the interview. “I was elected because of the solutions that I put at the table because I promised I would run a positive issues-oriented campaign and that’s what resonated.”

According to the Associated Press, Love earned 50 percent of the vote against her Democratic opponent Doug Owens who earned nearly 47 percent.

Love said it was clear that Utah citizens were “not interested in dividing Americans based on race or gender,” but electing people who had integrity.
Read more at http://conservativebyte.com/2014/11/mia-love-wasnt-elected-color-skin/

 

4. GOP wave could turn spigot on Keystone XL pipeline

Posted on November 5, 2014 by Cowboy Byte

The Republican wave Tuesday could bring a gusher of oil down from Canada, as GOP gains in the Senate appeared to give backers of the Keystone XL pipeline a filibuster-proof majority.
Check it out:

pipelineThe long-delayed final phase of the tube, envisioned as bringing oil from Alberta’s tar sands and North Dakota’s Bakken formation oil fields to Gulf Coast refineries, moved a major step forward as Republicans took control of the Senate. While Canadian oil is already piped into the U.S. via the existing, circuitous portion of the pipeline, the final phase would create a nearly straight shot from Alberta to Houston.
“I think you’re going to see us bring up energy legislation right away and Keystone will be one of the first things we pass,” Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said late Tuesday.
Read more at http://cowboybyte.com/34588/gop-wave-turn-spigot-keystone-xl-pipeline/

YouTube Video: Vote for Race or Liberty?

Truth about what Liberals are doing to destroy the Black community

To Liberals, everything is a about Race and Politics, but the truth is that Blacks who vote for Liberals are voting against their Liberty

Rising GOP Star Elbert Guillory, honorary chairman of the Free at Last PAC, reveals the truth about what Liberals are doing to destroy the Black community.

ARKANSAS: “End of the Pryor Dynasty”

GEORGIA: “We Will Have ‘Nunn'”

LOUISIANA: “Mary Landrieu is not helping Blacks”

YouTube Video:

 

Our ads are now airing statewide in Louisiana, Arkansas and Georgia. They aired during the Saints-Panthers TNF game, during the Florida-Georgia SEC game and even during the Miss. State-Arkansas nail-biter!

Our main goal at this point is to get this message in front of every possible voter…not just in these three key states, but everywhere. The truth needs to be told!

 

YouTube Video: Race, Chicago, and Obama Corruption

Black Chicago Activists Turn on Obama

These people are fed up with the democrat lies, corruption, and abuse against their own race. They’re finally speaking out about it.

keyThere’s no white folks running Detroit, cutting water on black folks in Detroit! Them black folks running that city! There ain’t no white folks doing that. Them black folks going along with that. Everything that’s happening in our community  is black leadership doing this. ~Paul McKinley

Truth-Detectors

Youtube Video

 

Rush Limbaugh

RUSH: Now, this story about black activists trashing and dumping the Democrat Party, it’s out of Chicago.  It is Chicago activists.  It’s a video.  It’s just been posted by Drudge on his home page, and I’ve got the eager staff working on putting that video together so I can share it with you.  But here are some quotes from the video.  All I know is, these are Chicago political activists, and they’re fed up.

They’re fed up with the Democrat Party.  “My life has been hurt by Democrats.  Everything wrong in our community is under Democrats.  Black leadership’s abusing us; Democrat leadership is abusing us.  We want an opportunity to own businesses.”  It’s a long rant.  It runs four minutes.  It’s four or five black men just taking down the Democrat Party.  They’re urging people to vote.

firetheliarThey don’t tell ’em who or how to vote, but they are dumping all over the Democrat Party.  Here’s some more quotes: “Black folks are in an abusive black-leadership relationship.  Look and see in your community who the real oppresses are.  Black-on-black crime is blacks voting against our interests.  Blacks are running Detroit.  White people are not doing that.  The minimum wage is a joke when you don’t have any jobs. 

“They forced us into a life of welfare.” 

Well, now, this may be in the category Too Good to Be True.  I mean, this is the kind of thing I was expecting. This should have been… Well, I’m not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth.  You just… Okay, no.  I’ll take it for what it is.  (interruption)  Well, no. All I’m gonna say is, you know, over the course these 25 years, I’ve asked openly: “When is it gonna dawn on people that the people they’re counting on are making their lives worse?  When’s it gonna dawn on them?”

It may have here in Chicago.

We’ll see.

RUSH:  All right.  I have the audio now from the Chicago activists just ripping into the Democrat Party.  It’s about a four-minute rant.  We’ve divvied it up here into four one-minute bites, and here’s who they are: Paul McKinley, Mark Carter, Joseph Watkins, and Harold “Noonie” Ward.  Now, McKinley, Watson, Carter and Ward have all spent time in prison in the past.

