Eric Holder dismissed America as a "nation of cowards" because we wouldn't, he argued, have a "national conversation" about race. It's a slander wrapped in a farce. We talk of race unremittingly. That's the farce. The slander is hydra-headed.
No honest conversation about race is possible when accusations of racism replace reasoned arguments. Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, who mentioned high rates of crime among black males, was rewarded with the racist label within minutes by some of those (The Atlantic, Slate) who presumably agree with Holder that we are too timid when discussing race.
Many American liberals are achingly nostalgic for old-fashioned racism. It offered them a helium high of moral superiority. It was deserved ... in 1967. But by perpetuating the fiction that modern America has not changed, they've become more than ridiculous, more even than grossly unjust, they've become dangerous. Look around you. The violence and bitterness that have followed the Zimmerman verdict were virtually ordered up by convicted slanderer Al Sharpton and his many imitators.
The Zimmerman case was complicated. Any fair-minded person could see that it was difficult to conclude that Zimmerman was not acting in self-defense (however unwise his initial actions may have been). But the racial-grievance industrial complex doesn't permit complexity. Racial enmity is their living. Stirring feelings of victimization and injustice among blacks and, to a lesser extent, among other designated minorities is their delight.
#1
Another conversation Holder doesn't want is about "Fast & Furious". If one of those guns had been used by Zimmerman on Trayvon, there would have been no story and no trial.
#2
A hispanic killed a black, so blacks go out and lash out at whites.
The MSM has done their level best to incite race hatred throughout this entire event. Beginning with the "White Hispanic" term. Where the hell did they even get that one?
That was a new one on me.
#4
I could be wrong but I do remember seeing White Hispanic on census forms. I think it was intended to seperate out more European hispanics (who make up the elite of Mexico) from those decended from native-americans (who are poor and crossing the border).
Reading the entire article may cause upset stomach, nausea, heartburn, headache, drowsiness, or dizziness. If any of these effects persist or worsen, proceed to Daily Gam Shot promptly.
But buried deep within the immigration bill are hidden multimillion-dollar slush funds for left-wing nonprofit groups to provide services to the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the U.S. Once enacted, the slush funds would total almost $300 million over three years and grow over time.
Reviewing the massive legislation, it's obvious that lawyering would be needed. The 1,100-page proposal is a network of legal requirements and protections, waivers and exceptions, including a new "provisional immigrant" or "blue card" status (the first phase of legalization for illegals), appeals of adverse rulings, stays of deportation, applications for work visas, and countless other such guarantees.
Within this thicket of new rights are features that would vastly increase the flow of immigrants to perhaps 30 million or 40 million over the next decade. One is a set of "chain immigration" clauses, legalizing the spouses and children of illegals.
#4
This also impies that false passports are now legal under this amnesty immigration bill that McCain never read. That means a forgers job is safe from penalty of former law. That means the LaRaza lady that helped write it can also continue to benefit from her hard and dilligent work. Any wonder why this is over a thousand pages of LaRaza policy? Hello. Rubio?
Since at least 1789, America's conservatives and liberals have argued about the proper role of government. Home library shelves across the land splinter and creak beneath the weight of books arguing the case for individual liberty or for government-led social justice. World Wrestling smackdowns are nothing compared with Hayek vs. Rawls.
Maybe we have been listening to the wrong experts. Philosophers and pundits aren't going to tell us anything new about government. The one-year rollover of ObamaCare because of its "complexity" suggests it's time to call in the physicists, the people who study black holes and death stars. That's what the federal government looks like after expanding ever outward for the past 224 years.
To call the U.S. federal government a black hole is a disservice to black holes, which have a neutral majesty. Excepting the military's fighting units, the federal government has become a giant slug, like Jabba the Hutt, inert but dangerous.
#1
Henninger nails it. It is indeed all about "social justice", power, and buying votes from a entitlement constituency. The obfuscation and diversion from fact finding and truth displayed this week in the IRS hearings by Congressman Elijah E. Cummings is a clear example. His goal is not to find truth, but to delay, thus insulating a corrupt regime from the discovery process.
#2
So, Obama wants a "Smarter" Government?
A "Smarter" Government would recognize a Parasite (Like You) and get rid of it, QUICKLY.
If this means a firing squad, so be it.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
07/19/2013 4:39 Comments ||
Top||
#3
OK, so what's next? Panic in the streets? Imperial-Rome-like decay?
Benefits don't get paid on time, or at all?
