The New York Daily News Instructs Us On Progressive Racism

September 28, 2022 Francis Menton @ Manhattan Contrarian

We still have three daily newspapers here in New York — the Times, the Post, and the Daily News. I subscribe to the first two, but not to the Daily News. And I almost never read the Daily News either. From my occasional encounters, my observation is that the Daily News has completely gone over to wokism, and is just a cut-rate, slimmed-down version of the Times, pushing the progressive narrative on all issues without concern for evidence or facts.

But like the Times, the Daily News can sometimes, undoubtedly inadvertently, shine a bright light on the twisted thinking of the progressive mind. Such was the case with a piece that appeared a few days ago (September 24) and that I came across because it was linked at RealClearPolitics. The piece has the headline “The NYPD’s arrest practices are still starkly discriminatory,” The author is Robert Gangi. Here is a picture from 2017 of Gangi announcing his candidacy for Mayor in that year’s election. (He didn’t get far; but then, the guy who won, de Blasio, essentially shared Gangi’s perspective on the issues):

Gangi begins his Daily News piece by identifying himself as running an organization called the Police Reform Organizing Project. PROP makes a thing of sending representatives into the New York criminal court “arraignment” parts to observe the goings on. According to Gangi, “Over the last eight years, PROP volunteers and representatives, numbering more than 100 people through the years, have observed more than 7,000 cases in the arraignment parts of New York City’s criminal courts.” As a result of observing these arraignments, PROP has collected quite a lot of information on the nature of the crimes for which people get arrested in New York, as well as on the races of the people arrested.

PROP is just out with a big Report with the title “Where’s the Outrage: The Persistence of Racist NYPD Arrests.” The Report covers the period January to July 2022. Gangi’s op-ed in the Daily News summarizes some of the information from this latest Report.

The conclusions of the Report are as indicated in the headline of Gangi’s op-ed and the title of the Report itself. NYPD’s arrest practices are “starkly discriminatory” and “racist.” You might find that a little dubious for starters, given that both New York’s Mayor (Eric Adams) and Police Commissioner (Keechant Sewell) for the period in question are black. But Gangi’s op-ed doubles down and elaborates on these themes:

The skewed numbers and harsh human reality we regularly observe in our city’s criminal courts are not an accident. They are a function of NYPD policy and practice going back many years entailing targeting and criminalizing large groups of marginalized New Yorkers: African-Americans and Latinos and the unhoused, drug-addicted, mentally ill and other vulnerable individuals.

The NYPD is “targeting” and “criminalizing” the “marginalized” groups. The remainder of the op-ed gives several examples selected by Gangi to illustrate his thesis. Presumably, the examples he has selected — out of a universe of thousands according to his own account — should be expected to be among the most compelling to prove the point. OK, here are his main examples:

• A Black woman in Brooklyn is arrested on a petty larceny charge. She was in a grocery store with her two daughters, who attempted to leave the place with fish hidden under their coats. Apparently not knowing where her girls are, she seems distraught. The judge releases her with the directive that she has to return at a later date as her case continues to be processed by the courts.

• A disabled and elderly Black woman is arrested in Manhattan, also on a petty larceny charge; petty larceny is the NYPD’s second most common misdemeanor arrest. The judge releases her, and, with the aid of a cane, she hobbles out of the courtroom. We follow her and ask about her case. She says that she had taken a package of ham and eggs from the Pathmark in Harlem. We ask why. Perhaps surprised by our question, she explains that she was hungry.

Just curious about the reaction of readers to the news that these two incidents led to the arrest of the perpetrators. My reaction is, of course they were arrested. Both were engaged in blatant shoplifting, known to the criminal laws as “larceny.” Nothing in Gangi’s article suggests in any way that the arrested parties didn’t commit the crimes, and indeed in the second incident the perpetrator admits to the crime, while attempting to justify it on the grounds that she “was hungry.”

Gangi thinks that we should all be “outraged” that these incidents — and thousands of other similar but likely less sympathetic ones — led to arrests. But somehow Gangi is oblivious to the fact that fundamentally what he is advocating is that black people are too stupid or incompetent to be held to the normal standards of behavior that govern society. If they “are hungry,” they should be privileged to steal whatever they need from whatever source they can find. Any attempt of the police, or presumably anyone else, to stop them is “racist.” Because his article is limited to a few instances of theft of food (those being incidents that might give rise to reader sympathy), we don’t find out his attitude toward thefts of other items. Does Gangi think that black people should be privileged to steal expensive sneakers? How about high-end TVs? Jewelry? Cars?