They have since taken to the streets of Chicago to fight against the injustices in their community and make this story all the more interesting.  The source for this is a website called RebelPundit.com.  Rebel Pundit. I have a little background on it, just so you know from where this all comes from. “Rebel Pundit was founded by Jeremy Segal, an anti-activist, and continues as a group effort based in urban centers across the” fruited plain.

“The blog is a beacon of truth, showing the unholy alliance of the mainstream media, Republican Party establishment, the liberal Democrat Party, big unions and corrupt ‘not for profits.'” This sounds like one of my kinds of groups.  No, seriously.  “The blog is a beacon of truth, showing the unholy alliance of the mainstream media, Republican Party establishment, the liberal Democrat Party, big unions and corrupt ‘not for profits.’

“Our team takes to the field with cameras to show what isn’t aired in the local and beyond. The members of Rebel Pundit believe that exposing the true nature of liberalism and the toll it has taken on regular peoples’ lives is our top mission.” The story from which this audio comes: “Chicago Activists Unchained, Destroy Black Leadership — “Chicago activists Paul McKinley, Mark Carter, Joseph Watkins and Harold ‘Noonie’ Ward recently went on the record with Rebel Pundit …”

DemPlaybookslgeThey’re not part of Rebel Pundit. Rebel Pundit found them. Rebel Pundit found ’em, and they “went on the record with Rebel Pundit to deliver a message to black communities across the country. That message sheds light on who they say are the ‘real oppressors’ of their community — black liberal Democrats.”  So we will listen, you and I together here, and I imagine that we’re gonna agree with quite a bit of it. Many of us have been asking…

I mean, if you, for 50 years, have been voting for the Democrat Party on the basis that they’re gonna lead you to the Promised Land, that they’re gonna rescue you from economic oblivion, that they’re gonna end discrimination and racism against you, then why do you keep voting for ’em?  Because none of that’s happened.  The Democrat Party has instead implemented policies that have destroyed the black family.

It’s not me who says that.  It is other blacks who have called here and told me that since 25 years ago, 20 years ago, you name it. It’s a regular occurrence.  But it’s a question that a lot of people ask. What is the hold? What is it?  And all we can ever figure out was that no matter how bad the Democrats are and no matter how bad their policies are, the branding of the Republican Party and the black community is insurmountable.

It’s even worse.  These guys… Again, they are Paul McKinley, Mark Carter, Joseph Watkins, Harold “Noonie” Ward.  Let’s get started.

This was yesterday in the Rebel Pundit website, RebelPundit.com.  It’s a video.  We got the audio from it.  Four Chicago African-American activists talking about who are the real oppresses.

MCKINLEY: (music/outdoor noise) Black folks is in a abusive black-leadership relationship.

CARTER: We have to send a message; this is the time for us to send a message.

WATKINS: We’re always talking about what the Republicans ain’t done for us, or what they will do to hurt us. My life has been hurt by Democrats.

WARD: And we got in our mind that we always got to keep voting Democrat. You know?

MCKINLEY: Look and see in your community. Who are the real oppressors in our community? They always talk about black-on-black crime, and when you hear the words “black-on-black crime” the first thing you think of is a black man robbing you or a black man breaking in your house, and that is a black-on-black crime.  But let’s take it one step further. There’s a black-on-black crime in down in City Hall.  There’s a black-on-black crime down in all the state capitals in America where black folks are voting against our interests, where black folks are voting and making us poorer. We’re getting poorer and poorer, and other groups are getting richer and richer!

WARD: Everywhere you go there’s poverty in black areas.

WATKINS: This lot where I stand at right now ought to be housing, public housing for people to live in. Most of the people are homeless, living in the street, and it’s because of you, Mr. President.

RUSH:  Doesn’t need any commentary.  Here’s the next.  We have four bites.  This rant went on four minutes.

MCKINLEY: (music/outdoor noise) In Detroit, where your leaders at? There’s no white folks running Detroit, cutting water on black folks in Detroit! Them black folks running that city! There ain’t no white folks doing that. Them black folks going along with that. Everything that’s happening in our community (siren) is black leadership doing this.

WATKINS: Our children know that if the Democrats have not done anything for us as of yet, why should they even go out and vote? What agenda’s on the table that’s going to change their lives?

MCKINLEY: The only thing they’re offering the black community is abortion on demand. This is what the President [Obama] is asking us to vote for.

CARTER: Now he wants to have this conversation about a minimum wage raise because he knows this is the way to get a lot of the poor people’s attention. But to hell with his minimum wage raise! We don’t have any jobs. A minimum wage raise for what?

MCKINLEY: They’re not pushing a black agenda. They’re not pushing a family agenda. They’re pushing a neo-liberal agenda.

CARTER: Across this city in these major Democratic cities, this is what it looks like.