How long can Congress and The O keep announcing and funding new giveaways?
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/19/2013 6:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Forever if they like; the value of such is determined by the people receiving such handouts. When that value is negated is when bad things will happen; when it becomes unhidable that promises are not being kept. Then it becomes a question of who stays bought.
#5
All govt is not created equal. You cannot compare the agency and mission of the NTSB, investigating plane crashes, with today's EPA, waging war on coal miners.
The DOT facilitates interstate commerce and worldwide flight, the IRS is a thuggish boogeyman that the Admin will unleash on you if you screw with them.
The people at the Smithsonian or National Archives, workers at the nation's military cemeteries, VA hospital workers, the water pumping teams that dewatered the Sandy mess, Forest Service Firefighters.....I could go on and on. I'm a Federal Employee and fairly proud of what I do. I work hard, make tough decisions that affect the safety of my feds coworkers and flying public and get paid a salary that is nothing to write home about. I do ok, but engineers don't work for minimum wage anywhere that I know of. What I miss out on in pay I feel I make up on things like sick leave that is separate from my annual leave, TSP matching, etc. I am in the Architects and Engineers Union, so I guess that makes me a fat, stupid, annoying, obammy loving subhuman, but think what you wish. I work at facilities full of people just like myself, normal people you would live next to or pass on the sidewalk....not monsters, parasites and hucksters all.
The discussion here has gotten more and more bizarre over the last couple of years, I can't remember people ever talking about govt employees this way before Obama took office, but that was before I was a fed. Most feds are career people who have been in the govt since George Bush the 1st or Clinton was in office and have seen Admins come and go.
#6
Bigjim-CA, sorry the acts of others make you feel that way. I have two sincere questions:
1. Did you have a choice in joining the Union?
2. Do you voluntarily pay Union dues?
Please don't answer that if you do not want to, and I have to go round up the kiddos, and I will come back and explain how I also am a Federal Employee but not technically part of a Union but am paying Union dues anyways.
#8
Other than getting to play with big toys and help people, I am compensated by government money in the form of insurance and a very modest retirement fund. That money comes from the government in the form of a fund collected by the government from a percentage of insurance premiums.
Also, in the event of things going very wrong, I can find myself under the command of a variety of government organizations.
So a portion of my insurance pays for the Union departments, who in turn send as many deligates allowed to vote for the committee members who run the fund, who then agitate for a single official rep for lobbying, which would be de facto Unionization of all state firefighters.
Thing is, what works in New York City does not work in Kansas City, what works in Kansas City does not work in Dodge City, and what works in Dodge City does not work in Smalltown.
And as it turns out one Union promoter was such a loser he had to get a job in an entirely different state. That's my problem, he wasn't fired, and that's bull.
#9
Sorry bigjim-ca and swksvoIFF, but you are what I call "the human shields": of course there are certain activities that require Government coordination and enforcement, and I believe the majority are enumerated in the Constitution or are very logical extensions thereof: NIST for standards, the VA because of the specialized injuries sustained by our fighting forces, the NRC because the consequences are too great to leave it unregulated. In fact, my fear of Government interference in medicine is that very loss of independence and review.
The problem is the illogic of Liberals: SOME government is good, therefore MORE of it must be better. WRONG. You can still be in the government and still argue that there are activities that the Government should not be involved in. It is simply NOT the case that trimming or reigning in the NSC or the IRSor cutting back on welfare MUST NECESSARILY require the destruction of the CDC or some other essential government function supported by the Constitution, and any Government official who says so should be fired for incompetence and the next one admonished to be smarter.
Say I have work on my house. If its big work then I want someone qualified and if a union guarantees a level of training then I will want to use a worker from that union and that person will be earning their $20/hr. If all I need is an extra hand or small work, and Joe just wants to make a few bucks here and there, I should be able to hire him at $10/hr.
Joe has neither the time or inclination make the union standards, and knows he only is worth $10/hour. My problems occur when union is forced, then Joe is out of work or taken on by the union knowingly sub standard skills and my two person job goes from $10/hour to $40/hour, if I can afford it.
#11
"Human shield" - I like that. I too work for a federal agency with explicit Constitutional authorization. We are free to choose whether or not to join the union. I did, thereby also voluntarily choosing to pay dues. Mainly because scientists make crappy managers, and would work us like grad students (100-hour weeks) otherwise.
I agree 100% that "you can be in the government and still argue that there are activities that the Government should not be involved in." I do it all the time, and I am not alone.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