If Gangi has given any thought to the collateral consequences of the criminal justice policies he advocates, he gives no indication of that in this op-ed or Report. Those collateral consequences are of course devastating for black people, and include things like making shopkeepers highly wary of any black customers entering the store; making stores catering to large numbers of blacks unprofitable and leading to dearth of stores in black neighborhoods; making prices higher at stores in black neighborhoods, because the stores must charge the paying customers prices that cover the losses from theft. None of these things makes life better for black people.

Gangi is just a vile racist, and yet unable to see it in himself. In that he exemplifies a wide swath of the progressive movement.

Harvard Progressives Covering Up For Their Systemic Racist Friends

May 14, 2022 Francis Menton @ Manhattan Contrarian

It has been obvious for quite a while that pandemic-induced school closings and extended remote learning were going to have substantial negative effects on development among K-12 students. Equally obvious has been that Democrat-controlled jurisdictions — which include essentially all of the major cities with high concentrations of poor and minority students in the education system — have indulged in the longest school closures and the most remote learning. Clearly, this would lead to major negative results for the poor and minority students in these jurisdictions, particularly as compared to the students in places where schools mostly remained open for in-person learning.

A big new Report out from the Center for Educational and Policy Research at Harvard (and other institutes with similarly long names) now confirms the facts that we all knew were coming. The Report is titled “The Consequences of Remote and Hybrid Instruction During the Pandemic,” and has a date of May 2022. The lead author is Dan Goldhaber. This is a very large and well-funded study. It relies on data collected from some 2.1 million students in 10,000 schools in 49 states.

Two things about the Report stand out: (1) The large extent of the negative effects of school closures and remote learning, particularly in what the authors call “high poverty” districts, which effects are at the highest end of what anyone might have expected, and (2) The extreme lengths to which the Report goes to avoid pointing the finger of blame where it needs to be pointed, which is toward the politicians and bureaucrats — essentially all Democrats — responsible for the excessive closures in the high-poverty districts, and on the teachers unions that control the schools and back the politicians in those jurisdictions.

The May 5 issue of the Harvard Gazette contains an interview with Thomas Kane, Professor of Education and Economics at Harvard and second author of the Report, that gives an idea of the extent of the damage inflicted on poor and minority students by the school closures and remote learning. Excerpts:

The striking and important finding was that remote instruction had much more negative impacts in high-poverty schools. High-poverty schools were more likely to go remote and their students lost more when they did so. Both mattered, but the latter effect mattered more. To give you a sense of the magnitude: In high-poverty schools that were remote for more than half of 2021, the loss was about half of a school year’s worth of typical achievement growth. . . .  

Over the last 30 years, there has been like a gradual closing in both the Black-white and Hispanic-white achievement gaps. . . . Our results imply that when those [NAEP] results come out later this year (likely in October, before the midterm election) there will be a decline nationally, especially in states where schools remained remote, and gaps will widen sharply for the first time in a generation.

The Report itself is much more filled with dense technical jargon, but the gist can be gotten from a few sentences:

High poverty schools were more likely to go remote and the consequences for student achievement were more negative when they did so. . . . As noted earlier, there was essentially no widening in math achievement gaps in districts that were fully in-person (.002 standard deviations). In the fifth row, we report the effect of greater incidence of remote/hybrid instruction in high-poverty schools, which was about one third of the total difference (.051/.168). The remaining half of the gap (.085/.168) was due to the differing impact of hybrid/remote instruction on high-poverty schools.

So what are these “high poverty” schools that had long closures and extensive remote learning and left their already struggling students farther behind than ever? You would think that the Report would call them out by name, but instead it doesn’t name a single one of the worst offenders. Nor is the fact ever mentioned that essentially all of these places are in 100% Democrat control, or that they essentially all have powerful teachers unions that led the demands for the long closures and the remote learning. It’s like these things are taboos that must not be mentioned in polite company.

