Tag Archives: denial

Racial Madness

Four blacks kidnapped and tortured a white mentally-challenged man while using “terrible racist statements.” (Torture streamed on Facebook Live!)

racial-madness

The Washington Post suggested it was inconsequential. CNN called it a “hazing.” One CNN panelist actually blamed Trump! NBC argued the thugs were not “truly trying to be criminal.” (Imagine saying that about the abominable Dylann Roof.)

The Chicago police refused to call it a hate crime. When is a hate crime not a hate crime? When its committed by blacks against a white male.

In related news, a university professor tweeted “All I Want for Christmas is White Genocide.” This professor remains employed.

Racial Healing Aborted

Barack Obama promised racial healing in America and racial tensions reached new heights under his presidency.

Despite Obama winning the presidency twice in a majority white nation, the racial grievance industry took control of the national debate. (No, not the KKK; the BLM.)

Phony Black Lives Matter narratives filled the airwaves, Internet, and social media.

Enslaved and energized by identity politics – and rejecting the promises and realities of Martin Luther King’s famous dream – the Black Lives Matter movement employed a range of racial myths to create a constituency and gain power and prestige. (Let’s not forget the money.)

quote-abraham-lincoln-freed-the-black-man-in-many-ways-dr-king-freed-the-white-man-how-did-ronald-reagan-137-80-36

Some of these narratives (e.g., “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”) have been proven totally false, yet they retain a visceral power which overwhelms reason and reality.

From Ferguson to Baltimore and across the nation, Black Lives Matter propaganda has destroyed communities and created chaos.

Riots are called “protests.” Murder is deemed “social justice.”

Root Causes

So-called “white privilege” is the latest bogeyman. But blacks are not victims of a fictitious “institutionalized white racism” or presumed “white privilege.”

Rather, some blacks are victims of a fifty-year-old War on Poverty and a welfare state which has become the new plantation – created by Democrats who treat them as children. The paternalistic state gone awry.

The welfare statenot white racism – has created generational poverty, generational broken homes, and a cultural of dependency justified by allegations that blacks are victims of white racism and the legacy of slavery.

Consequently, perceiving themselves to be victims, many feel entitled to whatever they can get from the government, becoming dependent upon that government. With it, comes rage against the injustices they perceive have been perpetrated against them. And with that comes a culture of irresponsibility.

quote-white-liberals-are-the-most-racist-people-there-are-because-they-put-blacks-in-a-box-benjamin-carson-93-91-53

David French observes, “When you celebrate thugs, you get more thugs.” He laments a “depraved culture” and “breakdown in law and order.”

French concludes: “Our nation’s social fabric is fraying — nowhere more than in Chicago. This is the Left’s city, a foundation of its national power. How many more people have to die before it changes course?”

Contemporary dysfunctional black communities are not rooted in America’s founding. Rather, one need only look to Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and subsequent iterations of the welfare state and the adoption of progressive policies and political correctness to see the development and escalation of dysfunctional pathologies in some black (and a growing number of white) communities.

America No Longer Needs to Apologize for Slavery

My MSNBC Op-Ed (7/2/97), entitled, “America has acknowledged mistakes,” is as relevant today as it was twenty years ago. Here it is:

Kimberle Crenshaw writes about passionate “white opposition” to a formal apology for slavery (neglecting to mention the many blacks who oppose it as well). While citing their objections (in her terms: “personal denial,” “finger pointing,” “traditional historicizing,” and “new-age globalizing”), she fails to refute any of those arguments. She doesn’t even try.

Instead, Crenshaw questions the motives of those opposed to an apology, saying it “reflects a deep unwillingness to desegregate American history and to integrate American self-identity.” Self-flagellation is not my self-identity.

Crenshaw contrasts post-slave, post-apartheid societies with non-slave, non-apartheid ones, failing to note that all societies are at least post-slave and, even today, many societies remain slave societies. (Why is the Left always willing to condemn America but praise our enemies?)

Crenshaw accuses the right of explaining away the black underclass as a result of “inherent characteristics.” Wrong! The right recognizes that the welfare state promotes self-destructive behaviors and the underclass is enslaved to the welfare state. Let’s forget apologies and free the underclass.