RUSH:  These guys are in Chicago.  They’re nailing it.  They’re saying things that, if anybody else other than them says, it’s heap big doo-doo.  They were still not finished. There was more.

WARD: (music/outdoor noise) How can the same process happen over and over again and nobody can do nothing about it?

MCKINLEY: Black leadership is abusing us. The Democratic Party is abusing us.

WARD: Its the same way in every black community across the country.

CARTER: And they force us into a life of welfare. We don’t want no welfare! We want opportunities to go to work. We want opportunities to own businesses. They bailed out all of the major banks and these big investors, but left the people starving.

MCKINLEY: There are no Tea Parties in your city. We don’t have those people.

CARTER: We have a major Democratic machine — and the majority of them, they look like me! These are the people who make sure we get nothing, but then turn around and have us vote for them again.

WARD: They only come around when its time for elections, when they think they can give you a toy or give you a turkey or something and everything is good.

RUSH:  They’re right about that, too.  They come around and warn ’em about how bad the Republicans are gonna be to ’em. They come back and warn ’em about how mean the Republicans are gonna be, and they come around and they warn ’em that this is gonna happen and that’s gonna happen.

Meanwhile, these guys are taking note of what has been happening under Democrat Party rule and denomination. All of these cities are run by Democrats. They’re taking stock and taking note of conditions that black people live under in these places run by Democrats, black and white.  I’ve not… Look, we’ve had calls over the course of the program here from individuals who have said things like that.

But never from the street level.  We’re never had any guys like this call.  Well, maybe a couple.  I wouldn’t know for sure.  But this is intense, and it is serious, and these guys mean it.  They certainly understand it’s liberalism doing them in.  There’s no “black agenda.” There’s not. This is “a neo-liberal agenda” they’re talking about.  Here’s the final bite.  This runs just under a minute.

ObamaPoliciesMontage5HopeChangesCARTER: (music/outdoor noise) Hundreds of millions of dollars are coming down from the federal government, but the money is going to all these special interest groups.  My Brother’s Keeper went to [Obama’s] friends, this whole corrupt Democratic system that gobbles up all the dollars and starves the people out.  Can you all look around your community and see any changes that have come about with these hundreds of billions of dollars that have come through our cities?  No you cannot. What we do see is our elected officials riding around in new cars and they have new homes.

MCKINLEY: When our people don’t have jobs in our communities, when we don’t have any vital resources — when all the deals have been cut and all our people are left out — this is where we end up.

WARD: And we got the most important thing that we got. We can stop all this.  Everybody’s gotta vote, and if you use your vote wisely, you can stop a lot of this stuff.

RUSH:  These guys are out on a get-out-the-vote campaign except it’s unlike any I have ever seen.  These guys are in a get-out-the-vote campaign, and they are urging people to vote against the status quo, and that is the Democrat Party running the show.  And they’re right.  Look at all the money supposedly over the years, billions that’s been allocated to wipe out these horrible circumstances that poor people, black and white, live under.  It’s actually trillions since 1964, and it’s the same percentage of people in poverty, and black people the worse.

Something else these guys have noticed.  There ain’t no Tea Party here. Don’t tell us the Tea Party is hurting us.  There isn’t any Tea Party here.  All we got are Democrats running our show.  There is no Tea Party here in Chicago.  Don’t tell us about the Tea Party.  There aren’t any white people turning off the water in Detroit. There aren’t any Republicans doing that to us. 

It’s inescapably true.  Everything these guys are saying.  What are you smirking about in there, Mr. Snerdley?  (interruption)  Oh, you love it, you’re not dubious about this?  (interruption)  No, no.  I know.  This couldn’t come at a better time, and it’s right on the streets in Chicago.  Again, these guys that you were just listening to, they are Chicago activists Paul McKinley, Mark Carter, Joseph Watkins and Harold “Noonie” Ward, and they made these statements I guess in an interview at a website called RebelPundit.com.  

Other Truth Updates …

Democrat lies

“End justifies the means”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/10/28/the_old_playbook_backfires_on_democrats

 

‘Bad, Bad Science’: Weather Channel Founder Says Climate Change Is a Myth

hoaxglobalwarmingMany officials in the Obama administration – including Secretary of State John Kerry and President Obama himself – have repeatedly hammered home the message that climate change is one of mankind’s greatest threats.