Instead, if a reader is curious as to whether political differences between jurisdictions might have influenced these results, he is left to read between the lines to search for hidden clues. One of the closest things in the Report to real information is the following chart giving average lengths of closures/remote learning by state and, within states, broken down to low, middle and high poverty:

They never mention which states are governed by members of which party, but if we apply our own external knowledge we can see that 10 of the 12 states (including DC) with the highest levels of remote learning had Democratic governors (mayor in the case of DC; Arizona and Maryland are the exceptions), while 11 of the 13 states with the lowest levels of remote learning had Republican governors (Louisiana and Maine are the exceptions). Nothing in the text of the Report, or in the Gazette’s interview with Professor Kane, specifically calls out any of the major Democrat-controlled cities — like Chicago, Baltimore, Philadelphia or Los Angeles — with the longest closures and the worst results for the minority students.

In a time where progressives seem to be focused on racially-based guilt for societal failure to achieve equal results in education, you would think that the unveiling of the data in this Report would be an occasion for accountability for the parties responsible for the disastrous school closures. Instead, what we have is Harvard covering up for its systemically racist friends.

 

Leaders at One of America's Largest Investment Firms Must Now Get Approval to Hire White Men

By Mike Miller | Nov 08, 2021

Another day, another headline that looks like it’s straight from the satire site, The Babylon Bee.  State Street Global Advisors — actually one of the world’s largest investment companies — has announced that henceforth, its leaders will need permission to hire white men as part of the company’s new diversity hiring initiative. “This is now front and central for State Street; it’s on every senior executive’s scorecard,” said Jess McNicholas, the company’s head of inclusion, diversity, and corporate citizenship........To Read More....

My Take - Why isn't this outright racial discrimination?????  Because they're not being sued.  If enough firms are sued over this kind of disgusting behavior it will end. 

Otherwise, if this is acceptable behavior, then firms should be able to choose to hire only whites, or Jews, or blacks, or Hispanics or homosexuals, or Christians, or atheists, or Muslims, if that's the owner's view on how a company should be run.  Then we should be able to refuse service to those we find unacceptable in restaurants, hotels and businesses based on whatever social paradigm the owners choose.   

But it can't go only one way.  That's illegal.  And now we're seeing the other side of this issue, Native American Lawsuit Challenges Colorado Ban On Native American “Mascots” As Discriminatory.  Is it possible most tribes aren't in favor of these name changes, and this whole thing was being driven by a handful of misfits and the misfits known as the Main Stream Media?

MSNBC Slammed Over ‘Disgusting Racist Rant’ Attacking Black Republican: ‘Unbelievably Insidious’

ByDaily Wire News>Nov 5, 2021 

MSNBC host Joy Reid and frequent guest Michael Eric Dyson faced backlash online late on Thursday evening after a video clip went viral from Reid’s show that was widely panned as blatantly racist. 

Dyson purportedly made the remarks about Virginia Lieutenant Governor-elect Winsome Sears, a Republican, who won her election on Tuesday night as Republicans dominated across the state. Dyson said:............To Read More....

The Real Structural Racism

Is it OK that black eighth graders aren’t proficient in math and reading?

By William McGurn Sept. 6, 2021 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may have a point about structural racism. But it’s probably not the point the Queens Democrat and her progressive allies think it is.

For if ever there were a structure systemically keeping African-Americans from getting ahead, it would surely be America’s big city public-school systems. By any objective measure, these schools consistently fail to provide their African-American students with the basic education they will need to get ahead. But instead of addressing achievement head on, the progressive answer is to funnel yet more money into the existing failed structure, eliminate tests that expose its failure, and impose race-based preferences to make up for it.

Look, for example, at the most recent results from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the nation’s report card. For the past 20 years, achievement has been broken down by school district level in its Trial Urban District Assessment. Of the 27 U.S. urban school districts that reported their results for 2019—from Boston and Chicago to Fort Worth, Texas, and Los Angeles—not a single one can say a majority of the black eighth graders in their care are proficient in either math or reading.

It isn’t even close. In a number of these school districts, proficiency rates for black eighth graders are down in the single digits (see Detroit’s 4% for math and 5% for reading, or Milwaukee’s 5% for math and 7% for reading). Most are in the low teens.

In Bill de Blasio’s New York City, for example, the public schools show 10% proficiency for black eighth graders in math and 14% in English. Yet the mayor then professes to be shocked, shocked that black students aren’t passing the highly competitive entrance exams for the city’s most elite public high schools..............To Read More...