Crenshaw desires “historical closure.” Most Americans have experienced “closure” with past slavery. Constantly tearing at the scab only causes the wound to bleed.

Par for the course, Crenshaw criticizes America’s Founding Fathers for expressing the ideals of liberty for all while condoning slavery. No one disputes the divergence of these ideals and their implementation.

Crenshaw insists that whites – and American culture itself – are in a state of denial about slavery (and other historical atrocities). Denial? Our cultural elites positively revel in past American misdeeds (while glossing over our triumphs and glories).

Is Crenshaw really suggesting that Americans are denying historical slavery? Is she subtly suggesting a moral equivalence between this perceived denial and those who deny the Holocaust?

Tragically, while her ancestors may have been enslaved in chains, Crenshaw (and others) have enslaved themselves to the past. She desires “a reopening of American historical memory,” as if anyone could “forget” American slavery. She wants an acknowledgement of America’s “tragic mistakes” but Americans have already acknowledged them.

We are fast approaching a new millennium. Isn’t it time to put the past behind us, to let the wounds heal, to live for the future? Until we do, this schizophrenic identity crisis will only exacerbate the already tumultuous times we are living in.

Advertisements

We Are All Parisians!

Last Sunday, most of the world (absent the Obama administration) stood in solidarity against Islamic jihad.

Headline: “Today Paris is the capital of the world.”

Father James Schall observed, “This is the French 9/11.

Millions tweeted “I am Charlie” and hashtagged #jesuischarlie.

Parisians

It remains to be seen whether this Paris rally, with dozens of world leaders and millions of marchers, represents a watershed moment in our generation and a pivotal change in the West’s political and cultural zeitgeist.

Already this week, some Western leaders have backtracked on Islamic terrorism. Surprisingly, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has chosen to side with Islam. (First, it was the Nazis, now, the Jihadists?)

I Am Not Charlie Hebdo

While it is surely good to unify over a good cause (and defeating evil is always good), phony grandstanding and political opportunism can thwart that cause. Are these leaders and those marchers truly committed to vanquish evil? Or was it merely a “moment” to experience?

Just how courageous are legions of celebrities and anonymous Tweeters in spontaneously supporting this surge of condemnation against evil? Will their solidarity continue in the face of real danger?

Maggie Gallagher offered perceptive observations regarding who the real heroes are. She wrote:

“I am not Charlie Hebdo because that is not the right name. That is not a person, it is a magazine, and darn it, the heroes in this case have other names, especially Stephane Charbonnier, the editor in chief, who testified, ‘It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I’d rather die standing than live on my knees.’”

“No Stephane Charbonnier, it doesn’t sound at all pompous. Not today.”

“I am not Charlie Hebdo, in other words, because Stephane Charbonnier and his colleagues were heroes and I am not.”

“What have I done to deserve that title, to make that claim?”

“Tweeting ‘I am Charlie!’ does nothing to change the fact that I live in utter safety; Stephane Charbonnier and his colleagues did not die because they wrote ‘I am Charlie Hebdo,’ but because like the others on the al-Qaeda hit list, he and they dared to criticize the Prophet Mohammed.”

Let us apprehend Gallagher’s words and realize that now is a time, not for hollow words, but for bold action. We need to be engaged in combat – in one way or another – or today’s heroes will be tomorrow’s forgotten martyrs and victory will be ceded to an evil enemy.

Will we stand up, criticize and combat Islamic jihadism or will we, like the Obama administration, refuse to even name the evil which is charging through the gates of hell to unleash Armageddon upon the world?

We Are All Parisians

We live indeed in an ever-shrinking world with a burgeoning Islamic caliphate. No-go zones, cities, territories, and nations are held by Islamic jihadists who seek the imminent fulfillment of their Islamic utopia: a global caliphate.

Paris has joined the growing ranks of victims of Islamic jihad.

France, like many other western European nations, has contended with a large influx of Muslim immigrants who self-segregate in isolated enclaves, often establishing no-go zones and enforcing sharia law. Jihadism thrives in these environments. This is the end to which multiculturalism has led the City of Lights.