According to Weather Channel co-founder John Coleman, however, there is no scientific proof that supports man-made climate change.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/10/27/weather-channel-co-founder-john-coleman-climate-change-myth

Race, Ferguson, and Real Stories

Truth, Real Stories are posted here …

keyThere is so much common ground between conservatives and libertarians (and even liberals). We can craft legislation to clearly regulate the use of military tactics and weapons. We can work on sentencing reform for some non-violent crimes. But to completely and dishonestly ignore the role that violent crime plays in limiting liberty and the critical role that a robust police response plays in preserving liberty is antithetical to all of our values. And to engage in politically motivated racial pandering to help legitimize the behavior is shameless. ~Daniel Horowitz

Truth-Detectors

Bill O’Reilly Sounds off on Ferguson Race Problem

 

http://www.cnsnews.com/video/national/oreilly-americas-race-problem

 

Horowitz: On Ferguson, Libertarians Playing with Fire

Libertarian Pandering on Race in Ferguson

Daniel Horowitz

As Congress remains in a protracted recess for another three weeks and the political news recedes from the headlines, it didn’t take long for the nonpolitical event surrounding the unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, to become political. After all, everything in this day and age is ultimately politicized.

There is a narrative developing among some libertarian figures that the actions of the police in Ferguson represent the latest example of egregious abuses of “big government.” From listening to their diatribes one would come away with the impression that the local police decided to randomly kill an African-American teen in cold blood, then proceeded to terrorize the neighborhood and suspend civil liberties while engaging in para-military exercises throughout the streets. Their account of the tragedy portrays the situation as a zero-sum battle between agents of government and private citizens.

For some on the libertarian right, the fact that the “victims” of the alleged police brutality are black makes this both an opportunity to bash big government and make in-roads with the black community by showing how unbridled government control is particularly harmful to their way of life. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), for example, parachuted into the conflict by penning an op-ed unambiguously making this tragedy about race. While offering a terse throwaway line about the importance of police maintaining the peace, he then weaved in general bipartisan concerns about a militarized police into a politically motivated supposition about the role of race in this conflict – all before the facts are clear.

“Given the racial disparities in our criminal justice system, it is impossible for African-Americans not to feel like their government is particularly targeting them,” said Paul.

He then boldly presented a long-held left-wing patronizing talking point that “anyone who thinks that race does not still, even if inadvertently, skew the application of criminal justice in this country is just not paying close enough attention.”

Really? Until Paul cites real evidence that blacks are punished more severely for crimes than whites or are wrongly accused of crimes more often than other people in the year 2014, he should leave the racial pandering to Al Sharpton. Clearly, this suburban police department was not ready to deal with such a volatile situation with full competence. But the notion that they had a racist agenda beyond protecting the citizens of the city or that they would have been more forgiving of other races engaging in violent rioting is not something that can simply be asserted.

Moreover, while this view of the events in Ferguson would indeed present us with an opportunity to show the harmful effects of a police state and the general concern of militarization of police, it fails to take a holistic approach to what actually happened.

There is nothing political about the events that took place on the tragic night of August 9, when Michael Brown was shot dead in an altercation with police. Like every individual fatally shot where law enforcement is involved, we have to learn the facts on the ground before pontificating and drawing politically motivated conclusions from the tragedy. The truth will come out through the judicial process.

What is clear from the aftermath of the shooting is that parts of the city erupted in mass rioting, burning down businesses and terrorizing neighborhoods with violence reminiscent of scenes in the Middle East. Even if a cop shot Michael Brown in cold blood, which has not been demonstrated, the lawlessness and the rioting was simply unacceptable and needed to be shut down immediately. Rioters weren’t just attacking the police; they were attacking private businesses and innocent citizens. There is no higher degree of tyranny than violent anarchy, in which people cannot travel freely without fear of harm to their bodies or property.

Conservatives are certainly in agreement with libertarians on many issues and share their concerns about over-criminalization of some dubious non-violent crimes or overzealous use of police to collect speeding tickets to purvey the welfare state. There is a valid general concern about the over-militarization of police forces, and there is certainly no need for such para-military arms of bureaucracies like the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of Education.

But conservatives should not rush into the libertarian social media mob against all things police or government engaging in a zero-sum “the police acted stupidly” meme while obfuscating the fact that the rioting presented an imminent threat to the liberty of innocent citizens. As conservatives, we don’t believe in zero government. We believe in ordered liberty built upon a strong civil society. There is no place in a civil society for violent rioting, and we need brave members of law enforcement to help preserve that ordered liberty. Their absence would lead to rampant tyranny much worse than what we experience under our ever-encroaching government.

Indeed, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) struck the perfect pitch, encapsulating everyone’s concerns: “Police officers risk their lives every day to keep us safe, and any time a young man loses his life in a confrontation with law enforcement, it is tragic… Civil liberties must be protected, but violence is not the answer. Once the unrest is brought to an end, we should examine carefully what happened to ensure that justice is served.”

There is so much common ground between conservatives and libertarians (and even liberals). We can craft legislation to clearly regulate the use of military tactics and weapons. We can work on sentencing reform for some non-violent crimes. But to completely and dishonestly ignore the role that violent crime plays in limiting liberty and the critical role that a robust police response plays in preserving liberty is antithetical to all of our values. And to engage in politically motivated racial pandering to help legitimize the behavior is shameless.