LA Times columnist goes there: 'Larry Elder is the black face of white supremacy'

John Sexton Aug 20, 2021 

I don’t know whether the author of this column published today in the LA Times wrote the headline but it reads, “Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy. You’ve been warned.” In any case, the headline is based on a direct quote contained in the story. So let’s jump to that:

“He is a danger, a clear and present danger,” said Melina Abdullah, cofounder of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles…

Abdullah of Black Lives Matter: “Anytime you put a Black face on white supremacy, which is what Larry Elder is, there are people who will utilize that as an opportunity to deny white supremacy. They say, ‘How could this be white supremacy? This is a Black man.’ But everything that he’s pushing, everything that he stands for, he is advancing white supremacy.”

I guess you could say it’s really BLM of Los Angeles that is calling Elder the black face of white supremacy but it’s pretty clear the author agrees with that:...To Read More

 

 

Distinguishing Respect From Patronizing Condescension In Matters Of Race

June 15, 2021/ Francis Menton @ Manhattan Contrarian

In our current national moment, distinguishing respectful conduct or language toward others from patronizing condescension in matters of race is of great importance. You might think that making this distinction would be easy, but I suggest that in many circumstances it is not easy at all.

Recently, many things that have become the latest fashion in what practitioners think is heightened respect appear to me to be exactly the opposite — condescension. That can be the case even where the respect-that-is-really-condescension is demanded by the recipient. And I am not the only one noticing this phenomenon.

Let’s consider a few examples.

Several weeks ago Princeton University announced that an intermediate knowledge of Greek or Latin would no longer be required for a major in Classics. John McWhorter discusses that decision in a June 10 essay at Substack with the title “Revisiting Classics at Princeton: Exempting Black Kids From Challenge Is Lousy Antiracism.”

McWhorter opens by quoting Princeton’s own statement about the change to show that “of especial interest to black students . . . today’s racial reckoning, . . . the department openly acknowledges, was the primary spur for this change.” It seems that, with the Greek and Latin language requirement, the Princeton Classics Department had difficulty attracting black students to the major. McWhorter comments:

The tacit idea is people guilty about their white privilege saying over a Zoom meeting “If we want to have more black students, we can’t be making people learn Greek and Latin anymore.” Ugh – see how that reads when exposed to the sunlight? . . . Anything but that patronizing condescension. . . . [A]ny public discussion that both reviles the idea that black people are less intelligent than others while also lustily demanding that it’s “racist” to submit black people to cognitive challenges is hopelessly incoherent. . . . [T]his exemption culture is premised on a basic assumption that it’s unsavory to require serious challenge of black students Because Racism. No. You don’t get past racism by creating new forms of it. Scrapping traditional challenges should only be on the table after black kids have mastered the challenge anyway.

Well, we all already knew that the worst racists are the left-wing academics. Meanwhile, as part of the same set of changes, Princeton also announced that its Department of Politics had added a “race and identity” track. Somehow these seemingly very smart people are completely oblivious to their own descent into rank racial condescension. Always in the name of “antiracism” and “diversity” of course.

Turning to another elite university, Ohio State, we have an example of black students demanding the creation of an “exemption culture” for their benefit — or is it to their detriment? Admittedly this one comes from a few months ago, but it just came to my attention. It relates to the subject of a so-called “hate crime.” Campus Reform reported that on September 3, 2020 Ohio State had sent around a campus-wide email notifying students and staff that there had been a “hate crime” perpetrated by two African American students; a few days later a follow-up email informed the community that the victims of the crime were white. It appears that Ohio State believed it was under an obligation to inform the community of “hate crimes” under a federal statute called the Clery Act. Nevertheless, the emails set off a wave of protests. Student newspaper The Lantern reported on September 8:

A demonstration of about 100 people has gathered outside Bricker Hall demanding Ohio State acknowledge its“error and confusion in the handling of" a public safety notice on a pair of assaults against white victims the university categorized as a hate crime under the Clery Act.

But what was the “error” that led to the protests? A group called Student Solidarity at OSU explained the logic in a tweet on September 8:

“Racial slurs” referring to White people are not based on a history of violence & oppression towards White people. Using this “slur” does not have the same violent, racist implications as a White person saying the n-word, for example, nor does it make this incident a hate crime.

So the reasoning is, because of the history of the races in this country, black people are incapable of committing “hate crimes” and their conduct is immune from scrutiny no matter how egregious. Student Solidarity at OSU seems to believe that following this reasoning would be according respect to the black students, but it sure looks more like condescension to me.