This is the path America and many other nations are on. We are all in the same boat.

America is becoming France.

Let’s stand in solidarity with the people of Paris and oppose Islamic jihad.

Benghazi-Paris Nexus

The nexus between terrorist attacks in Benghazi and Paris is stark. Both expose the flawed ideology, non-existent strategy, anti-Western sentiments, and self-absorbed leadership of the Obama administration.

Obama and his comrades have denied that these terrorist attacks were committed by Islamic terrorists. In the case of Benghazi, Obama created a false narrative of an amateur YouTube video inciting a demonstration which led to the attack. (Many of his comrades are now rushing to blame cartoons – and not Islam – for the motivating force behind the Paris attack.)

Benghazi-Paris

Both Benghazi and Paris disprove Obama’s narrative that al-Qaeda (and, by implication, every terrorist organization) is decimated and that the war on terror is over. He further claims that America is stronger than ever and the world has never been more tranquil.

Clearly, the war on terror is not over. Obama cannot create peace by fiat.

Nevertheless, Obama continues to promote his false narrative, which he intends to be his foreign policy legacy: the hero who ended two wars, unilaterally ended the war on terror, and brought peace to the world. (He is a Noble Peace Prize winner, after all.)

Hence his decision to boycott the historic anti-Islamic terrorism rally in Paris last weekend. To attend would have been to validate the purpose of that rally. To attend would have been an admission that Islamic jihadism is the enemy. To attend would have corroborated that his much-vaunted victory over terrorism was a sham.

Now, the Obama administration is engaged in a diplomatic cover-up for its foolish boycott. The snub seen around the world.

What that gaffe of biblical proportions reveals is the very same mindset which permeated the Situation Room during the Benghazi attack and which drove the false YouTube narrative during the presidential campaign.

A mindset which is focused more on ideology than reality. Which is willing to go to any extreme to promote its fanciful vision of the world. Which will allow brave men to die in Benghazi – providing no help whatsoever – to advance a narrative of peace and safety. Which will allow the world to converge in solidarity against the Islamist threat – providing no symbolic support whatsoever – to again advance that same narrative.

Leadership was absent during and after the Benghazi attack, just as it was absent when Paris became the capital of the world. Obama prefers to attend fundraisers, play golf, or watch football than do what a leader does: lead.

Benghazi and Paris are also emblematic of Obama’s pacifism. He does not have the cojones to fight. Benghazi proves that. Obama would not even defend marines under attack. And Obama would not even pretend to be interested in the war on terror. Remember, his false narrative – and his legacy – depend upon that war being over. Peace in our times.

This president and his administration are in denial. Their strategy of appeasement is an abysmal failure. And the world is going up in flames.

Obama Snubs Paris, Disses War on Terror

President Obama snubbed Paris – and the world – by refusing to participate in a truly historic gathering of world leaders who met in Paris to show solidarity against Islamic terrorism.

Paris01

Wow!

The world united against terrorism!

And the President watches a football game while history is in the making!

A headline highlighting this truly global event proclaimed, “Paris Is the Capital of the World Today.” But Obama missed the memo.

Obama refuses to even admit that we are at war with terrorists of any kind, let alone to identify their source and motivation. Indeed, Obama defends the perpetrators of evil around the world. Failing to identify and name the enemy, Obama fails to offer a strategy. Indeed, we see this administration giving lip service to the defense of the nation while failing to act.

Obama would rather appease and negotiate with terrorists than fight them. Obama and his Kumbaya comrades think we can live in peace with people who want to destroy us. He, and they, prefer to empathize with and accommodate the enemy.

At the same time, Obama is vociferously opposed to Israel. What he should be doing, instead, is learning from the Israelis how to fight terrorists! Instead, Obama makes war on global warming.

Millions of people participated in this astonishing global rally, representing a sea change in world opinion, but Obama fears giving his imprimatur to the movement. He does not want to validate what he opposes.

Obama certainly does not oppose Islamic terrorism. At another time, in a different war, Obama would be called a fifth columnist.