And finally, consider the recent fad of capitalizing the word “black” (i.e., “Black”) when it is used to refer to a black person or the black race. The new style became all the rage in mid-2020 after the death of George Floyd. As an example, in June 2020 the AP announced that henceforth it would “capitalize the word ‘Black’ when used in the context of race and culture”; but in July AP said that it would not do the same for the word “white.” The Washington Post announced on July 29 that it would begin capitalizing both “Black” and “White.”

Is capitalizing “Black” an example of showing appropriate respect, or rather of what McWhorter calls “patronizing condescension”? The matter actually reached the U.S. Supreme Court in a case called Terry v. United States that was decided just yesterday. The decision was unanimous, and the actual subject of the case is almost unimportant. Mr. Terry was convicted in 2008 of selling crack cocaine, and because he had two prior felony convictions he got a sentence of over 15 years as a “career criminal.” In 2018 Congress passed something called the First Step Act, which retroactively reduced sentences for crack cocaine convictions if the sentence was based on volume of product seized. Terry applied for a sentence reduction, but his problem was that his sentence was not based on the volume of product seized, but rather on his being a career offender. So the Supreme Court re-affirmed his sentence unanimously.

The opinion of the unanimous Court was written by Justice Clarence Thomas. But that opinion drew an unusual concurrence from Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Sotomayor did not quibble at all with the logic of the main opinion or the result (in both of which she joined), but rather only called on Congress to revise the statutory framework one more time to correct the injustice visited on Mr. Terry. But there was a very interesting back and forth between the two justices. Justice Thomas’s opinion takes note that the mandatory minimum sentences enacted by Congress in 1986 received strong support from the black community:

Many black leaders in that era professed two concerns. First, crack was fueling crime against residents in inner cities, who were predominantly black. . . . Second, there were concerns that prosecutors were not taking these kinds of crimes seriously enough because the victims were disproportionately black.

The most important point of Justice Sotomayor’s concurrence appears to be that she capitalizes the word “Black”:

Black people bore the brunt of this disparity [in sentencing]. Around 80 to 90 percent of those convicted of crack offenses between 1992 and 2006 were Black, while Black people made up only around 30 percent of powder cocaine offenders in those same years.

I can just imagine the back and forth in the Supreme Court as copies of Justice Thomas’s opinion circulated for comment. The reason that Clarence Thomas is my favorite justice is not just that he is an independent thinker, but also that he is not the kind of guy to back down. I have no doubt that he was pushed hard on this one, and would not give in. In the end, all nine justices signed on to the opinion with the lower case “black,” including Sotomayor.

Clearly Thomas views the capitalizing of “Black” as condescension. Note that McWhorter (in the Substack piece quoted above and elsewhere) also declines to join the capitalization fad. Another refusenik is Thomas Sowell, whose 2020 book Charter Schools and Their Enemies does not follow the capitalization convention. I would join those in viewing the capitalization thing as condescension, but obviously many smart people disagree. In any event, the official Manhattan Contrarian style book is going with Thomas, McWhorter and Sowell and sticking with lower case for “black.”

 

Tucker Carlson: CNN hates the idea of Buckhead trying to leave the city of Atlanta

Rich liberals hate diversity so much that 'at the first sign of spray paint, they run for the whitest hills they can find' 

By Tucker Carlson | Fox News

Ever been to Buckhead in Atlanta? It’s a beautiful residential and commercial neighborhood in the northwest corner of the city. It’s not a huge place. Fewer than 80,000 people live there, but it’s fair to say that, without Buckhead, Atlanta, at least as it’s currently run, could not exist. Taxes from Buckhead residents account for fully a fifth of Atlanta’s entire city budget. You’d think the people who run the city would be very polite to Buckhead. They certainly should be. But the opposite is true. For decades, various mayors of Atlanta have attacked Buckhead, as if there’s something offensive or immoral about maintaining a clean and orderly neighborhood. For the most part, the residents of Buckhead have taken this abuse in silence. Complaining seemed impolite. So they’ve continued to send huge amounts of money to a city government that hates them. For politicians in Atlanta, it’s been a very good deal—attack Buckhead and take the dough. But that deal could soon be ending.  ...............To Read More and See a Must See Video

 My Take - Carlson makes mention that CNN is headquartered in Atlanta and know exactly how bad it is as a result of these racist, incompetent leftist politicians actions, and yet they attack Buckhead residents as racists.  The reason to not watch CNN is the same reason you don't drink water our of your toilet. 

‘Crickets’: GOP Slams Corporate America, NAACP, BLM Silence over Racial Slur Against Tim Scott

Edwin Mora1 May 2021 

Republicans criticized Black Lives Matter (BLM), the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and corporate America for refusing to condemn the “Uncle Tim” slur to black Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) that surfaced Wednesday and went viral on Twitter.

In the wake of his rebuttal to President Joe Biden’s address to a joint session of Congress, leftists on Twitter began using the hashtag “Uncle Tim” in reference to Scott, the lone black Republican in the Senate.

Democrats, who claim to be the only party to stand up for black Americans, have also reportedly remained silent on using the hashtag “Uncle Tim,” a play on the derogatory racial caricature Uncle Tom’s name presents black people as subservient.

Scott, the lone black Republican in the Senate, called out the hypocrisy of so-called “woke” corporate America.

He indicated that while they support BLM, sometimes echoing one of the leftist group’s favorite slogans, “Silence is violence,” they stay silent when the political ideology of a victim of racism does not align with the left.............To Read More....

North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson: Insulting to Say Blacks Can’t Get a Free ID to Vote

Robert Kraychik 22 Apr 2021  22

Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson (R-NC) said on Thursday it was “preposterous” and “insulting” for Democrats to frame black Americans as incapable of obtaining a photo ID to comply with voter-ID laws.

Robinson was invited to testify as a witness before the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing entitled, “Oversight of the Voting Rights Act: The Evolving Landscape of Voting Discrimination.” Democrats and the broader left regularly frame voter-ID laws as racially discriminatory against blacks, including comparisons between such regulations and Jim Crow laws.

Robinson said:

Am I to believe that black Americans — who have overcome the atrocities of slavery, who were victorious in the civil rights moment, and now sit in the highest levels of this government — cannot figure out how to get a free ID to secure their votes?

They need to be coddled by politicians because they don’t think we can figure out how to make our voices heard

Are you kidding me? The notion that black people must be protected from a free ID to secure their votes is not just insane, it is insulting.

Robinson observed the subtext of Democrat narratives regarding voter-ID laws:.................“H.R. 1 [is] despicable,” he stated. “The entire thing is designed to keep one party in power and make sure they stay there indefinitely. … They plan to do that by taking away the rights of states given by the Constitution to govern their own elections.”  He concluded, “[H.R. 1 would use] government dollars to fund campaigns in order to give an advantage to one party, mandating that felons are allowed to vote — including illegal immigrants on voter rolls — and of course, trying to banish states from having voter ID.”...........To Read More.....

My Take - Mark Robinson came to my attention in an article with this video.  He's an impressive man.

Voter I.D. and What Leftists Really Think About Black Americans

By Rich Kozlovich

On Apr 2, 2021 Amanda Prestigiacomo posted this piece,  Watch: Black Americans Debunk Liberal Talking Point That Voter ID Is ‘Racist’: ‘They’re Ignorant’.  The article makes it clear it isn't black Americans who promote the idea black Americans don't have, and can't get I.D.s.   It's the liberals, leftists, white elites and black race hustlers who promote this clabber telling Ami Horowitz these voter I.D. laws are racist.  

Why are voter I.D. laws racist?  Here's what they had to say:  

• Black Americans allegedly lack access to the internet 
  
• Don't know how to use it
• Don't know where their local DMV is
• Don't know how to find their DMV
• Don't live in areas with easy access to the DMV
• Don't know how or where to get an I.D.
• Blacks aren't informed
• Blacks not aware, and finally 
• Convicted felons can't vote and since blacks have a lot of convicted felons that makes voter I.D. laws racist.
  

Wow!  That's seems to sound racist to me. Did I miss something?  Am I the only one who thinks that seems racist?   The black Americans interviewed by Ami Horowitz in Harlem, had this to say: 

Everyone they know has an I.D. and everyone they know has access to the internet......know how to use it, including their kids, and use it all the time.  When told these leftist's views one black woman thought it was weird and another thought that this whole argument is weird, and one wanted to know if “this some trick candid camera thing?” Everyone knew where the DMV was and how to get there.

But that's all on the surface.  What's the real thrust of this article?  What should be taken from this piece?  Answer: What white liberals, leftists and race hustlers really think about blacks.  

Horowitz then asked this question to her black interviewees: “What does that say to you for people that have this perception of black people?”  And their answers were:

“They’re pretty much ignorant,” “Ignorant, very, very ignorant,” "What people are they talking to? Who are these people talking to?” “I think it is a little racist, because you’re putting people in a category and you have no idea what you’re talking about,” “Maybe a little bit of racism in it, but like I said, I think it’s more stupidity."

Well, one thing is clear from the comments made by these leftist elites at Berkeley, they have no respect for black Americans. It seems clear to me they think black Americans are a dumb, lazy, ignorant, and criminal element in American society.

So, who are the real racists here?  

Is it the conservatives, white and minority conservatives, who merely insist everyone be responsible in their actions, including black Americans.  Is it conservatives who feel everyone who is eligible to vote, including black Americans, is totally capable of that kind of civic responsibility?   Or is it the leftist elites, including black Democrat operatives, who insist blacks are incapable of that very basic level of civic duty?

Go to the original piece to see the video.  One thing came through clear as a bell to me, and that was the level of self satisfied, smug, arrogant racism of the Berkeley white leftist elitists. A view that's apparently shared by Major League Baseball, Delta Airlines, Coca Cola and a host of Hollywood hypocrites. 

They're the real racists!   Let's cut to the chase and face reality. This isn't really about fairness. It certainly isn't about race.  It's about voter fraud, and Democrats unending efforts to supplant and overcome the legitimate vote in America and the actual will of America's citizens with fraudulently won elections.  All in order to gain the power to eliminate the American identity, the American culture, the American economy and the Constitution, and impose a socialist system of world wide governance under the auspices of the United Nations.  

It really is that simple!

 

Ending advanced classes in public schools because the wrong races excel at them

February 28, 2021 By Thomas Lifson

If the Chinese Communist Party wanted to ensure that China will dominate the United States technologically for generations to come, it would push with all its might to spread the poisonous ideology underlying the follow news, from Asche Schow of The Daily Wire:...........

Denying advanced education opportunities to qualified and hard-working students because they are not of the races that Superintendent Cassellius favors does not give them “a fair shot at an equitable and excellent education.” It has the effect of lowering their opportunities and achievements to the lowest common denominator, simply because some other groups cannot keep up with their pace and scope of learning. It is a policy of cutting down the tall grass, so that in the future, there will be no Einsteins, no Katherine Johnsons, among future graduates of the Boston Public Schools

The racialist left has started following the practice of apartheid-era South Africa and lumping Asians with Caucasians, as “honorary whites” when it suits their agenda:........To Read More....

Whites need not apply: Campus sci-tech symposium to only feature scholars of color

Event at Williams College to explore sci-tech’s ‘relationship to society’

Brittany Slaughter - Liberty University September 16, 2019

An upcoming science and technology symposium slated to take place at Williams College promises a unique feature: it will showcase “new” voices in the field, and those voices will only come from scholars of color.

“New Voices in Science and Technology Studies: A C3 Symposium,” set for early November at the private Massachusetts-based liberal arts university, invited scholars to submit papers if they represent a “historically underrepresented group.”

The call for papers specifies that means either “African Americans, Alaska Natives, Arab Americans, Asian Americans, Latinx, Native Americans, Native Hawaiians, and other Pacific Islanders.”.........To Read More....

• Artificial intelligence can be ‘sexist and racist,’ professors say
• University researchers warn that we’re biased against black robots
• University hosts no-whites-allowed faculty and staff listening sessions

My Take- More good reasons to stop funding America's universities. 

The hijacking of civil rights

August 17, 2019 By Robert Arvay

At a very early age, I remember being babysat by a beautiful young lady named Willie-Mae. She taught me a simple lesson that has guided me for more than sixty-five years. One day, when I was about four or five years old, I crawled up on her lap. I noticed her black skin and asked her, "Don't you wish you were white?" She replied, this is the way God made me, and I would not wish to be any other way.............You may ask what the relevance is. I will attempt to state it below, if my goofy negro mind will allow. After all, according to Mr. Arceneaux, I'm just another groveling wayward negro riding on the Trump hate train.

The hatred and bigotry exhibited by Mr. Arceneaux in the op-ed toward conservative blacks is surpassed only by his belief that we lack the intelligence to make informed voting decisions or find a good barber. The same man who claims that the president disparages black communities calls all blacks who support President Trump goofy negros, negro league deplorables, and sycophants. The same man who chides the president for telling black congresswomen to go back to the countries they came from calls black conservative women BAPS and buffoons! ..........To Read More.....